faith and theÌ„ afterward by faith onelie to be iustified This were to destroy the efficiencie and force of the Sacraments and to make no more of them then we make of an Iuie garland which is onlie set forth to signifie that there is wine to be sold bought and drunke It is manifest that the Ghospell the word of God preached is a greate motiue and forceable meanes to moue vs to beleeue and to strengthen our faith and S. Paule sayeth it is Virtus Dei in salutem omni credenti Rom. 1. the power of God vnto saluation to euerie one that beleeueth much more then is the Sacrament of Baptisme the power of God not mouing onlie to faith but working in it self as his instrument to saluation And in deed faith because it cometh vnto those of age vnderstanding by hearing as S. Paule sayeth Rom. 10. Fides ex auditu Faith is by hearing therefore faith is in them as a necessarie dispositioÌ„ to Baptisme Where vpon Christ sayeth Qui crediderit Baptizatus fuerit Mar. 16. saluus erit He that beleeueth and is Baptized shall be saued So that faith going before Baptisme is a cause dispositiue and necessarie vnto Baptisme but not the onlie effecte of Baptisme as some would haue it For that the immediate effecte of Baptisme by applying the merits of Christ Passion is remission of sinnes to saluation is a newe regeneration and opening the gate to heauen And this plainlie Christ spake to Nicodemus Io. 3. Nisi quis c. Vnlesse a man be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost he can not enter into the kingdome of heauen Where we see our regeneration and second Birth attributed vnto Baptisme which consisteth in an externall element of water and an internall power of the holie Gost and that no man can enter into heauen without it Who seeth not then that it is the instrument of God working to saluation and not a bare signe or motiue onelie to faith That the effect of Baptisme is the remission of sinne the Scripture is plaine The people of Ierusalem and Iurie at the first sermon S. Peter made act 2. being as it were conuerted Et compuncti corde and compuncte of harte sayed VVhat shall we doe S. Peter answered Be euerie one of you Baptised in the name of Iesus for remission of your sinnes Note that he sayeth for remission of your sinnes shewing the effect of Baptisme to be remission of sinne Act. 22. And S. Paule as he reporteth himself being stroken blind and called of Christ to be the vessell of election for the conuersion of the Gentiles Ananias came vnto him restored him to his sight and then sayed vnto him Et nunc quid moraris Act. 22. v. 16. Surge Baptizare ablue peccata tua inuocato nomine eius And now what tarriest thou Rise vp be Baptised and wash away thy sinnes inuocating his name S. Paule beleeued before he was Baptised but his sinnes were washed away by Baptisme I will therefore conclud vpon these testimonies of Christ and his Apostles that the Scripture is plaine that Baptisme of it self as the instrument of God doeth wash away sinnes by the force vertue of the word and worke done and sayed and that faith going before Baptisme is but a disposition to remission of sinnes Auoyd then the doctrine of Heretikes whoe affirme and teach that this Sacrament of Baptisme doth not remit sinnes but signifie remission of sinnes and doth worke of it selfe nothing but is as a bare signe and simbole onlie to excite and moue to faith as the Iuie garland is onlie a bare signe to excite and moue men to buy wine and to signifie that in such a place it is to be sold Flie this Hereticall doctrine I say which killeth the life of the Sacrament contrarie to the Doctrine of S. Paule Christus dilexit Ecclesiam Ephes 5. tradidit seipsum pro ea mundans eam lauacro aquae Christ sayeth he loued his Church and deliuered him self for it cleansing it by the lauer of water Also in his epistle to Titus Saluos nos fecit per lauacrum regenerationis he sayeth Christ hath saued vs and made vs safe by the lauer of regeneration and renouation of the Holie Ghost Ad Titum 3. Can anie man more forceablie or plainlie expresse the working effecte and force of Baptisme then S. Paule in caling it the Lauer of regeneration and that we are to be cleansed made safe and saued by this lauer of water And withall let vs consider what Ezechiell the Prophet prophesied of the effects and force of Baptisme Ezech. ca. 27. Effundam super vos aquam mundam mundabimini ab omnibus inquinamentis vestris I will powre out sayeth the Prophet in the person of God cleane water vpon you and you shall bâ— cleansed from all your filthes and staines Baptisme therefore reallie and in deed is an instrumentall cause of our Iustification and not a bare signe and meanes onlie to excite stirre vp and moue vs to faith or a Single seale or signe as Caluiâ— would haue it of former Iustice. CAP. 7. Whether he who once is Baptised can not sinne but shal be saued Bellar. li. 1. de Bapt. ca. 14. This controuersie is excellentlie and compendiouslie handled by that most worthie learned Prelate Cardinall Bellarmine It was the errour of Iouinian the heretike against whom S. Ierome wrote That he who was trulie and in deed Baptised Ioro li. 2. con Iouin could not be damned or become a reprobate or sinne after Baptisme And for this his errour he brought Scripture as all other Heretikes doe Christs owne words and his Apostles S. Iohns Christ sayed Non potest arbor bona malos fructus facere A good tree can not bring forth euill fruite Therefore being made good by Baptisme can not sinne and consequentlie can not be damned But what if this tree be corrupt the roote be withered either it will bring forth no fruite or bad fruite which this Heretike considered not And for that he alleadgeth out of S. Iohn Io. ep i. ca. 3. 5. Euerie one that is borne of God committeth not sinne because his seede abideth in him and he can not sinne because he is borne of God By which words of the Apostle this Heretike would proue that the Baptised can not sinne But the sense of the Apostle is that no man continuing the sonne of God committeth mortall sinne because mortall sinne can not stand togeather with the grace of God therefore so long as we keep the Innocencie of Baptisme we can not sinne S. Iohn then would not say that the Baptised could not fall from their first estate of Innocencie For S. Paule doth reproue this as an errour Rom. 11. ver 19. 20. and proueth that he who now hath faith may fall and become incredulous as the Iewes were the faithful people of God but by incredulitie are become repâ—obate so also may
doe the Gentiles And therefore sayeth he Tu fide stas noli altum sapere sed time thou by faith doest Stand be not too highlie wise but feare Wherefore beware the vaine presumption and securitie of Heretikes for he who standeth by faith may fall Aug li. 20. de ciuita Dei ca. 25. and he who hath the Innocencie of Baptisme may loose it S. Augustine doth reprehend some Catholikes of his tyme of grosse errour who held that those who were Baptised should not be damned although they liued wickedlie so that they kepte themselues in the Catholike Church Against whom he wrote a whole booke intitleing it de fide operibus Of faith and good workes Also against this heresie spake S. Paule prouing that by the lawe of Christ by Baptisme we are freed from the state of damnation vnlesse we againe willfullie giue our selues ouer to the flesh Rom. 8. ver 13. And therefore he concludeth Si secundum Carnem vixeritis moriemini If ye liue according to the flesh ye shall die And he plainlie telleth the Corinthians and willeth them to know that the vniust the wicked although they are Christians and Baptised shall not possesse the kingdome of heauen And biddeth them not erre in their opinion 1. Cor. 5. Nolite errare for neither fornicatours nor seruers of idolles adulterous nor the effeminate nor theeues nor the couetous nor drunkards nor railers nor extortioners shall possesse the kingdome of God Caluin lib. 3. inst ca. 22. §. 11. Yet after all this comes M. Iohn Caluin with his Hereticall proposition vera fides semel habita non potest amitti True faith once had can not be lost Which is contrarie to the expresse words of the Apostle before cited and examples in Scripture 〈◊〉 the Acts of the Apostles it is written of Simon Magus Act. 8. that at the preaching of S. Phillippe the Deacon he beleeued was baptised an cleaued to Phillippe Yet it is also manifest that he became a reprobate For S. Peter sayed of him that his parte was not right before God and sawe in him the gall of bitternes 1. Timo. cap. 1. and obligation of sinne S. Paule exhorteth Thimothie to be stedfast in faith and haue a good consience Quia quidam naufragauerunt circa fidem For some repelling their good conscience haue made also shipwracke about the faith And he absolutlie affirmeth that there shall be Apostatates in the latter dayes 1. Timo. cap. 4. In nouissimis diebus discedent quidam a fide In the last dayes certaine shall departe from the faith Also Martin Luther hath this libertine proposition Non potest homo Baptizatus damnari Luther lib. de Capti Babil cap. 6. nisi nolit credere He that is Baptized can not be damned vnlesse he will not beleeue Against which idle position I will sette downe the decree of the generall councell of Trent Si quis dixerit Bapizatum non posse etiamsi velit gratiam amittere quantumcumque peccet nisi nolit credere anathema sit If any man shall say that he who is Baptised can not loose grace if he would let him sinne neuer so much vnlesse he will not beleeue let him be accursed Werefore I may well conclude that he who hath bene once Baptized may sinne may be damned may be a reprobate It is too frequent to heare of renegate Christians who becomes Turkes and Apostatates and Chatholikes also who fall from their Church and faith CAP. 8. VVhether Baptisme hath force to remitte sinne committed after Baptisme THere is no question as hath bene declared before but that Baptisme hath force te remitte all manner of sinnes either contracted in our first parents or committed in acte by our selues that is either originall or actuall be they mortall or veniall The difficultie nowe is in that there are sinnes besides Originall precedent that is sinnes past and going before Baptisme in those of perfect age and there are sinnes subsequent that is committed after Baptisme Nowe the question is whether Baptisme extend it self to sinnes committed after or onlie contained it self within the bounde of those committed before Ins the generall doctrine of the Catholike Church that if we committe any sinne after Baptisme we must seeke to releeue our selues not by Baptisme but by other meanes that is by the sacrament of Penance Aug. ep 23. ad Bonif And S. Augustine expresseth saying Semel acccptam paruulus gratiam Christi non amittit nisi propria impietate si aetatis accessu c. The Infant Baptised looseth not the grace of Christ vnlesse it be by his owne proper impietie and wickednesse For if he become euill when he cometh to vnderstanding and vse of reason then properlie shall he begin to haue sinnes which sinnes may not be taken away by regeneration and Baptisme but are to be cured by some other medicine This S. Augustine So that it is plaine by this auntient Doctour and learned Fathers opinion that sinnes committed after Baptisme are not releeued by Baptisme but by other meanes S. Paule exhorteth men to be perfecte and warneth them to be carefull that they fall not from their faith and grace they receiued once in Baptisme Heb. 6. Impossibile est eos qui sunt illuminati iterum renouari ad Poenitentiam It is imposible saieth the Apostle for them whom are illuminated and Baptised to be Baptised againe to be renewed again by Baptismall Penance that is by that easie remedie that Baptisme affordeth But if thou sinne after Baptisme then must thou goe to the Sacrament of Penance which is open to all sinners called the second table after shipwracke a remedie a medicine more painfull then Baptisme requiring much fasting praying corporall affliction confession contrition Ambr. li. 2. de PaeniteÌ„ cap. 3. satisfaction c. So taught S. Ambrose entreating of Penance so preached S. Iohn Chrysostome in his ninth Homilie vpon the sixth chapter to the Hebrewes And there is no doubt to be made but Christ after his resurrection gaue commission and commaundement to his Apostles to Baptise all nations and people in remission of their sinnes and those who beleeued Mat. 28. and were Baptised should be saued So it is also as plaine as may be in S. Iohns Gospell Mar. 16. that the same day of Christs Resurrection he instituted the Sacrament of Penaâ—ce knowing the infirmitie and weaknesse of man that after Baptisme he might loose his first grace and former estate and fall into mortall sinne therefore he prouided a second remedie to reuiue him againe And as he gaue commission to remitte sinnes in Baptisme so also after Baptisme he gaue power authoritie and commission to forgiue sinnes The words of Christ in the Gospell are these As my Father sent me I also send you When he had sayed thus he breathed vpon them and he sayed to them Receaue ye the Holy Ghost VVhose sinnes you shall forgâ—ue they are forgiuen them and whose you shall retaine they
be saued or haue life life in Christ. Thus S. Augustine Idle then is this not imputation of sinne by Caluin maintained because they are borne of Christian Parents CAP. 4. VVhether Infants and children are to be Baptized before they come to yeares of discretion THe Anabaptist maintaine this heresie that children and Infants ought not to be Baptized but onlie those who are of yeares and vnderstanding and doe seeke it and desire it of themselues And some of this sect doe contend that they ought to stay vntill they come to thirtie yeares of age because Christ was at that age Baptized of Iohn All men may plainlie see in this age the worke of the Deuill who not only by heresie endeauoureth to destroy in ChristeÌ„dome the soules of a great parte of the elder sort but also to send to hell euen the poore Infants children in taking away froÌ„ them the vse of this Sacrament of Baptisme The Catholike Church and all Catholike Doctours haue alwaies practised and taught that Infants and children ought to be Baptized And first they proue it by example out of the old Testament Colos 2. Circumcision sayeth S. Paule was a figure of Baptisme but Circumcision was commanded to be giuen to children of eight dayes old Wherfore then may not Baptisme be ministred to children GeÌ„ 17. Secondlie Christ hath pronunced and giuen this sentence generally without exception that there can be no saluation without Baptisme Iâ—a 3. Vnlesse sayeth Christ a man be borne againe of water and the Holy Ghost he can not enter into the kingdome of heauen And that we may not thinke children to be excluded Christ hath recorded by three Euangelists Mat. 19. Mar. 10. Lâ—c. 18. Esay 49.22 Sinite paruulos c. Suffer children to come vnto me for the kindome of heauen is for such To signifie that he would not that children and Infants should be lest without remedie to saluation And that children should be members of the Church of Christ prophesied Esay Ecce leuabo ad gentes c. Behold I will lifte vp my hands to the Gentiles and will exalt my signe vnto the people and they shall bring their sonnes in their armes and shall carrie their daughters vpon their shoulders Therfore Children are to be admitted to the Sacrament of Baptisme Thirdlie the Church hath euer taught obserued and deliuered it as from the Apostles to be lawfull yea necessarie to Baptize children and Infants And no man can denie but that Baptisme of children hath bene euer held as an Apostolicall tradition Wherfore although it be not expressly commaunded in Scripture yet it is sufficientlie collected and deducted as I haue proued and no way contradicted therfore lawfullie to be practised We read in the historie of the Apostles Act. 16. that they Baptized whole families No doubt but their were some children amongst the familie Wherfore we must nedes conclude that Baptizing of children proceeded from the direction of the Holy Ghost or else we must confesse that the Apostles spake and practised not with the Spirite of God which were blasphemie Dionisius Areopagita S. Paules Scholler sayeth Dionis Areop Eccle. Hier. ca. vltimo Duces diuini nostri scilicet Apostoli probauerunt Infantes recipi ad Baptismum Our heaueÌ„ly guides the Captaines of our God the Apostles haue approued and allowed Infants to be receaued vnto Baptisme Finally no man can doubt vnlesse he will become a Pelagian Heretike but that Infants are borne in originall sinne therfore it is of necessitie that children be Baptized or els that they be left without remedie for their saluatioÌ„ as the Anabaptists would haue it Which were against the mercie of God who would haue all saued The difficultie of this question is because there is faith required in the Baptized and a will and desire to receaue the same How this can be in children that they may be admitted to Baptisme is the question Wherfore in the next ensuing Chapter we will put downe what faith is required in children and how this may be performed CAP. 5. VVhat faith is required to the Baptisme of Children and Infants Mat. 28. WE must vnderstand when Christ sayed to his Apostles Goe yee first teach then Baptize as S. Matheu reporteth And meÌ„ must beleeue before they be Baptized as hath S. Marke Mar. 16. And when the Eunuch asked whether he might not be Baptized S. Philippe answered Si credis licet If thou beleeue thou mayest Act. 8. to signifie that he must first beleeue before he could be Baptized And S. Paule sayeth That faith is by hearing Fides ex auditu and other such like places of Scripture we must vndestand I say that Christ spake of the Conuersion of nations of men of vnderstanding and such as had vse of reason who were by preaching teaching instructing and miracles to be brought to the faith and beleefe in Christ And for those who are at mans estate capable of vnderstanding apte to be taught readie to heare the word of God preached I say it is requisite yea necessarie that they haue actuall faith and beleefe in Christ and that of themselues they seeke and desire Baptisme before it can or ought to be ministred vnto them because the Scripture doth require this actuall faith and beleefe in full age the elder sorte and those at mans estate making no mention of Children Therfore say these Anabaptists that Children are not to be Baptized before they be capable of teaching preaching to receaue actuall faith to require of them selues Baptesme So that Infants and children if they neuer come to age should perish and be without remedie of saluation in these mens opinion But to confound these Heretikes and satisfie anie reasonable man in the precedent chapter it hath bene sufficientlie proued that children may and ought to be Baptized in their childhood and infancie Now because they are not capable of actuall faith for that they can not distinguish betweene good and euill Deu. 1. Ionas ca. vltimâ— nor be able to knowe the right hand from the left as Ionas the Prophet sayeth Therfore it is sufficient for them to be Baptized In fide aliena In the faith of an other that is in the faith of their Parents or those who offer and bring them to be Baptized if they be Christians Or In fide Ecclesiae In the faith of the Church if they be the children of Infidells This is the doctrine of the Church and the opinion of Catholike Doctours both ancient and moderne and that with reason For as these Infants contracted Originall sinne from their first parents Adam and Eue and were infected in their soules Alieno peccato with an others sinne so now also they should be cured and haue this sinne remitted in the faith of an other Therfore Saint Augustine writing to Bonifacius sayeth In Ecclesia Saluatoris paruuli per alios credunt c. Aug. ep 23. In the Church of our Sauiour
after he instituted Circumcision and threatened all those who had it not that they should perish but CircumcisioÌ„ was a figure of Baptisme Therfore although we be partakers of the benediction yet we must be Baptized or els we perish eternallie Secondlie this promise and benediction is to be vnderstood either carnally or spiritually If carnallie then it belongeth only to the Iewes who where of the seed and flesh of Abraham and the carnall children of him If spirituallie then they onlie are partakers who Rom. 9. as S. Paule sayeth Doe imitate the faith workes of Ahraham For so are they made the Children of Abraham But the Children of the faithfull doe no way imitate Abrahams faith or workes vntill they be Baptized and receaue the Sacrament of faith wherby they are in deed Verè fideles and become trulie faithfull For as we haue proued before the ChildreÌ„ caÌ„ not haue faith but by Baptisme For actuall faith they are not capable of and habituall faith they haue infused in them only by Baptisme Therfore that they be the children of Abraham it is necessarie they be Baptized to receaue faith Thirdlie this absurditie would follow that children should not contract Originall sinne which were to reuiue the Pelagian heresie For if children be iustified by this that they are of the seed of Abraham yf you vnderstand it according to the flesh there is no doubt but in the first instance of their conception they are of Abrahams seed and so consequentlie iustified Therfore not borne in Originall sinne Wherfore we must needes conclude that this place of Scripture no way can proue M. Caluins opinion The second obiection is out of S. Paule Ob. 1. Cor. 7. where he sayeth That the vnbeleeuing man is sanctified by the faithfull woman and that the Children of them are cleane and holy Therfore the children may be borne sanctified by the Fathers faith To this I answere Sol. that no man will thinke if a Turke should marrie a Christian woman and be content to liue with her and let her vse her conscience that the Turke therby should be sanctified and made lust Or if a ProtestaÌ„t marrie with a Catholike womaÌ„ be coÌ„tent to liue with her let her vse her coÌ„science that therfore the Protestant becomes a Papist But it may verie well be thought that by the prayer of the wife by her perswasion by her good example of life the Turke may become a Christian the Protestant a Catholike but the one must be Baptized and the other reconciled or els the faith of the woman will not suffice So I say the faith of the Parents without the Sacraments of Baptisme can not cleanse or wash the soule of the Infant from Originall sinne contracted But this benefit the Child may haue being borne of Christian Parents that they will and are bound to haue care and seeke the onlie remedie for the soule of their Children which is Baptisme Therfore Saint Augustine sayeth Aug. li. 3. de anima c. 9. Si vis esse Catholicus noli dicere noli docere noli credere Infantes c. If thou wilt be a Catholike doe not say doe not teach doenot beleeue that Infants dying before the come to Baptisme can obtaine indulgence pardon or remission of originall sinne Secondly I answere that the Pelagians vrged this place of Saint Paule against Saint Augustine to proue that Children borne of faithfull Parents did not contract Originall sinne and so consequentlie were not to be Baptized to take away Originall sinne And Caluin vrgeth the same place not daring plainly to say that Infants doe not contract from their Parents Originall sinne but to proue by their Fathers faith that they may be saued without Baptisme because Originall sinne shall not be imputed Therfore the same answere Saint Augustine gaue to the Pelagians I thinke may also satisfie the Caluinists Aug. li. 2. de Pect meritis ca. 26. l. 3. ca. 12. First Saint Augustine sayeth that the cleannesse sanctitie and holines that the children haue from their parents the Apostle doth not meane to be sanctitie or holines to Iustification saluation or to remission of sinnes For then it would follow that the Turke or Infidell should be saÌ„ctified by the beleeuing woman and that by the verie coniunction of matrimonie he should become Iust and saued which were against Scripture and reason Haeb. 11. because it is impossible to please God without faith Also it is manifest by Scripture that Christ hath layd an other foundation of Iustification saluation then the beleeuing woman for the husband and the faith of the Parents for the Infant and that is to be borne againe by water and the Holy Ghost and to be incorporate to Christ by Baptisme No doubt but the true sense and meaning of the Apostle was not to seperate man and wife although they were different in Religion because who knoweth whether one may be an occasion of the others Conuersion sayeth the Apostle So also the Parent may be a cause of the Saluation of the Infant in seekeing to haue the Sacrament dulie ministered And thus expoundeth S. Chrisostome vpon this place of S. Paule the Infidell man to be sanctified by the faithfull woman Chry. in hunc loc Quia spes est quod 〈◊〉 fideli pertrahatur ad fidem because there is hope that by the faithfull woman he may be drawen to true faith and beleefe And concerning the Infants of the faithfull Saint Ierome doeth interpret those words of Saint Pauâ—e Nunc Sancti id est Fidei Candidati Iero. li. 1. cont Ioui c. 5. ep ad Paulin. â—oc est deputati ad Christianam fidem Now â—hey are holy that is now they are cloaâ—hed in white endeauoring to obtaine â—aith That is as much to say Now â—hey are deputed vnto Christian faith and sanctitie esteemed and admitted as Christians because there is a great hope that by the industrie and care of the one Parent being faithfull the children may be brought to Baptisme This was S. Ieromes opinion and this I hope may satisfie anie reasonable man CAP. 7. VVhat punishment Children dying without Baptisme shall haue after this life HAuing sufficientlie proued in the precedent Chapters that Infants and Children contract Originall sinne and are by nature therby become the Children of wrath and in deeâ— constituted sinners and that the only ordinariâ— meanes to restore them to grace Innocenciâ— againe is by Christs institution the Sacramenâ— of Baptisme without which if they departe thiâ— life they can not be saued It must needes consequently follow that they shall absolutlie bâ— depriued of the Kingdome of heauen that theâ— shall neuer possesse eternall beatitude and blessednes which consisteth in the fruition anâ— sight of God they shall perpetuallie want thâ— blessed vision that is neuer to see God anâ— consequentlie they shall be no companions oâ— blessed Angells nor Saintes of Christ in heauen So that it is the generall opinion of
the day of Pentecost visible in the forme of fierie tongues Where vpon the Apostles Disciples might be sayed to be Baptised in the Holie Ghost and fire But this was but once effected and done and that vpon the Apostles onlie and neuer proposed by Christ as an ordinarie meanes for all men and therefore as much difference in these two places of Scripture as betweene fire and water two contrarie elements Secondly Caluin might haue marked if he would and so may his Complices that this word fire is put after the word Holy Ghost as expressing the effects that the Holie Ghost may worke as to illuminate enflame and heate the hart and soule with faith and Charitie as fire doeth the bodie externallie But the word water is put before the Holie Ghost by Christ as in his proper signification and concurring togeather with the Holie Ghost to the spirituall generation and new birth of man to life in Christ therefore â—here is not like reason in the one as in the other Thirdlie S. Iohn Baptist spake those words comparatiulie that Christ who was to be after him should Baptise in the Holy Ghost and fire and that he was not worthie to carrie his shooes after him to signifie that his Baptisme was but weake did not remitte sinne but moue to Penance had not so absolutlie conioyned with it the operation power of the Holie Ghost and therefore no way comparable with that of Christs How then can that saying of Caluin and his partakers be approuable and allowed That Iohns Baptisme and Christs is all one Ob. and that Iohns was as forceible as Christs I answere the proposition and saying is most vntrue and it was spoken by Caluin not so much to extoll Iohns Baptisme Sol. as to derogate from Christs And therefore he would that Christs Baptisme should not haue efficacie and force to remitte sinne to giue grace to cause Iustification and so Consequentlie not necessarie to saluationâ— but onlie an externall signe of admittance to the Congregation And thus shall Christs Sacraments be disgraced to maintaine Caluini conceit and idle dreame against all antiquitie CAP. 11. VVhen and at what tyme Christ institute Baptisme Math. 3. Mat. 1. Luc. 3. THere are three diuers opinions concerning the institution of this Sacrament by reasoâ— that three seuerall times in holie Scripturâ— Christ hath in acte or word made speciall mention of this Sacrament The first opinion is that Christ instituted this Sacrament when hâ— came himself in person to Iohn Baptist to bâ— Baptised of him The second opinion is theâ— Christ to haue instituted Baptisme when hâ— instructed Nicodemus and shewed the necessitie thereof saying Io. 3. Nisi quis renatus c. vnlesse eueriâ— one be borne againe of water and the Holy Ghost hâ— can not enter into the kingdome of heauen The third opinion is that this Sacrament was instituted after Christs Resurrection when he gaue Commission to his Apostles to Baptise all nations and people and withall prescribed vnto them the forme thereof saying Omnis potestaâ— data c. All power is giuen me in heauen and in earth Going therefore teach ye all nations Baptising them In the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holie Ghost To make as it were a reconciliation of these three opinions I will put downe what I thinke submitting not withstanding my self to better iudgment In the first action I suppose that Christ decreed the institution of this Sacrament when personallie himself was Baptised In the second action when he instructed Nicodemus he gaue as is were the precept shewing the necessitie thereof Finallie in the third action after his Resurrection Tho. 3. par q. 66. a. 2. Tertul. li. con Iudaeos cap. de passione Hilla c. 2. in Math. Amb. li 2. in Luc. Iero in dialogo con Lucifera Greg. Nazi in orat in Sancta Lumina when he gaue Commission to Baptise all nations and people and withall expressed the forme he declared the obligation thereof that then it was obligatorie and began to bind all men to receaue it For proofe of the first that â—t was decreed and instituted in Christs Baptisme is the opinion of S. Thomas and by common consent the auncient Fathers doe teach that Christ when he was Baptised in Iordan did giue force and vertue of Sanctification to the waters Read Tertullian S. Hillarie S. Ambrose S. Ierome and S. Gregorie Nazianzen And no doubt he determined water to be the matter of Baptisme when he would vouchsafe to consecrate illustrate and make famous the water by the touch of his most holie and pure flesh The forme also was sufficientlie declared although not in words expressed as it was in the last action after the Resurrection for the voyce of God the Father was heard from heauen the Holy Ghost appeared in forme of a doue and Christ IESVS the Sonne of God was there present in humayne flesh So that here was the forme and matter declared For the second that Christ gaue as it were a precept and declared it necessarie to saluation it is playne by the words of Christ to Nicodemus Yet that men were not bound to receaue Baptisme nor this precept obligatorie before the Passion of Christ and promulgation of the newe Lawe and abrogation of the old S. Thomas proueth in the place before cited For the third that the obligation and necessitie to vse Baptisme was declared and proclaimed vnto all men after the Passion and Resurrection of Christ it is manifest Because at that tyme and after the Passion of Christ all the Ceremonies and figures of the old lawe ceased and in place of them succeeded Baptisme and other Sacraments of the Ghospell and newe lawe And also because man by Baptisme is configurated and fashioned alike to the Passion and Resurrection of Christ For as Christ died for sinne so also man should die to sinne And as he rose to life and glorie so also he should begin the newe life of Iustice Therefore Christ must first suffer his Passion and rise againe to life before man could of necessitie configurate and conforme himsâ—lf Wherefore I conclude that Baptisme might be instituted and commaunded by Christ in his life tyme but not obligatorie nor of bond necessarilie to be obserued before the death and Passion of Christ. It were no improbable opinion to thinke that Christ might haue instituted this Sacrament of Baptisme when he in person Baptised his Apostles CAP. 12. Whether the Sacrament of Baptisme by Martirdome or Contrition of harte may be supplied And whether the definition of three Baptismes that is Of Bloud of Charitie and water be in holie Scripture THere is no doubt but from the begining in the Primitiue Church and all aâ—es vnto this day the threefold distinction of Baptisme that is SaÌ„guinis flaminis fluminis Of Bloud charitie and water hath bene approued and allowed of all and that the Sacrament of Baptisme might be supplied by the other two
Baptisme tooke no effect without the right forme Wherefore I conclude that the Arrian Heretikes in this their particular forme did not trulie Baptise CAP. 15. VVhether Baptisme giuen only in the name of Iesus Christ be auaylable THe diffigultie of this questioÌ„ doth arise ouâ— of two difficultes and hard places of Scripture that is the tenth and ninth of the Acts oâ— the Apostles In the first S. Peter commaundeâ— Cornelius the deuour Italian with his kinreâ— and freinds to be Baptised in the name of ouâ— Lord Iesus Christ In the second S. Paule coming to Ephesus Act. 10. v. 48. finding some twelue Baptized only with Iohns Baptisme told them that Iohns Baptisme was not sufficient for that Iohn Baptised the people with the Baptisme of Penance saying that they should beleeue in him that was to come after him Act. 19. that is to say in Iesus They hearing these things were Baptised in the name of our Lord Iesus Out of which two places some haue gathered that Baptisme onely ministred in the name of Iesus without the inuocation of the Blessed Trinitie the Father the Sonne the holy Ghoste was sufficient and auaylable also so commaunded and permitted by the two Chiefe Apostles S. Peter S. Paule Not withstanding these two places of Scripture in myne opinion there ought to be no doubt as hath bene proued before but that the forme of Baptisme was instituted determined and commaunded by Christ himself to be In the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost And therfore no way to be altered because it was Christs Institution nor sufficieÌ„t or auaylable without the InuocatioÌ„ of the whole Trinitie the Father the Sonne the Holy Ghost Wherfore as I sayed these two places of Scripture are hard difficulâ—e The generall doctrine of the aunceÌ„t Fathers the practise of the Church hath euer beene to Baptise In the name of the Father and of the Sonne of the Holy Ghost and neuer to awarrant or approue Baptisme ministred onely in the name of Iesus Christ or onely in the name of the Father or onely in the name of the Holy Ghost Therfore we are not to thinke that S. Peter nor S. Paule commaunded or permitted Baptisme to be onely in the name of Christ or Iesus As concerning S. Paule it is plaine he asked the twelue he found at Ephesus whether they had receyued the Holie Ghost They ansuered Act. 19. Nay neither haue we heard whether there be a holy Ghost But he sayed In whom then were yee Baptised As if he should haue sayd why then no Baptisme without the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost They answered In Iohns Baptisme But that not being sufficient he farther instructed them in Christ and the Holy Ghost So that there is no doubt but Christs Baptisme according to S. Paule was In the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holie Ghost Werefore we must vnderstand S. Luke who writeth the two Apostles to haue commaunded Baptisme in the name of our Lord Iesus not so that it was onlie in the name of Iesus but with all in the name of the Father and the Holy Ghost Or we may suppose that S. Luke named Christ Iesus onlie for the greater honour of his name altough the Baptisme was in the name of the whole Trinitie Or we may interprete S. Luke that he would say the Apostles to haue Baptized in the name of Christ Iesus that is In the fayth of our Lord Iesus or by the authoritie of Christ or with the Baptisme vhich Christ had instituted and so for breuities sake to haue named onlie Christ not deniâ—ing the Trinitie And Iustinus Martyr thinketh that the Apostles might adde the name of Iesus to the forme which Christ had instituted saying Ego Baptizo te In nomine Patris Filij eius Iesu Christi Spiritus Sancti I Baptise thee In the name of the Father and of â—is Sonne Iesus Christ and of the Holy Gâ—ost And this they might doe at that tyme for to make more honorable the name of Iesus because his name was in contempte and hatred amongst the Iewes Wherfore I conclude if any should vpon mistaking or errour of these places Baptise onlie in the name Christ or onlie in the name of Iesus not inuocating the Blessed Trinitie it were no Baptise THE THIRD BOOKE Of the Minister Baptizing the Partie Baptized CAP. 1. VVhether Christ in his owne Person with his owne hands did Baptize SAINT Chrysostome was of opinion Dionis Car. in ca. 3. Ioan. as reporteth Dionisius Carthusianus that Christ did not Baptize in his owne person with his owne hands because the Scripture sayeth Quamquam Iesus non Baptizaret sed Discipuli eius Howbeit Iesus dit not Baptize Ioa. 3.5 but his Disciples Secondly if Christ did Baptize any in his owne person with his owne hands it must be in most likliehood his Apostles and Disciples but after his resurrection vpon the day of his ascension Christ sayed to his Apostles Act. 1. Vos Baptizabimini Spiritu Sancto c. After these few dayes yea shall be Baptized with the Holy Ghost Therfore it may seeme Christ did not Baptize any for that the Apostles may be sayed to haue bene Baptised vpon the day of Pentecost by the Holy Ghost Yet not withstanding S. Augustine is of opinion that Christ did in proper person with his owne hands Baptize his Apostles and some of his Disciples which opinion is rather to be approued as more probable For S. Iohn in his Ghospell sayed Ioa. 3. v. 22. That Iesus came and his Disciples into the Countrey of Iewrie and there he abode with them and did Baptize Secondlie no man can or will denie but that all the Sacraments were instituted by Christ and the two principall as Baptisme and the Sacrament of the Altar or holy Masse were executed performed in proper person with his owne hands For as we haue sayed the first Sacrament which is Baptisme Christ in proper person with his owne hands did Baptise the Apostles And for the other Sacrament of the Altar or holy Masse the three Euangelist with the Apostle S. Paule record Math. 26. mar 14. Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 11. that Christ after his last supper Tooke bread in his hands blessed it brake it gaue it to his Apostles saying Hoc est Corpus meum and so consecrated it And in like manner tooke the Chalice in his hands saying This is the newe Testament in my bloud which shall be sed for you Wherfore we may coÌ„clude that seing it is plaine that Christ did Baptize and minister this Sacrament in his proper person with his owne hands it is likely that it was first to his Apostles and Disciples For if Christ thaught it good for others why also should it not be profitable for the Apostles why should any man thinke that Christ would ba wanting with his own hands to Baptize his Apostles
Ioa. 23. who did not disdaine with his owne hands to wash their feete And surely considering Christe was to committe this office and function of Baptizing by speciall commission to his Apostles and Discipleâ— it is likely he would first Baptize his seruants who were to be Baptizers of others VVe must take heed sayeth S. Augustine that we doe not say Aug. ep 108. that the Apostles were not Baptized with water but only with the Holy Ghost least we giue occasion to others to contenme Baptisme and that we our selues in so saying be not found to striue against Apostolicall practise discipline and order For Cornelius and those who were with S Peter although they receaued the Holy Ghost yet notwithstanding they were Baptized with water So that the receauing of the holy Ghost did nor take away the Baptisme of water Ibid. And further sayeth this holy doctour VVe ought in no case to doubt although there be no exprese mention in Scripture made therof but that the Apostles were Baptised with water in respect of that generall sentence which Christ hath pronounced Ioa. 3. Nisi quis renatus c. Vnlesse a man be borne againe of water and the Holy Ghost he sâ—all not enter into the kingdome of heauen And in particular he proueth S. Peter to haue bene Baptised out of those words of Christ Qui lotus est non indiget nisi vt pedes lauet c. He that is washed needeth not but to wash his feete but is cleane whollie As if he should haue sayed you haue bene washed Baptised by me alreadie and therfore you are whollie cleane now you need no more Or my will is no further but to wash your feete only When. S. Peter vpon humilitie thought himself vnworthie that Christ should wash his feete Christ sayed If I doe not washe thy feete thou shalt haue no parte withe me S. Peter hearing this made this petition Non tantum pedes sed caput manus Then o Lord not only my feet but my head and handes Christ answered He that is washed needeth not but to washe his feete So that I may conclude that Christ with his owne handes did Baptise his Apostles or some of them it remaineth only to accord those two places of Scripture in S. Iohn which seeme contrarie Christus Baptizabat Christus non Baptizabat Io. 3. 4. sed Discipuli eius Christ did Baptize and Christ did not Baptize but his Disciples I answere they are not contrarie but both true Christ did Baptize at the first institution and begining of his Baptisme and then afterwarde Christ did not Baptise himself but committed this office and function to his Disciples as proper vnto them and he himself tooke a higher charge and care vpon him which was to preach and teach and confirme by miracles So did also the Apostles after Christs ascension in the begining Baptize them selues but afterwards that their preaching might not be hindered they committed this office and function as proper to the Priest and betooke them selues To Euangelize 1. Cor. 1. and not Baptise as S. Paule sayeth So that we may vnderstand S. Iohn when he sayeth That Christ did not Baptize but his Disciples that is he did not ordinarilie by himself with his owne hands Baptize all sorts of people but only some of his Apostles and Disciples And when he had done thus he gaue commission to them as his Ministers to Baptize all others Wherfore when Christ sayed vpon the day of his ascension that his Apostles should be baptized with the Holy Ghost vpon the day of Pentecoste we must not so vnderstand as though they had not bene Baptized before with water but that they should be cleansed Baptized and inflamed with a speciall internall infusion of the grace of the holy Ghost vnder the visible forme of fierie tongues as hauing therby no ordinarie baptisme but an extraordinarie gift of the Holy Ghost to speake with tongues and by an especiall grace of his heauenly spirit that they might Euangelize with courage Christ crucified which was then Scandalum Iudaeis stultitia Gentibus A Scandall to the Iewes and foolishnes to the GeÌ„tiles therfore stood in neede of extraordinarie gift grace and fortitude CAP. 2. VVhether it doth belong to the Priest only Ex officio by Office and frunction to Beptize IT is the generall opinion of Catholike Diuines that ordinarilie by office and function it appertaineth onlie to Priests to Baptize This word only must not exclude Bishops for that they are also Priests and doe Baptize as Priests Yea in the opinion of some although the Priest by office and function in his ordination in that he is made Prieste hath this power to Baptize yet because it is a matter of Iurisdiction he doeth exercise it with a subordination and dependencie of the Bishoppe As also the Priest hath by ordination in that he is made Priest power to absolue from sinne Yet because the acte of Absolution is an acte of Iurisdiction and Iurisdiction is proper to a Bishoppe he can not vse and exercise this power except in case of necessitie but within such limites as the Bishops shall appoynt So then ordinarilie by office and function it appertayneth to the Priest only to Baptize and not to the Bishop as Bishop Werfore altough the Bishop may doe it yet we can not say he doth it Ex officio as Bishop but as Priest And this appeareth and may be proued out of S. Paule of whom there is no doubt but he was a Bishop yet he sayeth that Christ sent him 1. Cor. 1. To Euangelize not to Baptize for that it is not by Christs Commission and institution the office of a Bishop to Baptize by himself as in his owne person but ordinarilie it is committed by office and function as belonging to the Priest Yet in the same place S. Paule recordeth that he Baptized some fewe as Crispus and Caius and the house of Stephanus but not as belonging to the office of a Bishop but as he was a Priest Obiect True it is and may well be obiected that that Christ gaue this commission to his Apostles not only to teach but also to Baptize saying Going teach yee all nations Baptizing them Mat. 28. but the Bishophs are successours to the Apostles Therfore the Bishops haue by office and function also to Baptize To this obiection I answere with that worthie Doctour S. Thomas Tho. 3. p. q. 67. art 2. that Christ gaue in charge to his Apostles and so consequently to Bishops both functions that is to teach and to Baptize The first as principall to be exercised and performed by themselues in their own persons The second that is to Baptize to be committed by them to the Priests as proper to their office To manifest and make this plaine S. Iohn in his Ghospell sayeth That Iesus himself did not Baptize Ioâ— 4. but his Disciples were they that did Baptize Wherby it is
gathered that it is ordinarilie the proper office of Priests to Baptize for that the Priests are the Successours of the Disciples as the Bishops are to the Apostles Werfore I conclude that ordinarilie it belongeth Ex officio By office and Function to the Priest to Baptize although with subordination and dependencie of the Bishop and that also the Bishop may Baptize because he is a Priest for no man can be a Bishop vnlesse first he be a Priest Whervpon I leaue to your Iudgmentes what Bishops we haue now in England considering there hath bene no true ordination Consecration or imposition of hands of Bishop or Bishops amongst them since the begining of Queene Elizabeths raignie and so consequentlie neither Bishop nor Priest 2. Tim. cap. 1. for both Bishop and Priest must haue their ordination by imposition of hands from their Predecessours But no one but all the Bishops in England forsooke Queene Elizabeths new-deuised Religion so that she remained without Bishoppe CAP. 3. VVhether a Deacon may Ex officio by office minister this Sacrament I Answere that absolutlie he hath not by office and function to baptize but he may by subordination or dependencie of the Priest that is in absence of the Priest or in imminent daunger of the Child or by commission or permission of the Priest For properlie his office and function is to assist the Priest to read the Ghospell to minister at the Altar to compose set in order and prouide althinges necessarie for the administration of the Sacraments also to serue the widdowes and other such like offices Therfore Gelasius the Pope decreed Gelas ep ad Episco per LucaniaÌ„ ca. 9. 10. Act. 8. that Deacons did vsurpe the office of Priestes if the did presume to baptize in presence of priestes they not commaunding or permitting of it True it is that S. Philippe the Deacon baptized the Eunuch the Queene of Aethiopia her high-treasurer but it was not Ex officio but in absence of the Apostles Read Gratiam Dist 93 CAP. 4. VVhether a meere Layman who hath no holy Orders neither Priest nor Deacon may lawfully Baptize YOu must note and vnderstand that one thing it is to Baptize by function and office and an other thing to Baptise in necessitie that is when the Priest can not be had or in daunger of death The generall opinion of Catholike Diuines is and the practise of the Church hath euer bene A Cunabulis From the Cradle that in absence of the Priest in case of necessitie a meere Lay-man may lawfullie Baptize The reasons for proofe of this Conclusion are pregnant and many First it is not of the essence of Baptisme that the Minister that is he that Baptizeth be in holy Orders therfore in necessitie it may be lawfull for a meere Lay-man to minister this Sacrament SecoÌ„dly it standeth with the mercie of God who would haue all men saued that in those things which are of necessitie to saluatioÌ„ man may easilie find a remedie But amongst all the SacrameÌ„ts Baptisme is most of necessitie to saluation as hath bene proued therfore seing Christ our Sauiour would ordaine that coÌ„mon water should be the matter of this Sacrament because it was commoÌ„ to all in all places to be had that it might not be wanting to this Sacrament being of such necessitie to saluation there is no doubt also but the minister in case of necessitie should and might be euerie man not only of the Cleargie but also of the layety that for want of a minister the Infant or anie other in danger of death should not perâ—sh or be in way of damnation or destitute of the remedies of their saluation For Christ hath spoken the word That vnlesse a man be borne anewe an regenerated by water and the holy Ghost he can not enter in to the kingdome of heauen Therfore sayed Saint Ierome Iero. dial cont Lucif Baptizare si necessitas cogat scimus etiam licere laicis VVe know also if necessitie vrge or compell that it is lawfull for euerie Layman to Baptize Thirdlie Ananias in the first yeare after Christs Passion Baptized S. Paule but Ananias was none of the Apostles nor Deacon Act. 9. nor Priest therfore in absence of the Bishop Priest or Deacon a Lay-man may lawfully Baptize And although Ananias in Scripture be called a disciple yet that maketh him not a Bishop Priest or Deacon For Tabitha a widdowe woman is called also a Disciple Act. ca. 9.36 Wherfore we haue example in Scripture that Ananias a Lay-man by vision and speciall commaundement from God was sent vnto S. Paule restored him to his sight and in absence of the Apostles in case of necessitie did Baptize him We neede not then doubt but in absence of the Priest a Lay-man may lawfullie Baptize This confirmeth Saint Isodorus and giueth the reason why Lay-men may Baptize Ne quisquam sine remedio salutari de saeculo euocetur Least sayeth he any should be called out of this world â—ithout the sauing helpe and remedie of Salâ—ation Not withstanding these reasons and the neâ—essitie of Baptisme with the generall consent â—nd practise of the Primitiue Church and all â—ges sithence Caluin to crosse all antiquitie Cal. li. 4. Inst cap. â—eremptorilie doth denie That in anie case of â—ecessitie a Lay-man ought to Baptize Because Christ sayed onlie to the Apostles Goe yee and Bapâ—ize which we graunt and haue proued in the precedent Chapter that by office ordinarilie it â—elongeth and appertaineth to the Priest but extraordinarilie and in case of necessitie we allowe it lawfull for all men And our reason is because in the same place it was also sayed only to the Apostles Teach yee all Nations yet notwithstanding not only the Apostles but also the Disciples and others did theach why may not others also in case of necessitie with the Apostles Baptize Yf Caluin should meane or any other should thinke that none were trulie Baptized but those who were Baptized by true Bishops or Priests and that Lay-mens Baptisme were not auailable or of force which doth consequently follow in his opinion Or else why should they be denied in case of necessitie but that he would make the minister an essentiall poynt for the rightfull administration of this Sacrament In what case then were our poore Countrey of England which hath had no true Bishops nor Priests since the first of Queene Elizabeth as hath bene sayed For all the auncient Bishops of Queene Maries tyme standing firmlie to the Catholike fayth there was by them no impositioÌ„ of hands nor coÌ„secratioÌ„ vpon any Protestant Bishop but onlie letters Patents from Queene Elizabeth Confirmation afterward by ParlameÌ„t But how auaylable or of what force the one or the other or both ioyntly are to make Bishops may easilie be discerned and discried Let vs then allow the Baptisme of LaymeÌ„ to be auaylable or else we shall proue the most part of England to be Infidells and no Christians Idle then and
the Father secretlie his wife being a sleepe tooke away and brought him vnto a preaching minister to be Baptized who being readie to Baptise in the presence of the assemblie perceyued the child to be dead Whervpō presentlie he did expostulate and reason with the Father what he meant to delude and mocke him and to bring a dead child to be Baptized The father being stroken in a maze with this vnlooked for mischance returned home and layd againe the dead Infant by the mothers side And so secreetlie departing from the chamber a litle after returning called vpon his wife and asked how she and the Infant did She being ignorant what was done answered all was well and turning her self with pleasing countenance offered the child aliue and in good liking to the Father He being astonished with this miracle reiected his Caluinian errours and heresies embraced the Catholike faith became one of his wifes profession and caused the Infant to be Baptised Catholiquelie And for the Minister that he be not too hastie to Rebaptize the Child alreadie Baptized by a Catholike midwife let him read what happened at Amsterdame in the yeare of our Lord 1579. as testifieth Bredenbacius Bredē li. 7. coll Sacra c. 51. So it was a Catholike woman being married vnto a Caluinist and deliuered of a Child she caused the Infant priuatly to be Baptized by a Lay Catholike woman because she would be sure of Baptisme The Father tooke the Child according to Caluins rule brought it to the preaching to be Baptized by the Minister So it fell out that the minister being readie to baptise in the assemblie of all the people suddenlie he became dumbe not able to speake one word Wherat the Father being astonished tooke his child in his armes and came home vnto his wife charging her to tell him the truth whether the Infant had not bene Baptized before according to the Catholike order Which shee confessed to be true Wherupon he with the rest of his familie were cōuerted reconciled to the Church and became Catholikes CAP. 9. VVhether one may Baptise many at one tyme. I Say one may vnder this forme saying Ego Baptizo vos I Baptize yee which is as much to say I Baptize thee and thee determining euerie person But you must vnderstand that this must be onlie in case of necessitie as in danger of death or some extraordinarie cause otherwayes it is not to be done For this Sacrament bing of such necessitie that without it no saluation it must and ought carefullie and respectiuelie to be ministred Therfore it is more secure and better that it be seuerallie done and acted that the water and the word may goe togeater and the intention of the Baptizer may particulerly be applied to euerie partie who is to be Baptized Act. 2. There were three thousand Baptized vpon one day by the Apostles but the Scriptures doe not expresse in what manner they were Baptized It may be they had helpe of others of the Disciples but verie probable they Baptized many at once Wherfore I may conclude that in case of necessitie or vppon some extraordinarie cause one may Baptize many at once otherwise it must and ought to be done seuerally and distinctlie that is one by one CAP. 10. VVhether many at one tyme may togeather Baptize one Child Tho. 3. p. q. 67. art 6. SAint Thomas is of opinion that manie can not well concurre togeather to the Baptizing of one For when there are multiplicite of Ministers there may be many Baptismes which were dangerous For if the one should be before the other then the first did Baptize and the other Rebaptize which were a great fault Also S. Paule sayeth Eph. 4. There is one God one faith one Christ and one Baptisme So it were fitte there should be but one Minister to Baptize one partie CAP. 11. VVhether one may Baptise himself THe generall opinion is that one can not Baptize himself no not in danger of death or what other necessitie soeuer For better vnderstanding I will propose the case For example A Iew or a Pagan hauing heard or read of Baptisme or liued sometyme amongst the Christians and being desirous of Christianitie lying at the poynt of death amongst his owne neere no Christian and so consequentlie haueing no meanes to get any other man to Baptize him taketh water putting himself therin saying I Baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost The question is whether in this case he be Baptized and receaue the Sacrament of Baptisme The resolution is that he is not Baptised nor can of himself receaue the Sacrement of Baptisme The reason is for that Baptisme is a spirituall birth or regeneration but no man can be generated or borne of himself but necessarilie of an other so no man can be Baptized of himself but of necessitie must be Baptized of an other Also it is gathered out of Christs owne words that the Baptizer must be a different person from the Baptized For he sayed to his Apostles Goe yee and Baptize all nations And to signifie thus much we may also thinke that Christ would not Baptize himself but be Baptized of Iohn If you doe aske me what I thinke of this Iewe or Pagan in this case whether he should be saued or not I answere with Pope Innocentius the Third that he could not be saued by the Sacrament of Baptisme for that he had it not but no doubt he might be saued by the fayth vowe and desire of baptisme and the zeale feruour and loue to Christ and so he might haue it supplied by Christ in will and affection Read Innocentius libro 4. decretalium tit 42. de Baptismo eius effectu CAP. 12. VVhether the intention of the Minister be necessarie that the Sacrament take effecte ALL Diuines agree it is decreed in two generall Councells of Florēce and Trent and deduced expresslie out of Scripture that to the substance of Baptisme as necessarie are three thinges that is water as the matter the words as the forme and a minister to doe it and effect it For the two first I haue sufficiently proued before in my second booke that they are the two essentiall partes of Baptizme now that the minister must of necessitie haue intention to doe this acte I will briefly shewe When Christ instituted this Sacrament and gaue the forme he sayed to his Apostles Goe yee Baptizing no man can thinke Mat. 28. but that Christ meant that they should intend what he had instituted Secondlie if a man should take water say the words and cast it and powre it vpon an other and haue no intention to Baptize it were no Sacrament no Baptisme because there was no intention to doe the acte of Baptisme As also if a player vpon a stage should but shew the acte of Baptisme no man would say he Baptized And why There was water the word the minister and all other things
Because there wanted in the player intention to doe the acte of Baptisme In like manner if a drunken man who had lost the vse of reason or if a madde man or if a Priest should rise in his sleepe and doe all that belongeth to Baptisme Yet it were no sacrament because in none of these thee there were properlie anie humane acte with freedome of will or intention to direct this action or free mind to worke or not to worke to Baptize or not Baptize So also when the nource doth wash or bath the child if she should say I bath or wash thee in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost no man would be so madde as to thinke she Baptized the child And why For no other reason but because shee had no such intention as to Baptize Wherfore I cōclude it is necessarie to the true effecting of this Sacrament that the minister ought to direct this his exteriour acte to this end and purpose that is to Baptize that thereby he intend to performe that which Christ instituted and commaunded to be done Absurd then is the opinion of M. Luther and other his followers Luth. de cap. Bab. cap. de Bap. who doe not require anie intention in the Minister of this Sacrament but mayntaine that Baptisme is sufficiently performed if there be the water the word although they doe the acte of Baptisme like a minstrell or player in iest or in earnest idly or fainedly No man can thinke that the Iewes when they bowed their knees to Christ and sayed Aue rex Iudeorum Haile king of the Iewes they intended in deed and veritie to adore him but rather to iest and scorne him Worthely therfore is this opinion condemned as Hereticall by the Councell of Florence against the Armenians Concil Floren. Arme. Trid. sess 7. can 11. And now also by the Councell of Trent where Anathema and cursse is layed vpon him who doth not require in the Minister of this Sacrament intention to doe that which Christ instituted when he Baptizeth Not without cause then was Doctor Iohn Rainoldes one of the agent for the millinarie ministers by the Bishops of England reiected Cōfer at Hap Court 1603. Fol. 71. when he moued the King that this proposition should be inserted in their booke of Articles That the intention of the Minister was not of the necessitie of Baptisme CAP. 13. VVhat kind of Intention is necessarie THat the minister of this Sacrament must of necessitie haue intention I haue declared in the precedent Chapter The schoole-Diuines dispute what kind of intention may suffice For there are three kinds of intention Actuall Habituall and virtuall The Habituall all Diuines exclude as not sufficient for that it may be say they in a drunken man a madde man or in any man that is asleepe for it extendeth not to the acte but onlie to an inclination or promptitude gotten by the habite Arist. Phys 2. And therfore the Philosopher Aristotle sayed that Habitus non est actus The Habite cannot be the acte but a promptnes and power to the acte The Actuall intentiō is verie good and to be wished to be in all who Baptise which is De facto and in deed to haue and produce a mentall intention to execute the acte of Baptisme and to doe that the Church doeth Christ instituted But this is not alwaies of necessitie of the Sacrament For that men are often subiect to many distractions and hardly it is in mans power to be alwayes attentiue vpon those things we haue in hand although they be holy Wherfore if this actuall intention were alwayes of necessitie it would often breed much trouble and scruple in the mindes of the pious Baptizers and make vncertaine the acte of Baptisme Therfore it is generally holden that the virtuall intention is sufficient that is when one prouideth and intendeth actually to Baptise but yet when he doeth the acte his mind may be so dulled that he thinke of nothing or so distracted that he haue quite other cogitations Therfore when we purpose to Baptize it is sufficient to intend the externall acte of Baptisme as instituted by Christe or vsed by the Church although our mind at the tyme of the acte may be wandering vpon other things Neither is it necessarie that we extend our intention to the effect of Baptisme that is that we intend by this actiō to giue grace to remitte originall sinne and to sanctifie the soule For if this were necessarie we might iustly doubt of the Baptisme of many Heretikes For the Pelagians and some in these dayes denied that Baptisme did remitte Originall sinne Also it may be thought that neither Pagan nor Iew do thinke of grace or sanctification of the soule when they Baptize And it is probable that the Caluinists and Puritans of England will not be behind anie of them in this poynt their dangerous opinion leading them therunto Wherfore to conclude it is sufficient to haue internall intention to doe in deed and veritie the acte of Baptismes in the maner a foresaide for ther in is included to doe that which the Church doeth and Christ instituted To take away all intention in the Baptizer as Luther would were to make a Parrate that can speake to Baptise CAP. 14. VVhether the Deuill can Baptize I Moue this question the rather that you may vnderstand what a friend M. Luther is to the Deuill Luth. de mis pri v. painted 1554. For in his opinion the Deuill can Baptize if he obserue the forme Which Baptisme of the Deuills he approueth and alloweth as auaylable But to me it is strange and vnheard to imagine that the Diuell should sanctifie a soule being the common defiler and corrupter of the soule of man That you may not thinke this an idle dreame of his or a fained storie of mine you must vnderstand that he goeth about by argument to proue it Iudas sayeth he The betrayer of Christ and traitor to his Maister did Baptize but Iudas was a limme and member of the Deuill why then cannot the Diuell doe as much as anie limme or member of his can do◠M. Luther might haue considered if he would that Iudas when he Baptized he was an Apostle and no traytor at that tyme. Also he might as easilie haue conceaued that Iudas Baptized as an Apostle and minister of Christs and not as a limme and member of the Deuill Finally it is most manifest by Scripture that Christ gaue his commission for ministring of this Sacrament onlie to men for their good and not to Diuells the vtter enemies of mankind Therfore let vs leaue M. Luther with his Deuills it is likely he is amongst them take heed beware of his doctrine least thou be brought were he is CAP. 15. VVhether an Angell may Baptize THere is no doubt but the ordinarie commission for the administring of this Sacrament was granted and committed only to man Haeb. 5. Omnis
argument The Church doth vse that most ancient Cerâ—monie in Baptisme Aug. li. 1. de pe mâ—ritis ca. 34. l 6. in Iulian c. 2. that is by exorcismes Insufflations to expell the Deuill euen from Infants and children before theâ— be Baptized which she would not vse but that therby she intendeth to instructe teach that eueÌ„ childreÌ„ by Originall sinne were subiect to the power of SathaÌ„ The Meleuitane councell vnder S. Innocentius the First of that name hath decreed Anathematized those Quicunque paruulos recentes ab vteris matrum Baptizandos negat aut dicit eos in remissionem peccatorum Baptizari sed nihil ex Adamo trahere originalis pâ—ccati quod lauacro regenerationis expietur Anathema sit VVhosoeuer dothe denie that children newly borne are not to be Baptized or doeth affirme that children are to be Baptized vnto remissioÌ„ of sinne but so that they coÌ„tracte from AdaÌ„ nothing of originall sinne which is to be purged cleansed by the lauer of regeneration let him be accursed Wherfore to conclude it is necessarie that Infants and Children be Baptized for remission of Originall sinne CAP. 3. VVhether Originall sinne doth appertaine or be to be imputed to Childâ—eÌ„ borne of ChristiaÌ„ PareÌ„ts I Haue in generall proued in the precedent chapters that all men borne of man and woman since Adam except Christ and the B. virgin are conceaued and borne in Originall sinne and therby constituted and made sinners also that it is of necessitie that Children and Infants be Baptized in remission of this sinne and for the cleansing and taking away therof Now the question is in particular whether to be borne of Christian parents be a sufficient meanes to remoue Originall sinne from their children that it may not appertaine or be imputed vnto them I moue this question not that Christian people shoulde make any doubt of the valâ—â— vertue and force of Baptisme instituted by Christ vnto remission of sinne as the ordinarie meanes for Originall sinne in children and Infants but to decypher the dangerous doctrine of Caluin Caluin li. 4. Inst c. 16. §. 24. Antid ad can 5 sess 6. who dares not auouch with the Pelagian Heretikes condemned by the Church of God aboue some twelue or thirteene ages past that Children borne of Christian Parents doe not by birth and conception contract Originall sinne Yet notwithstanding hath this newe Ghospeller found out this new deuise that this sinne shall not be imputed nor layd to the charge of children borne of Christian Parents but couered and hidden in the sight of God And what is his intent hereby Surely no other then Iudaizare to play the Iewe to debilitate and weaken the vertue power and strength of the Sacrament and to take away the necessitie therof for the saluation of Infants and Children and withall to make Christian men carelesse of Christianitie in their children and posteritie If I should demaund of anie in different man whether it were not better and a more safer way to haue Originall sinne cleane washed by Baptisme vtterlie abolished and taken away by the Holy Ghost working in and by that Sacrament and so to haue the wound and sore perfectlie cured then to haue the sinne remaine although not imputed but couered not perfectlie cured but plastered I thinke this would be a sufficient argument to confute this errour to make meÌ„ beware to endaÌ„ger their childreÌ„s saluation vpon this slipperie doctrine For what warrant hath Caluin or any of his Complices or partakers our Contreimen out of Scripture That children borne of Christian Parents shall not haue Originall sinne imputed vnto them But sure I am that we haue the testimonie of Christ and his Apostles that Baptisme doth open the gate to heauen â—nd regenerate and cause vs to be borne a new to Christ Ioa. 3. Eph. 5. And that it is a washing and cleansing of our soules in the word of life And that we therby die to sinne that we may walke in newnesse of life RoÌ„ 5. Therfore let all Christian Parents of our countrey with all their Predecessours and the whole Christian world round about them seeke the saluation of their children by the Sacrament of Baptisme and not trust vnto the new deuise of Caluins not imputation least they be guiltie of their Childrens damnation But for further confutation I will alleadge two or three examples out of Scripture that to be borne of faith full parents is not a sufficieÌ„t meanes to free them from contracting Originall sinne or being contracted therfore not to haue it imputed Dauid was the sonne and child of faithfull parents and true beleeuers in God as also of the seed of Abraham yet he confesseth That his mother conceaued him in sinne Psal 50 But where can it be found in Scripture that his Parents was the cause that this sinne should not be imputed and not rather Circumcision to be the true cause which was a figure of Baâ—tisme And S. Paule when he was borne his Parents were of the faithfull true beleeuers yet sayed he that he as well as the rest was by nature the child of wrath But how became he the child of God and to be cleared of all sinne By his Parents in that they were true beleeuers No. The Scripture telleth vs no such thing but rather by the Sacrament of Bâ—ptisme Act. 22. For Ananias bidde him arise and be Babtized and so to wâ—sh away his sinnes And the same Apostle proueth the Iewes to be reprobate although they came of Abrahams flesh And that to be the sonne of God goeth not by birth but by the grace of God For example Esau twinne to Iacob was borne of Isaac the Father RoÌ„ 9. and Rebecca the mother faithfull Parents and immediatlie from Abraham yet Esau was a reprobate sayeth S. Paule from his birth Wherfore we may conclude that it is not the parents that freeth their children from Originall sinne let them be true beleeuers and faithfull before Christ or now Christians after Christ Cyp 11. 3. Epist ep 8. de InfaÌ„t BaptizaÌ„dis Therfore S. Cyprian writing to fidus the Priest concerning Baptizing of Infants before the eight day willeth that no man be hindred froÌ„ Baptisme the grace of God but especiallie children and Infants newly borne taken euen from their mothers wombe For although they haue no actuall sinne yet because they are borne carnallie according to Adam they must needs contract Originall sinne Worthely then we may conclude with S. Augustine Quicunque dixerit c. Aug. ep 28 non loÌ„ge a fine VVhosoeuer shall say that children â—lso shall liue in Christ who departe this life without participation of the Sâ—crament of Baptisme by him instituted in verie deed that man doeth oppose himselfe against the open Apostolicall declaration and condemneth the whole Church seing that for that cause she doth hasten the Baptizing of câ—ildren because without doubt it is beleeued that no other way at all they can