Booths or Tabernacles to dwell in Deut. 16. 16 17. compared with Levit. 23. 34 35. 38 39 40. which none will say was Infants worke Let none then object that you may as well plead for Infants comming to the Lords Supper as in Cyprians time and was the corruption of the time as was crossing rebaptizing c. in use in his time too and as the Jewes Infants partooke of the passeover the contrary whereof appeares in a word wee spake of initiatory sealing of persons outwardly capable thereof otherwise albeit the parties have a covenant right unto it in the generall yet in that case of incapability it 's peculiar and their jus in re justly suspended from being personally elicited and this doth not make the ordinary rule and ground of right to the initiatory seale to bee invalid suppose an adult beleeving Pagan or Turke to joyne to our opposite Churches who make totall immersion essentiall to baptisme and that they were banished into Freezeland or Greenland or some such cold countrey if this person bee very weake and sick yet desireth to joyne to them ere hee die I demand whether hee hath right to baptisme or no this will not bee denyed Yea but is this right to bee elicited surely no unlesse they would bee guilty of his death But why not baptized because you will say it 's not simply necessary to salvation There being no contempt of it but onely a naturall and corporall incapacitie thereof but this crosseth not that ordinary rule ground and way of baptizing Very true but then let none object against such Infants covenant right to the initiatory seale the case of the females of Abrahams seed which albeit in Abrahams covenant yet not circumcised for when God injoyned cutting away of the superfluous foreskin of the flesh to bee the seale of his covenant the very nature of the command doth in reason if the notion of males had never beene expressed reach the case of the males which have such a superfluous foreskin of their flesh and not the females which are naturally and corporally uncapable thereof as having by nature no such superfluous foreskin and so in that case as in some others that law of circumcision had some things peculiar in it albeit it had other things in common with that of baptisme For the clearer handling of this thesis propounded wee shall lay downe a few other propositions or conclusions SECT II. 1. THat mixt commands of God having some part circumstantiall vanishing some part substantiall abiding the latter is binding to us since Christs time albeit the former be not A seventh day which God shall single out to bee holy is binding to us not the very seventh day of the week to be that day he that commanded the sanctification of the seventh day hee commanded a seventh day of his owne choosing and that to bee that seventh day the former stands in the fall of the latter Hee that commanded a strict holy worship on the Sabbath Exod. 34. 21 c. he commands sutable worship to the day and strictnesse of worship in such and such a manner of expressions the former was perpetuall the latter temporary the moralitie of the second commandement inforceth all the substantialls in seales or worship injoyned nor doth Christ in that sense abolish a title of the Law SECT III. THat consequentiall commandements grounded on Scripture are Scripture commandements as even consequentiall articles of faith are articles of faith and in a word all consequences drawne as necessarily flowing from or grounded upon Scripture principles these are of Scripturall warrant Paul Act. 13. 46 47. maketh a promise yea an old testament promise to bee virtually a command yea a new Testament commandement Loe wee turne to the Gentiles why so For God hath so commanded us How doth that appeare or where It followeth so hath God commanded saying I have set thee for a light to the Gentiles that thou shouldest bee my salvation to the ends of the earth this was spoken too in Esay 42. and 49. and it was a gracious promise in the letter of it yea but Paul rightly drew the force of a command as included in it according to the old rule Hee which promiseth the end hee commandeth the meanes tending to that end but of this more hereafter but here wee see what ground worke is made use of in way of authorising so great and waighty a matter upon It 's verily the mind of God and Christ that Baptisme and the Lords Supper should bee administred to the worlds end yet is it onely to bee drawne by Scripture consequence from such like places as Matth. 28. 19 20. and 1 Cor. 11. 26. So when it 's said As oft as yee doe this our Divines make account it is a virtuall command to celebrate the Lords Supper often and not as in some places twice or thrice a yeare That sisters as well as brethren should in case bee ecclesiastically censured it is of Scripture warrant yet by consequence onely for the rule is of a brother offending c. nor is brother of the common gender Matth. 18. 15. 2. Thes 3. 6. 14. And as in matter of practise so of faith it is thus in Christs time there was no other Scripture how then should that great article of the resurrection bee convincingly proved even to learned Sadduces which deny it verily an old Testament proofe Christ maketh account sufficeth as that Matth. 22. 29. 31 32. compared with Exod. 3. 6 c. and Luke 22. 37. yet this was but drawne by consequence Thus the orthodox fathers dealt against the Arrians denying Christ to bee essentially one with the Father they held him forth to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantiall or coessentiall with the Father yet no direct Scriptures are for the same expresly so in reasoning against such as denyed the deity of the holy Ghost or that hee was to bee worshipped they did the like And where is it otherwise then by consequence to bee drawne from Scripture that there are three distinct persons or substances in that one God or that Christ hath two natures essentially distinguished and yet united in one Person c Circumcision is called a signe of the covenant how did Paul in speaking of Abraham mention circumcision as the seale of the righteousnesse of his faith whence drew hee that that circumcision was in the nature of it else it had not beene so to Abraham or any other any such thing verily it was from Scripture consequence And as in matters of faith and practise so in matters of fact the same rule holds Acts 4. 4. there were foure thousands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 virorum not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hominum a word of the common gender which beleeved What no woman among them none of their wives that were very strange but were they not baptized Anabaptists will yeeld surely they were yea but that must bee drawne by consequence The Church of the Philippians Colossians
alone convey sinne to the Infant It beleeveth then and it's baptisme is valid and it 's joyned to the faithfull formerly baptized This the authoritie of the Church our mother holdeth This doth the sure Canon or rule of truth obtaine Thus far forth then it was looked at as a doctrine not onely which the Church had in it but which the Scripture the rule of truth contained in it that in the businesse of Baptisme at least the faith of such as conveyed sinne to the child even of the parents was in stead of its owne personall faith so farre as to make its baptisme valid and beneficiall to it SECT IIII. Arnobius THe next witnesse is Arnobius upon the Psalmes which Perkins putteth at the yeere 290. but because Perkins in Praepar ad Demon. Probl. and Rivet in his Crit. sac makes it a spacious booke as mentioning on Psal 119. the Pelagian heresie which came up above sixscore yeeres after Arnobius his time I shall not attempt to fight against a shadow Albeit the place being of the way of Adults Baptisme concludeth nothing against what wee maintaine Lâ—do Vives Ludovicus Vives is the next who in his notes upon Austin de Civitate Dei l. 1. cap. 26. saith the Treatise but it 's rather cap. 27 as Hen. Den. more truely quoteth it affirmeth that in times past no man was brought to bee baptized but those that were come to their full growth who having learned what it concerned desired the same But whether hee that lived but in Henry the eighths dayes or Austin whom hee expounds which lived above twelve hundred yeares agoe had better reason to know what was done of old let any sober minde judge Strabo To the same purpose Walefrid Strabo who lived about the yeare 800. seemeth to speake but Origen who was in the yeare 201. according to Osiander or 230. according to Perkins and Vsher hee mentions Paedobaptisme as from the Apostles as well as Austin doth Melivitan And so doth the Milevitan councell in the yeare 402. according to Wolfius say as much that the Catholique Church hath alwayes understood Infants to bee defiled with Adams sinne and according to the rule of faith to bee on that ground namely amongst others for it 's knowne sundry other gounds were of old urged for Paedobaptisme as that Matth. 19. 13 14 15. Suffer c. For of such c. urged in Tertullians time 200. yeares before as appeares by his assaying to take off that ground in his booke De Baptismo before mentioned baptized See the 1. Tome of Councells SECT V. Bucer THe next witnesse is Bucer in his Annotat. upon the 4th of John set out Anno 28. So much as in the Apostolicall writings are written of baptisme is apparent that baptisme was administred to none by the Apostles but to those of whom concerning their regeneration they made no doubt c. I have looked that very booke and a booke distinct from his greater booke on the Evangelists and there is no such words It 's a meere forgery Bucer is againe cited Proposion 6th saying that Christ hath no where plainly commanded that children should bee baptized If the speech had been just thus yet it 's evident his Intent was not that children ought not to bee baptized by vertue of Gods command which is the direct conclusion subscribed to in the explication of it at Wittenberg by him and others as before but that the command was not in so many words expressed but by necessary consequence to bee concluded His booke intituled The groundworke and cause I have not though like testimonies have been answered before SECT VI. Ruffinus THe next is Ruffinus in his exposition upon the Symbol that those at Rome and Aquila that were to bee baptized must first acknowledge and confesse the 12. Articles of the Creed Here Ruffinus is as one against Paedobaptisme By others when Origens authoritie is urged upon Rom. 5. for Paedobaptisme then it is spurious and the words of Ruffinus Now how should one behave himselfe amidst this contradiction of the antipartie Well wee shall ward off both Blowes as they come God willing As for this testimony as much is in the Treatise and the same place brought out of Austin in his 8th Booke of Confessions that albeit the Authors conceale the name of the place where Victorinus was to have made confession of the faith as the custome was namely at Rome Yea but how then saith Austin lib. 4 cont Donat. cap. 13. 14. that it was ever the use of the Churches and that delivered from the Apostles to baptize Infants Verily both are subordinates and not contraries According to the subjects mentioned if speaking of Adults then the former is true if of Infants then the latter is as true Albeit it 's as true after the custome then in use in Ruffinus his time that Infants did make confession by their sureties as according to God they did and doe now confesse their faith so farre as concerneth their baptisme in their parents even as every man Deut. 16. 17. giving as hee was able their males which personally there appeared came not before the Lord empty not any of them but gave scil in their parents offering for them CHAP. VII SECT I. HIs proofes out of Popish writers as Eckius mentioned in proofe of that and of the 7th Proposition Rossensis Cocletus Ennusius and Staphylus to which some adde Bellarmine I doe not much regard because they can play Legerdemaine fast and loose with a trick that they have If they dispute against Calvinists about the sufficiency of Scripture or validitie of humane traditions then Paedobaptisme is a tradition of the Church If against Anabaptists then Eckius in his Enchiridion here cited hath his foure Scripture arguments to prove it to bee of Scripturall authoritie and foundation For Bellarmine hee hath in his book of Baptisme cap. 8. 3 arguments from Scripture for it And although saith hee wee doe not find it commanded expresly that wee should baptize Infants Tamen id colligitur satis aperte ex scripturis ut supra ostendimus Yet it is to bee gathered plainly enough from Scriptures saith Bellarmine as wee have before shewed Wherefore of such if I may say as hee bluntly once spake to his companion If they can with the same breath blow hot and cold let them even eate porridge with the devill if they will I like not their falshood SECT II. OF Lutherans Pomeranus is quoted whose booke of children unborne I cannot meet with and so cannot trace my Authors here And in such a case as they say Travailers and Souldiers may lie by authoritie when none can contradict them But yet what sayes Dr. Pomeranus that for the space of 1200. yeares men erred concerning children the which wee cannot yet willingly would baptize what his intent is by these words of his cannot well bee gathered If hee intend it of all sorts of children that it is an errour to baptize
to purge away and mortifie heart sinnes and sheweth it was a very Gospel promise like that Heb. 8. 10 11 12. of writing the Law of grace in the heart now this was made to the seed or children of these Church-members assembled as Chap. 29. 14 15. here is not any evasion as is usuall in mentioning Abrahams seed to say hee meant their Allegoricall and their spirituall seede c. this people to whom this was made being not so spirituall themselves Nor was it some bare tender but it was in way of speciall Covenant and oath on Gods part as Deut. 29. 14 15. sheweth nay it was of a soveraigne nature to bring about what God in his secret counsell intended hence called a commandement Deut. 30. 11. like that Psal 105. 8. the covenant and the commanded word were one and lest any doubt should arise how this should bee ratified and made good Moses prophetically setteth out Christ as dead and risen in whom this covenant was virtually ratified vers 12 13. all which the Apostle further explaineth when to set forth the way of Gods free Covenant grace in Christ without workes Rom. 10. 6 7 8. calling it the righteousnesse of faith or Covenant of grace in Christ which justifying faith is to improve the righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise say not who shall c. where was this spoken but in Deut. 30. 11 12 13 14. That commandement or covenant was not farre off that any should say who c. but it was nigh them c. and that commandement which was not farre off vers 11. that any need speake as verse 12 13. who shall ascend c. was the same word which was nigh them in their mouth and heart vers 14. this the Apostle expounds to bee the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. 6. and word of faith verse 8. or covenant and promise of grace in Christ descending into the grave noting his humiliation ascending into heaven noting his exaltation verse 6 7. which faith was to beleeve and that very doctrine of faith was that which the Apostles preached as Paul saith this is the word of faith which wee preach this then albeit called in Deut. 30. a commandement yet was it a covenant and that not of workes nor a bare subservient covenant but the very Gospell covenant ratified in Christ the very object of faith and that which the Apostle preached now what this commandement or Covenant was that circumstance noteth Deut. 30. 11. this commandement or covenant which I have commanded this day for Moses had that day propounded it in a Church-way and as a mutuall covenant betwixt them and God as well as God and them the parents stipulating therein in behalfe of themselves and children and so in reference to them also a conditionall covenant made that day in the plaines of Moab Deut. 29. 1. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15. 29. and 30. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14. so that the places compared evidently prove 1. That the covenant interest of inchurched stipulating parents children is Gospel And secondly that the Apostles preached this doctrine Thirdly that beleevers are to eye the Covenant in such a latitude as to their children with them by faith Fourthly that the essentials of the Covenant of grace in the latitude of the extent thereof to covenant parents with their children held forth in the old Testament was delivered and held forth as valid to the faith of the Saints in the new and after Christs incarnation This second and fourth particular here mentioned might bee further confirmed both by rule in that it being proved to bee Gospel by the places now compared it must needs bee that the Apostles preached the same being injoyned to preach the Gospel Marke 16. unlesse they either disobeyed Christs charge or hid some part of Gods Evangelicall mind from his people contrary to Rom. 10. 15. 18. and Acts 20. 27. 2 In that also Peter being to call upon his hearers to repent and consequently to beleeve hee propounds the word of their faith in such a Latitude as with reference to their children Acts 2. 38 39. The like doctrine doth Paul hold forth to the Saints at Rome and inchurched beleevers there touching such children Rom. 5. 14 15. even touching the abounding of the graces of Christ to them And the like virtually also is held forth by him Rom. 11. 16 17 18 19. as elsewhere is proved and so 1 Cor. 7. 14. First then that which beleevers as such have doe and ought to beleeve as a branch of the covenant of grace that is Gospel but this is of that nature ergo The major needs no proofe the former Texts also clearing the same the minor de jure it 's evident they ought to beleeve the whole Covenant made with them as is evident faith must bee as large as it's object the Covenant is the word of faith A beleever in the exercise of faith should as well have respect to the whole covenant as in the exercise of the obedience of faith respect the whole word of commandement hee doth not else beleeve rightly which doth not desire and indeavour this this therefore being one branch of Gods Covenant to beleevers as beleeving and inchurched as these Scriptures compared shew they ought to beleeve this which respecteth their seed as well as that which respecting themselves if they beleeve aright God in making a covenant in a Church reference especially as was that with Abraham Gen. 17. 7. hee taketh in their seed or children as joynt covenanters Hence the phrase of seed in their generations taking in parents generating and children begotten as those in and by whom Churches are likely to bee continued whence God when to speake in reference to the Church seed as well as to the choyce elect seed of Isaccs line in which the visible and not meerly the invisible Church was to bee continued hee saith hee will establish his covenant with Isaac not with Ishmael Ishmael was Abrahams seed too and therefore externally in the covenant and therefore sealed but God knowing that Ishmael would reject this hee warneth Abraham of it a little before that it might not trouble him afterwards It is not to bee with him in his generations for that cause Gen. 17. 18. compared with Gen. 21. 9 10 11 12 13. but with Isaac in his generations God not opposing therein Isaac to his Church-seed but to Ishmael who by rejecting the covenant will and did come hee and his to bee cast out hence when God speaketh in reference to our times after Christs incarnation when a woman compast a man Jer. 31. 22. hee saith hee will bee a God not to the families in Judah or Israel meerly but to those throughout the earth It 's the old phrase in Abrahams covenant expounded and enlarged I will be a God to thee and to thy seed in their generations Hee saith not barely to thee and to thy seed in regeneration but in their generations Now
Ephesians c. surely had the Lords Supper administred among them so the Thessalonians the seven Asian Churches had baptisme administred to and among them yet this must bee drawne by consequence or no way according to that true rule all this is regular scil Scripture is not the letter alone but the minde and intent thereof drawne by consequence according to the Analogy of faith and by this rule wee are to hold forth the doctrine of faith and rule of manners and worship c. Rom. 12. 6. Else as well many absurdities would follow Must wee actually sell all taking up a Gibbet daily lend freely looking for nothing againe turne the other cheeke to him which smiteth one plucke out our eyes cut off right hands c Analogy of faith must helpe here Hence Evangelicall duties are not alwayes grounded upon expresse commandements either in old or new Testament but from consequences drawne from either such as are praying morning and evening in the family and also in the closet alone constant daily and set meditation daily reading of the Scriptures in the family holy vowing setting a part solemne dayes in private or publique for thanksgiving c. much lesse are many of these come over againe as some phrase it in the new Testament with mention of the persons thereunto oblieged thereby receiving their binding virtue nor is that therefore sound that in point of worship that is excluded which is not expressed doe not such even grant consequences SECT IIII. 3. THat Federall ordinances such as are the seales are as well priviledges as precepts hence circumcision is reckoned as the fathers priviledge Acts 7. 2. 8. hence Rom. 3. 1 2 3 4. see more Acts 2. 38 39. this some which oppose us acknowledge when such speeches as these are used that it is certaine the Jewes had by Gods appointment the priviledge of circumcision and the covenant made with Abraham did belong to them in speciall manner and that children of parents not matrimonially sanctified as Zara and Pharez were in the covenant of saving grace and Church-priviledges surely then circumcision was one which these babes did partake of And the Jewes had this priviledge to bee reckoned in the outward administration as branches of the Olive and one of the wayes of that administration was circumcision was it not And the priviledges in respect of the administration of the covenant are now many wayes inlarged and made more honorable and a little before the promises of the covenant of grace being of the substance not of the administrations are priviledges and the same now to beleevers and as large and honorable as then These speeches indeed seeme not so consonant to some passages before and some after that it is no priviledge to us to have any thing in lieu of that administration but Christ already come who is in stead of all But let mee reason of these things a little the covenant of Abraham in speciall wise belonged to the Jewes and that was a covenant of grace scil to bee a God to them and theirs as I have proved was this no priviledge to them or was that Deut. 29. 14. with 30. 6. no priviledge was it no priviledge for this name-sake of God to have such ingagements not meerely for temporalls but spiritualls even when they had provoked him Ezek. 36. from the 17. to the end Were they with theirs so peculiar a people in these respects and yet were these no priviledges Deut. 14. 2. see more Chap. 7. 6 7 8. it 's reckoned as a choyce fruit of his love And were even sundry Infants of theirs base borne in the covenant of saving grace and Church priviledges and was this no priviledge to them if so since the promises of the covenant of grace are priviledges and the same now to beleevers and as large and honorable as then either these promises to their children mentioned Deut. 30. 6 c. were not of the substance of the covenant of grace and then how could even base borne children bee in the covenant of saving grace or they are no priviledge neither of which I suppose will bee affirmed if these promises to Church children bee not barely of the administration of the covenant for so are the Church priviledges rather which are before made distinct from their inbeing in the covenant of grace but of the substance Then why not now the same and larger rather Why are beleevers children then excluded the covenant And are the priviledges in respect of administration of the covenant now inlarged c. Then either that administration of the covenant initiatory seale as such to their children was no priviledge or there must be such a like priviledge and not straitned at least not wholly excluded as that of a like I say not the same but a like administration of the initiatory covenant seale to inchurched beleevers children now And suppose it bee no priviledge to have any thing in lieu of circumcision of Infants but Christ yet is it no priviledge to have any other thing then Christ to beleevers themselves Circumcision is confessed to bee an appointed seale of initiation to them that entered into covenant with God before Christs incarnation and baptisme such a seale since and that it signified sanctification by the Spirit justification and salvation by Christ and faith in him but as to come and baptisme as come c. and is this no priviledge to beleevers that now they have not that manner of initiation by circumcision yea but in a better way they have scil by baptisme Christ indeed was then to the Saints and so hee is now all in all ordinances and priviledges the Chieftaine that first or principall one Esay 41. Cant. 5. Psal 73. 25. but it was not therefore no priviledge nor is now the like to have together with Christ many pretious ordinances dispensed to them and us and verily the Scripture in old and new Testament accounteth it no small priviledge to have Gods Tabernacle and Sanctuary Church and Church ordinances with us and persons to bee in and under the same hence promised as a reward and a fruit yea part of the ratification of his covenant with them Levit. 26. 9. 11. and therefore in the choyse times of the Gospel it 's so reckoned Revel 21. 3. yea and as of old the childrens Church estate and priviledge was therein included as of that nature so in reference to the other times mentioned was the same of the same account as wee have shewed from Ezek. 37. 25 26 27. SECT V. 4. THat Baptisme is now the onely initiatory visible seale of the covenant which being once administred there needs no more renewing of it First it is a seale of the covenant no bare badge of Christianitie as some have said albeit the more judicious of our opposites yeeld this that the covenant of grace is said properly to bee sealed in Baptisme and that Baptisme since Christs incarnation is the appointed seale of God to such as
gladly accepting Peters word especially the gladding word of promise which was the joyfullest word hee spake as belonging to them and to their children yea when accepting so gladly that injoyned dutie upon the ground of baptisme surely controversies of farre lesse weight are not passed over in silence witnesse that Acts. 6. 1. and 15. 38 39. and Gal. 2. 11. and 21 22 c. mee thinkes to common reason and rationall heads and hearts as well as gracious It should bee rather concluded as a matter out of question and that no such new distance and difference was put of parents in covenant and Church estate but not now the children as formerly of parents to bee sealed by the initiatory Church and covenant seale unto Church and covenant fellowship but not now their children as formerly SECT IX A Fourth argument followeth scil In that the Infants of covenant inchurched parents which were externally interested in the covenant of grace as invested with the covenant of a politicall visible Church to whom the Seales were appointed they were sealed as they were in bodily respect capable to bee sealed in that initiatory way of circumcising therefore Infants now according to their capacitie in bodily respects of the like initiatory appointed seale are to bee sealed in the initiatory way of baptizing For clearer proceeding in the argument I shall lay downe a few propositions First that the old testament is avowed by the holy Ghost in the new to containe all things necessary for faith and practise for substance and that so fully that a minister of the Gospell ordinary or extraordinary might bee furnished thence with ground-worke and generall rules upon and according to which to proceed in holding forth any thing necessary to bee beleeved or practised Of the Scriptures of the old Testament is that full testimony 2 Tim. 3. 14 15. See Cartwright in locum see Luke 16. 29. 31. Secondly that the Apostles in all other things used to hold forth Gospel services with analogy to legall Types Rites and Sacrifices c. testimonies are plentifull for it Thirdly that it was the Apostles use to hold forth and confirme things of most weight from the old Testament Act. 2. from the 14. to 41. and 3. 22. to the end and 4. 10 11. 24. to 29. and 8. 12. 25. 35 36. compared with Esay 52. 15. and 53. 1 c. So Acts 21. 38 39. old Testament grounds yea from the promise are given them for baptisme it self in the new yea for the dispensation of all the Gospel ordinances unto the Gentiles as thereof capable Acts 13. 46 47 48 c. Either then they had no ground or if any they urged them not which is contrary to those places or if any they urged them from the old Testament then onely extant to establish their practises Fourthly that Christ himselfe gave them patterne in this way of proofe Fiftly that the people with whom they had firstly to doe were beleeving Jewes in that way and they were zealous for the old Testament in the generall Sixtly that the ancients of the primitive Churches have rarely if at all denyed the comming of baptisme in circumcisions stead Seventhly that where a commandement of God doth injoyne any one thing upon such a ground there the command doth require all things wch are of the same nature as helpefull to the same thing as the Commandement Thou shalt not kill forbids anger also as tending to the same end scil to murder and as well forbidding striking rash speaking c. on the same ground as tending to murder yea but Christ expresly forbids it Answer Christ doth not put any thing thus upon the commandement which was not virtually in it before hee urged it but not legislatively as then making a law in such particulars but declaratively as expounding that law and reducing particulars to their generall heads of commandment Yea but there was his sanction thereof in that reducing True but when explained yet so as things in the commands before onely then clearely understood to be so so here looke as God commanding Abraham circumcision in the flesh for that end and on that ground that it might be an initiatory seale or Sacramentall signe of the covenant so also in the same doth hee virtually command baptisme with water as being of the same nature scil such as fulfilleth that end scil initiatorily to seale the covenant therefore albeit circumcision cease yet the commandement thereof reacheth and partly authoriseth that baptisme in the application of it to Infants for that end as of old to those Infants for that end Baptisme is a signe I say of the covenant and therefore either naturall and then any washing uninstituted had sufficed this way but that such washing of water should bee that signe needed an institution and being instituted it is now of the old use to seale initiatorily the covenant to adult or Infant externally initiated in it Yea but Christs institution gave a rise both to the signe that baptisme should bee that and that such and such persons should be signed with it therefore not the command of circumcision gave rise so much as to the application of that signe to such or such persons Answer it followeth not that Christs institution gave warrant therein therefore not the commandment of circumcision since both consent in the maine ground of both scil that wee shall apply our selves to the use of such signes as hee shall appoint and that in both should bee the same moralls or spiritualls signified the Lord knowing that wee needed some solemne externall way of signification of his mind of grace by some signe as well as they did Eighthly as none may adde to so neither may any detract from any words of Gods grace wherein hee hath expressed himselfe unlesse hee himselfe repeale the same hee once would have his covenant of grace to bee to the whole Church and Church seed and once would have it initiatorily sealed on them hee hath repealed the way of sealing but the covenant hee hath not the extent of it to parent and child hee hath not the ordinary dispensation of it in and from and by the visible Church hee hath not the sealing use of an initiatory covenant and Church seale hee hath not the things mainely to bee sealed even covenant and Church right at least externall and the like both of inchurched covenant parents and children hee hath not as in former conclusions hath been shewed SECT X. HItherto that knowne and much controverted place Col. 2. hath reference the Colossian Church and members of it as the Apostle urgeth against the circumcision teachers are as compleat in Christ without circumcision as ever any other Church or the members of it yea as even the best of them were with circumcision that is the proposition hee layeth downe Col. 2. vers 10. if they had objected Abrahams and Isaacs and Jacobs and Davids compleatnesse in covenant respects and Church respects Gentile Churches and members are as
concluded it is in the order of things acted as uttered that repentance goeth before faith and that a man actually may repent before hee actually beleeveth the Gospel and so Rom. 10. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth is placed before the other if thou shalt beleeve with thine heart Ergo a man may make a saving confession of Christ before hee savingly beleeve with the heart yea if the place it selfe in Marke must bee so closely stuck to without comparing it with the Scriptures of the old Testament which were then when Marke writ the onely Scriptures besides Matthews Gospel existing it would follow in the reason of persons then living that the Gospel must bee preached to Dogs and Cats Fowles and Fishes c. since it 's expresly said Preach to every creature Thirdly I demand of Mr. B. whether it bee absurd to say the Gospel is preached to little ones which understand not what is said if so then what thinkes hee of that speech of Christ in the presence of the little ones which hee uttered concerning them Of such is the kingdome of God and hee that receiveth not the kingdome of God as a little child c. was this Gospel or not surely yes to Mr. B. it is so which holdeth that Christ spake it of their interest in glory it selfe here was then Gospel preached to little ones to Infants yet not absurdly Hee dares not say that was not Gospel which Moses on Gods behalfe uttered Deut. 30. 6. as hath been shewed yet spoken to little ones then present Deut. 27. 14. and that was such Act. 2. 38 39. to so many as might bee present as well as touching so many as were absent Zacharies speech spoken as to his babe Luke 1. And thou child shalt bee called the Prophet of the most high c. it was Gospel preached to a babe But to come to the core of the objection as if absurd to bee baptized unto one knoweth not what or as others when one understands not the mysteries of such an Evangelicall act and ordinance I answer Isaacs circumcision was an Evangelicall ordinance as a signe of Gods covenant of grace with him and to confirme the promise of God to bee a God to him scil to fulfill such promises as Luke 1. 73 74 75. and hee to walk in his father Abrahams footsteps c. as some acknowledge it did signifie sanctification of the spirit justification by Christs blood and faith in him as to come c. and so of an Evangelicall nature if to any to him who was the child of promise yet did not hee then understand these things did God then in injoyning his circumcision so young injoyne an absurditie surely no. Christs act in blessing those Infants Marke 10. and Luke 18. as that also of his imposing hands on them and imbracing them or taking them into his armes these were no legall nor ceremoniall but truely gracious and Evangelicall acts of Christ and very mysterious yet not absurd because they knew not nor understood what hee did for them in blessing of them Peter understood not at present that Evangelicall act of Christ in washing of his feet yet must it bee done or it had beene worse for him John 13. 7. 9. 12. will Mr. B. challenge this act also upon the former grounds to bee absurd As for that whim of I. S. I say wee lay not foundations of building faith upon humane testimony more then they of old in holding out the Doctrine of circumcision Infants circumcised knew not more that they were circumcised in way of an ordinance then children now doe of their baptisme when they come to bee growne up both sorts know it as it is testified to them by others Yea but there was a visible mark to bee seene which is not in baptisme grant it so yet how knew they that it was not given them in ludibrium by enemies or unto some false God and worship by some Idolatrous Priests amongst whom they might bee as captives and they could not know that it was administred to them in a Church way and according to Gods rules but by hear-say by friends or parents And therefore in the maine of knowing both as ordinances administred upon them they are one Fourthly Disciples onely that is beleevers are to bee baptized according to Marke 16. 16. the affirmative including the negative therefore not Infants Let us examine this principle and principall ground worke of our opposites 1. Then it seemes Scripture Disciples of Christ are onely such beleevers as Marke 16. 16. speaketh of and such beleevers onely as that verse mentions are to be baptized which I deny First the beleever mentioned Marke 16. 16. is one that shall surely bee saved and not condemned as the opposition sheweth but neither is every one which is called a Disciple such a one witnesse that John 6. 66. and Act. 20. 30. no true beleevers can so fatally bee rent away as members cruelly torne from the body as the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth they were but externally in the body of Christ not efficaciously Mr. B. saith a Disciple is in English a Scholler yea but all that are Schollers at schoole come not to good nor do they effectually learne what they are taught Secondly if Marke 16. 16. bee the rule of baptizing then none are by rule to bee baptized but such as savingly beleeve for of such a one hee speaketh in opposition to such a one as is damned And then the Apostles which baptized so many John 4. 1 2. whereof sundry Chap. 6. 66. proved apostates and came no more at Christ breake rule as also did John in baptizing sundry of the multitude amongst whom hee knew were many chaffy hypocrites Matth. 3. 9 10 11 12. but of that more else where And whereas Mr. B. challengeth us to shew an Example of one baptized without faith It 's evident many a one was baptized besides such a one as beleeving and being baptized should bee saved as Marke hath it many a baptized person being never saved as sundry of them John 4. and 6. compared yea if hee meane it of some speciall personall confessing of faith in Christ it was propounded to them as a future thing which afterwards rather they were to attend Act. 19. 4. John said to them that they should beleeve in him which was to come after him and of those scribes and no mention of so much as their confessing of sinnes before their baptisme John sharply reproved them c. and minded them what they should doe afterward bring forth fruits of repentance c. Matth. 3. 7. 8 9 10. and yet hee expresly saith hee doth baptize them c. I indeed saith he baptize you c. but as Mr. B. urgeth us in that matter of shewing any baptized without faith the Scripture saith hee is silent so say I here the Scripture is silent touching these Scribes confession of faith and in Act. 16. 15 16. the Scripture which
persons albeit not all of every kind are included else I cannot see how any Infants can bee saved unlesse either some are saved which are not blessed in Christ or if blessed in Christ yet such as God never promised should bee blessed in Christ and if so they have a mediator of Christ to them but such an one as is not in respect to them a mediator of the new covenant yea and so have Christ a Savour to them to whom hee is not a covenant as Esay phraseth it Chap. 42. and 49. so every man for every sort of men Heb. 2. 9. and all men for all sorts of men Rom. 5. 18. which are not simply all but many rather vers 16. compared so the world for all sorts of persons in it 1 John 2. 2. how usuall an acceptation and why should it here in matters of lesse moment be scrupled Secondly taken from the nature of the commission scil a charge of Church dispensation of the Gospel or dispensing of it with Church reference Marke 16. 15. it is Gospel they are to preach and this being Gospel that children of inchurched covenant parents were to bee with them also taken into the fellowship of the covenant and people of God externally interested in it as was proved before and the initiatory scale being a branch of the Gospel as well as the promise as baptisme is reckoned Luke 3. 34. 5 6. compared with Marke 1. 1 2 3 4. such Infants federall interest in the Church and initiatory Church seale must needs bee included Thirdly from the latitude of the Church reference to which this commission relateth albeit with some different respects had to those times and ages following according as then the Ministers were extraordinary and Apostolicall and those succeeding were to bee ordinary Pastours Teachers and withall with various respects had to the first foundation members strictly considered as such and others now that latitude it appeares was such as tooke in all the visible Churches throughout the world unto the worlds end From which if such Infants bee excluded an actuall and priviledged interest they are excluded as was proved in ordinary course from salvation there being ordinarily none saved but such as are in the visible Church or some visible Churches in the world And if not excluded an actuall interest in some visible Church or other in the earth why are they excluded baptisme which is here given to distinguish the inchurched parts of the world from all other as well as to ratifie and seale up the covenant to them there is no time set now to limit them to such a day as of old to the eighth that that should suspend their jus ad rem which they had as Abrahams seed so soone as borne from being elicited till the injoyned day Fourthly from that latitude of the nation disciple which taketh in such Infants as well as others and consequently they are reached in the commission of being baptized For Disciples are to be baptized as our opposites confesse For proofe of their discipleship I argue thus All those to whom the thing signified by a disciple as explained in any place of Scripture is appliable they are Scipture Disciples but the former is true of such Infants ergo the latter The Major is evident in that in reason significant names cannot bee denied to persons to whom the thing signified is granted And the spirit of wisedome would not in any place expound the name by the thing if that thing it selfe did not give ground worke to bee so named If any reply that it sufficeth not to have the thing signified by the name in one place unlesse withall the pâ—…ty bee qualified with the signified thing in another as for inâ—…ce in many Scriptures it signifieth a beleever c. this must bee 〈◊〉 in too to this I answer â—…irst I speake of significations of the name as explained by the 〈◊〉 Ghost himselfe and if any will refuse that they presume to 〈…〉 holy Ghost to expound his owne words â—…ly if wee may not rest in one or other such a place but 〈…〉 another way why not another to that and so anoâ—… 〈◊〉 â—…arroweth yet more the signification then that did yea why 〈◊〉 â—…ke in all such places where in any sense it is mentioned where 〈◊〉 wee stop and so that exposition of a disciple Luke 14. 26. must bee taken in as requisite to according as Hen. Den. urgeth it aâ—d thâ—n Judas and Demas and divers others which forsooke Christ never hating their owne lives for his sake could not bee his disciples yet they were so and so doth the holy Ghost call Judas and many others John 6. yea many that never beleeved in Christ himselfe but did after a sort approve his doctrine and followed him albeit for base ends c. yet these were disciples and baptized as such John 4. 12. It 's spoken of disciples of Christ in the Pharisees sense scil persons addicted to his doctrine c. as Disciples of John of Moses c. signifie and not of persons beleeving in him or them John 9. When they asked so oft touching Christ as if they pretended to desire to learne of him c. saith the blind man to those Pharisees Will yee also bee his Disciples or Schollers c. vers 27 28. Bee thou his disciple say they c. not meaning that either should beleeve in him those many Disciples never beleeved that heavenly doctrine of his John 6. yet called Disciples vers 66. Yea if the latitude of the signification of a Scripture disciple must all meet in one to make a compleat definition then Disciples must bee Apostles because some were so called which were such The names of the 12. Disciples Matthew 10. 1. and the names of the 12. Apostles vers 2. are one see more Matth. 28. 16. The eleven Disciples i. e. Apostles It is then enough to attribute that name Disciple to any to whom the reason and explication of that name any where in Scripture mentioned is by the Spirit of God applyed wee neede not feare to follow such a leader and speake after him the minor then is to bee proved that such a signified thing by that name Disciple is appliable to such little ones mentioned For proofe hereof I must take up that wherein I perceive I am prevented by others yet shall not desist to speake the same thing in substance with them one to whom drinke or water is given in Matth. 10. 42. in the name of a Disciple is expounded by the Spirit Matth. 9. 41. to be one to whom it is given in the name of one belonging to Christ Whence I argue All such as belong to Christ externally they are externally his Disciples such Infants mentioned belong to Christ externally therefore they are externally Christs Disciples And the same description of a Disciple which shall bee saved holds thus such as savingly belong to Christ are Disciples which shall bee saved but it 's not needfull to
and second booke of the Epistles of Zwinglius and Oecolampadius they give grounds from Scripture to the contrary See l. 1. Epist Zwingl ad dilectos fratres I will now tell you from what grounds of Scripture I judge Infants to bee baptized c. and l. 2. in his Epist Bercktold and Francis Preachers at Berne hee saith peremptorily contra Scripturas ergo fecissent Apostoli si Infantibus negavissent baptismum the Apostles therefore had done contrary to Scriptures if they had denied baptisme to Infants See more of Oecolampadius his mind too herein in his Epist to Zwinglius and in that to the Preachers at Berne here therefore are two more witnesses abused in this Treatise CHAP. VI. HEre the Authors forget and mistake their owne witnesses names they are in such a hurry they bring in proofes that the Teachers according to the ancient Fathers right did so and so making the Fathers and those Teachers distinct as persons of whom the testimony is brought and as witnesses by whom and yet in the proofes the ancient Fathers themselves are the witnesses of what was done by those Teachers after them as Hilary Tertullian Arnobius Ambrose c. these might say what was in their time but cannot say what Teachers after them will doe or practise unlesse the Authors can by a spell play the Witch of Endors trick to fetch up old Samuel in his likenesse to speake after he was dead SECT I. BUt let us heare what any of them say if wee have not heard it before Hilary As for Hilaries testimony of his owne baptisme it 's not materiall wee mentioned him among the Authors instances of Adult persons baptized Proposition 3. as for his interpretation of baptizing in or upon the name that is upon confession of the beginners it 's as easily rejected as urged unlesse his grounds were shewed or were Scripture proofe SECT II. Ambrose THe next witnesse is Ambrose de spiritu Sancto l. 2. in our Sacrament there are three questions propounded and three confessions made without which three questions no man can bee washed if Mr. B's answer bee good to that part of Tertullian in the beginning of his booke de baptismo mentioning that a man without cost or pompe is let down into the water Observe saith Mr. B. that hee speakes of a man not of an Infant so I might as well say here hee speakes of a mans baptisme not of an Infants which then also was in use but that I feare some body would sit upon my skirts presently and aske mee whether an Infant be not sub genere isto subalterno hominis whether an Infant bee not homo and I ever thought before Mr. B. helped me with that distinction that when the Scripture saith it 's appointed to all men once to die c. Heb. 9. that Infants also were there counted men to die as well as others not to mention other places of Scripture or authors for the use of the word that way and I wonder Mr. B. when hee supposeth Rom. 5. 18. makes for his fancy of generall redemption of children whether of Pagans or Christians then Infants are men on whom the free gift commeth and yet here homo demissus in aquam in Tertullian must bee onely a growne man not Infants as if Infants now were not homo but this answer must bee better grounded or else I shall keepe my opinion that as an Infant is homo so Tertullians testimony there speaking indefinitely of any baptized person man or woman Infants youths or riper persons c. hee doth beare implicite testimony in that very place to Paedobaptisme as in his time But to returne to Ambrose I say that in Ambrose his time such confessions and questions were and Infants were baptized too that corruption being then in use of adding to Infants baptisme interrogations to them that brought them to baptisme which answered in their names and made confession in their stead For others were baptized in Ambrose his time and before then such as could personally answer or make confession yea and that it was Ambrose his judgement that it was the mind of God that others should bee baptized then could make such confessions witnesse that among other places of Ambrose which hee hath in his 5th Tom. in his Homilies upon Luke Jordan was turned back signifying the future mysteries of salvation in baptisme by which little ones in their Infancy are cleansed from the wickednesse of their natures namely in a Sacramentall way SECT III. BUt it will bee here objected that that custome of susceptors in Infants baptisme and the interrogations and questions that were put to them or others in their stead doth shew that of old none but growne persons were baptized upon confession of faith for that when Infants are baptized they must also make confession by others I answer if the very use of susceptors in baptisme were an argument of force against Infants baptisme of old it might as well bee of force against the baptisme of adult persons too upon the same ground as then in use since they also had of old their susceptors when Pagans desired to be baptized they had those which instructed them before hand and when they were baptized they presented them to baptisme and undertooke for them also Stories are plentifull in instances that after that corrupt custome of susceptors in baptisme came up adult persons had susceptors as well as Infants Epidophorus at Carthage of the Church of Fausty had the Deacon of the Church to bee his susceptor Magdeb. hist cent 5. c. 6. Justinian the Emperour was surety for Gethes King of the Herulians when baptized and divers others the Centurists mention as do other Historian nor doth it follow because such confessions and answers were made by such as brought Infants to bee baptized that therefore it argues onely adults used to bee of old baptized rather it argues that of old it was the doctrine of the Church that Infants were baptized principally in others right which offered them to baptisme namely their godly parents or such as tooke them as their owne adopted children to bring them up in Gods feare Hence even after the corrupt and abusive practise of susceptors came up Stories are not wanting to tell us of Christian parents which were susceptors to their owne children witnesse the Story mentioned by Fabian in his 5th book c. 114. Andovera wife to Chilpericus having a little daughter born in her husbands absence did by the perswasions of the Bishop Fredegrand become witnesse to it her self at its baptisme The Centurists mention the same Story out of Ganguinus Hence also Austin in his 14th Sermon upon the words of the Apostle speaking of Infants Baptisme saith if baptisme profit the baptized I demand whom it benefiteth the beleeving or the unbeleeving but God forbid I should say that Infants are not beleeving I have but now disputed it before Hee beleeveth in another which sinneth in another scil in the parents which