of Vertue and Election must cautiously be understood seeing they neither can do any thing hereto as they have reason or election both which are naturall and so corrupted that they are utterly inactive to any moral good without the help of Gods preventing and quickning grace supervenient The Scrâ—pture is expresse You hath he quickned who were dead in trespasses and sins and were by nature the children of wrath even as others c. It is neither of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy And where he said Work out or finish your salvation we may not think it dependeth on our works or of our own ability for saith he it is God which worketh in you both to wil and to do of his good pleasure Lest we should think our selves excused from our uttermost endevour whom he hath made voluntary agents and in some part repaired in our regeneration he requireth that we work that we receive not that grace in vain that we so run that we may attain yet that we may not think that this is or can be by any choice or ability of our own he telleth us presently it is God which worketh in us all which he requireth of us and so good works which follow the â—ustified person being fruits of our calling and election give us a comfortable hope thereof Yet is it most true that God alone according to his abundant mercy not our merit hath begotten us agâ—in to a lively hope 1 Pet. 1. 3. and that if we do these things we shall never fall You say again That God requires nothing on mans part but that its efficacy be not hindred This Proposition though plausible yet is unsound as may appear by that which hath been said to which I add It is indeed required that we do not ponere obicem by unbeliefe impenitency contempt of Gods ordinance c. but he that saith Cease to do evill saith also Learn to do well So the Apostle exhorteth To give all diligence to make your calling and election sure for if ye do these things ye shall never fall And indeed this is the end of our implantation into Christ by Baptism that we should walk in newness of life and no doubtâ— but God requireth of his Israel that they should not quench the Spirit or ponere obicem in that he said Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart and harden your necks no more Deut. 10. 16. Yet he requireth them to fear the Lord their God to walk in all his ways to keep all the commandements of the Lord v. 12. 13. And into the same covenant are children admitted by baptism which bindeth them on their first abilities to perform the same though for the present they are no more active then circumcised Infants were who were received and sealed into the present covenant of future faith and obedience Then you say there is a necessity that they should be brought to baptism there being an absolute exclusion of all persons unbaptized There is a necessity of Baptism in respect of Gods ordinance which bindeth us to administer it but we affirm not such a necessitatem medii that all they should be absolutely excluded from the Kingdom of Heaven who die without baptism as many infants do That uncharitable opinion we leave to the maintainers therof we have no warrant so to judge and therefore we say that not the bare privation but the contempt of the Sacrament condâ—mneth of which Infants cannot be guilty So that if you clearly mean a necessitatem medii in respect of the externall ministry of man your Proposition is not true nor owned by us but if you mean a necessity in respect of our duty in baptizing infants or their spirituall baptisme by regeneration we so farre consent but then we cannot excuse your medium for an homonomia which concludeth not an absolute exclusion of all persons unbaptized is apparently fals in the example of the â—enitent Thiefe saved but not baptized and in charity to be concluded so in elect children dying before they are baptized so that if our Arguments for baptizing children were no better you might confidently say as you do in the Epilogâ—e of your Plea They have been encouraged in their error more by our weak arguingsâ— then by any truth of their cause or excellency of their wit You say Internall means of bringing them to an eternall happiness they have none for grace being an improvement and heightning the faculties of Nature in order to an heightned and supernaturall end grace hath no influence or efficacy upon their faculties who can do no naturall acts of understanding What acts of understanding elect Infants dying have I cannot determine but I am confident all considering Readers will abominate and loath this bold and uncharitable censure Who admitted you into the secret of Godâ— councel concerning the state of Infants whom either he preserveth to age or taketh away before they could be baptized It is better resolved toa worse end by your self p. 231. Num. 16. Many thousand ways there are by which God can bring any reasonable soul unto himself And here in the very next place you affirm That God hath made a promise of the holy Ghost to Infants as well as to men Reconcile these two and your self to your self if you can First you say Grace hath no influence or efficacy upon their faculties who can do no naturall acts of understanding And next you affirm that God hath made a promise of the holy Ghost to Infants as well as to men I demand Doth God perform every one of his promises Do you mean by the Holy Ghost the giâ—ts and graces of Gods holy Spirit regenerating the elect to the Kingdome of Heaven Can any be saved without such grace can the holy Ghost be inactive and without effectuall influence in any soul Doth God give in his good time and measure his grace of Regeneration to all the elect that is a powerful influence on them to regenerate sanctifie and finally save them Doth God save any Infants These things being concluded on I would fain learn how it can be true that children have no internall means of salvation or that Gods Spirit hath no influence upon their faculties Doth the reasonable soul of an Infant express an admirable influence on the bodily faculties by a naturall instinct for its preservation and shall not the Creator the Spirit of Almighty God have much more active influence on the soul of the elect to save it though there appear none or very slender acts of understanding to the judgement and sense of man This your Proposition will appear false if we consider infants circumcision those could do as few acts of understanding as infants now can neither can any man without high impiety affirm that Gods grace had no influence or efficacy on them whom he did not in vain command to be sealed into his covenant It
is well observed by our party that the Sacraments are not bare resemblances or memorials of things past neither naked signes or testimonies of grace received but also Canales gratiâ—â— whereby God ordinarily deriveth to us those Rivers of living Waterâ— Ioh 7. 3. and both delivereth and sealeth unto us the grace which they represent so that these holy signes are not empty void of or without the things signified although the things are received after one manner and the signes after another one is given by God alone without the observation and knowledge of man and the other onely by the ministry of man and before men As at first Iohn Baptist baptized with water and Christ baptized with the holy Ghost though he baptized not with water but his Disciples and substiâ—utes neither did Iohn baptize with the holy Ghost but Christ So is it now â—hrist baptizeth elect infants by the secret iâ—fluence of his holy Spirit the fruits whereof appear in their season and his Ministers according to his appointment baptize with water To all this you say the Anabaptists give a soft and gentle answer Sure you do but herein laâ—dando praecipereâ— and by saying they do so rather shew them what they should do then us what they do M. Fisher in his Position at the Disputation at Ashford in Kent stiled the maintainers of Pedobaptism an evill and adulterous generation this is one of their soft and gentle answers Mr. Francis Cornwell in his Sermon at Crambrook in Keâ—t called Pedobaptism an Antichristiâ—n Iâ—novation a humane Trâ—â—ition c. Mr. Cha. Blâ—ckwood Title-page calleth his Pamphlet agaiâ—st us The storming of Antichrist Iohn Spislbury calleth Pedobaptism Baptism administred and received in a false Antichristian estate and by the power of Antichrist Edward Barber calleth it Antichristian and abominable And before he saith concerning Mark 10. 14. This place is put in to be read at the sprinkling of children for the Whore hath sweet words c. Is this as you say for your Clients to give a soft and gentle answer or a Boyish manner of contest to call Whore and all ill names where they have not other power to prevail Let all judge who have any sense of humanity wheâ—her this be a soft and gentle answer to call his mother Whore and the worst of such Antichristian whereas in spight of calumnies with other reformed Churches the Church of England hath excluded Popery and what she could banished that mysticall Whore out of her communion But this is their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to conclude their Scene where they have no evicting reason against that which they dislike to pronounce it Antichristian And who is so ready to cast this odious Livery upon others as the most Antichristian I might hereto add many more the like instances of Railers at Infant-baptism calling it Idolatrous of the Dragon and Beast none other then a ceremony of Antichrist a Satanicall Institution c. but that we have too much of our own at home It is the quality of the Beast to open his mouth unto blasphemy against God to blaspheme his Name and his Tabernacle and them that dwell in Heaven But we like not our cause the worse because such rail at it but wish them to consider where the Railers place shall be 1 Cor. 6. 1â— You say The Argument from Circumcision is invalid upon infinite Considerations Pag. 228. Num. 13. It will I doubt not at last prove so strong that neither you nor any other Advocates shall ever be able to over-throw it for that which circumcision was in the Old Testament Baptism is in the New which succeeded it and hath the same end and use that is to be a seal of the Righteousnesse of Faith Rom 4. 11. the same Faith in the same Christ and thereâ—ore the Apostle tells tâ—e Colossians that they wâ—re Circumcised in Christ in that they were buried with him in Baptism so that Baptism is our Circumcision or Sacrament whereby the same things are conferâ—ed and confirmed an in-let for us into the visible Church of Christ a Seal of the Covenant of Grace and free remission of sins by Faith in him into whom it implanteth us But you say Figures and Types prove nothing unless a Commandement go along with them or some express to signifie such to be their purpose We answer 1. They signifie something which is their end and the argument à typo ad veritatem holds good from the signes in the Law to the things signified in the Gospel as Children were typically baptized under the law under the Cloud and in the red Sea â— Cor. 10. 1 c. and their washing with rain from the cloud prefigured our washing in Baptism and by the Spirit And the red Sea in which the Aegyptians were drowned and Israel saved was an Emblem of Christs blood in which all our ghostly enemies are drowned and we saved 2. Here is a meer ignoratio elenchi and mistake of the question in hand which is not whether Circumcision were a type and figure of Baptisme but whether Baptisme so succeed Circumcision as a Seal of the Righteousnesse of Faith That such sorts of persons to wit young and old within the covenants as had right to the one have the like right to the other which we affirm 3. Where you say Vnless a Commandment go along with them c First we say that where the question is mistaken we are not in reason bound to answer untill it be rightly stated and so may wave all that you infer concerning the Dâ—luge Paschal Lamb c. as meerly impertinent to our present controversie Secondly concerning a command for baptizing you doubt not nor we for baptizing of Infants seeing that where the Reason and Equity of the Law remains there the Law for substance is still in force though not for every circumstance Now nothing can reasonably be alledged why children have lesse use of Reason now then they who then lived had â—nder the Law or why they should for present want of the use of reason be now lesse capable of the Seal of the Righteousness of Faith then they were who lived under the Law But you say further Supposing a correspondence of Analogie between Circumcision and Baptism yet there is no correspondence of Identitie This Bull deserves some baiting were we not treating of sacred things therefore I onely say If correspondence iâ—port answering unto in some similitude and likeness therâ— can be no correspondence of identity for no like is identically the same with that to which it is like For although it were granted that both of them Circumcision and Baptisâ— did consign the Covenant of Faith Speak you this as a matter doubtfull Is not the Scripture evident Do you also call the truth thereof in question See Rom. 4. 11. There is nothing in the circumstance of childrens being circumcised that so concerns that mystery but
wholly fail there is nothing left to inferre a necessity of complying in this circumstance of age any more then in the other annexes of the type It wholly holds in substance for ought you have said to the contrary and therefore your following instances are frivolous As concerning baptizing the eighth day we answer 1. That whereas God appointed no set day for baptism we have the greater liberty to do it at the most convenient season on the first second third fourth c. or on any day so that we neither contemn Gods ordinance nor unnecessarily delay it 2. As hath been noted baptism sucâ—â—eded circumâ—ision not in every circumstance but in the thing signified in the end and use 3. This your argument is a fallacious and childish caption à fallacia accidentis from the subject to the accident from the substance to the circumstance as the learned Dr. Featly observeth such a fallacy is this What the Jews were commâ—nded in the fourth Commandement that we Christians are bound to perform But the Jews were commanded to keep holy the seventh day from the creation Therefore we Christians are bound to keep that day Such is this Paralogism If Baptisme succeeded Circumcision then children ought to be baptized the eight day it no more followeth then that children ought to be baptized in the same part where thâ—y were circumcised it will follow rather That because Circumcision was administred to the infant as soon as it was capable thereof or could receive the Sacrament without danger therefore children ought to be baptized as soon as conveniently they may But you say The case is clear in the Bishops question to Cyprian for why shall not infants be baptized just upon the eighth day as well as circumcised If the correspondence of the Rites be an Argument to inferre one circumstance which is impertinent and accidentall to the mysteriousnesse of the Rite why shall it not inferre all The case is as clear in the Question of Fidus the Presbyter whom you call Bishop as it is in your objecting it Fidus made a querie or rather affirmed that Infants ought not to be baptized on the second or third day but that the law of ancient circumcision ought to be considered so that he thought the newâ— born infant might not be baptized within â—r before the eigâ—â—h day Cyprian answereth There is one eâ—uality of the Divine gift to all whether they are inâ—ants or old men for as God is no accepter of persons so neither is he of ages buâ— he shews himself in an even-ballanced equality alike to â—ll as to their attaining heavenly grace if to grievous offenders and to those who have before that much sinned against God and no man is prohibited baptism and grace how much less ought the infant to be prohibited who being new-born hath committed no sin onely that in Adam He hath in his first nativity been infected with the contagion of ancient death But concerning the cause of infants who you say are not to be baptized at two or three dayes old and that we are to consider the law of ancient circumcision so that yâ—u think that a child born may not be baptized before the eighth day all that were in our Councell are of a far different judgment for no man consenteth to that which you thought was to be done but we all rather judged that the merâ—y and grace of God is to be deâ—ed â—o no man born Let the Reader judge bow clear the case is in the Bishops question to Cypriâ—n To the rest of your Arguments we say you dispute ex non concessis We do not say that â—â—e correspondence of Rites inferre the circumstances but the substanceâ— but errors are fruitfull and one absurdity granteâ— many easily follow For that you say from your own fancy which you run away withall And then also fâ—mâ—les must not be baptized because they were not ciâ—cumcised We answer 1. As we have said before baptism succeeded circumcision not in every circumstance which your selves justiâ—ie in that you baptize women but in the substance the thing signified the end and use or as others say in the inward mystery in the promises in use in effects 2. God expressly â—estrained circumcision to males Gen. 17. 10 1â— 14. yâ—t the females were comprehended in the males and to be born of circumcised parents was to them in 〈◊〉 of circumcision and so were they born to God and in his account Daughters of Abraham Luke 13. 16. and so within his covenant of grace and mercy and the sealing of males was then limited to the eighth day but now in baptism the circumstances of sex age and a fixed day are not expressly mentioned but we have a generall commandement to baptize all without exception to any time sex or age 3. Though women were not capable of circumcision and therefore it was not enjoyned them yet the female is as capable of baptism as the male and therefore without exception to sex they who are all one in Christs account must equally be baptized into him 4. Circumcision and Baptism agreeing in substance did yet differ in many circumstances First in the Rite or Ceremony Secondly in the manner of signifying For Circumcision held out grace in the Messias then to come but baptism presenteth it in Christ exhibited Thirdly in the particular testimony annexed to make good the promise for then God promised not onely a covenant with his Church but a pâ—culiar place for the same the land of Caâ—aan untill the coming of the promised Seed but baptism hath no particular promise of this or that fixed place Fourthly in the manner of binding Circumcision did oblige the circumcised to the observation of the whole Law Morall Ceremoniall and Judiciall but baptism bindeth us onely to the observation of the Morall â—aw that is faith repentance and newness of life according to the holy Rule of Gods will revealed in the Moral Law from the curse whereof in respect of non-performance we are delivered in Christ into whom we are baptized Fifthly in their appointed continuance Circumcision was appointed onely for Abrahams posterity and to continue onely unto the coming of Christ but baptism was instituted for all Nations and times unto the worlds end Lastly in circumstance of sex and age so far as circumcision was limited to males and the eighth day So that to argue as you do from the substance to the circumstance or that which is accidentall is fallacious and captious as hath been shewed You say Therefore as Infants were circumcised so spirituall Infants shall be baptized c. This you think a right understanding of the business after your shuâ—â—ling together many strange impertinencies to tell us of baptizing spirituall Infants To which we answer If you mean by Spirituall Infants such as are born again of water and the holy Ghost then you would have them twice regenerate or born If you mean Believers onely for in reason you cannot call an unbeliever or wicked person a spirituall infant then I would fain learn by what discerning spirit you
profit was there of circumcision the Apostle saith much every way and what is the advantage of the believing Christians child and Gods covenant with them what no more then of Turkes and Iewes where is then that promise I will be a God unto thee and thy seed interpreted by S. Peter the promise is to you and your children and to as many as the Lord our God shall call what is it of force only to men and women of yeares where 's the infants part where is his priviledge of federall holynesse as being borne of believing parents What must they be interessed onely when they come to that act of which by nature they have the faculty That is the act of understanding â—aith and repentance In those acts the persons and children of Turks and Iews have a right in the same promises you cannot exclude any person from baptism who believes in Christ repenteth and desireth baptism at your hands Thus you make the promise of God concerning the children of the faithfull of no effect by your tradition and vain opinion But to amend this you say Baptism is not the means of conveying the holy Ghost I suppose you mean the ordinary gifts and graces of the holy Ghost as faith love hope sanctity c. if not there may be a double fallacy in your assertion First in the term conveying and next in the term holy Ghost both whiâ—h may be homonymically intended and then your discourse is meerly captious and to discover it is a sufficient answer and indeed by your following words God by that miracle did give testimony c. it seems you mean that baptism is not now the ordinary means of conveying the holy Ghost that is the gift of miracles unto the baptized if so here is both an homonymia and an ignoratio elenchi Your reason being reducd to a Syllogisme you might take these words the holy Ghost for the ordinary gifts and graces of God necessary to salvation in the one proposition and for the extraordinary in the other and so the question were mistaken which is not whether baptism be an ordinary means of conveying the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost into the baptized as speaking divers unstudied languages curing the sick raising the dead casting out devils c. which we affirm not but whether baptism as the word preached be not the external ordinary means by God appointed to seal us up to a lively hope in Christ to beget faith and to engage us to repentance and newness of life to which all that you here triâ—le concerning imposition of hands and insinuation of rite to confirmation is nothing to purpose neither is the case of Cornelius and Peters argument thereon any waies advantagious to you for you confess it a miracle and how then is it pertinent to our present question You say that God by that miracle did give testimony that the persons of the men were in great disposition to heaven and therefore were to be admitted to those rites which are the ordinary inlets into the kingdom of heaven I then demand if that argument be good Are not children of believing parents to be admitted to those rites which are the ordinary inlets into the kingdom of heaven seeing they are also in great disposition to heaven whom Christ blessed and proposed for paterns to all that shall enter therein But we answer 1. That the great disposition which you talk of was not so much the gift of miracles as the persons inward baptism by the spirit of regeneration and sanctification for the gift of miracles is not of it self any certain argument of salvation see Matth. 7. 22 23. but this was a sufficient warrant to Peter to baptize them as being marked out thereby for the visible Church at least into which elect and reprobate may come 2. To the main we answer That as by delivering a key putting in possession of an house is not only signified but also livery and seisâ— the conveyance and chirogrophum are passed confirmed and actually made sure So in baptism by water the washing which is wrought by the blood of Christ is not only figured but also at last fulfilled in the elect by Christ. 3. In a right use of the Sacraments the things therby signified are ever held out and convey'd together with the signes which are neither fallacious empty nor void of a due effect or without the thing represented because they are of God who cannot deceive and is able to give the effect if the receiver do not ponere obicem therefore the Sacraments are rightly called the Channels or Conduits of grace that is the ordinary means to convey the graces of God into the receivers 4. God confirms his mercies to us by the Sacraments wherein the Minister by Gods own deputation beareth his person or place in the Church as well as in preaching the word so that what they doe who are his Ministers by his appointment he doth both in respect of the institution and effect So the Lord is said to have anointed Saul whereas Samuel anointed him so Jesus made and baptized more disciple then Iohn whereas Iesus baptized not but his disciples by his assignement Therefore although these signes neither convey grace nor confirm any thing to them for good who keep not the Covenant for God made no promise to them yet are they means to convey the graces of God to those that do To conclude we affirm not that baptism conveyeth Gods grace to all that are baptized but to the elect only as that whereof he hath made a peculiar promise to them and that so certain as are those things which God himself sealeth covenanteth for and testifieth in heaven and earth as 't is written There are three that bear record in heaven the father the word and the holy Ghost and there are three that bear witness in earth the spirit and the water and the blood Now if we receive the witness of men the witness of God is greater Under the mouth of two or three witnesses every word must be confirmed and taken for sure how much more when we have by Gods blessing the same witnesses of our faith who are also the promisers workers and sureties of our salvation But from thence you say to argue that wherever there is a capacity of receivinig the same grace there also the same signe 〈◊〉 to be ministred and from thence to infer poedo-baptism is an argument very fallacious c. Quis tulerit Gracchos your dispute is fallacious upon your grounds on which we go not and so all your impertinent superstruction here falleth together They that are capable of the same grace are not alwaies capable of the same signe for women under the law of Moses although they were capable of the righteousness of faith yet they were not capable of the signe of circumcision I would gladly be resolved quanta est illa propositio is your meaning Some of them
Testament and in the â—postles sense Heb. 4 5 6. They crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to open shame who being once baptized and thereby planted together in the likeness of his death Rom. 6. 4 5. Who having once died dyeth no more death hath no more dominion over him will yet be baptized again The Apostles saying It is impossible for those who were once enlightned that is baptized as the Syriac Interpreter rendreth it and as we shall make it appear more anon If they fall away to renew them again unto repentance seeing they crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to an open shame How do they crucifie him afresh to themselves that is as much as in them is Why 1. They are said so to do who iterate or again do or resume that which is a resemblance or similitude of Christs suffering who died but once for in a reiterating it we declare or intimate the first to be void and so if we will have a new baptism we must have a new Christ and he must in our Symbole suffer as if one Christ or his once suffering were not sufficient for our redemption And is not this to pollute the bloud of the everlasting Covenant and Testament and to crucifie again the Son of God Secondly this may be said in respect of reciduation or falling away from Christ as they do who renounce their baptism by which they were implanted into him by receiving another baptism because the merit of Christs Cross being abolished and made void by which they were once renewed it must needs be that Christ should be crucified again and put to shame that they might be renewed by a fresh or new merit of the Cross which seeing it cannot be the Apostle possibly would infer that it was impossible that they which are once sealed and regenerate should ever fall away and that therefore all Christians should do their uttermost endeavour that they may be like good ground near the blessing and that they may not want an iterated renovation which no man can possibly attain As for the rest of your reviâ—ings though we have no cause to be troubled at your dogged eloquence yet for their sakes who are weak I shall endeavour to shew the injurious falshood thereof You say that we in baptizing infants dishonour and make a Pageantry of the Sacrament c. We answer to this puted calumny 1. You may as well in this your Theomachy and fighting against Gods Ordinance object the same against Circumcision of Infants if incapacity of present giving account of their faith as you pretend can make the Sealers of infants lyable to your unjust censure for infants could then no more give an account of their faith then now they can 2. Infants have a capacity of the holy Ghost as hath been proved in the examples of Ieremy and Iohn Baptist c. yea such a measure of sanctification and so certain a regeneration working in them all such things as God knoweth to be necessary to their salvation or himself supplying all those things as that Christ both pronounceth their propriety in the Kingdom of heaven and proposed them as patterns to all those who should enter thereinto Therefore the Apostles Argument being good from the extraordinary and visible gifts of the holy Ghost gifts of miracles flourishing in the primitive Church and marking many receivers to a capacity of baptism which yet might then be had without any interest in the Kingdom of heaven who can forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the holy Ghost as well as we It must as certainly hold from the gift of regeneration and the spirit of sanctification which is in many infants because many infants dying such are saved And now in your judgment doth the baptism of such as are saved dishonour the Sacrament the outward seal which man can give and wicked men receive who have received the thing signified the inward seal of Gods holy spirit which none but himself can give and none but the elect receive Or do you dishonour your self who were so admitted into the Church the Church our holy Mother who maâ—gre the Devils malice and the powers of hell by Infant-baptism bringeth an holy seed to Christ Christ himself commanding us to baptize all without exception to any estate sex age or condition that either are within the Church as born of Christian parents or in their conversion profession of faith and repentance desire to be admitted into the same Adde hereto that Christ particularly cautioned for children left any should despise them openly declaring that of such is the kingdome of heaven And yet the doing of this duty is dishonour to the Sacrament and Pageantry with you But If of every idle word which men shall speak they shall give an account in the day of judgment it concerneth them speedily to repent of these blasphemous calumnies lest it prove a black and dismal day to them in respect of these things for which they can give no better account then their own fancies and others And whereas you say they that baptize infants ineffectually represent a Sepulture into the death of Christ and please themselves with a signe without an effect making baptism like the fig-tree in the Gospel full of leaves but no fruit To say this is an untruth is as much answer as we owe to so reasonless a calumny yet I shall be contented to lay it further open I say 1. Can you be assured that none of these who are baptized in infancy and no otherwise are regenerate and saved Whence have you either such knowledg or commission so to judg You say the Anabaptists say so so said the Pharisees concerning those that believed in Christ This people who knows not the Law are cursed But what warrant is this for you to blaspheme for company 2. God be blessed that we who believe one God one Mediator one Faith one Baptism which we received in our infancy have such a testimony of Gods holy spirit effectually working faith repentance mortification and a comfortable measure of sanctification in us as that we know you speak untruth in that you say that Poedobaptists ineffectually represent a Sepulturâ— into the death of Christ and please themselves in a signe without an effect c. God be blessed which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a lively hope wherein as we need not be beholding to you for testimony so neither are we to regard what you say against it With me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you or of mans judgment but he that judgeth me is the Lord therefore judg nothing before the time He that saith that baptism is a bare signe only fallaciously concludeth dividing things which God hath joyned together 3. Although baptism of infants be effectless to the reprobate whether infant or person
which our present question is is one thing and the inward effect thereof another As it is also in the Word preached the Administration must be indifferently to all Mark 16. 15. whether stony thorny highway or good ground Gods Seeds-men must diligently sow the fruit and efficacy will be to Believers only Hebr. 4. 2. but that no meer man can foresee 2. What Illumination Infants have by the secret working and influence of Gods holy Spirit belongeth to Gods secret councel and therefore not to our inquest 3. Sanctification more then Ecclesiastical in order of time doth not always precede the Seal and Sacrament thereof as may be proved from Infant Circumcision but by the Sacrament which implanteth us into Christ and which is therefore the washing of Regeneration and Renovation the seeds of Faith Sanctity and good conscience are sowed in us which by a powerful and secret working of the Holy Ghost sheweth it self in due season without which work of the Spirit the Gospel most powerfully preached and Sacraments duly administred to the most knowing men and women could bring forth no better effects then a favour of death unto death and condemnation Seeing then the effect to Sanctification and Salvation is neither in the Minister nature of the Water and Washing therewith but in the Ordinance of God nor in the capacity or ability of the most prudent sons of men but in the sole working of Gods gracious Spirit why should any rest in opere operato the work it self done or deny it to any within the Church needing Regeneration that they may be saved Christ joyneth these two together Teach and Baptize and Believe Repent and be Baptized But Infants are not capable of Faith and Repentance Therefore they ought not as such to be Baptized We answer Here is an Ignoratio Elenchi in the mistake of the Question which is not Whether that teaching ought to be divided from Baptism which we affirm not but the contrary persons of years ought first to be taught to believe and repent and then to be baptized But our question is not concerning the Baptism of Adults or persons capable of these things for the present but of Infants here again the question is mistaken and therefore such disputes are fallacious It is true the water without the Word can make no Sacrament nor give any sacramental effect therefore neither young nor old may be baptized where the Gospel is not first preached and received For Baptism is a seal of the Gospel but believing Parents have been taught received the Gospel and been sealed into Gods Covenant therefore they ought to present their children to Baptism who are joynt Covenanters with them Again Baptism is administred with the words of institution by Christ appointed take away the Word and what is the Water but ordinary water The Word is added to the element and makes the Sacrament Whence is this so great vertue of the Water that it but toucheth the body and cleanseth the heart but by the Word not because it is spoken but because it is believed Moreover though God taught Abraham concerning the Sacrament of Circumcision and so he was circumcised and all his Males yet he circumcised Isaac at eight days old so long before that word of faith could be preached to Isaac he received the same Sacrament and Seal of the same Righteousness of faith in Christ in whom believing we also are saved Men of ripe years were first instructed concerning the institution end and use of Circumcision and then received the Seal but Infants as such not capable of instruction first received the Seal of Faith and if they lived to years then they were taught yet the Word and the Seal were not parted in either So is it in Infant-Baptism now Those Infants whom Christ blessed and of whom he pronounced Theirs or Of such is the Kingdom of heaven were such as were fit to be taught for so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also signifieth And Christ in the persons of children blesseth those that were such in humility and innocency not in age We answer 'T is true that in their persons Christ commended humility and innocency and also shewed their interest in the Kingdom of heaven saying Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven that is of such persons and of persons of such quality for he proposeth Infants for a patern Now as they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which sometimes signifieth a Son or Servant of years yet not always as common use of that word shews Matth. 2. 13 14 20. Luke 2. 21 c. so are the same called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 18. 15. which without controversie properly signifieth Infants lately born as Luke 2. 12 16. Acts 7. 19. 1 Pet. 2. 2. new born babes and sometimes children in the womb as Luke 1. 41 44. that which is said 2 Tim. 3. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From a childe thou hast known the holy Scriptures is as much as the Greeks proverbially said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latines à teneris unguiculis from thy tender years that is so soon as it was possible for thee to learn so Psal. 58. 3. The wicked are estranged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the womb they go astray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab utero as soon as they are born speaking lyes So Psal. 22. 9. Thou didst make me hope 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when I was upon my mothers breasts that is very soon very yong The Syriac 2 Tim. 3. 15. translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from a childe from thy tender years so soon as it was possible for thee to learn by a word indifferently signifying Infancy Childhood or Youth but that Luke 18. 15. the same render by the word which signifieth Infants 1 Tim. 2. 15. Acts 7. 19. 1 Pet. 2. 2. and Mark 10. 16. it is said that Christ took them up in his arms put his hands upon them and blessed them which sheweth that they were little portable children had they been of mans growth though never so humble or innocent they would have been too heavy to have been carried in the arms Lastly there can be no rational doubt but that he blessed Infants properly so called who took on him Infancy to save them Nor may we think that they are less then blessed of Christ who are saved by his blood as Infants are That which God Commandeth not in some express precept concerning his worship is not any better then mans invention Will-worship and may not be done But Infant-Baptism is no where in Scripture commanded in any express Precept Therefore it is no better then mans invention Will-worship and may not be done We answer 1. By demanding quanta est major Propositio if it be universal the sense running thus All that is Will-worship which is not commanded in some express Precept it is evidently false For there is no express Precept for many things
as can appear in Scripture how much water must be used herein noâ— how deep it must be as there is no quantum of the elements prescribed in the Eucharist neither is there in all the new Testament either one precept for or example of plunging or dousing the party to be baptized over head and ears under water 3. In Circumcision the whole body was not cut but onely the foreskin of the flesh whereby the whole person body and soul was sealed and admitted into Gods Covenant and so is it proportionably in baptism the seal of Gods prâ—sent Covenant In common use we know the seal of a writing obligatory is not set all over the deed but to some one part by which the whole is confirmed and as in Livery and Seisin a little turf of grass with a twig or smal bough delivered to the Purchaser investeth him in the whole state of the demeasn So here 't is the seal and subscription of a just Deed which passeth the estate not the quantity of the wax or largeness of the parchment nor greatness of the Character whether Text-hand Chancery Court-hand Secretary all these things are circumstantial and no more and so is it in the matter of much or little water in baptism the essence whereof is applying water to the body of the baptized in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost There is therefore no simple necessity of dipping the whole body under water it is sufficient if the face which is as it were the representative or epitome of man in which are united all the senses be dipped washt or sprinckleâ— 4 In baptism lawfully administred by washing sprinkling or dipping the elect have the same interest in the death burial and resurrection of Christ as if they were baptized in the deepest channel of Iordan or any other water Faith which instrumentally gives them interest in Christ being no effect of deep waters but of those Rivers of living waters whereof Christ spake Iohn 7. 38 39. to wit the Holy Ghost 5 Sprinkling doth also aptly signifie our sprinkling with the blood of Christ in baptism cleansing us from our sins â—nd sealing our election 1 Iohn 1. 7. 1 Pet. 1. 2. and pouring water signifieth the effusion of the Spirit upon us Tit. â— 5. and those sprinklings of the blood of sacrifices signified the very same Christ being baptized is said to have come up out of the water Matth. 3. 16. therefore he was in it And the Eunuch went down into the water with Philip in neither appears any sprinkling or washing but rather dipâ—ing We answer 1. It appearsâ— that Christ and the Eunuch were baptized it appears not that either they or any other whom Iohn B or any of Christs Disciples baptized were dipped all under water as hath been said any more then that they were washed or sprinkled with water The word Baptizing in the original signifying sprinkling washing or dipping therefore we take it to be indifferent which of the three ways baptism be administred respect being had to convenience of times places and persons 2. The Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the cited places rendred Out of signifieth properly From as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From not from under the ships and so Christ might come from the water though he were never dived under it or though he had gone only to the depth of the first or second measure of the Sanctuary waters to the anckles or to the knees 3. Philip and the Eunuch are said to have gone down into the water Act. â— 38. for it was a descent to them the waters though shallow or possibly not within very low or hollow banks as Iordan and all great waters of Rivers usually run yet always running lower then the Superficies of the earth near the sources and channels thereof 4 The words Acts 8. 38. are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And both of them descended c. so the word also signifieth to descend or to alight as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to alight from not to come from under an horse or to descend or lâ—t down ones self or to come down from some higher place as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Budaeus after Suidasâ— or to go down to some even place as to invest an enemy to wrestle fight or encountre also to go from one place to another as Acts. 17. 15. it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iacob descended or went into Egypt Acts 10. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Get thee down and go with them So Acts 14. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they went down unto Attalia for so they usuually expressed going from one place to another as the Hebrews by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So far is that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 8. 38. they went down both to or into the water from inforcing the conclusion aimed at therefore the Eunuch baptized was dived under water that it makes nothing for it more then that Iacob going down into Egypt was therefore duckt in Nilus or Peter in the waters of Cesarea â—r Paul and Barnabas in some Attalian waters because these were said in the very same word to go down to these places all which being frivolous and vain your assertion must be left unconcluded for any thing to the contrary in these cited Texts appearing Add hereto that here is nothing said of the Eunuch as going down into the water more then of Philip for they both went down c. now I suppose you will not affirm that Philip as and then when he baptized the Eunuch in that administration stood all under water with the Eunuch or that Iohn B. in the like action in Iordan was ever doused over head and ears for company And how then can it hence appear that the baptized were more dived then the baptizers Behold upon what unsound grounds our Antagonists build their pretended necessity of ducking their disciples in Rivers or deep waters CHAP. V. Protestants arguments against the supposed necessity of dipping rather then sprinkling or washing with water in Baptism THat which the word used by Christ enjoyning the duty of Baptism doth indifferently signifie and commonly import there being neither express example nor precept to restrain it precisely to either that is lawfully and warrantably to be done in baptizing But the word used by Christ enjoyning the duty of Baptism or Baptizing doth indifferently and commonly signifie dipping washing or sprinkling and there is no express example or precept in Scripture to restrain it precisely to either Therefore in Baptizing we may lawfully and warrantably pro more loci temporis statu personarum eitheir dip wash or sprinkle in water In the name of the â—ather and the Son and of the Holy Ghost The major is out of controversie The minor thus confirmed The Word used by Christ Matthew 28. 19 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth indifferently to wash
blind see the Sun what can you gain hereby it may be and certainly is that the Gospels light is hid to some the Apostle will tell you to whom and why 2 Cor. 4. 3 4. It is hid to them that are lost in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ should shine unto them we undertake not to make the truth evident to every gain-sayer and despiser thereof but say of such an one as Elisha for his servant at the beleaguered Dothan 2 King 6. 17. Lord I pray thee open his eyes that he may see The most manifest light of the Gospel had not evidence enough with the Pharisees whom Christ pronounced blind and it concerned them chiefly which he said they have winked with their eyes c. an unbeliever may doubt of any truth and then it is not evident to him The old Academicks were wont to question the testimonie and evidence of their own senses with a quid si falleris being not confident of the truth of that they saw with their eyes and heard with their ears Carneades doubted of all things yet certainly many things were evident of themselves to those who could and would see and know manifest truths though not to him 4. They who deny convincing evidence in Gods Word not only erre not knowing the Scriptures but tacitely accuse the Wisdom and Providence of God for mans salvation of insufficiencie for how shall matters of controversie concerning faith and manners he decided without sufficient evidence and if you think there is not sufficient evidence in Scripture to keep us from errour and to direct us in the way of truth and salvation in what other rule or testimonie will you place such evidence as you would have what in Traditions and unwritten verities where shall we seek these among our adversaries nay but no man can be edified by that which is destructive or in Enthusiasms and Revelations but what evidence can there be in those things whose authority cannot be proved and whose truth cannot be infallible nothing less then that which cannot be false can be the ground of faith and religion whatsoever falleth below that supreme certaintie is but opinion at most Now the Word of God only is infallible because he cannot lye Tit. 1. 2. and therefore his Word is profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished unto all good works 2 Tim. 3. 16 17. 5 If it be rejoined that in our present question and some other cases the Scripture saith nothing expresly and positively to evidence the truth I answer I with Tertullian I am confident to say that the Scriptures themselves were so disposed by the will of God that they might administer matter to Hereticks seeing that I read there must be Heresies which could not be without Scriptures 2 That is Scripture truth which the Scripture proposeth or enjoineth by necessary consequence though not in express words and whosoever disbelieveth or disobeyethâ— that so far he rejecteth the Scripture in his errour and ignorance of Scripture So the Sadduces denyed the resurrection of the dead among other vain arguments so principally a non scripto because Moses whose writings only they received did not in terminis or express words and syllables say the dead shall rise again now though that is true Moses did not expresly say so yet our Saviour told them that therein they erred not knowing the Scriptures Mat. 22. 29. where he meaneth not express words of Scripture but necessary consequence for certainly they knew the express letter yet thought they had not evidence enough from Scripture because they found nothing there in terminis against their errour which Christ yet justly chargeth on them Ye do erre not knowing the Scriptures as touching the resurrection of the dead have you not read that which was spoken unto you by God saying I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Iacob Well what express Scripture is here to prove the resurrection of the dead that Christ should charge those that denyed the same with errour and ignorance of Scriptures Truly no more then we find for Infant-baptism in appearance much less yet thus he who could not be deceived chargeth them because denying necessary consequence they required express words now the consequence was thus God is not the God of the dead but of the living therefore the dead shall rise again To the folding up of all I might repeat sundry things which as necessarily conclude our Infant-baptism as Infants circumcision into the same faith Gods Covenant with Abraham and his spiritual seed that is all Beleevers Christs honouring Infants with sacred embraces proposing them as heirs and patterns designed for the Kingdome of heaven the extent of Gods federal promise to us and our children childrens capacitie of the inward baptism signified in the external sign whole Families and Nations baptized of which children are and ever were a great part Christs absolute command to baptize all Nations without any tittle of exception to Infants Infants-federal and ecclesiastical holiness by their parents and their own right But that I would not be irksom to the prudent and pious Reader to whom I heartily wish a right understanding in all things constancie in the truth and unitie of the holy Spirit that we may all meet in Gods eternal kingdom of glory AMEN A SURVEY OF The Controverted Points CONCERNING INFANT-BAPTISM c. THE SECOND PART CHAP. I. Infants of Christian Parents ought to be baptized I Need not be long in describing this Sacrament only I say that Baptism is a Sacrament of the New Testament succeeding Circumcision the Seal of the Old appointed by Christ for our Inlet into his Church our implantation into Him and the similitude of his death and resurrection in which the water sanctified by the word representeth the blood of Christ sealeth and exhibiteth to the Elect all the benefits of his inestimable merits death passion and resurrection to our regeneration remission of sins and cleansing our bodies and souls from them all though not presently so that we have no sin yet so as that believing in Christ we have no guilt of original or actual sin imputed to us to condemnation for the water by the Ordinance of God touching the body the Spirit of Jesus baptizeth body and soul. Hence Baptism is said to save us 1 Pet. 3. 21. the end of Baptism is that being baptized we might be illuminated being illuminated we might be adopted sons of God being adopted we might be perfected that we may become immortally blessed In our being baptized in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost we do as it were by a solemn Oath or Covenant declare and
the covenant of grace But God hath given the inward operation of his H. Spirit to Infants Ier. 1. 5. Luk. 1. 15. 1 Câ—r 7. 14 therefore no man may forbid water or the outward administration for the baptism of Infants The reason of the major is that all they who are partakers of the grace both signified exhibited in baptism have right to the sign and sacrament thereof and therefore may not be barred from it for that were to withstand God Act. 11. 17. In reason where God hath bestowed the grace signified man may not deny the signifying element and in common right the apparent heirs are unjustly denied the deeds and evidences whereby that right is assured upon them for these are a part of their inheritance and ought by right to follow the same moreover 't is impious to divide that which God hath join'd the sign from the thing signified as they do who allow children grace remission of sins and salvation by Christ and yet deny them baptism into Christ they will yeild them the Jewels but not the Cabinet the Treasure but not the Purse 6 All that are capable of the initiatorie seal of future faith ought to be baptized but Infants are capable thereof therfore they ought to be baptized So under the law Infants were capable of circumcision the seal of their future faith our Infants have no less capacitie thereof then they had 7 All they to whom Gods covenant of Grace extends are to receive the initiatory seal thereof for sealing of the covenant respectively is a part thereof Gen. 17. 10 11. Mark 16. 16. but Gods covenant of Grace in Christ extends to Infants of covenanted persons therefore Infants ought to receive the initiatory seal of the covenant which is baptism The assumption is proved from Act. 2. 38 39. Be baptized evâ—ry one of you for the remission of sins for the promise is unto you and to your children What promise that upon which the Covenant was sealed to Abraham and his seed the faithful and when where or how have Infants of Christians forfeited their right to the seal who as such cannot forfeit 8 If circumcision and baptism were for substance both respective seals of the same covenant of God in Christ then those sorts of men who were capable of the one are capable of the other but circumâ—ision and baptism were for substance both respective seals of the same covenant of God in Christ therefore those sorts of men to wit Infants as well as persons of years who were capable of circumcision are capable of baptism The major may appear in that God never made any covenant of grace but only in Christ and the same Gospel was preached to Abraham and he believed in the same Christ Gal. 3. 8. add hereto there is the same efficient primary cause to wit God making a covenant with his and appointing the respective seals thereof the same necessity on the receivers part original sin in Infants who have therefore as much need of regeneration and admission into the covenant of â—od for remedy as they had under the law and there is the same power and efficacie of the holy Ghost still remaining otherwise Gods grace in the New Testament and covenant in Christ exhibited should be more restrained and of less latitude then it was in the Old under that severe Schoolmaster the Law and which were impious to affirm then Christs coming into the world should be so much disvantageous to believers as that the Gospel should take away the seal of Gods covenant of grace from our children which the Law allowed them under the severity therof No part or condition of the covenant by God appointed for remission of sins and salvation may be withheld by man from those who have right to the covenant and promise of God under severe punishment but the initiatory Sacrament Baptism now is a part or condition of the covenant by God appointed for remission of sins and salvation whereto Infants have right therefore it may not be withheld from such Infants as are within the covenant and have right thereto and to the promise of God See Exod. 4. Luk. 3. 3. Act. 2. 38 39. Tit. 3. 5. now the initiatorie seal of the covenant was and is a part or condition of the same Gen. 17. 10 11. Mark 16. 16. Ioh. 3. 5. 10 All they whom God accounteth holy have a capacity of baptism the seal thereof but God accounteth children of believing parents holy 1 Cor. 7. 14. Therefore children of believing parents have a capacitie of baptism nor doth that ridiculous interpretation which Anabaptists have borrowed of the Jesuites concerning legitimacie overthrow this argument 11 All those who being redeemed by Christ have right to the kingdom of heaven have right to the ordinary Port and Inlet into the same that is baptism but children of believers have right to the kingdom of heaven Mark 10. 14. Mat. 19. 13. therefore children of believers have right to baptism Christ expresseth the entrance or means to regeneration and the kingdom of heaven Ioh. 3. 5. to wit water of baptism by which the H. Ghost doth ordinarily work thereto and presently gives the reason that which is born of the flesh is flesh that as such cannot enter into the kingdom of God 1 Cor. 15. 50. now Infants are from their natural birth but flesh and blood Ps. 51. 7. Eph. 2. 3. therefore if they must enter into the kingdom of God they must be born again of water and the H. Ghost it is true that God can and doth regenerate many Infants without baptism by his H. Spirit 〈◊〉 that they dying without the Sacrament are yet saved in an extraordinary way but for us to deny them baptism and to put their salvation upon extraordinary means where God hath appointed and declared the ordinary is as much as man can do to shut them from the kingdom of heaven and so though their want of baptism shall not be their eternal loss whom God hath elected yet is it their great sin who neglect or despise the ordinance of God and thereby except in case of repentance they shall exclude themselves 12 Whatsoever Christ commanded Ministers to do and which the Apostles in the ordinary office of Ministers did do that is right and just to be done and we ought to do but Christ commanded Ministers to baptize all nations without exception of children and that the Apostles did do for above all contradiction they obeyed Christ therein therefore it is right and just to baptize Infants as being a great part of all nations and we ought to do it 13 That which agreeth with the nature of the seal of the righteousness of faith and the institution of Christ ought to be done but Infant-baptism agreeth with these therefore it ought to be done it agreeth with the institution of Christ who commanding to baptize all nations well knew that there were many Infants therein yet makes no exception of them