commonly take into your Churches such Persons that are converted whose Parents were very wicked and ungodly Persons as any in the Parish and so lived and died as far as you know and yet do you not account their Baptism to â—e sufficient 10. Is it not an hurtful and evil thing to defile and pâ—lute the Church by bringing in the Fleshy Seed which Christ hath cast out 11. Is it not an evil and dangerous thing to lay a foundation of Ignorance and Prophaneness and to confound the World and Church together which ought to be separated and to make the Church National which ought to be Congregational 12. Is it not an harmful and evil thing to establish Human Traditions and make them of equal Authority with Christ's sacred Institutions and reproach them who will not against their Consciences do the same things 13. Is it not an evil and harmful thing to plead for Inâ—ant Baptism or rather Rantism and make it a bone of Contention amongst Christians and so â—inder the Unity of Churches and godly Christians For was that Rubbish gone what a glorious Harmony would follow even such a Day as would make all our Souls rejoyce for he is blind who can't see that that Relick is the cause of our sad Divisions 14. Is it not an evil and false thing to say Persons may have Grace and Regeneration before they know God or are called by his Word and holy Spirit 15. Is it not a strange thing to say Persons may be visible and lawful Members of the Gospel-Church before Conversion and to deny them one Sacrament and yet give them another 16. Is it not a false thing to say Persons may believe and be saved by the Faith of others 17. Is it not an evil thing and a contradiction to say Baptism is a Symbol of present Regeneration and yet apply it to Ignorant and Unconverted Babes wholly uncapable of Regeneration in whom none of the things signified thereby do or can appear 18. Is it not a false thing and a contradiction to say that Baptism is a lively Figure of Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection and yet do nothing but sprinkle or pour a little Water upon the Face by which act all must confess nothing of such things can thereby be represented 19. Is it not a strange and foolish thing to say Baptism is an Ordinance of the Solemnization of the Souls Marriage with Christ and to say 't is a strange Marriage where nothing is professed of a Consent and yet administer it to Babes wholly uncapable so to do 20. Is it not a foolish thing to cry out against Traditions and all Inventions of Men and yet strive to uphold and maintain them And doth not these things hinder that glorious Reformation we all long for and encourage Papists 21. Is it not strange Men should say all the Children of Believersare in Covenant and that there is no falling from a State of Grace but that the New Covenant is so well ordered in all things and sure that it will secure all that are indeed in it unto Eternal Life and yet many of these Children who they say were in this Covenant perish in their Sins dying Unregenerate 22. We will conclude this Chapter as Mr. Danvers does with the words of Dr. Taylor And therefore saith he whoever will pertinaciously persist in his Opinion of Pedo-Baptism and practise it accordingly they pollute the Blood of the everlasting Covenant they dishonour and make a Pagentry of the Sacrament they ineffectually represent a Sepulchre into the Death of Christ and please themselves in a Sing without effect Making Baptism like the Fig-Tree in the Gospel full of Leaves but no Fruit. And they Invocate the Holy Ghost in vain doing as if one should call upon him to illuminate a Stone or a Tree CHAP. XIV Proving Baptism a great and glorious Ordinance and that 't is initiating or an In-let into the Church THE last thing I shall do is to prove Believers Baptism a very great and glorious Ordinance though much despised by Men nay by many Professors of this Age. First of all 'T is a Principle of Christ's Doctrine nay a Foundation-Principle viz. of a true Gospel-Church-State so that according to the Apostolical and Primitive-Institution a Church cannot be truly gathered without it Secondly It appears to be a great Ordinance if we consider the Commission of Christ 1. Consider with what Authority our Saviour gave it forth All Power is given to me in Heaven and Earth Go ye therefore teach all Nations baptizing them c. 2. In that it was one of the last things he gave in charge to his Disciples before he went to Heaven And 3. In that he joyns it to Teaching expressing no other Gospel-Ordinances besides though he gave other Commandments to them Act. 1. 4. In that no Ordinance is to be administred in a more solemn manner than this is viz. in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit We are hereby obliged to believe in adore and worship the whole Trinity Thirdly No Ordinance in all the New-Testament was ever so grac'd nor honoured with such a Presence as this was at the Baptism of Christ the three Persons manifest their Presence at this Solemnity the Heavens were opened and a voice heard saying This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased 1. The Father seals it and honours it 2. The Son is there and subjects to it shewing what an honourable respect he has to it nay and came many Miles upon no other Business but to be baptized as we read of 3. The Spirit also descended like a Dove and rested upon him the Holy Ghost puts his Seal upon it and in a glorious manner owns it And then our Saviour saith it became him to be obedient to it 't is it seems a becoming Ordinance it became the Master and doth it not become the Servant to submit to it It was not too low for him and is it too low for thee He said also it was a fulfilling of all Righteousness that is it became him to fulfil all the Commands of his Father or do his whole Will which it appears he could not have done unless he had been baptized And in that of being a Patern or Example to us those who neglect it neglect a most righteous thing and do not fill up after their Master Fourthly 'T is called a justiâ—ying of God and our Disobedience herein a rejecting the Counsel of God Luk. 7. 29 30. Fifthly It appears a great Ordinance in that the highest nay the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit can't exempt a Person from his Obedience hereto as appears in Cornelius's case Nay the greater Gifts and Graces a Person hath the more fit a Subject he is of this Ordinance as Peter's words do import Sixthly Consider the great things and Mysteries held forth hereby viz. the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ and our dying to Sin and Duty
given him at his Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven And having declared himself Supream Lord and Law-giver He 2. Delegates a Power to his Disciples Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make Disciples that must be by preaching the Gospel to them instructing them in the Principles of the Christian Faith teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and lo I am with you alway to the end of the World that 's the Promise These are the words of the great Commission which contains part of the last Will and Testament of the ever blessed Jesus the glorious Testator of the New Covenant wherein Baptism is found and expresly given forth and with as great Authority and in as solemn a manner as ever was any Precept or Ordinance that we read of in all the Book of God. Object But 't is not said baptize them in Water it may therefore intend the Baptism of the Holy Spirit Answ To which we answer As 't is not said baptize them with Water so 't is not said baptize them with the Holy Spirit They were commanded to baptize that 's evident and that it was Water our Saviour did require them to baptize with and not the Spirit we prove First Because the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was never by our Saviour or his Apostles commanded it was never injoyn'd as a Precept or Duty to be done but was always mentioned as a Promise He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with Fire And again Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence It argues great Weakness or else Wilfulness that Men should see no better how to distinguish between a Baptism that was commanded as a Duty to be done and a Baptism promised which was never injoyned as a Duty Secondly It cannot mean the Baptism of the Holy Ghost because the Disciples of Christ nor no Man under Heaven had ever any such Power delegated or given to them as to baptize with the Holy Ghost 't is strange Persons should be so blind and bold to think much less to assert that meer Men can give the Holy Spirit or administer that Baptism as if the Holy Ghost was at the disposal of the Will of Man or that Men know whom to give it to which indeed only lies hid in the Breast of God himself who bestows it to whom and in what manner he pleaseth And therefore Thirdly We do affirm from the Authority of God's Word that to baptize with the Holy Spirit is the peculiar Prerogative Royal of Jesus Christ and that he did never impower any Disciple of his to give it He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit The Father by him and he immediately by himself in his own Person distributes or gives forth of the Spirit according to the good Pleasure of his Will without imparting with this Sovereign Prerogative or peculiar Power to any other Now since Christ's Disciples could not baptize with the Spirit and yet are commanded to baptize it follows clearly it must be Water Object Doth not the Apostle shew that Men had Power to give the Spirit what else is the meaning of these words he therefore that ministreth to you the Spirit it appears that Persons who preached ministred the Spirit Answ By the Spirit is meant the Gospel or Word of Christ as the Law is called the Letter so is the New Testament called the Ministration of the Spirit 2 Cor. 3. 6. The words that I speak unto you saith Christ are Spirit c. Doth God as if the Apostle should say concur with our Ministry and give the Spirit to those who hear it and help us to work Miracles to confirm it And is this done by our preaching the Law or by the hearing of Faith that is the Word of Faith viz. the Gospel see vers 2. or by preaching the Word of Christ Fourthly The Baptism in the Commission cannot intend that of the Holy Ghost because the Spirit 's Baptism signifies the miraculous Effusion or extraordinary Gifts thereof and not the saving Influences Graces and Operations of it which but a few and those too in the Primitive Time did partake of but the Baptism in the Commission is injoyned on all that are made Disciples in all Nations and in every Age even to the end of the World. Fifthly It must be Water-Baptism because our Saviour joyneth it with Repentance and Believing Now all along in order of Practice these two went together both before this time and also afterwards You may be sure had it been any other Baptism it would never have been thus joyned together in order of words with that Baptism that was so united in order of Practice with Repentance and Faith without the least intimation of any thing by our Saviour to the contrary Sixthly Because 't is a Baptism that is to be administred in the Name of the Father of the Son and Holy Spirit how can any with the least shadow of Reason suppose it should be meant of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit sith it is to be administred in the Name of the Holy Spirit Were any ever baptized with the Holy Spirit in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost The Spirit was that with which they were baptized and therefore not baptized in the Name of the Spirit Seventhly The only way further to remove this Objection is to observe what the practice of the Disciples was after the Ascension of Christ in the execution of this great Commission What was it they baptized with See Acts 8. 36. And they came to a certain Water and the Eunuch said See here is Water Vers. 28. They went both down into the Water and Philip baptized him Acts 10. 47 48. Can any Man forbid Water that these should not be baptized And he commanded them to be baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus That Baptism which in the Commission the Lord Jesus commanded his Disciples to baptise with was the Baptism which they after his Ascension did baptize with and that it was Water the Scriptures we have now cited do evidently shew certainly the Apostles well understood what Baptism it was their blessed Master did command them to administer Eighthly Besides were it not the Baptism of Water which was given to them in the Commission Matth. 28. 19 20. They did that in his Name i. e. by his Authority which they had no Authority to do for other Commissions they had not this being the only place where Water-baptism is mentioned as being instituted and given in Commission to them to administer and to all other Disciples and Ministers of Christ to the end of the World. Now Secondly that this Holy Ordinance of Baptism doth continue to the end of the World is evident First Because whatsoever is given forth by Jesus Christ is given forth by him as he is King and Mediator of the New Covenant and as part of his
be joined to the Father c. And St. Austin saith They were commanded to be baptized in the Name of Christ and tho the Father and Holy Ghost were not mentioned yet we understand they were not otherwise baptized than in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Why dost thou not apprehend when it is said of the Son All things were made by Him that the Holy Ghost also though not mentioned is there likewise understood To be baptized into Christ Jesus saith Eulogius signifies to be baptized according to the Precept of Christ that is into the Father Son and Holy Ghost And that other into his Death is typically representing his Death in Baptism The same Patriarch in the same place a little before saith thus What is said in the Acts of those that had received the Baptism of John that they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus denotes that they were baptised according to the Institution and Doctrine of the Lord Jesus that is to say they were baptized into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost For so the Lord Jesus Christ taught and commanded his Disciples to baptize Mat. 28. 19 20. Object Notwithstanding what we have said yet saith the Objector John Baptist opposeth his Baptism to the Baptism of Christ which could not have been done if the Baptism with Water was an inseparable Companion of Christ's Doctrine How could John say Verily I baptize you with Water but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost c. Moreover if Christ had been commanded to baptize with Water as well as John the words would have run thus Verily I baptize you with Water only but he shall baptize you also with the 〈◊〉 Answ Thus to distinguish the Baptism of Water and that of the Spirit into John's and Christ's and oppose these two one to the other as if the one of these were distructive to the other as if that of John's were his own and none of Christ's is very ridiculous and argues great darkness in the understanding of these opposers of Water-baptism for 't is undeniably evident that this of Water as well as that of the Spirit was given forth by Christ himself and as part of his last Will and Testament to abide together with teaching believing and repenting to the end of the World. These Men would fain have us believe that the Baptism of Water was the Baptism of John's and none of Christ's but as if John had instituted it and not Christ and as if John were the Author of it and Christ the Finisher whereas nothing is more clear that Christ consider'd as God was the Author and the first that ordained appointed and instituted it to be administred by John and after John's decease yea and after his own Death and Resurrection too gave order to its continuance And for the observation of it amongst all Nations our late Annotators also on Mat. 3. 5. agree with us exactly herein He that is John was sent to baptize in Water so as from this time say they the Institution of the Sacrament of Baptism must be dated Nothing can be more evident than that the Baptism with Water was Christ's Baptism and howbeit it is called John's as John was the first Minister and Messenger from Christ to begin it For behold I send my Messenger and he shall prepare my way before me saith Christ Mal. 3. 1. It was Christ's Appointment in whose Name and not in John's it was begun and dispensed always even in that juncture wherein John himself was living and one would think Men could not be so blind to suppose it ceased in John fith our Lord Jesus after his Death and Resurrection gives special Command for the continuation of it in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost in all Nations to the end of the World And in regard also that the Apostles after Christ's Ascension into Heaven preached the same Doctrine of Repentance and commanded such who were discipled to be baptized in Water in the Name of the Lord Jesus which signifies as we have already shewed nothing less than according to the Institution of Christ and that glorious Commission they had received from him Therefore John Baptized only as Christ's Servant and it was from Heaven he received Commission to Baptize and our Lord's Submission to it himself as administred by John to fulfil all righteousness that is as one observes the Righteousness of his own Law i. e. the Gospel to be an Example to us and the Father's glorious Approbation of his Son in his Obedience herein by a Voice from Heaven at the time of his coming out of the Water one would think might put an end to these foolish Objections Jesus Christ we say owned Water-baptism to be his Ordinance by subjecting himself to it tho administred by his servant John and the Father ratified it also as well as the Holy Ghost the one by that Voice from Heaven saying This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased and the other in coming down or descending in a visible manner like a Dove and lighting upon him And certainly had not this Ordinance been to abide our Saviour would not have given such a Commission a little before he ascended into Heaven for the continuance of it to the World's end Nay if it had been to cease he would doubtless have given some hint of it and have told his Disciples plainly when at Jerusalem they should be anointed with Power from on High they should go and Preach the Gospel to all the World or make Disciples of the Nations but not baptize them any more for that the way of Repentance and Faith and the Spirit 's Baptism was all the Baptism they should teach and instruct the People in Moreover had Peter known this to have been the Mind of his Blessed Master he would doubtless have said to them Act. 2. when they asked what they should do Repent and believe in Christ for the remission of your Sins but in the Name of Jesus Christ be not baptized in Water never a one of you as some while since every Penitent was required to be for that was a Dispensation and Baptism of John and had its time for a while meerly to prepare the Way of Christ but now is abolished and out of date ye must forsake John's old Administration of Water-baptism that being a carnal and low thing and look wholly to a higher and more sublime Baptism i. e. that of the Holy Ghost And had he known this to be the Mind of his Master would not he rather have said concerning Cornelius and those with him Acts 10. instead of saying Who can forbid Water Who can require Water that these Persons should be Baptized who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we No doubt had Water-Baptism ceased or been abolished we should have had some discovery of it as well as we have
were drowned or drenched or overwhelmed in Misery no part free every Suffering is not the Baptism of Suffering but great and deep Afflictions suffering unto Blood and Death in opposition to a lesser degree or measure of them being dipp'd and plunged into Afflictions Mr. Wilson on the Baptism of Affliction renders it to plunge into Afflictions or Dangers as it were saith he into deep Waters so that it appears also from this Metaphorical Notion of Baptism to baptize is to dip or overwhelm or cover the Body in Water See what our last and best Annotators positively affirm on Matth. 20. 22. To be baptized is to be dipped in Water say they Metaphorically to be plunged in Aâ—flictions I am saith Christ to be baptized with Blood overwhelmed with Sufferings and Afflictions are you able so to be c. 2. We read of the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and Fire I indeed baptize you with Water saith John but he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with Fire Now the Question is What we are to understand to be meant by the Baptism of the Holy Ghost whether the sanctifying Gifts and Graces of the Spirit are intended hereby which all the Godly receive or those extraordinary Gifts or miraculous Effusions of the Holy Ghost only which many received in the Primitive Times I know some are ready to make use of the Baptism of the Spirit to justify their Rite of Sprinkling or Pouring because God is said to pour the Spirit upon his People and to sprinkle them with clean Water which we do grant does intend the Graces of the Holy Spirit But certainly if they did consider the ground and reason why Persons were said to be baptized with the Spirit they would soon perceive this Argument would utterly fail them likewise or stand them in no stead For we do affirm that every Believer who hath the Holy Spirit cannot be said to be baptized with the Spirit like as every one that is under Afflictions and Sufferings cannot be said to be baptized with Sufferings as we have shewed But in the first place it is necessary to understand the difference between the Baptism commanded and the Baptism promised the Baptism commanded is that of Water the Baptism promised was that of the Spirit Our Saviour after his Resurrection gave forth his Commission to his Disciples to teach and baptize and then being assembled together with them commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem but wait foâ— the Promise of the Father which said he ye haâ—â— heard of me Acts 1. 4. What was that why 't is exprest in the fifth Verse Ye shall be baptiz'd with the Holy Ghost not many days hence and this was made good to them on the day of Pentecost Acts 2. 1 2 3. which was no other than the Spirit in an extraordinary manner or the miraculous Gifts thereof these the Apostles and believing Jews received first and in the tenth Chapter of the Acts the same extraordinary Gifts or Baptism of the Spirit the believing Gentiles received I mean Cornelius and those with him for they spoke with Tongues and magnified God and Peter saith Chap. 11. And as I spake unto them the Holy Ghost fell on them as on us at the first then saith he I remembred the word c. Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost ver 15 16. Now no other Gifts of the Spirit than these great and extraordinary and miraculous Effusions of the Spirit we do conclude is or can be intended or meant by the Baptism of the Holy Ghost And that you may see we are not alone in this Opinion see what Dr. Du Veil saith on Acts 1. 4 5. shall be baptized the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Casaubon is to dip or plunge as if it were to dye Colours in which sense saith he the Apostles might be truly said to have been baptized for the House in which this was done was filled with the Holy Ghost so that the Apostles might seem to have been plunged into it as in a large Fish-Pond Hence Oecumenius on Acts 2. saith a Wind fill'd the whole House that it seem'd like a Fish-pond because it was promised to the Apostles that they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost To the same effect saith another as is noted in our Book of Metaphors Baptism is put for the miraculous Effusion of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles and other Believers in the Primitive Church because of the Analogical Immersion or Dipping for so Baptizo signifies for the House where the Holy Spirit came upon the Apostles was so filled that they were as it were drowned in it or the reason of the Metaphor saith he may be from the great plenty and abundance of those Gifts in which they were wholly immerg'd as the Baptized are dipp'd under Water And it appears by what Mr. Delâ—un hath written and translated out of Tropical Writers that Glassius and others assert the same things And so likewise Mr. Gosnold a worthy and learned Man understood it speaking of those Scriptures We have here cited saith he these places diligently compared together evidently shew that the Baptism of the Spirit is a distinct Baptism from that of Water and hath no Reference at all to the inward sanctifying Graces of the Spirit but notes out the most extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit that ever were given to the Sons of Men therefore called the Baptism of the Spirit Object But yet this Baptism however was by a pouring forth of the Spirit and why may not Baptism be administred so Answ 'T is evident 't was not by a sprinkling or dropping of the Spirit and therefore no ways for your turn and though it was by a pouring out or a pouring forth of the Spirit yet in such sort that the House in which they were is said to be filled and so they immerg'd or baptized with it But however all confess this was but a Metaphorical Baptism and therefore your Argument from hence at best is but far fetched and signifies nothing for 't is a strange way to go to the Metaphorical Notion of a word to prove a Practice that is contrary to the literal and proper Signification thereof Moreover if this be granted which we have hinted here it may serve to detect the Error of some Men who own no other Baptism than that of the Spirit and think that the ordinary Gifts and Graces of the Spirit is the Baptism of the Spirit which there is no ground as I can see to believe nor was there any other Baptism to continue to the end of the World but that of Water without doubt sith the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was given only to the Apostles and Saints in the Primitive Time for the Confirmation of the Gospâ—l as these Scriptures shew Mark 16. 16 17 18 20. Heb. 2. 3 4. Therefore let such take care who say they have the true Baptism
without the Profession of a saving Faith or any Precept for so doing then must we not baptize any without But saith he the Antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent 1. I have saith he shewed you John required the Profession of true Repentance and that his Baptism was for Remission of Sins 2. When Christ layeth down the Apostolical Commission the Nature and Order of the Apostles Work it is first â—o make them Disciples and then to baptize them in the Name c. That it was saving Faith that was required of the Jews and profest by them Acts 2. 38. is plain in the Text. The Samaritans believed and had great Joy and were baptized c. The Condition upon which saith he the Eunuch must be baptized was if he believed with all his Heart Paul was baptized after Conversion Acts 9. 18. The Holy Ghost fell on the Gentiles before they were baptized Acts 10. 44. Lydia's Heart was opened before she was baptized and was one the Apostle judged faithful Acts 16. 14. So he goes over with all the Scriptures we have mentioned proving they were Believers and none else that all along in the New Testament were baptized 't is strange to me that the Man should have such clear Light and plead for the Commission and the Practice of the Primitive Christians and yet dare attempt to sprinkle Children having neither a Command from Christ or a Precedent from the Apostles for any such thing Object I know 't is objected Baptism was administred only to Believers in the Apostles time but that was the Infancy of the Church Answ I am not a little troubled to hear any Man to argue after this manner for though it be granted in the Apostles days the Church was newly constituted and so might be said to be new born yet to say that was the Infancy of the Church as Infancy imports in our common Acceptation Weakness or Imperfection is a false and foolish Assertion 1. Because that was in truth the time of the Churches greatest Glory Perfection and Beauty and very soon after the Apostles fell asleep the Church though she grew older yet she decayed and Corruptions crept in the Church might in that respect be compared to a glorious Flower that as soon as ever it is blown and quite put forth it is in its Glory and let it stand a while and it soon fades and loses much of its Lustre and Beauty even so did the Church of God and it was foretold also by the Apostles it would so after their departure come to pass by the entring in of grievous Wolves who should not spare the Flock i. e. the Church nay the Spirit of Antichrist Paul saith or Mystery of Iniquity did even then work in the Apostles days And St. John speaks to the same purpose Little Children it is the last time and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come even now are there many Antichrists whereby we know that this is the last time and indeed all generally believe the Church continued not a pure Virgin to Christ much longer than one hundred Years after his Death now then shall any presume to say that was the Infancy of the Church as if the Church arrived to clearer Light Strength and Glory in after-Times But 2. Had not the Gospel-Church in that Age the extraordinary Apostles with it like to whom never any rose after to succeed them nay such who were conversant with the Lord Jesus after he rose from the Dead and spake to him mouth to mouth and did eat and drink with them as Peter saith Acts 10. 3. Had not the Church then extraordinary Gifts nay such an infallible Spirit and Presence of Christ with her that her Sons could clearly discern Spirits and know when they speak and when the Spirit spake in them Now speak I not the Lord. 4. Was not that Church set up to be a Patern or perfect Copy after which all succeeding Churches were to write can we think that others ever attained to the like much less to greater Light and Knowledg than they These things considered fully shew the folly and weakness of this Assertion and Objection But if Believers were the only Subjects of Baptism in the Primitive Time and this was according to the Commission of Christ and Practice of those days how came this Order and Administration to be altered and changed I mean by whose Authority nay and which is worst of all if that Infant-Baptism may be deem'd to be a Divine Rite or an Ordinance of God sith 't is not recorded in the Scripture nor practised in the Apostles Time it renders not only the Gospel-Church weak and imperfect but Christ himself unfaithful or less faithful than Moses who was but the Servant and yet lest nothing dark or unwritten which God commanded him but did do every thing exactly according to the Patern shewed him in the Mounâ— Nay and by the same Argument since Infant-Baptism was not instituted by Christ noâ— practised in the Primitive Church and yet may be admitted as a Divine Ordinance of Christ and so practised by Christians why may not all or many other Rites and Sacraments owned and maintained in the Romish Church be admitted also But Object I have heard some say Is it my where forbid Answ To which I answer where are such things as Crossings Salt Spittle and Sureties c. forbid At this Door what Inventions and Innovations may not come in or be admitted of such a dangerous Consequence is this that it would undo us all Object But say you at that time i. e. at the first preaching the Gospel and planting Churches Adult Persons were baptized only because they were before they believed either Jews or Heathens but when they believed and were baptized their Children had a right to Baptism likewise Answ This is soon said but hardly nay not at all to be proved For it cannot be their Childrens right without Authority or Command from Christ for if we should grant all our Brethren say concerning Abraham's Seed and of their Childrens being in Covenant this will not justify their Practice of baptizing them if they argue thus till Dooms-day except Christ hath left them a Precept or his Church a Precedent so to do for Abraham's Seed though they were such a thousand times over had no right to Circumcision until he received the word of Command to circumcise them from the great God. Nor had Lot and other godly Men in that day any right to that Ceremony who were not of Abraham's Family because God limited his Command to himself his Sons and Servants or such who were bought with Mony and so came into his House Secondly We desâ—re it may be considered that the History we have of the Gospel-Church in the Apostles days from the first planting of the Church at Jerusalem till St. John received his Revelations contains more than â—ifty Years and there was no â—ewer than three thousand Persons
baptized at once in that first Church so that we may conclude there were many thousands of Believers who doubtless had many Children born unto them during the time of the Gospel 〈◊〉 in the History we have recorded in the New Testament and yet we read not of one of their Children upon the account of federal Holiness and their Parents covenanting with God baptized and can any be so blind as to think the holy God would have left this thing so in the dark without the least hint or intimation had it been any of his Mind or Counsel that Believers Seed should be baptized I am sure they cannot say it without reflecting upon the Faithfulness Care and Wisdom of God. CHAP. VIII Proving Believers the only true Subjects of Baptism from the special ends of this holy Sacrament WHat the special end and use of Baptism is comes next in order to be considered wherein it will more fully and clearly appear that no Infant in Non-Age ought by any means to be baptized First of all it was ordained to be a Sign 〈…〉 the Baptized of some inward 〈…〉 viz. of the Person 's Death unto 〈…〉 to a new Life buried with 〈…〉 i. e. Christ doth certainly 〈…〉 â—mmediately if not wholly in 〈…〉 Scripture to that outward Sign 〈…〉 that in which there is a plain Representation of the Mystery and inward Grace we are said to be buried and risen both in Signification and also in lively Representation of the inward and spiritual Burial and Resurrection with Christ Secondly Here is mention made of the Sign and of the Thing signified And as for that which is spoken of under this Expression Buried in Baptism 't is delivered as a Mâ—dium saith one whereby as a Motive whereunto and as a Reason wherefore as an Image and Representation wherein we are both to read and remember and also practise and perform that other for do but mark how shall we that are dead to Sin i. e. should be live any longer therein Know ye not that as many of you as were baptized into Christ i. e. into or in token of an Interest in him and of a Oneness and Fellowship with him by Faith are baptized into his Death i.e. in token of such a Communion with the Power of his Death as to kill Sin and crucifie the old Man so that henceforth we should not serve Sin therefore hence it is saith he that in Baptism i. e. the outward Sacrament we are buried with him i. e. outwardly visibly bodily in Water into his Death i. e. in token and resemblance of our dying unto Sin by virtue of his Death That we should be ever practically mindful of this That like as Christ rose again after he was dead so we should rise to a new Life for if we have been planted together in the likeness of his Death i. e. signally in outward Baptism spiritually and really in the inward Work of Death unto Sin c performed by the Spirit upon the Soul we shall be also in the likeness of his Resurrection Thirdly This Burial and Resurrection that is immediately expressed by these words Buried with him in Baptism wherein ye are also risen with him is made a Motive Argument and Incitement to the spiritual Death and Resurrection for therefore are we perswaded to die to Sin and live righteously because in Baptism we are buried in Water and raised again in token that we ought so to do and to this end are we baptized and buried and raised therein and so interested into all the other Benefits of Christ's Death Remission of Sins and Salvation viz. that we should die to Sin and live holily and to the end also that we may thereby be put in mind so to do Now if this Death and Burial in Baptism be to this end viz. to teach us and shew us how we must die to Sin Then I infer two things First That the burial in Baptism here spoken of is not the Death to Sin for the Motive and things we are moved to do are two and so are the Sign and the Thing signified Secondly That Infants are not capable Subjects of Baptism for this Sacrament calls for Understanding and Judgment and Senses to be exercised in all that partake thereof or else the whole work will be altogether insignificant Therefore saith one to carry a poor Babe to Baptism is as much as to carry it to hear a Sermon A Sign as Pareus observeth is some outward thing appearing to the Sense through which some inward thing is at the same time apprehended by the Understanding Therefore saith Mr. Perkins the preaching of the Word and the administration of Sacraments are all one in substance for in the one the Witness of God is seen and in the other heard Secondly Another end of Baptism is that it might be a signal Representation of a Believers Union with Christ hence called a being baptized into Christ and a putting on of Christ As many as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ and are all one in Christ Jesus saith Mr. Baxter and are Abraham's Seed and Heirs according to Promise Gal. 3. 27 28 29. This speaks the Apostle of the probability grounded on a credible Profession c. And further saith he our Baptism is the Solemnizing of our Marriage with Christ and 't is a new and strange kind of Marriage where there is no Profession of Consent Now if this be true which Mr. Baxter affirms and I see no cause to doubt of it most worthy Men as well as Scripture agreeing in this case with him how absurd and ridiculous a thing is the Invention of Infant-Baptism sith all Men know they are not capable to signify their Consent of Marriage with Christ if any thing in the World cuts in pieces the very Sinews of Infants Baptism 't is this for there is a Contract made between both Parties before the Solemnization of Marriage and how can a Babe of two or ten days old do that 't is a strange Marriage if it be not done though more strange indeed without the other But may be some will say 't is a Marriage by Proxy or Sureties as Princes sometimes are married Answ Sometimes there has been some such like Action done I must confess But does not the Prince actually consent so to be married But all this while who has required any thing of this at our Hands Are not Sureties in Baptism a meer human Invention and have not our Brethren cast it away as such The third end of Baptism as Mr. Perkins observes is this viz. 'T is a Sign to Believers of the Covenant on God's part of the washing away of our Sins in the Blood of Christ we see saith lie what is done in Baptism the Covenant of Grace is solemnized between God and the Party baptized and in this Covenant something belongs to God and something to the Party baptized Are Infants capable thus to covenant with God though
Almighty God Jesus Christ nor his Apostles neither commended for baptizing any one Child or Children nor reproved for neglecting to baptize such then Infants Baptism is not of nor from God. But no Man or Woman was at any time or times either commended by the Almighty God c. for baptizing any one Child or Children nor reproved for neglecting to baptize such Ergo Infants Baptism is not of nor from God. This Argument remains good and unanswerable unless they can shew us that there is some Gospel-Ordinance and universal Duty injoyned on Men that no Man or Woman was ever commended for doing it nor reproved for neglecting it when they can shew that this Argument will be invalid That Doctrine that reflects upon the Honour Care and Faithfulness of Jesus Christ our blessed Mediator and glorious Law-giver or renders him less faithful then Moses and the New Testament in one of its great Ordinances nay Sacraments to lie more dark and obscure in God's Word than any Law or Ordinance of the Old Testament did cannot be of God. But the Doctrine of Infants Baptism reflects upon the Honour Care and Faithfulness of Jesus Christ c. or renders him less faithful than Moses and the New Testament in one of its great Ordinances nay Sacraments to lie more dark and obscure in God's Word than any Law or Ordinance of the Old Testament Ergo Infants Baptism cannot be of God. The Major certainly none will deny The Minor is easily proved Can any thing reflect more upon the Honour of Christ c. than this as if he should neglect to speak out his Mind and Will to us plainly or be so careless about it that sorry Man is forc'd to try his Wit to supply what is defective and wanting in this Matter in Christ's Word for he is strangely left of God and benighted who will not confess Infant Baptism to need much of humane Craft and Cunning to make it out from Christ's New Testament and when he has done all he leaves it as doubtful as he found it in the Judgment of indifferent Persons Did Moses deal thus with the Children of Israel No no. How careful was he to deliver every Law Statute and Ordinance exactly particularly the Law of the Passover Do but read how careful and circumspect he was in that in all respects and matters relating to it Nay and the Wisdom of God was such to leave nothing then in the dark but gave order that all Things might be made plain that he that run might read it and he that did read might know the Duty i. e. the Statuâ—e or Ordinance tho in many things they might need instruction how in a right Spirit to be found in it and what it signified But I dare affirm no Man who reads the New Testament from the beginning of Matthew to the end of the Revelations a thousand times over shall ever from that Holy Word or any place or part of it find it to be his Duty to baptize his Child the Word of God is powerful in convincing Men of their Duties as well as of their Sins but in this it fails it has no Power to convince Mens Consciences The Faith of Persons must stand in the Wit and Subtilty of Men in respect of Infant-Baptism and not in the Power of God and efficacy of his blessed Word Let some shew us the Person who only by reading the New Testament was convinced of Infant-Baptism though 't is true divers by reading of the Writings of Learned Men and their subtil and sophistical Arguments for so I must call them have been perswaded to believe it to be of God. Yet after all some of them have plainly signified the great Ground and Argument they build upon is this viz. Because such and such Learned Godly and Wise Men assert it to be a Truth of Christ So that it appears very clear they build their Faith herein not upon the Authority of God's Word but upon the Credit and Authority of Men. But certainly it must needs as I said reflect upon the Honour and Faithfulness of Christ to conclude Infant-Baptism to be of God for can any think the Lord Jesus would leave so great an Ordinance or Sacrament of the New Testament so obscure and dark in his Sacred Word had it been his Mind that Believers should baptize their Children since the Apostle magnifies Christ's Faithfulness who is the Son above that of Moses who was but the Servant And Moses verily was faithful in all his House as a Servant for a Testimony of those things which were to be spoken after Hebr. 3. 5. But Christ as a Son over his own House c. ver 6. and therefore was counted worthy of more glory than Moses ver 3. Besides do but consider what Darkness and Confusion the Asserters of Infant-Baptism seem to be in about the Proof and Right they say Children have to it 1. Some of them say it depends wholly upon the Authority of the Church 2. Others dare not baptize them but as Believers and Disciples and therefore affirm they have Faith c. 3. Others can't believe this and therefore though they likewise baptize them as Believers yet get Sureties to stand for them 4. Others say they have a Right by the Faith of their Parents some are for baptizing all Children others none but the Children of Believers 5. One says if either of their Parents are Believers they may be baptized some say both Father and Mother both must be godly Persons and in the Covenant of Grace or else the Child has no Right to be baptized No marvel when Men have lost their way they are thus lost in a Wilderness That Ordinancé God has made no Promise to Persons in their Obedience thereto nor denounced any Threatning or Punishment on such who slight neglect and contemn it it is no Ordinance of God. But God has made no Promise to Persons who baptize their Children nor denounced no Threatning or Panishment on those who slight neglect and contemn it Ergo Infant-Baptism is no Ordinance of God. Let any such who assert Infant-Baptism shew us a Promise to the Obedient herein or a Threatning denounced against the Disobedient thereto and we will say no more There are Promises made to Believers in their being baptized that 's evident and Punishments threatned on such who reject the Counsel of God in that respect the like there is in respect of any other Gospel-Ordinance but none of this in the Case of Infant-Baptism CHAP. X. Wherein the great Arguments and pretended Scripture-Proofs for Infant-Baptism concerning the Covenant Circumcision and Infants Church-membership are Examined and Answered ONE main and great Argument the Pedobaptists bring for that practice is this viz. Children of Believers are in Covenant as well as their Parents The Covenant made with Abraham was the Covenant of Grace or Gospel-Covenant to which the Seal of Circumcision was annexed and as Circumcision belonged to the Children of the
Faith or a Confirmation of that Faith he had long before he was Circumcised but so it could not be said to be to any Infant that had no Faith. It was indeed a Sign put into the Flesh of Infants but a Sign and Seal too only to Abraham witnessing to him that he had a Justifying Faith but to the Truth of the Promises there was 'tis evident a two-fold Covenant made with Abraham 1. That he should be the Father of many Nations and that the Land in which he was a Stranger should be given to his Seed these Promises seem to relate to his Carnal Seed 2. That he should be the Father of the Faithful Rom. 4. 11. Heir of the World Rom. 4. 13. and that in him and in his Seed all the Families of the Earth should be blessed that is Jesus Christ Gal. 3. 16. Now none could receive Circumcision as such a Seal to them but Abraham because none before circumcised had such a Faith which intitled them to such singular Promises The Apostle in the fourth of the Roâ—ans shews that Abraham was not justified by Works nor by Circumcision but by Faith which he had long before he was circumcised and so but a Seal or Confirmation of that Faith he had before and to assure him of the Truth of the Promises made to him and to his Carnal and Spiritual Seed You ought not therefore to call Circumcision a Seal to any but to Abraham neither ought you to call it a Seal of any other thing to him than what the Scripture calls it a Seal of viz. And he received Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had being yet uncircumcised Rom. 4. 11. And that you may see we are not alone in this matter see what Chrysostom and Theophilact as I find them quoted by Mr. Danvers It was called a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith because it was given to Abraham as a Seal and Testimony of that Righteousness which he had acquired by Faith. Now this seems to be the Priviledg of Abraham's alone and not to be tranferred to others as if Circumcision in whom ever it was were a Testimony of Divine Righteousness for it was the Priviledg of Abraham that he should be the Father of all the Faithful as well uncircumcised as circumcised being already the Father having Faith in Uncircumcision he received first the sign of Circumcision that he might be the Father of the Circumcised Now because he had this Priviledg in respect of the Righteousness which he had acquired by Faith therefore the sign of Circumcision was to him a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith but to the rest of the Jews it was a sign that they were Abraham's Seed but not a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith as all the Jews also were not the Fathers of many Nations Moreover it is evident a Seal is a Confirmation of that which a Person hath made over to him and it doth insure him of it Now to call Circumcision a Seal of the Covenant of Grace 't is all one as to say all that were circumcised were assured of all the Blessings of that Covenant then must all that were circumcised be pardon'd and saved and so also would it follow in the case of Baptism were that acknowledged to be a Seal to all those that are baptized of the new Covenant But in a word we know nothing called a Seal of the New Covenant but the holy Spirit which the Saints were said to be sealed with after they believed Ephes 1. 13. 4. 30. unto the day of Redemption God by setting his Seal upon us assures us that we are his and that we shall have Eternal Life Baptism is called a Figure but no where a Seal and a Sign or Figure proper only to such who have Understanding to discern the Spiritual things and Mysteries that are represented thereby and wrought in them Object Say what what you will the Promise and Covenant of Grace was to Abraham and his natural Off-spring Answ Why do you not believe the Apostle who tells you the quite contrary and that he said not of Seeds as of many but to thy Seed which is Christ But it you will have it as you say see what absurd Consequences will follow and arise from your Notion And first take what Calvin saith 'T is manifest saith he that the Promise understood of Spiritual Blessings pertaineth not to the Carnal Seed of Abraham but to the Spiritual as the Apostle himself saith Rom. 4. 8 9. for if you understand the Carnal Seed saith he then that Promise will belong to none of the Gentiles but to those alone who are begotten of Abraham and Isaac according to the Flesh by this it appears you go about to shut out your selves and Children too from having any part in that Covenant made with Abraham Secondly If God made the Covenant of Grace with Abraham and his Carnal or Fleshly Off-spring and so with all Believers and their Children then all their Off-spring must have saving Grace bestowed upon them and a new Heart because these things are some of the chief Blessings contained in the new Covenant Now do you see that all the Children of Believers have the Grace of God bestowed upon them so that they are new Creatures certainly no for as Abraham had his Ishmael and Isaac his Esaâ— and David his Absolom so have most or many Believers wicked and ungodly Children and so they live and die to the great Grief of their Souls You can't think that God fails in his Promise and that the Covenant of Grace is not so firm and sure as the Scripture declares it to be one of them will follow or you must conclude your selves mistaken in your Notion But certainly they cannot miss of Grace if Mr. Blake is right for saith he Christianity is hereditary that as the Children of a Noble-Man are Noble the Child of a Free-Man free of a Turk a Turk and of a Jew a Jew so the Child of a Christian is a Christian We will grant him they are so called but withal must tell him the Children of Christian People are by Nature the Children of Wrath as well as others Fourthly This would render Grace to be a Birth-Priviledg as Mr. Danvers observes and Regeneration tied to Generation contrary to the Scripture and all good Doctrine as if a Believer doth not only beget a Child in natural Generation but a Saint also Fifthly Then the Apostle spake not true in saving the Children of the Flesh these are not the Children of God i. e. of the Promise Rom. 9. Sixthly And it also would follow that all the whole Off-spring of Believers shall be saved without you will assert the Doctrine of James Arminius that there is a falling away from Grace Seventhly And would it not follow also that all the Children of Believers know God and need not be taught saying Know the Lord for you know who saith
Infant-Baptism is taken from Mat. 19. 14. Suffer little Children and forbid them not to come unto me for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven Object The Kingdom of Heaven belongs to Infants which is the greater therefore say you Baptism belongs to them also which is the lesser Answ 1. That the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to little Children we have no cause to doubt But that they have a right to Baptism therefore is deny'd May not our Brethren infer from the greater to the lesser thus as well viz. Infants belong to the Kingdom of Heaven which is the greater thererefore to them belongeth the Lord's Supper which is the lesser and sure we are that those who are fit Subjects of Baptism ought not to be deny'd the Sacrament of Bread and Wine How often must we tell you that Baptism wholly depends as to Subject Time End and manner of Administration on the words of Institution 't is a positive Law we must go to the Pleasure and Will and Design of the Law-maker what may not Men infer after this sort 2. Were these little Children be ye sure the Children of Believers If you can't prove this what signifies all you say and how this can be made appear I see not for though Christ was then in the Coast of Judea yet that they were Children of Godly Parents is a great Question 3. If it should be granted they were Believers Children yet it doth not appear how little these Children were we have no account of their Age. And as the Learned observe the Greek work doth not always signify a little Child or Infant as appears by 2 Tim. 3. 15. where the same word is used they might be such who might be capable of teaching as far as we know But since Dr. Jer. Taylor Bishop of Down hath so fully answered this Objection pray take what he saith upon the place From the Action of Christ's blessing Infants saith he to infer that they were baptized proves nothing so much as there is a want of better Arguments for the Conclusion would with more probability be derived thus i. e. Christ blessed Children and so dismissed them but baptized them not therefore Infants are not to be baptized But let this be as weak as its Enemy yet that Christ did not baptize them is an Argument sufficient that he hath other ways of bringing them to Heaven than by Baptism he passed an Act of Grace upon them by Benediction and Imposition of Hands And therefore although neither Infants nor any Man in pâ—ris naturalibus can attain to a Supernatural End without the addition of some Instrument or Means of God's appointing ordinarily and regularly yet where God hath not appointed a Rule nor an Order as in the case of Infants we contend he hath not the Argument is invalid And as we are sure God hath not commanded Infants to be baptized so we are sure God will do them no Injustice nor damn them for what they cannot help viz. if the Parents baptize them not Many thousand ways there are by which God can bring any reasonable Soul to him but nothing is more unreasonable than because he hath tied all Men of Years and Discretion to this way therefore we of our own Heads shall carry Infants to him that way without his directions the Conceit is poor and low and the Action consequent to it is bold and venturous let him do what he please with Infants we must not Thus far the Doctor A second Scripture brought formerly by Doctor Featly and of late by divers others is that in Joh. 3. 5. Except a Man be born again of Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. Object There is no other way to regenerate and save Infants but by this of Baptism and so to add them to the Church therefore they ought to be baptized In some saith Mr. Isaac Ambrose the new Birth is wrought before Baptism as in the Eunâ—â—h c. in others is the new Birth wrought in Baptism 〈◊〉 indeed is the Sacrament of the new Birth and Seaâ— of Regeneration but howsoever in Pedo-Baptism we see the outward Seal yet we seel not the manner of the inward working for this also is the secret of the Spirit Answ There is no pretended Proof for Infant-Baptism brought by the Asserters of it that I wonder at more than this especially considering how fully and excellently they are detected by several able Men of their own Party yet notwithstanding it seems to abide as a standing Doctrine in the National Church as witness their Catechism Baptism wherein I was made a Member of Christ a Child of God and an Inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven Pray see how excellently the late famous Stephen Charnock detects this Error It is not saith he External Baptism speaking of Regeneration many Men take Baptism for Regeneration the Ancients usually give it this term One calls our Saviour's Baptism his Regeneration this confers not Grace but engageth to it outward Water cannot convey inward Life How can Water an external thing work upon the Soul in a physical manner Neither can it be proved that ever the Spirit of God is ty'd by any Promise to apply himself to the Soul in a gracious Operation when Water is applyed to the Body If it were so that all that were baptized were regenerated then all that were baptized should be saved or else the Doctrine of Perseverance falls to the ground Baptism is a means of conveying this Grace when the Spirit is pleased to operate with it but it doth not work as a physical Cause upon the Soul as a â—rge doth upon the Humours of the Body for 't is the Sacrament of Regeneration as the Lord's-Supper is of Nourishment As a Man cannot be said to be nourished without Faith so he cannot be said to be a new Creature without Faith Put the most delicious Meat into the Mouth of a dead Man you do not nourish him because he wants a Principle of Life to concoct or digest it Faith only is the Principle of spiritual Life and the Principle which draws Nourishment from the Means of God's Appointment Some indeed say that Regeneration is conferred in Baptism upon the Elect and exerts it self afterwards in Conversion but how so active a Principle as a Spiritual Life should lie dead and asleep so long even many Years which intervene between Baptism and Conversion is not easily conceivable Thus far Mr. Charnock others we find to agree with him herein Amesius saith outward Baptism cannot be a Physical Instrument of infusing Grace because it hath it not in any wise in it self Our late Annotators agree directly with these nay Dr. Owen saith that the Father of Lies himself could not well have invented a more pernicious Opinion or which might pour in a more deadly Poyson into the Minds of Sinners If Baptism were meant here then no Man can be saved without being baptized But
none does the business better than the Learned Bishop Taylor For saith he the Water and Spirit in this place signifies the same thing and by Water is meant the Effects of the Spirit cleansing and purifying the Soul as it appears in its parallel place Christ's baptizing with the Holy Ghost and with Fire for although this was literally fulfilled in the day of Pentecost yet morally there is more in it for it is the sign of the Effect of the holy Spirit and his Productions upon the Soul And you may as well conclude that Infants must also pass through the Fire as through the Water And that we may not think this a trick to elude the pressure of this place Peter saith the same thing For where he saith that Baptism saves us he adds by way of Explication not the washing away of the Filth of the Flesh but the Answer of a good Conscience towards God plainly saying that it is not Water or the purifying of the Body but cleansing of the Spirit that doth that which is supposed to be the Effect of Baptism But to suppose it meant of external Baptism yet this no more infers a necessity of Infant-Baptism than the other words of Christ infer a necessity to give them the holy Communion Joh. 6. 53. Except ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood ye have no Life in you and yet we do not think these words a sufficient Argument to communicate with them if any Man therefore will do us Justice either let them give both Sacraments to Infunts as some Ages of the Church did or neither for the Wit of Man is not able to shew a disparity in the Sanction or in the Energy of its Expressions And therefore they were honest that understood the Obligation to be parallel and performed it accordingly and yet because we say they were deceived in one Instance and yet the Obligation all the World cannot reasonably say but is the same they are honest and reasonable that do neither and sure the Ancient Church did with an equal Opinion of necessity give them the Communion and yet now adays Men do not Why should Men be more burdened with a Prejudice and a name of Obliquity for not giving Infants one Sacrament more than you are disliked for not affording them the other Thus far Dr. Taylor If what these great Men say is not sufficient utterly to invalidate this pretended Proof of Infant-Baptism we know not what to say A third Proof they bring to prove the baptizing of Babes is taken from those places that speak of the baptizing of whole Housholds as the Jaylor and his House Lydia and her House c. Object Whole Housholds we read were baptized therefore some Children were in the Primitive Time baptized Answ To which we answer that the Consequence is not natural from the Antecedent unless you can prove there were no whole Housholds but in which were some little Babes make that appear and this is the best Argument you can bring But the contrary is very evident for how many hundred Housholds or Families are there in this City in which there are no little Children but all Adult Persons which being so how uncertain is your Inference Secondly But suppose there were Children in those Housholds for usually in Scripture by a Figure which is called Synâ—â—doche the whole is put for part or a part for the whole Hence we read Jerusalem and all Judea and all the Regions about â—ordan went out to be baptized of John that is many of those places in Jerusalem Judea and in those Regions So 't is said 1 Sam. 1. 21 22 23. That Elkanah and all his House went up to offer unto the Lord yearly Sacrifice c. yet vers 22. 't is as expresly said that Hannah and her Child went not up who were part of his House yet 't is said all his House or Houshold went up Exod. 9. 6. 't is said All the Cattle of Egypt died that is all that were in the Field see Chap. 14. 26 28. and chap. 9. 26. I could give you many other Examples of the same nature wherein the whole is taken but for part And from hence 't is that Dr. Hammond grants that no concluding Argument can be deduc'd from the baptizing whole Housholds to baptize Children and therefore in his Judgment Arguments drawn from hence are better wav'd than made use of by the Defenders of Infant-baptism And certainly the Doctor judges but rationally therein saith a worthy and Learn'd Man because a clear Word of Institution or plain Precedents ought to be the ground of the practice of all Gospel-Ordinances especially in the case of Baptism one of the great Sacraments of the New Testaments Thirdly We will see in the next place what the Holy Ghost hath left on Record concerning those whole Housholds that are said to be Baptized First The Jaylor's Houshold Acts 16. 33. He was Baptized and all his Whether he had any Children 't is a great Question his may refer to his Wife Servants and Domestick Friends and Relations c. However 't is expresly said that Paul and Silas spake unto him the Word of the Lord and to all that were in his House certainly they did not preach to little Babes And Vers 34. 't is said He rejoiced believeng in God with all his House Observe 1. he and all his House had the Gospel preached to them 2. He and all his House believed And 3. he and all his House rejoiced as well as 't is said He and all his were baptized Can there be any Reason given saith Mr. Gosnold why his vers 33. should be larger than all his House vers 32 34. these two Verses being a Key to the 33d Verse saith he and this Houshold a Key to all the other The second Houshold is that of Crispus Acts 18. 8. And Crispus the chief Ruler of the Synagogue believed in God with all his House and many of the Corinthians hearing believed and were baptized All that is said of his Houshold is that they believed besides the scope of the Text shews none were baptized but such who first believed and they we say and none but they are true Subjects of Baptism that believe The third Houshold is the Houshold of Stephanus I baptized saith Paul the Houshold of Stephanus 1 Cor. 1. 16. And he saith the House of Stephanus was the first Fruits of Acaia and that they had addicted themselves to the Ministry of the Saints which little Children were not capable to do Chap. 16. 15. The fourth Houshold is that of Lydia Acts 16. 14 15. Whether this good Woman was a Maid Widow or Wife is uncertain If she had been a married Woman 't is much there is no mention made of her Husband Besides she is reckon'd the Head of the Family her Houshold which would not have been saith Mr. Gosnold if at this time she had a Husband Grant saith
he she were a Widow yet she might have no Children or if any they might be grown up and to such Children we deny not Baptism upon profession of Faith. Besides she was at this time from her own Dwelling and that many miles distant for she was of the City of Thyatira but now was at the City of Philippi where she was a merchandizing being a seller of Purple Grant she had Children how unlikely a matter is it saith he that she should carry them about with her trading so many miles distant But finally to resolve the Doubt the last Verse of this Chapter calls them of the House of Lydia Brethren They entred into the House of Lydia and when they had 〈◊〉 the Brethren they comforted them and departed Who now can conclude rationally that any Children were in any of these Housholds 'T is a haâ—d case Men are forc'd to fly to such weak and unlikely grounds to prove their practice but as the Proverb goes A poor Shift is better than none at all The next Proof they bring to prove Infant-Baptism is from Acts 2. 39. The Promise is to you and to your Children c. The Pedo baptists would sain have this Promise to be a Promise of External Priviledg and such as gives Children of Believers a right to Baptism but that there is no such thing in the least to be proved from this place we shall make appear by opening the Text. First 'T is evident that Peter preach'd this Sermon to the Jews and to many of them who had a hand in murâ—hering the Lord of Life and Glory And this he laid home and prest upon their Consciences very close and they being prick'd in their Hearts cried out Men and Brethren what shall we do If it be thus we are lost Men and undone No as if Peter should say Do not dispair upon your Repentance there is Mercy for you Then said Peter unto them Repent and be baptized every one of you for the Remission of Sins and ye shall receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit For the Promise is unto you Ay this is good News indeed they might say But what will become of our Children our Off-spring for we have wish'd that his Blood might not only be upon our selves but also upon our Children Well what tho let not this terrify you neither as to drive you into despair for the Promise is not only to you who repent c. but to your Children or Off-spring also your Posterity shall not be lost for the Promise is unto them as it is to you viz. if they repent and not only to them of your Race or Posterity but also to all that are afar off meaning the Gentiles who were said to be sometimes afar off But now if they would know who of their Children and those who were afar off the Promise was made unto In the close of the Verse he resolves them in these words Even to as many as the Lord our God shall call The Promise therefore here evident is that of the Spirit and all the Divine Graces and Blessings of it which was promised and first tendered unto the Jews and their Off-spring upon unfeigned Repentance and turning to God or being effectually called and brought over to close in with the Tenders of Mercy and then to the Gentiles who in like manner should be wrought upon or effectually called This Promise was not made to their Children as Believers Seed nor to them or any other uncalled by the Lord but with this express Proviso Even so many as the Lord our God shall call Which Calling or effectual Work of Grace upon their Souls made them capable Subjects of Baptism Nor are the words to you and your Children mentioned as an acknowledgment of a Priviledg to them above others being Abraham's Seed according to the Flesh but by reason doubtless of their Wish Mat. 27. 25. His Blood he on us and on our Children Nor is there the least intimation given of a right to Baptism to them or their Children as the Children of Believers but as an Exhortation to them and theirs to repent and be baptized as their Duty for their Benefit and Soul-advantage the Promise being not mentioned as though of it self it gave a title to Baptism either to them or their Off-spring without Repentance But as a Motive why both they and their Children should actually repent and be baptized i. e. because in so doing they would be in the way of obtaining Remission of Sin and receive the Holy Spirit the two grand Branches of the Promise here mentioned Which Duty of Repentance little Children being not capable of performing are not therefore according to this direction of the Apostle the proper Subjects of such an Ordinance By Children here saith a Learned Man is not meant their Infants but the Posterity of the Jews And so Dr. Hammond grants it and therefore confesseth this place a very unconcluding Argument for Infant-Baptism And says he though by Children be here meant the Posterity of the Jews yet not the natural or carnal Seed neither but the Spiritual as appears by the last words in the verse viz. Even to as many as the Lord our God shall call So that it is very evident that this Text is grosly abused by such as infer from hence a title to Baptism for Children of Believers by virtue of a Promise to them as such whereas it is manifest from the whole scope of the Context that it is only an incouragement to the Jews against Dispair by reason of their crucifying the Son of God letting them know that yet there was hope of Mercy and Pardon for them and their Children upon the respective Repentance of both or either of them And to the same purpose our late Annotators I find give it speaking of this Text. A Fifth pretended Scripture-proof for Infant-Baptism is taken from 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your Children Vnclean but now are they Holy. Object From hence 't is asserted That the Children of Believers are holy with a Federal or Covenant-Holiness and therefore to be baptized Answ To this we answer That the same sort of Holiness which is ascribed to the Children is to be understood in reference to the unbelieving Husband or the unbelieving Wife who are both said to be sanctified by their respective Yoke-fellows which cannot be meant of a federal or a Covenant-holiness but that which is matrimonial For if we must understand it of a Covenant-holiness then it will follow that the unbelieving Wife or unbelieving Husband may upon the same ground lay claim to Baptism as well as their Children which yet your selves will not grant Besides it is evident from the words themselves in which the Term Husband and Wife are twice used which shews that the Holiness is from the conjugal Relation and cannot be meant of any other than Legitimation And the term Vnbeliever is also twice used and said to be Sanctified which can
did baptize and all Ministers ought to administer the same Ordinance to the end of the World. The nature and order of the Commission cuts this Objection to pieces For if the person be a Disciple a Believer he is to be baptized let his Parents be Jews Heathens or Christians 't is all one If you had the like grounds to baptize Infants we should contend no longer with you 3. When you can prove the Faith of the Parents or their subjection to the external Rite of Baptism adds any spiritual advantage to their Children or such as gives them a right to Baptism we will give up the Controversie Object But whereas you say Baptism was always done by dipping the Body all over in Water how can that be since some were baptized in Houses Answ I answer That is a fancy a thing asserted without the least shadow of ground tho no less Men than our late worthy Annotators seem to affirm this very thing for notwithstanding the Jaylor and those of his were baptized the same hour of the Night c. Yet can any suppose they could not go out of the House so late might there not be a Pond or some River near whithersoever they went or wheresoever it was done it is no matter they were baptized which has been sufficiently proved to be Immersion or dipping the Body in Water Object But say what you will the Baptism of Infants is of God for there was a multitude of Children of old baptized to Moses in the Cloud and in the Sea. Answ We have shewed you that was but tropically called Baptism and also that Baptism is a pure New-Testament Ordinance tho 't is like that as some Learned Men have said might be a Type of this Ordinance they being as it were buried or overwhelmed in the Sea and under the Cloud But if that may justifie Infant Baptism it will allow you to baptize Unbelievers also for there was a multitude of mixt People who went through the Sea with Israel besides much Cattel And a mixt multitude went up also with them and Flocks and Herds even very much Cattel Exod. 12. 38. All these were doubtless baptized metaphorically and typically as well us Children under the Cloud and in the Sea therefore this can be no proof for Infant-Baptism CHAP. XIII Shewing the evil Consequences Absurdities and Contradictions that attend Infant-Baptism as 't is Asserted and Practised Object BVT what harm is there in Baptizing of Children is it not an innocent thing can it do the Child any hurt Answ The harm will be to the Parents and Ministers who do that in Christ's Name which they have no Authority from him to do If it do any harm to Infants 't is not till they are grown up and then it may be a means to blind their Eyes and cause some of them to conclude they in Baptism became the Children of God were regenerated made Christians Members of Christ and Heirs of the Kingdom of Heaven and cause others to think they were then rightly baptized and so to look after no other Baptism Whereas poor Souls they are all unbaptized Persons having never had any Baptism at all but Rantism Pray see what Mr. Danvers hath said upon this Respect 1. But is it no harm to alter Christ's Order in the Commission who requires Faith and Repentance to precede or go before Baptism or first to make them Disciples by Teaching and then to Baptize them And for Men to invert this Order as to baptize them then teach them Repentance and Faith sure it must be an evil and hurtful thing so to do 2. Is it not an evil thing to change the true subjects of Baptism who are Believing and Understanding Men to ignorant Babes who neither know good nor evil 3. Is it not an evil thing to frustrate the sacred and spiritual ends of Baptism which are many as you have heard and by administring it to poor Babes render it wholly an Insignificant thing 4. Is it not an evil and a shameful thing to change Baptism into Rantism from Dipping the whole Body to Sprinkling or pouring a little Water upon the Face and to pronounce an Untruth in the Name of the Lord saying I baptize thee in the Name of the Father of the Son and holy Spirit you not doing the thing nor have any Authority so to do nor to baptize Children at all much less to sprinkle them 5. Is it not an evil and harmful thing and a great error to say Baptism takes away Original Sin whereas nothing can do that nor Actual Sin neither but the Blood of Christ 6. Is it not a foolish thing and a Lye to say Children have Faith and are Disciples who are not capable of Understanding to assert a thing that no Man has any ground to believe nor can't without offering violence to his Reason 7. Is it not a weak thing to open a Door into the Church which Christ hath shut up 8. Is it not weak and an absurd thing to say that Infants can't be Saved except they be Baptized partly because Christ saith Except a Man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God Baptism as some of you say taking away Original Sin As if it were in the power and at the will of the Parents to save or damn their Children For this is intimated by this Notion of yours If the Parents or Friends baptize the Child it shall if it die in its Infancy be saved but if they nor no other indeavour to get it Baptized the Child is lost and must perish How can outward Water saith Mr. Charnock convey inward-Life How can Water a material thing work upon the Soul in a Physical manner Neither can it be proved That ever the Spirit of God is tied by any Promise to apply himself to the Soul in its Gracious Operations when the Body is applied to the Water He says Water applied to the Body Because the adult Person who sat under the preaching of the Word cannot be saved without Regeneration Can't God save poor dying Infants unless the same change by the Spirits Operations pass upon them Is not God a free Agent may he not do what he pleases and magnifie his Grace to poor dying Infants through the Blood of his Son in other ways than we know of Do not secret things belong to him what Vanity is there in the minds of some Men 8. Has God ordained Baptism to be an Ordinance to save the Souls of any Persons either the Adult or Infants is the Opus operatum of Baptism think you a likely way or means to beget or bring forth Children to Christ or make Disciples of them Baptism signifies no thing it being but a Sign where the inward Grace signified by it is wanting 9. Is it not strange that you should say That none but the Children of Believers ought to be Baptized And that Baptism is absolutely necessary to Church-Communion or an initiating Ordinance And yet