se habeant quae insania est paucis de Filio Spiritie Sancto commutatis quae apertam blasphemiam praeferebant caetera ita ut fâ—ripta sunt protuliste in medium impia voce laudâsse cum utique illa ista de uno impietatis fonte processerint D. Hieron ad Avitum Tom. 2. Col. 218. A. B. Paucisque testimoniis de Filio Dei Spiritu Sancto commutatis quae sciebas diâ—plicitura Romanis caetera usque ad finem integra dimisisti hoc idem faciens in Apologia quasi Pamphili quod in Origenis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translatione fecisti D. Hieron l. 1. Apolog. adv Ruffinum Tom. 2. Col. 296. B. for his overmuch fidelity in translating some of Eusebius and Origens works and changing onely some few things concerning the Son and the Holy Ghost likely to grate upon Roman ears and letting the rest go intire and publishing them so as they were written Besides what should move Ruffinus to falsifie Origen in this place How came he concern'd to make any such Interpolation what advantage to himself or any party could he intend herein But what if after all this that piece of Origen on Rom. were translated by St. Hierom himself and this be owned by him in his Epistle to Heraclius prefixt before the Commentary why then all the dust about Ruffinus his corrupting of Origen in this particular vanishes into smoke and we have St. Hieroms Authority as Dr. Dr. Hammond Inf. Bapt. §. 42. †Cum igitur constet Anabaptistas agi sanatico spiritu non moveat nos corum autoritas ut discedamus à communi consenâ—is veteris Ecclesiae de baptizandis infantibus Nam vetustissimi Sâ—riptores Ecclesiastiâ—i probant baptismum infantium Otigenes enim in 6 cap. ad Rom. sic scribit Itaque Ec clesia ab Apostolis traditionem accepit etiam parvulis dare baptismum Sciebant enim illi quibus secreta divinorum mysteriorum commissa sunt quod essent in omnibus genuinae sordes pâ—ccati quae per aquam spiritum abolere deberent Haec sunt Origenis verba in quibus utrumque testatur baptizari infantes consequi eos per baptismum remissionem peccati originalis hoc est reconciliari eos Deo Melancth Loc. Com. de Baptismo Hammond saith to secure us that these are Origens words And that Origens words they are †Melancthon doth expresly say And lastly why Origen should be so much as suspected to be corrupted in this Place unless in some other of his writings he had declared himself to the contrary which I see not pretended is no easie thing to say and the suggestion of it is nothing else but a miserable shift of persons enslaved to an Hypothesis and resolved to say any thing how irrational and groundless soever for the maintaining of it And though this place were laid by as likewise that of his in Levit. yet whilest his 14 Homil. on Luke of unquestion'd Authority shall be extant there will be a witness of Origens to be produced for Infants Baptism Lastly for Cyprian his not urging it as an Apostolical Tradition or Precept doth not prove it was none However his delivering his Judgment for Infants baptism is a sure evidence that he thought neither Scripture precept nor Apostles practice nor Church Tradition was against it And it cannot be thought a private opinion which was so early concluded in a Council of no fewer than 66 Bishops And though H. D. meets with no such Council nor can tell where it was held yet St. Augustine doubtless was satisfied concerning the truth of it and St. Hierom too or else he would never have appealed to its Authority in the case Nor does St. Cyprians mentioning it to be defined in a Council prove it no Apostolical Tradition because it was delivered for an Apostolical tradition before that Council Nor was it properly Infants Baptism that was defined in that Council but whether Infants might be baptized before the eighth day Whether the grounds upon which that Councils Conclusion was grounded wear weak and frivolous as they are confidently enough said to be is not now under my consideration though to wiser persons than I they may for ought I know seem strong and weighty but whether they did so conclude or no which so good a witness as St. Cyprian is sufficient to prove Nor do I find it so much contradicted by his great Master Tertullian whom he so much reverenced who disputed Inf. Bapt. Par. 2. chap. 7. indeed against the hastening but not against the lawfulness of Infants baptism to which disputation I have given an Answe in part and Mr. Wills more fully And therefore I shall rather believe St. Cyprian himself declaring himself to be for Infants Baptism then Baronius if he assert or suggest that he was against it And if other things have been fathered on Cyprian yet till that Epistle of his to Fidus be demonstrated to be spurious which H. D. doth not tell us is yet done no not by Daille himself I shall presume it is his own And well may having it own'd for his by two so early and eminent Authors as St. Augustine and St. Hierom †Beatus quidem Cyprianus non aliquod decrecum condens novum sed Ecclesiae fidem firmissimam servans ad corrigendum cos qui putabant ante oâ—tavum diem nativitatis non esse parvulum baptizandum non carnem sed animam dixit esse perdendam mox natum rite baptizari posse cum suis quibusdam cocpiscopis censuit D. Aug. Ep. 28 ad Hieron Tom. 2. Col. 108. B. the former of which in his Epistle to Hierom appeals to it * Ac me putes haeretico sensu hoc intelligere beatus Martyr Cyprianus cujus te in Scripturarum testimoniis digerendis amulum gloriaris in Epistola quam scribit ad Episcopum Fidum de Infantibus haptizandis haec memorat Porro autem si etiam gravissimis delictoribus c. D. Hieron l. 3. adv Pelag. Tom. 2. Col. 47. C. the latter in his third book against the Pelagians not onely doth that but transcribes a considerable part of it Nor shall I ever the unwillinger receive from him a Catholick Verity for his having held other I will not say with H. D. corrupt and Antichristian Tenents which I should tremble to say or think of so pious a person and eminent a Martyr but private opinions as Tertullians and Gr. Nazianzens for the delay of Infants Baptism are said to have been which if no worse than that of the Churches being founded upon Peter and that sprinkling might serve in stead of baptizing in both which I can assure the Reader he hath good company may prove not to deserve so heavy a censure nor he for them to be adjudged a Notable Factor for Antichrist and one in whom the mystery of iniquity did strongly work which is a character strangely inconsistent with that estimate that by the Catholick
retentam est non nisi Aâ—â—boritate dpoâ—lâ—lica traditum reâ—issime crediâ—â—r D. Aug. de Bapt. â—oâ—tra Donat l. 4. c. 24. therefore it is most rightly behaved in St. Augustines judgment to be delivered by Authority Apostolical c Co â—suâ—tuâ—o â—amcn matris Ecclesiae in baptiâ—â—an 〈◊〉 parvulis nâ—quaq â—amspernenda câ—t ni que ullâ— mâ—dâ— supersluâ— dep it inâ—â— ner omnino credâ—â—da nisâ—â—â—â—stolica esse traditiv D Aug. l. 10. de Genes al Literan c. 2â— This reading isasserâ—ed and vindicated by Dr. Sâ—illing flâ—â—â— Vindic. of A. B. of Cant. part 1. c. 4. p. 108. nor saith he is it to be believed to be any other but an Apostolical Tradition which it seems it was so apparent then to be that the Pâ—la 〈…〉 s themselves upon that account did yield that Infants were to be baptized though they would not yield it upon the account of any original sin in them because saith he they cannot go against the Authority of the Universal Church del vered d Parvulos baptizandos esse conâ—â—dant quia contra authoritarem universae Ecclesiae proculdubio per Dominum Apostolos traditam venire non possunt D. Aug. l. 1. de pecc merit remiss without doubt by the Lord and his Apostles And accordingly Origin testifies that the Church did receive from the Apostles e Ecclesia ab Apostolis traditionem susccpit etiam parvulis baptismum dare Origen l. 5. in â—p ad Roman a Tradition for the baptizing of Infants And so when the Author of the Ecclesiastick Hierarchy reports Infants Baptism to have been brought down to his Time from ancient Tradition f Hoc quoque de hac re dicimus quod divini nostri ponrisices à veteribus acceptum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nobis tradiderunt Aiunt cnim id quod ctiam verum est pucros si â—n sancto instituto ac lege instituan â—ur ad sanctam animi constitutionem perventuros esse ab omni errore solutos ac liberos sine ullo impurae vitae periâ—â—lo Hoc cum in mentem venisseâ— divinis nostris praeccptoribus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 placuit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 admitti pueros hoc sancto modo Dionys Areopag l. de Eccles Hierarch cap. ult and saith that when it came into the mind of our divine Guides that children being brought up in a holy law would lead their life in holiness it pleased them that Infants should be admitted to it after that holy manner there by him described Maximus his Scholiast interprets those Divine Guides to be the Apostles And so Ph. Meloncthon g Baptismum infantium constat à veteribus Scriptoribus Ecclesiae probari Nam Origines Augustinus scribunt ab Apostolis receprum esse Melancthon Concil Theolog. part 1. p. 59. names both Origen and Augustin as avouchers hereof And whereas the Antipaedobaptists in Mr. Calvins time made the simple believe that for many years together after the resurrection of Christ Infants Baptism was unknown in that saith he they telled a most soul lie for as much as there is no so ancient writer as doth not of a certainty refer the original thereof unto the Apostles h Quod autem apud simplicem vulgum disseminant longam annorum seriem post Christi resurrectionem praeteriisse quibus incognitus erat paedobaptismus in co faedissime menâ—iuntur siquidcm nullus est scriptor tam verustus qui non cjus originâ—m ad Apostolorum scculum pro certo reserat Calvin Instit l. 4. c. 16. Sect. 8. Age. § 5. So that I shall no further labour by the Testimony of Ecclesiastical Writers to prove the Tradition to have been Apostolical but rather go on to make it evident to you from the Testimony of the Sacred Scriptures that it was the Practice of the Apostles a thing done by some or all of them to baptize Infants Not that I can produce any Text which expresly saith they did so that must not be expected from me out of these writings which we have of the Apostles one such expres testimony would end the strise on all hands but that I shall name some Scripture Texts from which it may very probably at least be gathered if it cannot be demonstratively concluded that they did baptize Infants And yet by the way meâ—hmks even a probable Intimation of any Apostolick Practice from the Scriptuâ—e backt with so full and positive an Affirmation of it by the Catholick Church as hath been produced should be enough to sway the judgment and carry the Assent of any modest nquirer thereinto next to if not as good as a Demonstrative Argument CHAP. XXIX Infants Baptism an Apostâ—lical Practice § 1. Now for Practive We read in the Scripture of several hâ—ush Ids baptized at once as Lydia and her houshold Acts 16. 15. and the Jaylor and his houshold ib. 33. and the houshold of Stephanas 1 Cor. 1. 16. and all these by St. Paul And it is not to be doubted but the other Apostles walked in the same steps with him and did as he did receiving unto Proselytism whole housholds by baptizing them And no marvel if they did sometimes baptize whole housholds who were commisâ—ionated to baptize all nations § 2. Now though it be not expressed there were any Infants in those or any of those houses yet first it is very strange there should be none in any of them as if the grace of God had delighted to take place and dwell chiefly in barren families who should be in least probability of propagating it to posterity at a time when its propagation seems to have been the design of all the persons in the Trinity and secondly if there weâ—e any it is certain that being not excepted they were baptized Which probability though the Antipa dobaptists who cannot deny it do yet think they sufficiently conâ—ute by laughing at it is not so altogether improbable nor will be found so to be when it shall appear that it was the manner of the Jews to baptize the Infants of the Proselyte Converts as well as themselves and that the Christian Baptism founded therein made no variation therefrom in that particular Of which more anon § 3. But to come to that which I chiefly purpose to insist on St. Paul tells the Corinthians See Dr. Hâ—mmond of Inf. Bapt. Sec. 31. to Sec. 39. and Defence of Inf. Baptism pag. 101. pag. 58. to pag. 66. 1 Cor. 7. 14. that the unbeliâ—ving husband had beâ—n sanctisied by the nife and the unbelieving wife by the husband and that otherwise their children had been unclean whereas now saith he they are holy Now this Text rightly rendred and understood is a full evidence for Insants Baptism by the very Apostles themselves or those whom they themselves appointed to baptize which comes all to one The word which in the English we render is sanctified is if rightly rendered hath been sanctisied So the Tense of the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
to understand that our Saviour when he put an end to the Mosaical Observances did not wholly evacuate and make null all that was in use and practice among the Jews and introduce a perfectly new platform of his own wholly other in all both the Substance and circumstances of it from what was before but did take much of what he found ready to his hand among them that was usefull to him and did continue it still in his Church onely accommodating and fitting it to his own purpose and improving and heightning it in the uses and advantages of it to his Disciples This the Learned shew by instances Dr. Hammond Quaere of the Baptizing of Infants §. 5. in sundry particulars And thus particularly it was in the institution of Baptism That before the time of our Saviour even from ancient days had been in use among the Jews as one Ceremony among others of the initation of Disciples into the Covenant of God as the most Authentick Records of the Jewish Antiquities do testisie And that our Saviour leaving off the other two which were in use together with it namely Circumcision and Sacrâ—fice did continue and ordain shouâ—d be the sole and single Ceremony of Initiation or Admittance of Disciples into his Church And here by the way I cannot let pass without a remark the mercifulness of our Saviour towards mankind in the continuation of this and dismission of the other two in that whereas Sacrifice was chargeable and Circumcision was painfull he was pleased to lay down them and continue onely Baptism which was neither charge nor pain § 8. Now it is most certain that before our Saviours time those that became Proselytes to the Jewish Church were admitted into it by three things Circumcision Sacrifice and Baptism which last was so necessary that though one were circumcized yet if he were not also baptized he was not a true Proselyte but a Gentile still Whence as the Learned Dr. Light foot informs it is said and said as a known Axiome by the Gemara Non est quis Proselytus usque dum circumcidatur baptizetur Dr. Lightfoot Horâ— Habraicae l. 42. Babylonica Jevamoth fol. 46. 2. That till a man were both circumcized and baptized he was no Proselyte I say a Man because for a woman baptism was sufficient to maâ—e her a Proselyte without circumcision as the same Gemara shews Jevaâ—â—h fol. 45. 2. § 9. Now I being a Statute Law upon record among the Jews Numb 15. 15. that one â—â—dmaâ—ce should be both for them and for tâ—â— manger the Pâ—oselyte that so journed with them and that as thâ—y were so should the stranger he before the â—ord and that one â—aw and one Manner as for Moral Duties so for Rites and Ceremonies should be both for the native Jews and Proselyees that sojourned among them nothing can be more evident than this that what is recorded to have been their uâ—e with the Proselytes was theâ—r uâ—e also with and among themselves and that they did to themselves Dr. Hammâ—nâ— Defence of Inf. Bapt. p. 10 11 24 25. By three things say the Hebrew Doctors did Israel enter into the Covenant by Circumcision and Baptism and Sacrifice And so in all ages when an Ethnic is willing to enter into the Covenant and gather himself under the wings of the Majesty of God and take upon him the yoke of the Law he must be circumcised and baptized and bring a Sacrifice And if it be a woman she must be baptized and bring a Sacrifice as it is written Numb 15. 15. as ye are so shall the stranger be How are ye by circumcision and baptism and bringing of a Sacrifice so likewise the stranger throughout all generations by Circumcision and Baptism and bringing of a Sacrifice Ainsworth on Gen. 17. 12. pag. 68. and theirs what they did to the Proselytes and their Children insomuch that their way of arguâ—ng to what was necessary to be done to the Pâ—oselyte proceeded from what was done among themselves and that because the Law of God was that as it was with them so it should be with the stranger § 10. Now this is most certain as being upon record in the Gemara Babylonica one besides others of their most Authentick writings Dr. Hammond Bapt. of Inf. §. 15. and Def. of Inf. Bapt. Sec. 3. Dr. Lightfoot Horae Hebraicae pag. 42. 43. that when any of Heathens became Jews not onely the Proselytes themselves but also their Infant Children if they had any were baptized They baptize the little or young stranger or Proselyte saith the Gemana Again If together with a Proselyte his sons and daughters be made Proselytes which none were without being baptized what their father doth for them turns to their good Indeed as R. Josph said when they grew up they might if they pleased renounce what was done Where the Gloss saith This is to be understood De parvulis of little ones that were made Proselytes together with their Fathers And so again Maimonides They baptize the Infant or little stranger upon the knowledge or understanding of the house of Judgment or the Congregation And again saith he If an Israelite take or find a Heathen Infant and baptize him in the name of a Proselyte Ecce ille est Proselytus loe he is become a Proselyte So R. Hezekiah saith Behold one finds an Infant cast out and baptized him in the name of a servant do thou also circumcise him in the name of a servant but if he baptize him in the name of a freeman do thou also circumcise him in the name of a freeman Hierosol Jevamoth fol. 8. 4. Infants then were baptized among the Jews before our Saviours time admitted into Covenant with God and into Communion with his Church by Baptism § 11. And that it was so with Infants â—fter our Saviours time I have I hope sufficiently made it appear by what I have already said in this discourse shewing by abundant authorities and instances that it has been the Practice of the Catholick Church of Christ in all the Ages of it to baptize Infants and that Practice founded in the Tradition and derived from the Practice of the Apostles sufficiently though somewhat obscurely attested by the holy Scriptures § 12. Now where we find what was before and what was after our Saviours time in this matter answering exactly each to other save where an alteration is expresly made what other can any rationall man judge than this that as it was before our Saviours time and as it was still continued after his time so our Saviour in his time did institute and appoint ordain and decree that unto all future time it should be And it is impossible any better account than this should be given of any Institution of our Saviours that is not particularly recorded in Scripture as this of Infants Baptism neither is nor was necessary * Nam cum Paedobaptismus in Ecclesia Judaicâ in admissione Proselytorum ita
Propheticae Apostolice interpretationis linea secundum Ecclesiastici Catholici sensus normam dirigatur In ipsa item Catholica Ecclesia magnopere cur andum est ut id tene amus quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus creditum est hoc est etenim vere proprieq Catholicum c Vinc. Lirin advers baeres cap. 1. 2 3. cause I maintain not onely with the authority of divine Law but also with the tradition of the Catholick Church And even the Antipaedobaptists themselves are willing enough to flourish their writings with humane testimonies and to plead tradition too if for them Indeed I observe none to be against tradition but those that think it to be against themselves or to reject the evidence of humane testimony who do not fear to be condemned by it And because the judgments or rather fancies of men as to Authors are so infinitely various that one esteems that as gold which another despises as dross and values as wheat what another rejects as chaff therefore I have endeavoured to obviate that variety of judgments with a diversity of Authors producing those of the Middle and Modern ages as well as those of the Ancient and Primitive Schoolmen as well as Commontators Historians as well as Fathers Civilians as well as Divines and Polemiâ—al as well as Didactical Writers So that the Readers which do not like of all may please themselves with what they have most fancy too leaving the liberty which themselves make use of unto others who as being of different tasts may think their leavings as good as their takings and relish that best which they disrelish most And because there is no one Prejudice that holds a stronger possession of our Antipae dobaptists than that which arises from that bright evidence which they have of the baptizing Adult Persons in all the Ages of the Church and of many's deferring either to be baptized Themselves or to baptize their Infants in several Ages of it and those especially that were nearest to the Primitive Times and the removal of that Prejudice may be a fair Introduction to their depositing of all the rest therefore I will endeavour in my entrance to remove that And if I can shew that the Delays of Baptism which they so speak of in the Ancient times were upon other Grounds and on different Accounts from those that our Antipaedobaptists alledge in the case then that plea of theirs from the practice of baptizing Adult Persons and deferring the Baptism of Infants will neither serve their Hypothesis nor disserve ours The Grounds as I understand on which our Antipaedobaptist refuse to baptize their Infants and defer their baptizing to ripeness of Age are because as they suppose there is no command in Scripture for it And because there is no example in Scripture of it either of which if there found they would hold it lawfull and because they find neither of them there they hold it unlawfull Now if it appear that the unlawfulness to baptize Infants for want of a Scripture command or Example for it was none of the Grounds on which the Ancients did defer their baptizing and that never any such thing was in the Primitive Times pretended or pleaded by any to justifie or excuse that delay then I hope the case will be clear that their delays of Baptism on other Grounds can asford no protection to the Hypothesis our Antipaedobaptists who deny Baptism to Infants upon the Account of the unlawfulness of it That never any such pretence or plea was made by any in the primitive times even for five hundred years against Infants Baptism I rationally presume because I see none yet produced by any of the Learnedst of our Antipaedobaptists who have I believe search'd through and through all the writings of the Fathers and Primitive Historians and ransack'd every page and rifled every passage in them for some patronage to their Hypothesis And as they are quick sighted enough to have espied it so they would have been carefull enough if there had been any to have produced it And upon the most curious search that I have been able to make for it my self as far as the circumstances I am under would permit me I sincerely profess I have not been able to find any What I have found urged or but binted at as a ground or reason for any ones delaying either his own or any Infants baptizing I shall fairly give an account of and then leave the Reader to judge what advantage our pleaders against Infants Baptism upon the account of the unlawfulness of it can make therefrom or rather what a miserable fallacy they put upon themselves and others whilest they alledge the Primitive Practice of deferring Infants Baptism in justification of their denying Baptism to Infants upon the account of the unlawfulness of it for want of a Command or Example in Scripture whereas it was never in the Primitive Times denied to any Infant upon that account nor was that ground ever urged or alledged by any in those days as a reason or so much as pretence for their deferring to baptize their Infants nor did any ask as our Antipaedobaptists now do What Scripture have you for it Where did Christ ever command it or where did any Apostle practice it Now in order to the shewing on what Accounts Baptism was in Ancient Times so oft and so long deferred I must premise that some did voluntarily defer their own baptizing and some had their Baptism deferred by others the former were Adult the later Infants And of the Reasons or Occasions of both I will speak distinctly And First Those that delayed their own baptizing had severall Reasons and Pretences for it 1. Some did it out of a fear of sinning after baptism and so forfeiting the grace of it and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 647. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. ib. p. 649. Sed mundus rursus delinquit quo male comparetur diluvio it aque igni destinatur sicut homo qui post baptismum delict a restaurat Tertull. de Bapt p,259 ed. Rigalt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. Nyssen de Baptismo p. 221. Indeed 't was very usuall in those times notwithstanding the Fathers did solemnly and smartly declaim against it for persons to defer their being baptized till they were near their death out of a kind of Novatian principle that if they fell into sin after Baptism there would be no place for repentance mistaking that place of the Apostle where 't is said that if they who have been once enlightened 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Ancients generally understand of Baptism sall away 't is impossible to renew them again unto repentance Dr. Cave Prim. Christian par 1. ch 10. pag. 309. being certainly damned without â—hope of recovery even by repentance especially when they considered the pronenese of their own nature to sin and the occasions and temptations to sinning that they should meet withall in
Article of her Doctrine That the Baptism Baptismus parvulorum omnino in Ecclesid retinendus est ut qui cum Christi institutione optimè congraut Artic. Relig. 27. of young children is in any wiâ—e to be retained in the Church as most agreeable with the institution of Christ so it hath provided in her Liturgy a double Office for the Baptizing of Infants the one fitted for Publick Solemnity the other adapted to Private Necessity and hath ordered the Curates of every Parish to be often admonishing the people that they defer not the baptizing of thâ—ir children longer than the first or second Sunday next after their Bâ—rth or other Holy day falling between unless upon reasonable cause which must be great too and to be approved by the Curate What the Church then not onely allows and permits them to have but ordains and appoints their having of that by the Constitution of the Church they have a Right unto and they cannot without injustice to them be deprived of it unless perhaps any shall think it no injury to wrong them of any spritual advantage whereas it is a great one to rob them of any temporal one when as contrarily if the one be a robbery the other is a sacriledge § 3. But because the present Church is a Party and will not be allowed to be a Judge by her Opposers therefore I will proceed to shew a second Right that children have unto Baptism and that is by Prescription from the Custom and Practice of the Catholick Church of Christ And sure they that will not be Members of our Particular Church will yet be willing to be Members of Christs Catholick Church And if so they be then sure they will not oppose nor gainsay but submit unto and be regulated by the Custom and Practice of it unless they mean to become guilty of Schism in separating from that Church whereof they pretend themselves to be Members § 4. Now as to Church custom and practice 't is in that as in other customs and practices It hath the obligation of a Law Common usage we say is common Law in England So 't is in civil Customs and so too in Ecclesiastical Where Authority from the Scripture fails there the Custom of Ubi Authoritas deficit ibi Consuetudo maâ—orum pro lege tenenda est D. Aug. ad Casulan In rebus de quibus nihil certi statuit Scriptura divina mâ—s populi Dei vel instituta majorum pro lege tenenda D. Aug. Ep. 86. Consuet ido autem etiam in civilibus rebus pro lege suscipitur cum deficit lex nec differt Scriptura an ratione consistat quando legem ratio commendet Tert. de Coron Mil. In iis quae Scriptura nec jubet nec prohibet illud est sequendum quod consuetudo roboravit Id. Ib. Exigis ubi scriptum sit in actibus Apostolorum etiamsi Scripturae auctoritas non subesset totius Orbis in hac parte consensus instar praecepti obtinet Nam multa alia quae per traditionem in Ecclesiis observantur auctoritatem sibi scriptaelegis usurpârunt veluti in lavacro ter mergitare caput c. D. Hieron advers Luciferan Quis quis Catholici dogmatis moris sensum divinitus per loca tempora omnia dispensatum contemserit non hominem contemnit sed Deum Vincent Lilinens the Church is to be held as a Law So St. Augustine saith and so have others of the Ancients both thought and said Whence that conclusion of the Council of Nice that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ancient usages should continue in force And if so then Infants will have a Right to Baptism as good as any ever had to any thing on this account § 5. And that it should be so namely that the Custom and Practice of the Church should have the force of a Law either to justifie a Church Practice or to give Right unto a Church Priviledge will be no wonder sure to him that considers that the Apostle both hath made the Custom of the Church a Rule for Church-members to walk by 1 Cor. 14. 40. in saying Let all things be done decently and in order For by Decency there he means agreeableness to the custom of the Church which as our Learned Paraphrast saith is the rule of decency and hath also himself made use of Church custom as an argument for the refutation of such as should contend for the decency of womens publick praying that is being present at and joyning in the ivine service with their heads uncovered 1 Cor. 11. 16. But if any man seem to be contentious we have no such customs nor the Churches of God Which words of his we may sitly use to Opposers of Infants Baptism They contend for the deferring of the Baptizing of Infants even of all Infants though they be the children of believing Parents till they be grown men and hold it unlawfull for any to be baptized before But that is a novel opinion and practice of their own We have no such either opinion or custom nor the Churches of God § 6. And the stronger still will Infants Right unto Baptism from the Custom of the Church be which Custom yet must needs be granted to have a great force when an Apostle that could impose by an Authority Divine would argue from a Custom of the Church if it shall appear that this Custom of the Church hath been grounded upon Apostolical Tradition or Practice especially being the Apostle hath given express order to stand fast to and hold the Apostolical Traditions whether by word or by writing 2 Thess 2. 15. and to mark them which walked so as they had the Apostles for an example Phil. 3. 17. I will therefore first shew that the Practice of this Particular Church to baptize Infants has been the Practice of the Catholick Church and then proceed to shew that Practice of the Church to have been grounded on the Tradition of the Apostles and put fair to shew it to have been the Practice of the Apostles also CHAP. XXVII The Catholick Churches Custom to Baptize Infants § 1. NOw to shew that it hath been the Custom and Practice of the Universal Church of Christ to baptize Infants as it will be usefull unto you and also delightfull because you will see that what we hold and do in this case is no other but what hath been held and done in and by the Catholick Church in all the ages of it ever since that first wherein the Apostles lived so it shall neither be irksome nor unpleasing to my self because I shall hope thereby to contribute something toward the conviction and satisfaction of those that are doubters and dissatisfied in the point Wherein my progress shall be retrogressive beginning below and carrying my Catalogue upwards to the Primitive Times from the Present whereas other usually begin above and bring it downward to the Present from the Primitive it being not material which way it
paulo ante diximus Nullâ—s mundus à sorde nec si unius diei quidem fuerit vita ejus super terram Et quia per baptismi sacramentum nativitatis sordes deponuntur propterea baptizantur parvuli Nisi enim quis renatus c. Orig. Hom. 14. in Luc. into the remission of sins Again how can any account of baptizing little ones hold but according to what was said a little before None is clean from pollution no not if he but of a day old And again By the Sacrament of baptism the defilements of our nativity are put away therefore are even the little ones baptized So in his 8th Homil on Levit. Let it be considered what the cause is when the baptism of the Church is given for the remission of sins that baptism should according to the observation or custom of Addi his etiam illud potest ut requiratur quid causae sit cum baptisma Ecclesiae in remissionem peccatorum detur secundum Ecclesiae observantiam etiam parvulis baptismum dari cum utique si nihil esset in parvulis quod ad remissionem deberet indulgentiam pertinere gratia baptismi superflua videretur D. Origen Homil. 8. in Levit the Church be given to little ones See ch 28. § 4. His Authority is referred to by the Magd. Cent. 3. c. 4. Col. 57. § 75. In this Age may the Author of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy going under the name of Dionysius the Arcopagite be conveniently placed And here Dr. Hammond places him though the Magdeburgenses put him into the fourth Century as others into the first And saith he when it came into the mind of our divine Guides what influence Hoc cum in mentem venisset divinis nostris praeceptoribus placuit admitti pueros hoc sancto modo ut naturales pueri qui introfertur parentes tradant filium alicui â—orum qui initiati sunt bono puerorum in divi nis rebus informatori ac deinceps puer ei operam det ut divino patri sponsorique sanctae salutis D. Areop Eccles Hier. cap. ult Notandum est quid dicat pater hic de baptizandis infantibus Max. Scholin l. B. Dion de Eccl. Hierarch a pious education would be likely to have on children towards a holy conversation they ordered that Children should be admitted namely to baptism after this holy manner c. He had a little before propounded and answered this question why children as yet unable to understand divine things should be made partakers of the sacred birth from God By that sacred birth as is evident in the thing it self is meant Baptism and that it is so we are further instructed by Maximus his Scholiast on that place Here saith he is to be noted what the Father saith touching the baptizing of Infants § 76. And about the same Age it is also supposed was the Author of the Constitutions going under the name of Clemens Romanus whose Authority what it is I do not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Rom. Constit l. 6. c. 15. well know but that it is full for the baptizing of Infants the following words do make it appear Baptize saith he your Infants and bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. § 77. And let these Witnesses suffice for the Third Age. Step we now up into the Second Century that which immediately succeeds the Age wherein the Apostles lived And here the Centuriators Centur. 2. cap. 4. Col. 48. tell us that it is no where read that Infants in this Age were excluded from Baptism yea rather that Origen affirms the Church to have received from the Apostles a tradition to baptize even Infants But if this satisfie not I will endeavour to find out witness even for this Age also § 78. And Tertullian who lived in the latter end of this and in the beginning of the following Century and so may at once speak for both though he be produced as a witness against it yet even his witness against it is an evidence for it For whiles he pleads for a delay of baptism especially that Itaque pro cujusque personae conditione ac dispositione etiam cunctatio batismi utilior est praecipue tamen circa parvulos Tertull. de Bapt. Quid festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem peccaterum Id. ib. of little ones he tacitly declares that Infants then were baptized though sooner then he thought convenient And when by way of reproof he saith Quid festinat c. Why does that innocent age make hast to the remission of sins that is unto baptism wherein sins were remitted he plainly confesseth that that age did festinare make hast thereto What need else was there of his question what reason for his reproof And even in saying that the delay of baptism is utilior more profitable he tacitly implies that the hastening of it is utilis not without its profit And can we think but that he was really for the baptizing of the Infants of Christians Adco nulla ferme nativitas munda est utique Ethuicorum Hinc enim Apostolus ex sanctisicato alierutro sexu sanctos procreari tam ex seminis praerogativa quam ex institutionis disciplina Caeterum inquit immundi nascerentur quasi designates tamen sanctitati ac per hoc etiam saluti intelligi volens filelium filios ut hujus spei pignore matrimoniis quae retinenda censuerat patroâ—inaretur Alioqâ—in meminerat Dominicae definitionis Nisi quis nascetur ex aqua spiritu non ibit in regnum Dei id est non erit sanâ—lus Ita omnis anima cousque in Adam censetur donec in Christo recenseatur tamdiu immunda quamdiu recenseatur Tert. de Anima c. 39. Quum verò praescribitur nemini sine baptismo competere salutem ex illa maxime pronunciatione Domini qui ait Nisi natus ex aqua quis erit non habet vitam Tertul de Bapt. p. 261. Edit Rigalt Lex enim tinguendi imposita est forma praesâ—ripta Ite inquit docete nationes tinguentes cas in nomen Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti Huic legi collata definitio illa Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ spiritu non intraâ—it in regnum Coelorum obstrinxit fidem ad baptismi necessitatem Itaque omnes exinde credentes tinguebantur Tert. ib. pag. 262. what ever he thought as to the Infants of Heathens who saith they are designed to holiness and by this to salvation But how are they designed to holiness why by Baptism sure enough For saith he Except one be born of water and of the Spirit he shall not enter into the kingdom of God that is saith he he shall not be holy every sould being to be reckoned in Adam till it be enrolled into Christ and so long unclean as it is unenrolled in which his meaning I conceive is that one is in that state of nature wherein he first was
born till he be baptized into Christ and a child of wrath through the uncleanness of his natural birth till he be made a child of grace by baptismal regeneration Can we think but he was for the baptizing of Infants who saith it is praescribed that none is capable of salvation without baptism especially being the Lord hath positively said Except a man be born of water he has not life and who from a comparison of this Definition of our Saviours with that Law which he gave for the discipling of nations by baptizing them gathers a necessity of baptism to salvation upon the account of which necessity believers were baptized And if they were baptized themselves and upon the account of a necessity of baptism unto salvation then surely they would have so much charity for their children as to baptize them and not leave them in a state of perdition It is plain therefore that he was rather for than against Infants Baptism § 79. And as he was for the baptizing of Infants so was also Irenaeus in the same Age but before him one that had been an Auditor of Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna and is by St. Hierom lookt on as a man of the Apostolical times and so a most competent witness as Dr. Hammond argues of the Apostolical Def. of Inf. Bapt. c. 4. §. 2. pag. 96. doctrine and practice especially being as Tertullian saith a most accurate searcher of all doctrines and one that sealed his belief with his blood being martyred at Lyons in the year 197. And what saith he Why he saith that Christ came to save all by himself all Omnes enim venit per semetipsum salvare omnes inquam qui per eum renascuntur in Deum infantes parvulos pucros juvenes seniores D. Irenaei advers Haeres l. 2. c. 39. p. 192. See Dr Haem Bapt. of Inf. Sect. 40. I say who are born again unto God by him Infants and little ones and children and young men and elder men Here it is plain that Infants and little ones and children are in the number of those that are born again unto God through Christ Now that by being born again unâ—o God is meant by being baptized I suppose none doubts that has read and understands as the Catholick Church hath ever understood that of our Saviour John 3. 5. Except a man Quod verbum Christi ad Nicodemum intendie aquam sensibilent is a position of Thom. Waldens de Sacramentis Tom. 2. q. 102. fol. 104. col 2. be born again of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God or is acquainted with the Scripture notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 regeneration the laver whereof is Baptism § 80. In the same Age flourished Hyginus Bishop of Rome and about the same time being martyred Anno Dom. 144 And he as Platina affirms out of the ancient Records Voluit unum saltem Patrimum unamque Matrimam baptismo interesse sic enim eos appellant qui infantes tenent dum baptizantur Platina in Vitâ Hygini appointed that there should be at least one Godfather and one Godmother present at Baptism Now who he meant by Godfather and Godmother Platina informs us while he tells us that so they call those that hold Infants when they are baptized Godfathers and Godmothers appointed to be at the baptizing of Infants supposes Infants baptized § 81. Lastly Justin Martyr or who ever wrote that Ancient piece intituled Quaest Respons ad Orthâ—dox stating the difference 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Just Martyr Quaest Resp. ad Orth. 56. pag. 424. Edit Paris 1615. between Infants dying baptized and unbaptized saith it is this that the baptized obtain the good things that come by baptism but the unbaptized obtain them not A proof this clear and full as can be desired of the baptizing of Insants in that Age the age wherein that Author lived the very next to that of the Apostles if Justin Martyr were that Author To which it is not now needfull I should add any thing unless I should add what follows in the same Author touching the Baptized Infants namely that they are vouchsafed the advantages of baptism through the faith of those that bring them to be baptized § 82. And thus I have shewn you that it hath been the Custom and Practice of the Universal Church of Christ in all the Ages thereof from the present to the Primitive Times even up to that very Age wherein the Apostles lived to baptize Infants CHAP. XXVIII Infants Baptism a Tradition Apostolical § 1. I Am now to examine how this could come to be practice of the Universal Church And truly it can be no other but the Authority of the Apostles Tradition or Practice in their own Age. The Apostles some way by word or writing taught Vniversa Ecclesia quae Apostolicam proximè secuta est infantes baptizavit Igitur dubium non est quinmota Scripturae authoritate praxi Apostolicâ hoc secerit Wendelin Thelog Christ l. 1. cap. 13. Explic. Thess 11. others so to do or did so themselves and so made themselves an example for others to do the like or both or else it is not imaginable how such a practice should not onely be received so generally into the Church and so early too but continue also in it through all Ages down from their time to our own without interruption I will therefore speak of both And first of Tradition § 2. Tradition notes the delivery of a thing to be received into our belief or practice See Dr. Ham. Bapt of Inf. Sect. 99 100. That where 't is genuine and Apostolical is of mighty moment in religious concerns And that if any is truly such which hath been received and owned for such by the Church in all the Ages of it from the primitive to the present times either openly in profession or tacitly in practice § 3. To this is referred the Sanctification of the Lords day To this is referred the admission of Women to the Lords Table To this is referred the Canon of Scripture And to this is referred the Baptizing of Infants § 4. Let no man whisper you in the ear saith St. Augustin with any other doctrines a Quid de parvulis pueris si ex Adam aegroti Nam ipsi portantur ad Ecclesiam Nemo ergo vobis susurret doctrinas alienas Hoc Ecclesia semper habuit semper tenuit hoc a ma orum fide percipit buâ— usqâ—â— in sinâ—m perseâ—â—renter â—â—â—â—dit D. Aug. Serm. 10. de Vâ—â—v Apost This the Church hath always had hath always held this from the Faith of our Fore elders it hath received and this it keeps perseveringly unto the end And for as much as the Universal Church doth maintain it being always held in the Church and not brought into it by any Councils decree b Quod uniâ—â—rsâ—z tâ—nâ—t â—â—â—lâ—sia noc Conciliis institutum sed semper
that Infants were baptized in the Apostles days For the reasoning of the Apostle is this The unbelieving husband hath been sanctified that is brought to be a believer and to be baptized by that is through the means the instruction and conversation of the believing wifâ— dwâ—lling together with him gaining him to the Faith through her perswasion and good conversation And the same hath also been found to be effected upon the unbelieving wife by the dwelling of the believing husband together with her In confideration whereof he had advised the believing husbands still dwelling with his unbelieving wife and wife with husband ver 12 13. Upon this experience a hope hath been grounded that your châ—ldren though now they be not actually believers yet shall be brought to be believers by the means of their living in the same Families with you that are belâ—evers and by being instructed by you in the Christian Faith as soon as they shall be capable of understanding it And upon this hope they have been made holy by a Visible sanctification as Aquinas hath it that Aquin. Sum. 3. q. 68. Ar. 2. is baptized or sanctified by baptism separated by that Sacrament from the common unclean condition of Heathens and taken into the Communion of Saints Persons holy by design relation and vocation And else but for this hope they had not been sanctified nor made holy by baptism even as the children of Heathens are not baptized nor so made Holy because there is not the same reason for their coming hereafter to be Christians that there is for yours who therefore now upon this hope are in that sense Holy Let that hope therefore move the believing husband to continue with his unbelieving wife and the believing wife to continue with her unbelieving husband which hath moved us to baptize the children of those of you whereof either Parent is a Christian even the hope that those that now actually are not believers shall hereafter be broughâ— actually to believe through the instruction and conversation of the believers with whom they coinhabit and converse § 8. Well now Children as it appears by this Text were made holy in the Apostles See Dr. Ham. Def. of Inf. Bapt. ch 3. §. 1. p. â—2 c Times Those children were Infants who alone are capable of being baptized capable of being baptized by the benefit of their Parents Faith The Holâ—ness of those children imported their being baptized That Baptism was administred by none but the Apostles or Persons ordained and appointed by the Apostles for that work Hence it follows that Infants were baptized as in the Age so by the Hands or by the Appointment of the Apostles themselves Than which nothing needs be required further for the justifying of Infants Baptism § 9. And now it having appeared to be the Custom and Practice of the Universal Church of Christ to baptize Infants and that Custom and Practice being grounded on the Tradition and derived from the Practice of the Apostles themselves it follows that Infants have as good a Right unto Baptism by Prescription from thence as any person can have to any thing else by that Title which yet in many cases is as good as any other § 10. And now for Gods sake tell me why Infants should now be denied that which they have always had why should they now be forbidden coming to Christ who in all the Ages of the Church even up to that wherein the Apostles lived have had free access unto Christ and have been suffered to come to him and that by Baptism Why should we be less carefull of our childrens concerns than in all former ages others have been why should not we be as vigilant to preserve their Rights and this especially as others before us We need not doubt their Title nor question their Right having so good a Prescription for it Either Prescription can give no good Right to any thing which yet we see it doth in many or else children having sixteen hundred years prescription to plead for it have a good Right unto Baptism § 11. And yet is not that all the Right the little Children have unto Baptism For I shall now proceed to shew you a Third Right that they have unto it and that is by the Institution of Christ himself CHAP. XXX Childrens Right to Baptism by the Institution of Christ § 1. ANd truly if it can appear that Infants Baptism does come within the Institution of Christ and that Christ in his instituting of Baptism to be a Sacrament of the Gospel did either include Infants in it or not exclude them by it I cannot see what any sober modest inquirer can further want for his satisfaction in this point Unto that therefore I shall immediately hasten my discourse § 2. And if any man think that the Institution of Baptism is set down in Matth. 28. 19. or Mark 16. 15. and from the circumstances of those Texts define the Subject of Baptism as if those onely were to be baptized that are such as those were that are there expresly mentioned namely persons capable of hearing and learning believing and disbelieving the Gospel preached to them and so exclude Infants from baptizing because incapable of these things I shall humbly assume the boldness to believe that to be a mistake and to affirm that Baptism was by our Saviour instituted that is oâ—dained appointed and made a Ceremony of admission of Proselytes into his Church long before § 3. The Particular time indeed when he did institute it cannot be affirmed with so great câ—rtainty Aquinas groundâ—ng in St. Augusâ—â—nes Sum. 3. q. 66 a. â— Ex quo Christus aquis immergitur ex co omniam pecâ—nta a luit aqua D. Aug. ib. saying that from the time of Christs being dipped in water water did wash away the sins of all is of opinion that Baptism was instituted a Sacrament by Christ when himself was baptized though the necessity of using of it was not enjoyned till after his passion and resurrection But Ncâ—l de Orbell saith * Baptismus fuit à Christo in â—itâ—tus ante pâ—â—onem ipsius cum ante lilam disâ—ipuli baptizarent baptismo Christi Joh. 3. Quan viâ— hora pracisa instituâ—iâ—nis non have atur ex Evangelio non enim fuit institutus quando Christus baptizatus est à Johanne tamen Christus tune de dicavit qâ—am tanquam materiam l. doneam baptâ—smoex taitu suae mundissima carnis Nic. de Orbell list 3. 4 Sent. q. 3. de Baptismo fol. 7 8. †Baptiâ—mi Insinuatio fuit Facto quan lo fait Christus baptizatus insinuans noâ—esse baptizandos Verbo quando Nicedemo dicit Joh. 3. Nisi quis renatus fuerit Guiller vorrilong sup l. 4. Sent. de p. 3. aâ—t 3. that he did not then institute it but onely did by the touch of his most â—ure flesh dedicate water as a fit matter for baptism Nor will Cluitlerm â—orrilong allow that act to be the
not expressed in their extant writings that they did so § 2. Aâ—e all things written in the Scriptures that all the Twelve Apostles did in all places where they came and preached gathered and setled Churches Yea how little is there written of what was done by any of them And how many are there of them of whom there is nothing written at all neither what they did nor whither they went nor what became of them Did they nothing of whose doings nothing is written who are at least one half of the whole number of the Apostles And if they did any thing as sure enough they would be doing they might as well do that baptize Infants as any thing else for any thing that is written And where we find Infants Baptism in a Church planted by an Apostle as in Musâ—ovia Christianized by St. Andrew or in India by St. Thomas Why may we not think that planted there by that Apostle as well as other Christian Customs or Constitutions though in the Scripture there be a deep silence as to the whole Story And there is as good proof that they did not any thing else of all those things which our Saviour commanded them as that they did not that because no more is written of any thing else that they did than of that which is just nothing at all § 3. And they of whose doings any thing is written did they no more than just what was written Were they so exact in keeping and publishing Diaries of all their actions Not a word said not a deed done but what was book'd down How many persons do you read of that were baptized by Paul in all that time that he continued preaching the Gospel and planting the Church of Christ at Rome And do ye think none were baptized by him or at his command all the while Can there be a Church founded and formed up without baptism And if any were baptized where is it written in Scripture who what or how many they were Again do ye think the Saints at Rome did never commemorate the death of Christ in the celebration of the Eucharist If yea what mention is there of it in Scripture In what book chapter verse is it to be read No doubt both the one and the other Sacrament was by Pauls instructing and ordering received there and yet is the Scripture profoundly silent as to any such thing And who now will be so silly as from the Scriptures silence to draw a negative conclusion and say no such thing was done there because the Scripture says nothing of the doing of it The like may be said of other Apostles and the Churches planted by them § 4. Unless therefore that which is written were a perfect register of all that was done by all and every one of the Apostles as it is not of the doings of either all or one half or any one of them it cannot be proved that no one of them did any thing or appointed any thing to be done for instance to baptize Infants because it is not extant in those few scanty memoires and intimations rather than relations of some actions of some few of them written for the most part occasionally which are come to our hands that any one of them dâ—d it They might therefore do it though their doing of it be not expresly written in the Scriptures § 5. And that they did it or however so far delivered their mind concerning it that done it was and upon the account of their authority is most credible Because the Practice thereof is and has been looked on in all the Ages of the Church succeeding that wherein they lived as a Tradition of theirs And that Tradition from them is as credibly avouched to us as their writing those several Fpistles and Gospels which we receive for their writings and look upon as the word of God And we may as well receive the one upon that Tradition as the other and with as good reason reject the one as the other We have the Testimony of the Church for the one and we have but the Testimony of the Church for the other And if we may believe the Church when it tells us the Apostles wrâ— those Books why may we not as well believe it when it tells us the Apostles ordered that thing And if it be of no credit in the latter let our adversaries consider whether they do not by so saying derogate from and destroy all its credit in the former And so the matter is at last come to this that either we must have no new Testament Scriptures or else we must have Infants baptism The new Testament and this Sacrament of it must for ought I see ever stand and fall together both standing upon one bottom Catholick Tradition which must bear up both or neither not being able to support the one if it cannot support the other also § 6. I will not say but that some few one or two for many hundreds of years may have thought it not necessary to be administred so soon as in the prime of Infancy unless in case of death But their not thinking it necessary then is a sufficâ—ent evidence of their opinion of its lawfulness at other times For what is not lawfull at other times cannot be necessary even then § 7. And what ever reason we find any of the Ancients had to think it fitter to defer it I am of opinion we shall never find the unlawfulness of it to have been any of their reasons Tertullian thought the deferring of it Quid enim necesse est Sponsores etiam periculo ingeri quia ipsi per mortalitatem destituere promissiones suas possunt proventu malae indolis falli Tert. de Bapt. was more profitable but not the doing of it unlawful to be sure he does not say so And what 's his reason against the necessity of it That the Godfathers might not be brought into danger of failing in their undertaking by their own mortality or the Infants untowardness The deferring of it might then be prudential but that makes not the doing of it unlawfull And if he thought it prudential to defer it others as judicious as he have thought it no less prudence to hasten it And so his opinion in that case signifies nothing as to our present concern § 8. Perhaps some might think it prudence to defer it to avoid the exposing of so sacred an administration to the jeers of profane scoffers Dionysius the Areopagite mentions Eccl. Hier. c. 12. some such in his days as jeer'd at the Sureties being interrogated and answering in the Infants name And no doubt there are now such in our days as think that practice ridiculous enough But still be it as ridiculous as any has imagined it that renders it not unlawfull And if every thing must be laid by that any will think ridiculous we shall have little left either of our Worship or Doctrine When some heard of the Resurrection they
I beseech you Brethren a word of Exhortation Be perswaded to bring and suffer your little children to come to Christ Do ye not see Christ calling little children to him And how can ye then forbear bringing them unto him Do ye not hear him pronouncing them such as the kingdom of Heaven consisteth of and how can ye then any longer forbear entring them into his kingdom Do ye not observe him commanding that little children be suffered to come to him And how can ye then have the hearts to hinder them from coming to him O suffer little children to go to their Saviour who hath his arms wide open to receive them O forbid not Infants coming to Jesus who hath his hands stretched out to bless them O bring your children O carry your Infants to Christ who for their salvation did himself become an Infant and pass through the state of Childhood Suffer them to be made partakers of his grace by being baptized with water who that they might be made partakers of his glory was baptized with blood Consider the Benefit your children may have by Baptism and let that move you to have them baptized Consider the Need your Children have of Baptism and let that excite you to their baptizing Consider your Childrens Capableness for Baptism and let that perswade you to baptize them What shall I say more Consider your Childrens Right to Baptism and let that prevail with you not to suffer them to go unbaptized Shall the Constitution of this particular Church be of no force to move you Shall the Practice of the Catholick Church have no power to work with you Shall the Tradition of the Apostles of Christ be of no moment to induce you Yea shall the Institution of Christ himself have no prevalency in it to perswade you To conclude if not out of sense of your childrens misery yet out of conscience of your own duty if not that you may save your Children yet that you may not damn * Denique terrere nos summopere debet damnatio illa vindicem fore Dcum siquis foederis symbolo filium insignire conteâ—â—at quod co contemptu oblata gratia respâ—atur quasi ejuretur Calvin Instit l. 4. c. 16. S. 9. your selves if not out of regard to the Authority of the Church yet out of obedience to the command of Christ be so just to the fruit of your own bodies be so charitable to the issue of your own bowels as to suffer your little Children to come unto Christ and forbid them not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luc. 2. 14. A Postscript TAking notice of some attempts made by H. D. to take away the strength of the Argument from Ecclesiastick Tradition and Catholick Practice by decrying the Persons of four or five of the earliest Witnesses we have thereof as erroneous or their Writings as spurious and supposititious I think fit here to speak something in vindication of them which I could not so conveniently insert into and interweave with that part of my Discourse where their Testimonies were appealed unto And first in general I cannot but think it very unreasonable that Persons and Writings generally received for Genuine and Orthodox in those things wherein they did anciently agree with the Catholick Church should for the upholding of any modern Party in their differences from the Catholick Church be thrown by as erroneous and Heteredox Persons and as Fabulous and Fictitious Writings For if to say such an Author was Erroneous in his judgment or practice and held or did some things which any now through prejudice and prepossession rather than any just reason not knowing the true ground and genuine original thereof shall call erroneous or superstitious or that he was a Factor for Antichrist and that the mystery of iniquity did work strongly in him though a Confessor of though a Martyr for Christ be enough to blow away his Credit and blast his Reputation and take away all Authority from his Testimony in any case of Difference which a private Person or Party hath with the Catholick Church about matters of Doctrine Worship or Discipline if to say any Writing of any Father or Ecclesiastick Author is supposititious or corrupted in any point of present difference without demonstrable proof that it is so in it self or was so esteemed and accounted in the Church before the arising of that difference be enough to take away the Credit of all testimony given by that writing What Authors what Writings shall we have left unquestioned to appeal unto for testimony to the Truth and support of Religion For how many must be laid by or shrewdly purged by the Papists for being in their sense guilty of Heresie How many by the Protestants for suspicion of Popery How many by those who are for Episcopacy as favouring Presbytery and the pretended Discipline How many by the Presbyterians and Independents as for asserting Episcopacy and the Hierarchy How many by the Anabaptists for proving Infants Baptism How many by the Quakers for vindicating the Scriptures and Tradition How many by the Socinians for holding the Deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost and their Unity with the Father And how many by the Orthodox Christians for countenancing Socinianism or Enthusiasm How many by the Calvinists for being Arminian and how many by the Arminians for being Calvinistical Where shall we have a Father left where shall we have a Writing left wherâ— shall we have a Council left that must not upon the differences of some or other of the Parties be cashired and laid by as an unfaithfull and an unsufficient witness in the case and then what shall we have left to vindicate our Religion and Faith against Jews Turks and Pagans withall who will credit that Religion which is professed by such erroneous and superstitious Persons who will believe that Faith that is delivered and taught in such forged and corrupted writings who will receive any writings for the word of God upon the testimony of such fallacious and deceitful men Thus shall the whole concerns of Christianity be sacrificed to the interest of a Party O tell it not in Gath publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon lest both the daughters of the circumcised rejoyce and the daughters of the â—ncircumcised too triumph Secondly in particular if the Author of the Ecclesiastick Hierarchy were pretended by us to be that Dionysius the Areopagite that lived in the Apostles days much of what is alledged might perhaps really lie against him But when his time is laid much lower even about the third Century there will be no reason for such hideous out-cry of horrid cheat as is made against him For it being questioned as Dr. Hammond informs us * Dr. Hammond Quare of the Bapt. of Infants §. 43. about the year 420 whether these were the Genuine Works of that Dionysius and Theodorus Presbyter alledging the Arguments on both sides it must needs follow that he must be an Author before that
time and in all probability some considerable time before that Whence Dr. Hammond not onely saith of him himself * Dr. Hammond de Confirmatione c. 2. §. 10. p. 60. that he is not to be contemned in the opinion of other Doctors though Dalleus relish him not as being near upon equal with Damasus but also tells us * Dr. Hammond Quaere of Infanâ—s Bapt. §. 43. what Mr. Casaubons opinion was of him namely that he was Scriptor antiquissimus elegantissimus a very ancient and most elegant writer And it doth not follow that his writing was false and forged because questioned For then some books of Holy Scripture will come under suspicion whose Authentickness was for some time doubted of if yet they pass for current with all For what Hyginus who died a Martyr about the year 158 saith Dr. Hammond tells us it is affirmed by Platina out of the ancient Dr. Ham. of Inf. Bap. §. 42. 43. Records And though the words alledged from the Author of the Constitutions were not written in the Apostles times by Clemens Romanus yet he saith there is sufficient reason to assure us that they were very ancient and the Testimony of a Person of his Learning Judgment and Integrity is very considerable with unbias'd persons Then for the Responses ascribed to Justin Martyr if they should not be his yet being acknowledgedly a very ancient piece they are nevertheless a considerable testimony for the Antiquity of Infants Baptism And a suspicion of their Interpolation cannot take away their Authority unless it could be proved that they were interpolated in this part or a suspicion of it had been started before this controversie And it is observed that even in Justin Martyrs Dialogue with Trypho the Jew there is a passage that hath a favourable aspect on Infants Baptism Where saith he * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Just Mart. Dial. cum Tryph. pag. 261. D. C. And we who through him are come unto God have not received that circumcision which is according to flesh but that spiritual which Enoch and the like kept But we received it by Baptism through the mercy of God in as much as we had been born sinners and it is free for all in like manner to receive it Here the reason alledged for Mens obtaining from God that spiritual Circumcision by Baptism namely because we had been born in sin is as truly alledgable on the behalf of Infants And how can it be thought but that he that understood there was the same reason for childrens baptizing as for mens should be of opinion that children were to be baptized as well as men And when he extends the liberty of receiving it unto all why should he be thought not to extend it unto Infants Especially when as well the external motive of Gods compassion the misery of mans being born in sin as the internal Mover of God unto compassion even his mercy to men so born is extended unto Infants as well as Men. And when he saith * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justin Martyr Dialog cum Tryph. pag. 260. B. C. Moreover the precept of Circumcision commanding to circumcise Infants on the eighth day was a type of the true circumcision wherewith we were circumcised from our errour and naughtiness by him that rose from the dead hath he not a kind aspect on Infants baptism Fairly intimating by expressing the time of Circumcision the eighth day that our Circumcision which is baptism should agree with that which typified it so far at least as to be susceptible by Infants even of eight days old younger than which Fidus the Presbyter because of that law of circumcision thought they ought not to be baptized though Cyprian shew'd him that himself and a whole Council Cypian lib. 3. Ep. 8. were of another mind even that they might be baptized sooner And that he had so is the more probable in regard Greg. Naziarzene †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 658. A. B. gives the Circumcision of the Jewish Infants on the eighth day for a reason why the Infants of Christians should in case of danger be baptized even so early as whilest they are insensible of either the want or having of grace by the want or having of baptism To proceed to Origen if he were as perhaps he was not so very Heretical and desperately Erroneous in his own judgment as is pretended yet this doth not follow that he must be also insincere and mendacious in his report of the Churches Practice Is it impossible for a man that is erroneous in something to speak true in any thing If so the truth it self will have few witnesses to it but be well neer left to stand and fall by its self Had Origen been of no Authority in the Church sure St. Hierome would never have appealed to his judgment in the case of so high a concern as whether the Hebrew Books of the Bible had been falsified by the Jews or no saying * Quod si aliquis dixeris Hebraos libros postea à Judaeis esse falsatos audiat Originem quid in octavo volumine explanationum Esaiae huic respondeat quaestiunculae quod nunquam Dominus Apostoli qui caetcra crimina arguunt in Scribis Pharisais de hoc crimine quod erat maximum reticuissent D. Hier. l. 3. Comment in Esaiam cap. 6. Tom. 4. Col. 55. if any man doubt of that Audiat Originem let him hear Origen c. But we have not Origens Original of his Commentaries on the Ep. to the Romans but Ruffinus's Translation No matter so the Translation be right But Ruffinus added and alter'd at his pleasure so that if Erasmus say true you know not when you read Origen aâ—d when Ruffinus Then it cannot be known but that what we read in him touching Infants Baptism is his own And being taken so to be by all not concerned to oppose it it ought to pass for his unless the contrary could be proved And suppose it were not his but Ruffinus's yet still is that a good evidence for the Age he lived in and that was pretty early up towards the Apostles Times being confessedly in the Fourth Century But Ruffinus was a very bad man Perhaps not all out so bad as his bitter adversary St. Hierom makes him And may not a bad men speak truth Had he spoken untruth in this case why was not his falshood detected in the times he lived in why did not Hierom amongst all the rest of his accusations charge this upon him that he made Origen say l. 5. in Rom. c. 6. that the Church received from the Apostles a tradition to give baptism even to Infants when as Origen said no such thing 'T is plain he had nothing to say because he said nothing who had will enough to incline him and passion enough to provoke him to say all he could Yea who sometimes quarrels with Ruffinus * Cum haec ita
Church has been made of him both in the times he lived in and in those that succeeded as may appear by what Gr. Nazianzen saith in his Oration of him and what Baronius and others record concerning him in memory of whose pious life and glorious death Temples were built an Altar erected and a Festival observed And this with men of Reason and Modesty may suffice to have been said in Vindication of those Primitive Witnesses and their Testimonies He that is not satisfied herewith may find more for his satisfaction in Mr. Wills of Inf. Bapt Part. 2. ch 3. p. 125 c. One thing more I shall beg the favour of saying and then conclude the Readers trouble and that is that I have not urged all the Arguments that are or might be insisted on in this dispute so that if all I have said on these grounds should chance to signifie nothing yet still is the cause neither desperate nor deplorable there being behind Reserves of other Auxiliary forces for its succour and support But why then did I not insist on them Partly because I thought what I have said to be enough and was loth to be troublesome with more and partly because those Arguments have already Mr. Baxter Stephens Sydenham Geree Wills c. been managed by other Writers with great diligence and dexterity so that it seemed needless for me to concern my self in them As for those I have used they are the same mostly that were used by Dr. Taylor and Dr. Hammond which because I thought very good yet as delivered by them not so well adapted to vulgar capacities by reason of the too much abstruseness of the language of the one and too much floridness of the style of the other as to do that good on ignorant souls which they intended therefore I have sent them abroad again in a vulgar dress and country habit accommodated for language and style as near as I could and the matter would bear to mean capacities so as to be intelligible by the ignoranter sort who have most need of instruction as being most liable to temptation and whose information conviction and satisfaction I have chiefly and even almost solely aimed at in these Papers yet Adding withal some things of my own and somewhat Improving what was theirs And if I have at any time exalted my Pen it has been merely for the refreshment of some Readers who would else have been tyred with too long a continuation of one strain and that too but the dull hum of a Country drone and for that if it be criminous I beg and hope the Readers pardon Et jam defessus lampada trado FINIS A Table of the Contents CHAP. 1. THe Text. The occusion of the words The doctrine gathered from it and proved Pag. 1 Chap. 2. Of the children that are to be suffered to come to Christ Infants 4 Chap. 3. What children are to be suffered to come unto Christ 5 Chap. 4. What coming of little children unto Christ is to be suffered 12 Chap. 5. The interpretation of the Text vindicated 20 Chap. 6. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard of their early consecration there by unto God 26 Chap. 7. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard of their being brought thereby into Covenant with God 32 Chap. 8. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard of the Vow they are brought under by it 37 Chap. 9. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard of the care that by others is taken of them upon it pag. 48 Chap. 10. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard of their being thereby united unto Christ 53 Chap. 11. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard of their being made thereby the children of God 73 Chap. 12. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard of their being made thereby Heirs of Heaven 80 Chap. 13. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard of their being thereby made partakers of grace 90 Chap. 14. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard that by it they are consigned unto a resurrection 103 Chap. 15. Baptism beneficial unto children in regard they are saved by it 108 Chap. 16. Childrens need of baptism in râ—gard of its efficacy to take off the guilt of original sin 118 Chap. 17. Childrens need of baptism in regard of their being under the guilt of sin 125 Chap. 18. Childrens need of baptism further shewn from the consideration of the evil nature and evil consequents of original sin 136 Chap. 19. Childrens baptism not to be neglected upon presumption that God can or will save them without their being baptized pag. 144 Chap. 20. Childrens need of baptism shewn from six other considerations 151 Chap. 21. Children not incapable of baptism in regard of their bodily weakness 161 Chap. 22. Children not incapable of baptism in regard of their having sin in them 168 Chap. 23. Children not incapable of baptism in regard of their not believing 172 Chap. 24. Children not incapable of being baptized in regard of any thing required of them in baptism 184 Chap. 25. Children not incapable of baptism by any text of Scripture that forbids it either directly or by consequence 194 Chap. 26. Childrens Right to baptism by the constitution of this Church and custom of the Catholick Church 219 Chap. 27. The Catholick Churches custom to baptize Infants 224 Chap. 28. Infants baptism a Tradition Apostolical 287 Chap. 29. Infants baptism an Apostolical Practice 292 Chap. 30. Childrens right to baptism by the Institution of Christ 303 Chap. 31. Infants baptism lawfull though there were neither Command for it nor Example of it pag. 331 Chap. 32. Infants baptism no addition to the Word of God The Scriptures objected on that account considered cleared 340 Chap. 33. The Scriptures silence no proof of our Saviours not commanding the baptizing of Infants 368 Chap. 34. The Scriptures silence no proof of the Apostles baptizing no Infants 375 Chap. 35. The Argument from the sixth Article of our Church answered 384 Chap. 36. A Reply to an Answer made by H. D. to the Objection from the no express Command or Example in Scripture of Womens receiving the Lords Supper referring to Chap. 31. Sect. 9. 396 Chap. 37. The Conclusion of this Discourse with a Reprehension Caution and Exhortation 403 A Postscript 409 The END