as following thereupon as distinctly described And 3. The laying on of Pauls hands and their receiving of the Holy Ghost thereupon as distinctly and differentially described as either of the former The article AND which stands between the Description of their Baptism and reception of the Holy Ghost upon the imposit on of hands being a Note here not of identity or sameness of things but of transition or passing from one thing to another or else of copulation of things really distinct but yet relative 2. This is further discernable by a collation of this passage of Scripture with others where we have the same actions in the same order described as Acts 8.16 17. where speaking of the Holy Ghost the holy Historian saith That he was fallen upon none of them to wit the believing Samaritans onely they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus then laid they their hands on them and they received the Holy Ghost Whence it plainly appears that the Disciples were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus before they received the Holy Ghost and that they did receive the Holy Ghost after their Baptism upon those prayers that were made for them hands laid on them for that end so that these were not one but two distinct actions Just so in the place under discussion though they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus yet we do not find that they received the Holy Ghost till imposition of hands was super-added thereunto 2. Whereas it is further alledged by Calvin that it is no new thing to express the gift of the visible graces of the Spirit by the name of Baptism though this is indeed true in such a sence as the Scriptures to which he refers intend it yet I do believe it is a new thing and not to be found in Scripture to express the effusion of the Spirit as divided from Baptism by water under the description of being baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus the form here used in the Text under debate For both those places produced Acts 1.5 and 11.16 speak of the Fathers or Christs own immediate act of conferring the Spirit whereas to baptize in the Name of the Lord Jesus plainly and directly notes the Agency or Ministry of man managed in the Name of Christ the one is the Baptism of Christ ministred by himself the other is the Baptism of Christ ministred by man in his Name And so Master Calvin himself at another turn will tell you that When John said I indeed baptize with water but Christ when he shall come shall baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire he meant not to put difference between the one Baptism and the other but he compares his own person with the Person of Christ saying that himself was a Minister of water but that Christ was the Giver of the Holy Ghost Instit Lib. 4. Cap. 15.5.8 And the baptizing in the Name of the Lord Jesus and the pouring out of the Spirit are not the same individual thing but are clearly differenced and distinguished in respect of time order and action as I noted in part before from Acts 8.16 17. a place in this respect parallel with this in hand So that still you will find that to baptize in the Name of the Lord Jesus signifies such a Baptism as is not without water But some others not liking so well this construction of the words though they be of the same mind as to the impugning of that literall sence of them which I have imbraced have thought of another way to evade this and that is by understanding these words They were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus as the words of Paul recited by Luke declaring the Baptism of these Disciples by Iohn to be the consequent of Johns preaching to them and not the words of Luke as recording their Baptism as consequential to Pauls preaching to them and so the sence they make to be this That these Disciples when they heard John in his preaching say to them that they should believe on him that was to come after him to wit Christ Jesus then they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus by Iohn See the late Annotators upon the place for this But that neither this is the true intent and genuine sence of the words I strongly incl ne to believe upon these grounds 1. Because this Interpretation overthrowes the Grammatical sence of the words and renders them void of Common sence For it is evident that what Paul is here brought in speaking he spake it to these Disciples themselves for here is no mention of any other persons but Paul and them Now then what ever words were spoken by Paul to them must run in the second Person if you will suppose Paul to speak common sence whereas these words They were baptized in the Name of the Lord Iesus are spoken in the third Person and therefore cannot be the words of Paul to them but of Luke concerning them For if Paul would have declared such a thing to the Disciples as that they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus upon the hearing of Iohn then his words should have run thus When you heard this you were baptized c. and not as now we have them When they heard this they were baptized c. Besides how uncouth and harsh is it to make the people whom Iohn taught and baptized and those twelve Disciples to be the same persons and to conceive that Paul should tell them what Iohn said to the people when all the while he meant themselves both which you must suppose if you take the words in that sence which I oppose because then the people in the fourth verse unto whom Iohn spake and those in the fifth verse which are said to have heard and to have been baptized must be the same persons and consequently both of them these twelve men because as the Pronouns they and they in the fourth and fifth verse upon that supposition that both are Pauls words cannot be understood but of the same persons so also the same Pronouns they and they which relate both to the persons baptized ver 5. and to the twelve that prophesied after Paul had laid his hands on them vers 6. are undoubtedly meant of the same persons likewise And therefore that interpretation now under examination which runs us upon such rocks of absurdity and into such Solecisms of speaking as these must be rejected and consequently these words When they heard this they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Iesus must be taken as the words of Luke and not of Paul importing the Baptism of these Disciples upon the hearing of Paul and not of Iohn 2. That these words They were baptized in the Name of the Lord Iesus are not a Description of Iohns Baptism administred to these Disciples but of that Baptism which they received upon Pauls Preaching we have this reason further to conceive because it no
where appears that Iohn did baptize the people in the Name of the Lord Jesus Nay the truth is that Iohn saith concerning him that was to come after him which was Jesus Christ that he did not know him until the time that he baptized him Iohn 1.30 31. For he was before me and I knew him not and again ver 33. And I knew him not but he that sent me to baptize with water the same said unto me Vpon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining on him the same is he that baptizeth with the Holy Ghost If Iohn then did not know Jesus either personally or by his proper name until this time then we have no reason to conceive that he had baptiz d any hitherunto in this proper Name of his and yet before this time he had dispatched the greatest part of his Ministry in as much as he was but to prepare the way for Christ who upon this Baptism of his entred into his Ministry he then coming on when Iohn was going off Acts 10.37 and 1.22 But to put the business out of doubt the Apostle Paul here in this fourth verse of Acts 19. does plainly declare that Iohn when he baptized did say unto the people that they should believe on him that should come after him which Paul indeed does here interpret to these Disciples to be meant of Christ Jesus But if Iohn had baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus explicitly why had not Paul said so rather then to say that He baptized them saying unto them that they should believe on him that should come after him Or why should we conclude that if these Disciples had been baptized by Iohn into Christ Jesus expresly and by name that Paul would have made such a business of it to inform them of that of which they could not be ignorant viz. that they were baptized into Christ Jesus If there fore we will take the true scope and meaning of this passage of Scripture we must I conceive understand it thus 1. That these Disciples having been baptized unto Iohn's Baptism were baptized into one as yet to come and to be made manifest unto the world according to Iohn's accustomed manner on this behalf 2. That Paul did now open and declare to them who that was that Iohn said was to come after him and that he did declare him to them now not as one to come but as one already come for so that short expository saying of Paul here THAT IS ON CHRIST IESVS doth import as containing the subject matter of Paul's discourse then And then 3. That these Disciples hearing understanding and believing this viz. That he who is called Jesus Christ was he that was now come and had suffered death c. And was he whom the Baptism of Iohn did then point at more obscurely as one that was to come though not then personally and by name known amongst the people I say upon their hearing and believing this they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Iesus as acknowledging him to be that Messiah into the expectation of whom they had formerly been baptized And so we come to the third thing which we were to enquire into out of this Contexture of Scripture and that is why or for what reason it may be conceived that these Disciples were now bapt zed again upon the hearing of Paul when as they had been baptized unto the Baptism of Iohn formerly And the reason hereof must be either 1. Because that though these Disciples had been baptized by Iohn unto the Messias that was then to come after him yet this was not sufficient when once they came to the acknowledgment of Jesus the Son of Mary to be that Messias but that notwithstanding this they were then to be baptized into Christ Jesus as acknowledging him to be that Messiah indeed which before they did expect Or else 2. Because there was some error committed in the administration and reception of their Baptism and other reasons then these I think will not lightly present themselves to any mans mind For the former of these some indeed have conceived that such who were baptized by Iohn unto him that was to come not yet knowing him personally were afterwards baptized again when they came to acknowledge Jesus the Son of Mary to be the Son of God and Saviour of the world and truly this opinion is not altogether to be despised in as much as there is an appearance of reason both that it was so and why it should be so 1. That it was so there is this reason to induce the belief thereof because though as it should seem all the Jews generally were baptized by John yet very considerable numbers of them were baptized afterwards when they came to own Jesus for the Messiah That the Jews generally were baptized by John appears in that it is said There went out to him Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region round about Iorden and were baptized of him in Iorden confessing their sins Matth. 3.5 6. Acts 13.24 That there were very considerable numbers of the Inhabitants of these places baptized afterwards when they came to acknowledge Jesus to be the Son of God and Saviour of the world appears by Acts 2.41 where we shall find that at Ierusalem it self there were upon the hearing of Peter and their gladly receiving the word no less then about three thousand baptized in one day Now let it be considered how improbable it is that since the Inhabitants of Ierusalem and all Iudea were baptized of Iohn that these three thousand at Ierusalem only and that in one day should be converted and bap ized and yet not any one of them be of that number which Iohn had baptized before Besides whereas it is said that they that gladly received his word were baipized it must be supposed either 1. That not one of all the Iews which were baptized of Iohn formerly did now gladly receive the word Or else 2. That some of them which had been baptized by Iohn were now again baptized upon Peters preaching For when it is said They that gladly received his word were baptized we have reason to understand it of all that did so receive it for here is no exception made of such as had been baptized by Iohn as indeed there is not in any other place If then it be no wayes probable that in so great and eminent a coming in of the Iews to the Gospel as this was but that some of those who had been formerly baptized into the expectation of Christ did now gladly receive the word of the Gospel by which even Jesus stood declared to be both Lord and Christ then it cannot but be so probable that even some of them whom Iohn baptized were afterwards baptized again that there is scarce place left for any contrary thoughts 2. As there is this reason to prove that it was so so there is reason also to prove why it should be so For
righteousness then was in the multitude that were baptized before him and if not this what else imaginable but this viz. that his * Iesus said unto them My time is not yet come but your time is alway ready Joh. 7.6 appointed time and season of his appearing with the Gospel in the world was not till then and therefore not his time of being baptized in as much as the one was in order to the other and was to take its rise and beginning from the other And this we have further reason the rather to conceive because of that Particle NOW emphatically here used as it relates to the fulfilling of righteousness by that which was to be done Suffer it to be so NOW saith Christ to Joh. touching his being baptized For thus it becometh us to fulfil allrighteousness Mat. 3.15 Not only in being baptized of him but in being baptized of him NOW to wit at that juncture of time in which he was to be manifested to the world to be the Son of God to manifest to the world the Gospel of God NOW to be baptized viz. upon suchterms it was a thing very comely though John seemed to think otherwise in as much as that it was a fulfilling of righteousness i.e. that righteous law or institution of God given in that behalf And thus we see that the example of Christ's Personal Baptism which was intreated to bless the opinion for Infant Baptism hath contradicted it altogether The Second Part SHEWING How necessary it is for persons to be baptized after they believe their Infant-Baptism notwithstanding as also discovering the disorderly and irregular Communion of persons baptized with such as are unbaptized in Church Fellowship HAving in the former part of this Discourse laid down part of those grounds and reasons which have swayed my judgment and satisfied my conscience in the sight of God touching the unlawfulness of Infant Baptism and which I doubt not will have the like influence and operation upon the unbyassed minds of other men It remains now that I come to speak something to these two questions following 1. Whether men may not rest satisfied with that Baptism which was administred to them in their Infancy without any further reception of Baptism afterwards notwithstanding they come to understand the irregularity of their Infant Baptism 2. Whether it be necessary for such persons who have for some considerable space of time made profession of the faith though as yet unbaptized whether it be necessary for them to be baptized since the ends of Baptism seem to be anticipated by such a continued profession As touching the former of these Questions I conceive I may affirm that none may safely and without danger of sin rest satisfied with that Baptism which they received in their Infancy they coming once to understand the irregularity and sinfulness of Infant Baptism and I do assert it upon these grounds 1. Because the Apostle Paul as may reasonably be conceived did not hold it convenient or safe for certain Disciples with whom he met to rest satisfied with such a Baptism as had been formerly either erroneously administred to them or else which was deficient as touching some special ends of that Baptism which was enjoyned the Disciples of Christ but did proceed to baptize them or to cause them to be baptized afresh The Case before us is touching those certain Disciples which Paul found at Ephesus and of whom he demanded Whether they had received the Holy Ghost since they had believed Unto whom they replyed That they had not so much as heard whether there were any Holy Ghost Vnto what then said Paul were ye baptized And they said Vnto Johns Baptism Then said Paul John verily baptized with the Baptism of repentance saying unto the people that they should believe on him that was to come after him that is on Christ Jesus When they heard this they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus And when Paul had laid his hands upon them the Holy Ghost came on them c. Acts 19.1.2.3.4.5.6 In this passage of Scripture there are three things which I would have observed as to my present purpose The first is touching the Baptism which these Disciples are said formerly to have received The second is touching their later Baptism which they received upon Pauls instructing them And the third is touching the reason why they were now baptized upon Pauls preaching to them notwithstanding they had formerly been baptized unto Johns Baptism 1. That these Disciples had been formerly baptized unto Johns Baptism is that which they themselves affirm verse 3. 2. That the same Disciples were now again baptized upon Pauls preaching Christ to them I conceive fairly appears by those words ver 5. When they heard this viz. that which Paul had declared to them they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus There are indeed two other Interpretations of these words urged by some that do much differ from that sence which I have now given but are both beside the Scope and meaning of the place as I suppose I shall presently make appear 1. Some by their being baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus as here in this place would have us to understand it not of their being baptized with water but of their being baptized with the Spirit which is Master Calvins sence upon the place and so he takes these words They were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus and those that follow in the next verse viz. And when Paul had laid his hands on them the Holy Ghost came on them and they spake with tongues and prophesied to import one and the same thing and that the later words are only an Explanation of the former shewing after what manner they were baptized and he further saith That for the visible graces of the Spirit which were given by the laying on of hands for this to be expressed by the name of Baptism is no new thing as he does alledg from Acts 1.5 and 11.16 But 1. That their being baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus and their receiving the Holy Ghost upon the laying on of Pauls hands were not the same thing as is alledged may be discerned 1. By a due consideration both of the different nature of the actions themselves and the successive order of those different actions For the doctrine and so the practise of Baptism is one thing and that of laying on of hands is another as is apparent by that of the Apostle Heb. 6.2 where the Doctrine of Baptisms and of laying on of hands are differenced by the same note of distinction by which the Doctrine of the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment are differenced from them both And the same thing appears from the order and suecession of these different actions as well as from the different nature of them For we have 1. Pauls teaching of these Disciples distinctly mentioned 2. The baptizing of them in Name of Christ
the Apostle cautions the believing Romans to note and avoid such as cause divisions and offences contrary to the Doctrine of Christ Rom. 16.17 And again Who so transgresseth and abideth not in the Doctrine of Christ hath not God 2 John 9. Though I will not say that every transgression of the Doctrine of Christ riseth so high in the evil effect and consequence of it as the evils mentioned in these Scriptures amount unto nor in particular that transgression of which we now speak unless after conviction pertinaciously persisted in yet the least that we can say even of the lesser transgressions in this kind is that they have atendency in them hereunto proportionable to the nature and delinquency of them Baptism then being as we see one of the Doctrines of Christ and one of his Commissional Injunctions what peace can any man have whose heart stands in aw of the Word as Davids did Psal 119.116 that shall live in the transgression hereof and disobedience hereunto 3. Baptism is therefore necessary because it is relative to the salvation of men Those in Acts 2.37 being smitten with the sense of their sin and misery upon the preaching of Peter and crying out Men and brethren what shall we do viz. to be saved as Acts 16.30 it cannot reasonably be thought that the Apostle being now full of the Holy Ghost by the newly received power whereof he then spake would direct them to the belief or practise of any thing but that which should be very requisit to their Salvation the thing about which they with such earnestness enquire and yet we see the very first thing he directs them to in answer to their demand is to repent and to be baptized every one of them in the Name of the Lord Jesus for the remission of sins ver 38. By which we gather that Baptism as well as repentance is one of the requisites to remission of sins and so unto salvation It is the saying of Christ the faithful and true Witness that Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God John 3.5 By a mans being born of water Interpreters understand his being baptized of water as by his being born of the Spirit his regeneration See the late Annotations upon the place Those that are pleased to say that too great a Stress is laid upon Baptism by the Abetters of it and thereupon blame them for urging and pressing it as a thing so necessary as sometimes they do may be turned over unto Jesus Christ for an answer to their exception for indeed they do not so much blame the Servants as the Master himself upon the account of whose Doctrine they so press this practise So that each of them in this case may truly say to their Lord and Saviour The rebukes of them that rebuked me are fallen upon thee For none I presume ever laid a greater Stress upon Baptism then Christ here does in saying Except a man be born of water i. e. be baptized and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Another of the Oracles of Jesus Christ to the same effect is Mark 16.16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned Where we see our Saviour joyns baptism with faith as requisite to salvation and what Christ in this hath joyned together who is he that dares put asunder If any shall think that Baptism is left out in the opposite member here he not saying he that believeth not and is not baptized shall be damned but only he that believeth not shall be damned on purpose to indulge persons in the hope of salvation who do believe though they be not baptized let such rather judge with themselves that baptism being so expresly joyned with faith in the former part of the verse as that upon which the promise of salvation is made by Christ to depend as it is it was less necessary to mention the want or neglect thereof with unbelief on the contrary as that unto which damnation is threatned because frequently in Scripture dialect where things are succinctly delivered the Affirmative supposes the Negative And where Christ makes the assurance of salvation to depend upon faith and baptism joyntly as here certainly it will be no mans wisdom but extream folly to venture his salvation upon the one without the other upon the account of the afore-suggested presumption The Apostle Peter likewise speaking of that salvation which was vouchsafed those in Noah's Ark saith The like figure whereunto even Baptism doth also now save us not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience towards God c. 1 Pet. 3.21 The Negative here is not exclusive but interpretative i.e. when he sayes Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh h s meaning is not that the outward washing or baptism doth not at all contribute towards salvation which is the effect here mentioned for that were to render water-baptism wholly needless an interpretation which would fall foul on other Scriptures which speak the contrary But his saying Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh c. is to be understood as if the Apostle had said Not by that only or not so much by that but by the inward washing also and by the answer of a good conscience in Conjunction with the outward act It is a like form of speech with that of Paul 1 Cor. 1.17 Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel meaning that he was not sent so much to baptize as to preach the Gospel for otherwise he was sent to bapt ze as well as preach and accordingly he did baptize as there he himself acknowledgeth ver 14.16 And therefore that which the Apostle speaks concerning the man and the woman in another case is true concerning the outward and inward baptism in this Neither is the man without the woman neither the woman without the man in the Lord 1 Cor. 11.11 So neither is the outward washing without the inward nor the inward without the outward in the Lord that is by his appointment and in order to the Salvation of men If baptism then be a like figure or that which holds an Analogical Proportion with the Ark in point of salvation we may then easily guess how necess ry baptism is to salvation For if we follow the Apostles figure it w ll teach us That as it was necessary for those that would escape drowning in that Deluge of waters to enter into the Ark which was Gods appointed instrument of that salvation so is it necessary for those that would escape the perdition of the ungodly and unbelieving world to be baptized as being a means ordained by God for such an end likewise If then once to be baptized be a duty enjoyned every Disciple of Jesus Christ or such as profess belief in his Name as in the first
their Repentance this end and use likewise is better answered in mens Baptism who do repent then in Infants who do not 1. Because men who have begun to repent are in a good capacity to receive confirmation and establishment in their hope and confidence of receiving remission of sins from God upon their Repentance and consolation thereby whereas Infants whilest such are altogether uncapable of any such thing in respect whereof this end is made frustrate when Baptism is given to them 2. Because there is a greater appearance both of the wisdom and goodness of God in vouchsafing and applying such a means as Baptism is to strengthen mens Faith in his promise of remission of sins upon their Repentance unto such who 1. Have need of this confirmation and 2. Are capable of receiving it then there is in that application of it which is made to Infants who neither have need of it nor yet are capable of receiving it 4. If it be called the Baptism of Repentance for remission of sins because the persons who are baptized do thereby profess and declare unto the world that they look for remission of their sins from God upon their Repentance yet this end also is better answered in mens Baptism then in Infants because men are capable of making such a profession and declaration of themselves to the world in and by their Baptism when as Infants are altogether uncapable of doing any such thing 5. If it be called the Baptism of Repentance c. because it seals and confirms the Covenant or Promises of God made to men touching the remission of their sins upon their Repentance yet this end and use also is attained upon far better terms in the Administration of Baptism to Believers and to men of understanding then it is or can be when administred to Infants who have neither For if this end and use should be the reason of this denomination of Baptism yet this must be supposed That the intent of God in making Baptism a Seal of his Covenant and Promise is not to make his Covenant more sure in it self but to give it thereby a more sure stable and unquestionable Being in the minds and apprehensions of men and if so this end cannot be attained in Infants by their Baptism because they want the use and exercise of their reason judgment and understanding without which the Articles and terms of Gods Covenant will never take place or have a Being in the minds of any by way of belief 3. Another end of Baptism seems to be this viz. That such who are baptized might thereby signifie their acceptance of and consent unto the terms of the Gospel or Covenant of Grace For the Covenant of God with men does consist of certain Articles to be observed and kept by each party covenanting as Covenants amongst men generally do And as amongst men the parties covenanting are wont to signifie their mutual consent to their respective Articles by some solemn act of theirs in the presence of witnesses as by signing sealing delivering c. So God in the Covenant between him and men will have something like unto this done by men publiquely to signifie their consent to the terms of it as well as what is done by him to declare his readiness to do and perform what he hath undertaken on his part Now Faith in Christ and an obediential subjection to all his Laws and Precepts being the condition of this Covenant on mans part at what time soever he enters into Covenant with God and undertakes the performance of the condition he is to sign and seal the same in the presence of witnesses by that solemn act of his in being baptized In this respect especially I conceive it is that Baptism is called the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins Mark 1.4 Luk. 3.3 because men are to take up that Ordinance upon their first beginning to repent in order to the remission of their sins For like reason I suppose it is called the washing of regeneration Tit. 3.5 because men upon their being born again are to be baptized according to what was practised in the Apostles times Hence it is likewise as may well be conceived that mens being born of water and of the Spirit Joh. 3.5 the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost Tit. 3.5 are joyned together not because the Spirit works Regeneration in and by Baptism if we respect the beginning of it but because the work of Regeneration by the Spirit and the Baptism of water which is declarative thereof are neerly conjoyned in respect of time if he who is regenerate by the Spirit do but what becomes him And now why tarryest thou arise and be baptized Acts 22.16 And was baptized he and all his straightway Acts 16.33 Finally Beleeving and being baptized are conjoyned as relative to Salvation Mark 16.16 and Baptism hath its rank place or standing in Scripture next after Faith Heb. 6.1 2. Eph. 4.5 Mark 16.16 because it was one of the first fruits of Faith by which they gave account to the world that they did believe indeed and was doubtless esteemed a proof of Faith and without which they were not reckoned Disciples of Christ notwithstanding any other overtures that ways made That both Repentance and the declaration of it by Baptism is required on mans part to interess him in remission of sins and sanctification of the Spirit the things covenanted or promised on Gods part is too evident to be denyed by any but those that will not see from Acts 2.38 39. Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost For the Promise is to you and to your children and to all that are afar off even as many as the Lord our God shall call And that God did not intend this way only for those to whom these words were then spoken or for the men and women of that generation onely but that it was to be his standing method through all generations appears in that the Apostle saith that the Promise to wit of remission of sins and gift of the Spirit which was made on condition of Repentance and Baptism was made not onely to them then and their children but to those that were further remote to those afar off even to all whom the Lord our God shall call And if this be one end and use of Baptism as you see for persons thereby to enter their publique assent and consent unto the terms of the Gospel upon their cordial embracing of it then the Baptism of Infants is voyded as to this use also in as much as they are uncapable of exerting any act of heart or mind by way of assent or consent to the terms of the Gospel or to signifie any such thing by a voluntary submission to Baptism 4. Another excellent effect and use of Baptism is thereby to justifie God
the profession of Faith or the acknowledgment of Christ as that which doth declare who are the children of God then this saying of his that because they had been baptized into Christ that therefore they had put on Christ was a good reason or proof of their being known to be the children of God by their acknowledgment of Christ because by their putting on of Christ in Baptism and clothing themselves with his Name they did declare whose children they were and who it was they worshipped and resolved to serve and from whom they expected remission of sin and the Salvation of their Souls For so to be baptized into Christ what is it else but to be baptized into the belief profession and service of Christ and to resign up ones self to be his If ye be Christs says he Vers 29. as he supposes them to be upon that very account of their being baptized into him as will appear if you compare v. 27 28 29. together If ye be Christs then are ye Abrahams seed and heirs according to promise The upshot or result then of this piece of the Apostles discourse is That persons by Baptism do make such a profession of Christ as by which they are characterized to be his If this then be the characteristical mark to distinguish the children of God from the world then it will follow that no other acknowledgment of Christ without this or with neglect of this is to be looked upon as any other then a partial owning of Christ and not a compleat putting him on so as to be esteemed thereby visibly the children of God Which thing may be yet further confirmed by that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 12.13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body whether we be Jews or Gentiles whether we be bond or free and have been all made to drink into one Spirit That it is the Baptism by water that is here spoken of is the general sence of Interpreters so far as their judgment herein is come to any knowledg and observation The body into which we are said to be baptized is the mystical Body of Christ made up of Christ as head and of the Saints as members In that by one Spirit they are said to be baptized hereinto we are to understand I conceive that it is by the work of the Spirit upon their hearts by which men are inclined to seek membership or fellowship with Christ and his Saints in this way of Baptism as being the way of God to attain hereunto But that which is principally for our purpose is that men and women are initiated and brought into this Body by Baptism They are baptized into one Body And if their entrance thereinto be made by Baptism then it 's evident that they are not to be reckoned to be of this Body till they be baptized and consequently that Baptism is the visible door by which man enter into this spiritual corporation and a wall of partition between the world and the Saints Those Scriptures witness the same thing also which speak of mens being baptized into Christ and of their being planted together with him Rom. 6.3 5. Gal. 3.27 For can we conclude less hence then that mens visible being in Christ is to be reckoned from the time of their Baptism that being as it were the immediate instrument or means of their visible ingression into him For otherwise if they were to be looked upon as having a visible Being in Christ by any act endowment or qualification preceding Baptism why should their ingression their entrance into Christ be attributed unto their Baptism If mens owning of Christ which still did precede their Baptism had been sufficient as God accounts sufficient to have asserted or declared their visible or cognisible standing in Christ doubtless the Holy Ghost would not have ascribed or rather appropriated the same unto their Baptism as now he hath done For as Paul speaks in another case Gal. 3.21 If there had been a Law given which could have given life verily Righteousness should have been by the Law If the Law had been sufficient to have given life God would not have super-added the promise of the Gospel for the same end for he makes nothing in vain so we may say in this case if any qualification action or profession preceding Baptism could have rendered mens being in Christ knowable upon terms agreeable to the wisdom of God he would not have super-added Baptism for the same end But it should seem to be in this case as it is amongst men A Major or Sheriff receives that kind of Civil or Magistratical Being by which he is distinguished from other men from some solemn acts done at the time of his enstalment into his Office and as a Husband and Wife receive that conjugal relation and matrimonial Being proper to them from some solemn act done at the time of their marriage or as a man receives a relative Being as member of such a Corporation by some solemn act done at the time of his enfranchisement even so according to the import of these Scriptures now insisted on men and women receive that relative Being which they have in Christ and as visible members of that spiritual Corporation wherein Christ is head and chief from that solemn act of their being baptized into him And as a Major or Sheriff is not vested with his authority or Husband and Wife with that power over the bodies of each other of which the Apostle speaks 1 Cor. 7.4 nor yet any member of a body corporate with those immunities proper to him by any prequalification or action preparatory thereunto until first that be acted and done by way of solemnity which appropriately and immediately does invest them with their several and respective capacities in like manner none are to be esteemed to be in Christ or capable of those spiritual priviledges which visibly do belong to the body of Christ the Church upon the account of any precedaneous qualification profession or action whatsoever until first they have passed through those spiritual solemnities in Baptism by and upon which they are invested with the denomination and visible priviledges which do belong in common to the members of Christ mystical body By the way I have insisted the more largely upon this particular to detect the repugnancy of that Opinion against the plain current of the Scripture which holds Baptism needless useless amongst those that have long made profession of the Gospel though they as yet never were baptized But it may be I shall deal further with this conceit in a place by it self and therefore shall come to bring home what hath been discoursed on this head to our present purpose If then that publique owning of Christ in Baptism by which men put him on and by and upon which they are incorporated into Christ visibly be another end and use of Baptism as you see it is most clear and evident it is that this end and use is
Infants Circumcision 3. Another thing by which it may appear that Infant-Baptism is not agreeable to the Gospel-Ministration is in that it differs from it in this property of it viz. as it is a Ministration of the Spirit for so it 's called 2 Cor. 3.6 It 's the Ministration of the Spirit in two respects 1. Because in and by this Ministration the Spirit is given unto men Galat. 3.2 5. 2. Because the worship and service which God receives from men under it is or ought to be more spiritual then that was under the Law in both which respects Infant-Baptism will be found disagreeable to it 1. That Baptism as an Ordinance of the New Testament and part of the Gospel Ministration when duly administred and received does contribute towards their receiving of the Spirit in respect of a greater presence and operation thereof then till then ordinarily hath been enjoyed by them who are thus baptized may appear from the promise of God made in that behalf Acts 2.38 Then Peter said unto them Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost c. And that this was not particular and peculiar to those persons unto whom Peter then spake these words but that the same promise is made to all in all ages that shall repent and be baptized is evident by that which follows in the next Verse whereby the Apostle doth assure them of the remission of their sins and their reception of the Holy Ghost in case they did repent and were baptized upon this ground because the promise of God to wit upon the terms before mentioned was made to them and to their children and not to them only but also to those afar off viz. in respect of nation and generation even as many of them or their children or others afar off as whom the Lord our God should so call viz. by Repentance and Baptism And it is very like that it is because of that proximity or neerness of relation that is between this Ordinance of Baptism by water and this Baptism of the Spirit that mens being born of water and of the Spirit Joh. 3.5 and the washing of Regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost are coupled together in Scripture Tit. 3.5 1 Cor. 6.11 And it is not unlike neither but that the Spirits descending upon Christ immediately upon his being baptized Mat. 3.16 might have this instruction in it to teach all those that should regularly be baptized with water as he was to expect a greater measure and presence of the Spirit then before had been vouchsafed to them But now that it is not reasonable to expect that any such effect should be produced by Infants being baptized is evident upon this ground because the gift of the Spirit is still made in Scripture to follow the act of mens beleving the Gospel of which act Infants are uncapable Joh. 7.39 Acts 15.7 8. 19.2 Gal. 3.14 Ephes 1.13 And therefore when I affirm as before That the gift of the Spirit or some greater measure of the Spirit is promised upon Baptism duly received I would not be understood as if I meant that this promise is made to any meerly and barely upon their being baptized but to their Baptism in conjunction with their believing and repenting for so it is in the forecited place Acts 2.38 Repent and be baptized c. and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost The promise of the Spirit is not made either to Repentance or Baptism singly but to both in conjunction So that although Baptism be to be received with an eye to the promise of the Spirit and under an expectation of a greater presence thereof yet by such only who are under that qualification of believing for where things are promised upon several conditions or upon condition of several things in conjunction it is not the performance of one of those conditions alone that can put a man into a due and well-grounded expectation of the promise That Infants are in no present or actual capacity of believing whil'st such is evident upon this ground because they have not the use and exercise of understanding knowledg or reason without which none can actually believe For faith supposes an actual knowledg in him who does believe of these two things 1. A notion or knowledg of the thing matter record or testimony to be believed and 2. A notion or knowledg of him who is to be believed or who is the Author of that doctrine or saying which is the subject matter of Faith as namely That he is such an one as may be credited in what he says These things are clear from these and the like Scriptures Romans 10.14 17. Joh. 9 3 6. Psal 9.10 2 Tim. 1.12 That Infants have no such knowledg as to make any Judgment upon either person or thing to be believed as touching either the goodness or badness of the one or the probability or improbability of the other appears Deut. 1.39 Your little ones which ye said should be a prey and your children which in that day had no knowledg between good and evil they shall go in c. Isai 7.16 Jonah 4.11 If Infants then be in no present capacity to believe and without believing in no capacity to receive the Spirit it follows That Infants whilest such are in no due capacity of receiving Baptism in order to their receiving the Spirit and consequently that Baptism administred to them is disagreeable to the Gospel-Ministration as it is the Ministration of the Spirit where as the Baptism of Believers is most commodiously suitable thereunto Nor can it reasonably be supposed here that such a notion as this will salve this fore viz. That Baptism may be received by Infants in order to their receiving the Spirit when they come to believe and so their Baptism be agreeable to the Gospel-Ministration as it is a Ministration of the Spirit notwithstanding it be received in Infancy Because Baptism hath no influence this way as it is a work done in which respect only Infants are capable of it but as it is done submitted to and taken up out of faith and in obedience to God as hath been already proved before in part and will be further confirmed afterwards 2. Infant-Baptism is disagreeable to the Gospel-Ministration as it is the Ministration of the Spirit in this respect also viz. as it requires all Worshippers in all acts of worship in all the Ordinances of this Ministration to worship God in Spirit with the mind in faith and fear of the Lord. That these are the terms of the Gospel-Ministration appears from Job 4.23 24. with other places cited formerly upon somewhat like occasion upon which account I may spare further insisting on them here He that makes use of a Gospel-Ordinance and does not discern in some measure the nature tendency and import of it contracts sin and guilt to
For we shall find that not the baptizing of men into the expectation of Christ to come had the promise of the Spirit but the baptizing of them into the faith and acknowledgment of Christ come and of Iesus to be that Christ and so consequently that Iohns Baptism had no such promise annext to it as Christ's Baptism had on this behalf 1. That Iohns Baptism had no such promise of the Spirit appears by his own acknowledgment and assertion in which he makes this very difference between his own Baptism and the Baptism of Christ viz. that his was but a Baptism of water unto repentance but that he which should come after him should baptize with the Holy Ghost Matth. 3.11 Nay Mark hath it thus which is somewhat fuller I indeed have baptized you with water but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost Mark 1.8 His manner of speaking seems to import as if he intended hereby to beat them off from any expectation of the Spirit upon the account of his Baptism now they had received it and to put them upon the expectation thereof from and by the Baptism of Christ when he should come 2. The Apostle Peter accompanied with the rest of the Apostles herein addressing himself to that great multitude that heard him preach at Ierusalem advises them in order to their reception of the Holy Ghost to repent and to be baptized and that every one of them in the Name of the Lord Iesus Acts 2.38 Consider now who these were to whom he gives this advice And we shall find that it was the multitude as they are called ver 6. that came together flocking doubtless from all parts of the City upon occasion of that miraculous wonder of fiery cloven tongues siting upon the Apostles and of their speaking with strange tongues when this was noised abroad as there it is said And can any man imagine that when as but about four years before this the Inhabitants of this City generally went out to be baptized of Iohn and now as generally came together to hear and see this wonder that yet none of them that now came together should be of that number that had been baptized by Iohn Surely such a thing will not be any mans thought or if it shall yet will not be believed amongst considering men And yet even these notwithstanding their having been baptized by John are directed and exhorted now afresh to repent and be baptized and that EVERY ONE of them in the Name of the Lord Jesus for remission of sins and are thereupon assured that they shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost Their being baptized then in the Name of the Lord Jesus was necessary to render them meet to receive the Holy Ghost notwithstanding their former Baptism by Iohn 3. If things be well weighed I conceive it will be found that these twelve Disciples at Ephesus were baptized again though they had been baptized formerly unto Johns Baptism upon this very account especially and in order to this very thing viz. their receiving the Holy Ghost For 1. The manner form and import of Pauls questions or demands to them and their answers to him do imply that as it was common for the Spirit to be given upon the reception of Christs Baptism so also that it was not wont to be given upon the administration of Johns For when Paul queries Whether they had received the Holy Ghost since they had believed ver 2. And so when he again demands upon their declaring they had not Vnto what then they had been baptized it plainly implies that Paul did verily expect that they should have received the Holy Ghost upon their being baptized until he was informed that they had been baptized only unto Johns Baptism And not onely so but that question of his Vnto what then were ye baptized since ye have not received the Holy Ghost does also imply that Paul very well knew that there was a Baptism which was not accompanied with the giving of the Spirit and therefore the end of his question was to know Unto which Baptism they had been baptized and upon their resolution of the Case shewing that they had been baptized only unto Johns Baptism the true reason was discovered why they had not received the Holy Chost as being that which did not use to follow upon Johns Baptism the which appears hereby in that they knew Johns Baptism and the manner of it they themselves being baptized thereunto and yet they had not so much as heard that there was a Holy Ghost to wit extant in the world upon any such terms as Pauls question unto them did import of which surely they could not have been ignorant if the Holy Ghost had been wont to be vouchsafed unto men without any other Baptism save that of Iohn 2. That their re-baptizing or their being baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus mentioned in ver 5. of Acts 19 was in direct order to their receiving the Holy Ghost the thing first in question between Paul and them may easily be gathered from the connexion that is b tween the 5. and 6. verses and the matters therein related For that their being baptized as set forth ver 5. and their receiving the Holy Ghost ver 6. were neerly related the later having a dependance on the former the Conjunction copulative AND which knits both matters together shews For so the words run When they heard this they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Iesus AND when i.e. when this was done AND when Paul had laid his hands on them which imports as much I conceive as if he had said AND when also Paul had laid his hands on them the Holy Ghost came on them i.e. then or thereupon the Holy Ghost came on them So that their receiving of the Holy Ghost relates both to their being baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus and to the imposition of Pauls hands both which in their due order did prepare and dispose them for that reception To conclude this therefore if then men were to be baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus when they came to believe in him in order to their receiving the Spirit of God though they had been before baptized by Iohn then surely have they need to be baptized for the same end who come to the acknowledgment of the truth though they have been baptized as men call baptizing in their infancy because such their Infant-Baptism as hath been formerly evinced doth not operate towards their receiving of the Holy Ghost as true Gospel Baptism will do Come we now more briefly unto a second reason why it is not safe for any to satisfie themselves with that Baptism which they received in their Infancy the irregularity of it supposed and that is because it is none of Gods Baptism i. e. it is none of his ordaining but is the device of mans own heart As it is said of that Feast which Ieroboam ordained though in other
respects it was like unto the Feast that was in Iuda to wit of Gods own appointing yet because he took liberty to vary the time of its celebration from the fourteenth day of the first month the time of Gods own chusing unto the fifteenth day of the eighth Month which is therefore called the month which he had devised of his own heart therefore was this Feast worthily esteemed none of Gods Feast but Ieroboams Feast 1 King 12.32 33. And is there not the same proportion of reason to adjudg Infant-Baptism to have none other Authour but man and to be a thing devised of mans own heart Though it should be granted that in respect of the outward Element and actions thereto belonging it were like unto the Baptism which is from God yet in as much as man take liberty to vary the season of its administration from the time of mens regeneration or new birth the time of Gods own appointment unto the time of their natural Birth which is none of Gods it therefore worthily deserves to be called the device of mans own heart And if it be none of Gods Baptism then certainly its no-wise safe to adhere thereto in as much as Christ hath declared That every plant which his Heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted up and that every such worship is vain which is ordered and taught by the precepts of men Matth. 15.9 13. Isai 29.13 3. Because if Infant-Baptism be sinful sinful in parents to desire it for their children and sinful in those that administer it to them as it hath been proved to be then may none when they come to maturity rest satisfied in that Baptism or in the least own it without danger of partaking with them in their sin because that which de facto is sinfully done by another becomes my sin when I come to own and approve it 1 Tim. 5.22 Luke 11.48.49 50.51 which yet is the case of those which satisfie themselves with that Baptism they have received in their infancy 4. It s not safe for any to rest contented with that Baptism which they received when they were Infants because that Baptism which is so called is a meer Nuility in respect of that thing for which it is taken i. e. it is not worthy to be esteemed any such thing as is Baptism indeed or to pass under that denomination And the reason hereof is because there is that wanting in it which is essential to true Baptism For 1. There is the right subject of Baptism wanting in that Baptism which is applyed to Infants that Infants are not the subject of Baptism is that the proof and demonstration whereof hath taken up the former part of this Treatise and therefore shall take it for granted here 2. As the right Subject matter so the true external form of baptismal administration is wanting in Infant-Baptism as it is practised among us For the external form of Baptism is not a sprinkling of the party baptized with water which yet is that which is used in the Baptism of infants but a dipping or plunging him under water 1. This appears at least in the judgment of very many who so render that which we have translated baptizing or to baptize in so much as Master Daniel Rogers in his Treatise on the two Sacraments saith that dipping is that which Antiquity constantly and without exception of Countries hot or cold witnesseth unto And as it is to the same import frequently translated in the Dutch Bible so it is acknowledged indeed asserted to be the manner of baptizing in the primitive time to dip or bury the body under water by Calvin himself on Acts 8.38 and by our late Annotators on Rom. 6.4 Matth. 3.6 Besides Master Mead on Tit. 3.5 in his Diatribe and Master Thomas Goodwin in his Treatise of Christ set forth in his death c. with very many others 2. It further appears by that which Baptism represents and that is the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ and likewise the party baptized his death burial and resurrection with Christ For the water in which men are baptized or dipped is no more an Element for them to live in then the earth is Nay we know the Sea is frequently made the place of burial for the dead as well as the earth and therefore a being put under the water is upon the matter as lively a resemblance of ones death and burial as it would be if one were so long put under the earth and so consequently a mans coming or rising from under the water is upon the matter as clear and lively a resemblance of a resurrection from the dead as if he did come out of the grave and from under the earth upon like terms Now then those that are dipt in their baptism do if they answer the nature of that Ordinance thereby actually profess 1. That they do believe that Christ Jesus into whose Name they are baptized was as truly and really dead buried and raised again in order to the salvation of men as they are then figuratively dead buried and raised again in their Baptism 2. That they do thereby engage themselves to be conformable to the death and resurrection of Christ in their being thence forth dead to those sins in which they formerly lived and from which their lives were then denominated as likewise as concerning their living a new spiritual life unto God in righteousness and true holiness For as Christ when he was crucified then ceased to live any longer such a life in the flesh as thither-unto he had done and when he rose again begun that new and spiritual life which before he had not lived even so all those that answer their engagement and profession entred into by baptism do from the time of this figurative death and burial of theirs really cease to live their former sinful life and from the time of their figurative resurrection or new-birth begin to live a new life of obedience and subjection unto Christ their Lord These things lie fair in those Scriptures wherein such are said to be baptized into Christs death to be buried with him in Baptism wherein also they are said to be risen with him and to be planted together into the likeness of his death and the likeness of his resurrection that thenceforth they should not serve sin but walk in newness of life Rom. 6.3 4 5 6. Col. 2.13 These things then being so the sprinkling of the party baptized or the pouring of a handful of water upon his face is no more a figurative buriall of him or a true representation of Christs death and burial then the casting of a handful of dust upon the face of Christ when he was dead could have been a burying of him And therefore who sees not hereby that aspersion or sprinkling used in infant-baptism is far from the true external form of Gospel-baptism and that which was anciently used by the Apostles and other servants of Jesus Christ in
ends for which Baptism was ordained and in respect whereof all other men needed it yet in some other respects we see it was necessary even in Christ himself viz. as it was a thing well becoming him to fulfil all righteousness and to obey God in this as in all other his Commands and Institutions then on foot Matth. 3.15 2. It appears from the Baptism of Cornelius and his Company For though one end of Baptism is to put men into a regular capacity of receiving the Holy Ghost as hath been noted yet God preventing this end of baptism as unto them in causing the Holy Ghost to fall upon them extraordinarily while the word of the Gospel was in speaking to them and before they were baptized the Apostle Peter hereupon is so far from making this an Argument why they should not be baptized or had no need of Baptism as that he thence infers the reasonableness of the thing why they should be baptized in reference to other ends Acts 10.47 48. Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we And he commanded them to be baptized in the Name of the Lord. I might also from what hath been now last mentioned Objection take occasion to answer another Objection against the continuation of Baptism in these dayes which Objection is this That experience shews that Baptism now produces no such effects as it did in the Apostles dayes for then those that were baptized with water were baptized also with the Spirit some visible effects thereof frequently ensuing But no such effects are now produced by that Baptism which men take up in our days for what have they more of the Spirit who are baptized with this new baptism as they call it then those that are not and if they have no more then to what purpose is the practise of it continued To this I answer Answer 1. That by what hath been just now observed about the baptism of Cornelius and his Company it appears that baptism is necessary for other ends then to render men capable of those extraordinary receptions of the Spirit For we there see that baptism was necessary to them though they had been prevented herewith 2. If this Objection were forcible against the being of true baptism now in the world it might be to as good purpose an objection against the being of any true believers in the world at least so far as known to us For there are no such effects as a miraculous speaking with tongues c. that follow mens believing in these dayes which yet were promised to believers and received by them in the Apostles dayes Mark 16.17 But as the ordinary and common effects of believing to wit obedience love c. do now follow mens believing as well as they did in the Apostles dayes though those extraordinary effects are ceased or at least suspended as having been vouchsafed for a certain time only by way of special dispensation designe for the confirmation of the Gospel-ministration whilest it was but yet new Mark 16.20 Heb. 2.4 So do the ordinary common and indeed most salvivical effects of baptism where duly used now remain when as those that were extraordinary and by way of extraordinary designe and of special dispensation for a time voucsafed are now ceased or at least suspended Neither were those gifts which we call extraordinary extraordinary in point of saving benefit above those which we call ordinary nor indeed equal to them for the Apostle having spoken of these extraordinary gifts 1. Cor. 12.10 concludes thus in ver last Covet earnestly the best gifts and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way And what was that more excellent way but the way of Christian love and charity of which he speaks in the following Chapter the which if wanting though otherwise a man had the tongue of men and Angels and the gift of Prophesie and faith to remove mountains yet he would be nothing but as a sounding brass or a tinkling Cymbal 1 Cor. 13.1.2 But 3. whereas it is demanded what have they more of the Spirit who are baptized then those who are not Though I believe they will not boast of their measures of the Spirit yet I dare say that if they have not a greater presence of the Spirit with them then others have to acquaint them with the things freely given them of God to mortifie the deeds of the body to lust against the deeds of the flesh to crucifie their affections and lusts to the old world to guid them in the wayes of truth to help their infirmities in prayer to strengthen them to suffer and to support them in suffering for righteousness sake and to fill them with that joy and peace which is unspeakable and full of glory it is not because these and the like blessed effects of the Spirit are not deducible from God by baptism if rightly improved but it is because they either rest in the work done or do not exercise faith about the Ordinance and the promise of God annexed to it or else do not frequently and seriously apply themselves to God for these supplyes from it not study how they may all their dayes make the best improvement of it for otherwise this Ordinance is not barren nor is that a vain word which assures men of the Spirit that obey God herein Indeed Baptism doth not procure these effects by any natural efficiency or by the work done neither indeed doth any other Ordinance of the Gospel but in a moral way If then there be that answer of a good conscience joyned with it of which Peter speaks it will doubtless give a good account of it self as touching both what and whose it is Let any mans heart but serve him to obey God in this Ordinance of his and he will find himself upon better terms of confidnce towards God to expect larger receptions from him then before he could do especially whilest he was under any jealousie of mind lest he had not as yet sought such and such grace at his hand after the due order of the Gospel I perceive also Objection that many stumble at this stone as to conceive as if Baptism were an Ordinance and Administration peculiar only unto the first times of the Gospel and not to continue longer then whilest the first Plantation of Chu ches by the Apostles was in hand Towards the removing of which stumbling block Answer laid in their way by Satan I will not say much in more then what I have said though much more might readily be produced on that account But I would demand of the consciences of such whether Baptism were ever at any time an Ordinance of the New Testament of Jesus Christ or no And whether that New Testament in which Baptism hath its place standing were not the last Will and Testament of Christ And if so as I suppose it will not be denied so to have been then whether
or reason of his Exhortation to be of as large an extent as his Exhortation it self otherwise you reflect disparagement upon the wisdom of the Apostle that would use such an Argument to perswade the whole Church which concerned only but a part of them But now if you will suppose the Apostles foundation suitable to his building and such as would bear it then you must conclude that as the whole Church of Rome is perswaded to mortification upon the account of their engagement thereunto in and by their Baptism so also that the whole Church had formerly put themselves under such an engagement by their Baptism and consequently that the whole Church was baptized 3. Lastly besides all this such a supposition that these Churches did consist partly of persons unbaptized as well as of those that had been baptized does cross those other Scriptures by which we have proved that none doe duly in a visible way enter into the universal Church much less into a particular Church which is subordinate thereunto but by the door or through the water of Baptism The Apostle doth not say that some are but that all are baptized into one body i.e. into one Church body 1 Cor. 12.13 2. Others they object further thus Object 2 That such persons as have repented and do believe and which are sanctified are fit matter whereof to make a Church and accordingly are to be admitted into Church-Fellowship for the Christian Churches in the Apostles times are described to be such as are sanctified in Christ Jesus called to be Saints Rom. 1.7 1 Cor. 1.2 and sometimes the faithful in Christ Jesus Ephes 1.1 and the faithful brethren in Christ Col. 1.2 And therefore in as much as many of those who though they have not been baptized since they believed yet being godly sanctified persons and in that respect fit matter whereof to make Church-members ought to be admitted into Church-Fellowship upon their desire their non-Baptism notwithstanding To this I answer by distinguishing of fitness in men to make Church-Members Answ and of their right thereunto upon that fitness There is a mediate and an immediate fitness in men for Church-Membership for though these words and phrases are not found in the Scripture yet we shall find the matter of this distinction there That which I call an immediate fitness is such a qualification which does directly dispose a man for and render him regularly capable of admission into Church-fellowship without any other thing intervening or coming between That which I call a mediate fitness is such a qualification by which a man is remotely and to a degree yea it may be in all degrees one onely excepted rendred capable of such an admission as that is of which we speak but yet so that something else some other qualification then any yet he is invested with must intervene before he be regularly compleatly and according to Gospel-order capable of that admission According to this latter acceptation or notion of fitness I do with all my heart acknowledg that very many unbaptized persons as I count unbaptized are fit to make Church Members that is they are so fit for it that there wants nothing else to make them fit but onely their Baptismal obedience to wit their subjection to that part of the Gospel which requires them to be baptized in the Name of the Lord Iesus unless it be the Imposition of hands also with prayer in order to their receiving a greater presence of the Spirit which according to the Primitive practice was wont to follow Baptism Acts 8.15 16 17. and 19.5 6. Hebr. 6.2 We may well suppose the persons we speak of to be as fit for Church Communion as those converted Jews were Acts 2. and the Eunuch the Jaylor and others were upon their repentance and belief before they were baptized But that they are immediatly fit for admission into Church fellowship by vertue of their repentance faith or sanctification without Baptism is that which hath been and is still denied there being no ruled case in Scripture to justifie such an admission Whatever the faith or holiness of any man was before yet his Baptism did still precede his Church Membership in the Primitive times as hath been before declared Let a man in all other respects imaginable be as fit as fitness it self can make him to be the husband of such or such a woman yet he may not enjoy her as a man enjoys his wife this his fitness notwithstanding untill the solemnities of Marriage are passed between them In like manner may no man regularly and in due form of Gospel proceeding be admited into Church-fellowship upon any account of fitness otherwise if this fitting and preparatory qualification of Baptism be wanting in as much as God hath as well instituted Baptism as a means to bring men into visible communion with the body of Christ which is his Church 1 Cor. 12.13 Gal. 3.27 as he hath instituted marriage as a fitting means to bring man and woman into that civil Communion which is proper onely to man and wife And whereas those Churches to which the Scripture quotations mentioned in the Objection relate are described not by their being baptized into Christ but by their faith in him and by their Sanctification or Saintship I would to this say these three things briefly by way of answer 1. Though they are not described by their being baptized yet the persons so described were baptized as appears by other passages in those very Epistles where the said descriptions are as Rom. 6.3 1 Cor. 12.13 Col. 2.12 Eph. 4 5. and 5.26 compared with Acts 19.1.5 2. When they are said to be sanctified in Christ Jesus they are inclusively or by way of implication said to be baptized as the mentioning an effect supposes its cause so does their sanctification suppose their being baptized because their Baptism was a speciall means of their sanctification Ephes 5.26 The Apostle speaking of Christ giving himself for his Church saith he did it That he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water i.e. Baptism by the Word They Word and Baptism then were two great Instruments of their Sanctification And if you understand by their being sanctified their being separated from the rest of the world and set apart or dedicated unto God which most properly answers the notion of sanctification then their being said to be sanctifyed may be understood in respect of their Baptism in special though not that onely because by their Baptism they were visibly put into a new condition and into new relations being thereby transmitted or carried over from the fellowship of the world into the fellowship of Christ and of the Saints and solemnly set apart for the service of Christ 3. The Reason why the Apostle describes those of the Churches aforesaid rather by their sanctification then by their being baptized was not as may well be conceived because Baptism was not positively necessary as to their Church being but because