of this Because some have erred in staying too long before they were baptized Will you make too great haste and bring in little Babes to be baptized without any Ground or Authority from the Word of God So much shall suffice to your Twelfth and Last Argument Now Sir we have heard all your Proofs for the baptizing of Infants you have it seems impannell'd for your Jury to Sit Hear and Determine this Grand Cause Just Twelve and if they could speak they would being all agreed the Cause being also fully opened give their Verdict on our Side and against your Infant-Baptism but let them rather be so many Witnesses of your summoning the Statute Book and great Charter of the Church viz. God's Word having been opened and the Matter cleared We will appeal now to our worthy Reader particularly to the Antient and Noble Britains to make Judgment for themselves For in matters of Faith and Things that concern our Souls every Christian is to judg for himself Impartial Reader weigh well the matter Consider this we must all be judged by the VVord of God If you can find you are commanded to baptize your Children by Jesus Christ in the New Testament or can find any Precept or Precedent for it you may do it Or if what Mr. Owen hath said hath convinced you that Baptism doth not belong to Believers by good Authority he hath shewed from the Holy Scriptures but that Infants are the only Subjects thereof and that Baptism is nor dipping or burying the Body in VVater but only sprinkling or pouring a few Drops of VVater on the Person 's Face then continue in your former Practice till God shall open your Eyes But if you are otherwise perswaded that Mr. Owen is in an Error then I exhort you that believe in Christ to arise and be baptized But lest Mr. Owen should say 't is too soon for you to make Judgment yet pray stay till we have heard his Answers to our Objections and also all what he hath further to say CHAP. XIX Containing an Answer to Mr. James Owen's 16th Chapter proving that our Objections against Infant-Baptism are very weighty and his Answers to them very impertinent and defective MR. Owen begins with his Sixteenth Chapter after this manner viz. Thus have we proved by the Scripture saith he and by several Scriptural Arguments that the Children of the Faithful ought to be baptized if we look upon this Truth in the Light of the Scriptures Above the Objections of themselves will vanish away yet for the sake of the Weak I shall lay down the strongest of them 1. Object There is neither a Command nor Example in the Scripture for the baptizing of Infants To this Mr. Owen answereth viz. There is not one particular Command totidem verbis naming Infant-Baptism and that is not necessary but there is an Universal Command to baptize all Nations of which Children are a great part If there is a Command for the baptizing of the Parents then there is a Command for the baptizing of Infants for the Children are included in the Parents even as Parts of them being Partakers of the Privileges of good Parents and of the Judgments of the wicked Parents 1. Answ I answer Whether you have or have not proved by the Holy Scriptures and Arguments that Infants ought to be baptized is now upon a fair Trial committed to the Judgment of the Impartial Reader 2. We do not require you to bring a Command in totidem verbis or in so many Words Let Infants be baptized But your Inferences are not good for as you have no Precept no Command or any Precedent to baptize them so you can draw no fair and good Consequences for it from any Text of Scripture You bring the Words of the Great Commission Matth. 28. 19 20. Go baptize all Nations Sir Why dare you leave out part of the Words Is it not Go therefore teach all Nations baptizing them c. We have shewed in our Answer to you already that the Commission requires none to be baptized but such who are first taught or made Disciples which Disciples St. Mark calls Believers He that believes and is baptized Mark 16. 16. They are Reader the Words of the same Commission tho differently expressed by these two Great Evangelists and hold forth the same thing viz. That the Gospel is to be preached in all Nations or to all the World and that those that are discipled by preaching or that do believe ought to be baptized and none else 3. Whereas you say that Children are a great part of the Nations and may therefore be baptized this is a fallacious or deceitful Consequence For may not I as before argue thus Unbelievers i. e. Turks Infidels Pagans and their Children are a great part of all Nations therefore may be baptized Sir I appeal to your Conscience Whether this Inference is not as good and true from the Premises as yours 3. But you ask whether there is a command for the baptizing of Parents no doubt of this we and you agree that there is a command to baptize Parents that believe in Christ and to baptize Children too that believe in Christ but say you then there is a command to baptize Infants because they are included in the Parents even as parts of them now this is utterly false and also very ridiculous 't is for any Man to assert it 1. For if this was so it follows whatsoever God commands the Parent he commands the Child then when God commanded Abraham to offer up or slay his Son he commanded the Son to slay himself it would also follow That 2. When God commands the believing Parent to partake of the Lord's Supper he also commands all his Children to partake of the Lord's Supper because they are all included in their Parents 3. If Children are thus a part of their Parents then certainly if the Parents go to Heaven all their Children must go to Heaven likewise for the whole of Believers shall be saved and not a part of them only 4. Also if the Children are included in their Parents and are a part of them why may not the Parents Baptism serve for the Child and then it would also follow that no Man is a compleat and perfect Man without his Children was ever such Stuff by a Man of Parts and Learning published to the World 5. Sir will your Feeding or eating your Food feed your Children besure as much as your believing and being baptized will feed the Souls of your Children 6. Moreover why do you say the Judgments of wicked Parents fall on their Children did not God say that Proverb should be used no more in Israel but the Soul that Sins shall die If Children partake of the punishment of their Parents 't is when they are alike wicked and walk in the same steps their ungodly Parents walked in But you proceed and say that there is no particular command for the baptizing of Women Answ Male and
from Abraham in a lineal way by Generation or in respect had to any Covenant God made with him or his fleshly Seed as such that Covenant and Covenant right being taken away he took away the first that he might establish the second Heb. 10. 9. for the Priest-hood being charged there is made of necessity a change also of the Law Heb. 7. 12. there is therefore now no knowing or esteeming of Persons after that old Covenant manner the new Covenant being quite different or not according to the old which run to Abraham's Fleshly Seed as such they must now believe and their Children must believe before admitted as Members into the Gospel Church therefore if any Man be in Christ he is a new Creature old things are passed away and all things are become new 2 Cor. 5. 17. if any Person be grafted into Christ or into the Gospel Church he must have Faith and be a new Creature or be of the New Creation as the Greek word holds forth â—ay saith he though we have known Christ after the Flesh that is a Son of the Jewish Church or esteemed him upon that account Yet henceforth we know him or prefer him in that respect no more this was that Doctrine 〈◊〉 preached and 't is very probable it was as much from hence that they charged him for perswading Men contrary to the Law as upon any other Consideration whatsoever therefore all your flourish on this respect is vain but since you make so great a stir about the baptizing of whole Housholds I shall add something farther to clear up this Matter and I argue thus viz. 1. If there were no Families or Housholds but in which there are some Infants you might have some pretence for what you infer from hence but how palpable is it that there are every where many whole Families in which there is no Infant or Child in nonage and this being so what certain Conclusion or Consequence can he drawn from hence 2. Besides you know by a Synecdecha a part is put for the whole as Isa. 7. 2 5 8 9. the Tribe of Ephraim is put for all Israel 't is said all Jerusalem and Judah went out to be baptized by John in Jordan In 1 Sam. 1 21. 22. the Text saith The Man Elkanah and all his House went up to offer unto the Lord yet in the next Verse 't is said expresly That Hannah and her Child Samuel went not up nay you have shewed us a Family or whole House that were said to bury the Body of Sampson and yet you tell us the little Children were not included in that Expression all his House 3. As touching the Goalers House 't is positively said Paul preached to him and to all that were in his House do you think he preached to his Infants if he had any but to put the matter out of doubt 't is said he rejoyced believing in God with all his House as well as 't is said he was baptized and all his 4. Touching Lydia we say 't is uncertain whether she was a Maid Widow or Wife but if she was Married and had Children 't is very unlikely if Babes that they were at that time with her because she was far from her proper dwelling nay many Miles from it for she was of the City of Thiatira verse 14. but when Paul preached to her she was at Philippi where she was Merchandizing being a seller of Purple Can we suppose she carried her little Babes so far to Market Besides those of her House were called Brethren who were baptized with her therefore sure Children cannot be here meant will you build your Practice of baptizing little Babes from such uncertain Conclusions when 't is doubtful whether she had any Children or no Or if she had whether they were with her at that time or not our denying of it is as good as your affirming of it yet 't is plain she had Servants or some who are called her Houshold therefore what you say is impertinent upon this account And thus it appears to all impartial Persons that there is nothing in this argument touching the practice of the Gospel Church hear 's no mention made in baptizing whole Housholds of one Infant baptized nor the least color of reason to conclude there were Mr. Burkit is so unreasonable as to put us upon searching the Scripture to prove a Negative i. e. that there were none baptized in Infancy we might as well have desired him to give proof that there never was any Infant ordained an Elder or Pastor of a Church or how can we prove they did not make use of Honey or Oil in Baptism which some of the ancient Fathers used as Mr. Perkins Notes or Salt or Spittle which practice is still in the Romish Church Where is the extream â—unction forbid or auricular Confession or the use of Beads in Prayer and a hundred more such Romish Fopperies May these things be therefore done because we read not that they are forbid I thought adding to God's Word was forbidden Rev. 22. But says Mr. Burkit search the Scripture and produce me any one instance if you can from the time of St. John the Baptist to the time of St. John the Evangelist which was more than threescore Years during which time many Thousands of Infants were grown up to maturity and make it appear there were not any baptized in their Infancy or that their Baptism was deferred till riper years or that there is any divine Command for the delaying the baptism of Children of Christian Parents until they are grown up and I will frankly yield the Cause Bravely spoken Ans I must retort this argument back again on him and must say it is a great argument against Infant Baptism and not for it for say I let it be considered that since there was such a long space of time as 60 Years and more between John Baptist and the Death of John the beloved Disciple or John the Evangelist during which time many Thousand of Infants were born of baptized Believers both of Jews and Gentiles yet we read not of one Infant of them that was baptized Reader observe Mr. Burkit says in the Gospel day and when our Saviour sent his Disciples first to preach they were to teach or make Disciples of those they baptized but upon the Parents believing and being baptized he says their Children were admitted to Baptism also Now say I since many Parents thus taught and baptized had multitudes of Infants born to them how comes it about that we read not of one of their Infants that were baptized no not from the time of John Baptist to the Death of John the Evangelist Can any Man think had any Infants been baptized that God would not have left some account of it to put the matter out of doubt especially since it was never taught Doctrinally nor Commanded Certainly it could not stand consistent with the Care Wisdom and Faithfulness of Jesus Christ to have
Female are all one in Christ Jesus and Women are called Disciples and so are not Infants 2. We have plain presidents that Women were baptized which is all one with a Command Acts 8. 12. When they believed Philip Preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God and Name of Jesus Christ they were baptized both Men and Women And also that Lyd a was baptized Acts 16. Do but shew us one like president where any Infant was baptized and we will say no more You say we have not a particular Command for keeping the first day of the Week as an Holy Sabbath to the Lord. Answ We have a command to keep the Seventh part of time as a Sabbath to the Lord Exod. 20. and plain presidents in the New Testament That on the first day the Saints did meet to Worship God Acts 20. 7. 1 Cor. 16. 1. The first day of the Week as the Christian Sabbath was also confirmed by the first miraculous appearance of Christ after his Ascension into Heaven which was the day of Pentecost Acts 2. 1 2. give like proofs for your Infant Baptism You would have us to shew what Scripture we have for re-baptizing Answ I shall answer that by and by when I come to your next Chapter where we have it again we do not own it Lawful to baptize them Again who have been once rightly baptized but Rantism is not Baptism nor are Infants the true Subjects of it You say you have shewed already That there are many examples in the Scripture for Infant Baptism which are plain unto them that understand the agreement and the consequences of Scripture Answ I answer let the Reader judge in this case now we have examined all those Texts you draw your examples from whether your consequences are clear and plain or not Obj. The Scripture calleth upon some to believe before they are baptized He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved Mark 16. 16. and according to that Rule the Apostles did not baptize any untill they believed Acts 2. 38. This is the Second Objection Mr. Owen brings against what he hath wrote take his Answer viz. Saith he when the Scriptures saith that he that believeth and is baptized 1. It mentioneth Adult Persons viz. the unbelieving Gentiles unto whom Christ sent his Disciples Mark 16. 15. Mat. 28. 19. and not the Children of the Faithful Christ sending them into all the World to preach the Gospel into Pagan Nations and saying He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved Mark 16. 15 16. shews that neither Baptism nor Salvation belongeth unto them until they believe in the Lord Jesus if we were to preach unto such we should baptize none until they would believe But what is this to the Seed of the Faithful of whom Christ mentioneth not 1. Answ I answer Reader observe that here Mr. Omen hath given away his cause for ever for he saith Christ speaks not of the Children of the Faithful but of the Adult Now consider that these two Texts which he here Quotes viz. Mat. 28. 19 20. Mark 16. 15 16. does contain the great and only Commission and Warranty given by the Lord Jesus the only Law-giver about Baptizing and if Infants are not mentioned nor intended here there is no Warrant at all to Baptize them for if by virtue of the great Commission all persons must first believe before they are baptized farewell for ever to Infant Baptism 2. The Objection well saith That according to this Rule or Commission the Apostles did not baptize any until they believed which is true and he cannot refute it 3. Consider that the Commission Mat. 28. 19 20. Mark 16. 15 16. did not only authorize the Apostles to go and make Disciples among the Gentile or Pagan World but also among the Jews that were the Seed of Abraham nay they were commanded first to begin or open their Commission to preach to them at Jerusalem moreover the words of this Commission is all the Commission and Warrant the Disciples and Ministers of the Gospel have to administer Baptism to all the Christian Nations to the end of the World There are not two Commissions given by Christ about baptizing one to go to the Pagan or Gentile World and another to be believing Christian World or to believers and their Seed Now there is but one Commission and only Rule we have to baptize therefore Mr. Baxter saith well i. e. Christ in his Commission directeth his Apostles to make Disciples and then baptize them promising that he that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved Baxt. Confirm p. 27. And in another place he saith speaking of this only Warrant or Commission of Baptizing if we have it not here where have we it Shall any one think Christ's Commission short and defective 4. Mr. Owen saith if we were to preach unto such that is to unbelievers or Heathens we should baptize none until they believed Now pray consider that this is his Commission to baptize if he be a true Minister of Christ let him preach to whom he will or come where he will he must do all things according to this Commission as 't is here given neither baptize Young nor Old neither Jew nor Gentile Parent nor Child until they believe or profess their Faith in Jesus Christ if he doth he Violates and acts directly contrary to his only Commission and therefore if he doth he sins Should any Commissioner of an Earthly King act contrary to the very express words and purport of his Commission he certainly would be condemned as a false and unfaithful Servant and be turned out of his Masters Service Mr. Owen saith That the Seed of the faithful Christ mentioneth not that is in his great Commission Mat. 28. 19 20. Mark 16. 15 16. therefore such he must not Baptize unless he hath from Christ received a new or any other Commission that doth authorize him so to do 5. And observable it is to see how Mr. Owen contradicts himself here in respect of what he said before when he mention'd the same Texts and Commission of Christ he told us that Children are part of the Nations that Christ commanded to be Baptized but now he saith The Seed of the Faithful Christ mentioneth not and besure now at this turn he speaks the Truth and if none of the Seed of the Faithful ought to be Baptized by vertue of Christs Commission but such only of them that do believe then no Infant for Teaching is making of Disciples so that they are to be taught so as to believe before they are to be Baptized and that in all Nations whether Heathens or Christians and that also to the end of the World teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and lo I am with you all ways to the end of the Word Mat. 28. 20. It is certain saith Mr. Owen that this Scripture mentioneth not of Children if it doth they must needs be damned for want of Faith
being the Children of Abraham as such gave them a right to Circumcision or rather the meer positive Command of God to Abraham To this they gave no Answer Query 2. Whether Circumcision could be said to be a Seal of any Mans Faith save Abraham's only seeing 't is only called the Seal of the Righteousness of his Faith and also of the Faith which he had being yet uncircumcised To this the Athenian Society answer amongst the Ancient Hereticks they never met with such a strange position as this viz. that the Seal of the Righteousness of Faith was the priviledge of Abraham only Is this an answer Besides they mistake it is not a Position but a Question Furthermore 't is said that Abraham received the sign of Circumcision not only as a Seal of the Righteousness of that Faith he had being yet uncircumcised but also Mark that he might be the Father of all that believe Was this the priviledge of any save Abraham only Query 3. What do you conceive Circumcision did or Baptism doth seal or doth make sure to Infants since a Seal usually makes firm all the blessings and priviledges contained in that Covenant 't is affixed to The Athenians answer It Seals and did seal to all that did belong to Christ Life and Salvation but to such as do not it Seals nothing at all To which I reply How dare any Man Seal the Covenant of Salvation to such who have not that Faith Abraham had before he received that Seal It was not a Seal of that Faith he might have or might not have afterwards but of that Faith he had before he received it Secondly I affirm Baptism is no Seal at all of Salvation for if it was and of God's appointment all that are Sealed would be saved even Simon Magus but many who are Baptized may perish eternally and do no doubt Query 4. I demand to know what those external priviledges are Infants partake of in Baptism seeing they are denyed the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper and all other external Rites whatsoever If you say when they believe they shall partake of those priviledges and blessings so say I shall the Children of unbelievers Turks and Pagans as well as they The Athenian Society answer We insist not upon external priviledges 't is forrein to the Matter 1. Ans If you insist not on internal priviledges nor on external priviledges that are Sealed to Infants that are Baptized what does their Baptism signifie Just nothing but which is worse 't is a prophanation of Christ's Holy significant Ordinance of Baptism and this indeed is worst of all Query 5. If the fleshly Seed or Children of believing Gentiles as such are to be counted the Seed of Abraham I Query whither they are his Spiritual Seed or his Natural Seed if not his Spiritual Seed nor his Natural Seed what right can they have to Baptism or Church Membership from any Covenant Transaction God made with Abraham The Athenians answer They are his Spiritual Seed Visible for so far only belongs to us to Judge and therefore they have a right to the Seal of that Covenant Reply What they say cannot be true because the Scripture positively saith that such who are the spiritual Seed of Abraham have the Faith of Abraham and walk in the Steps of Abraham and are Christ's Gal. 3. ult But Infants of Believers as such cannot be said to have the Faith of Abraham nor to walk in Abrahams Steps c. 2. Such who are Abrahams Spiritual Seed are in the Election of Grace and are always his Seed not for so long but for ever we can judge none to be Abraham's Spiritual Seed but such only in whom these Signs appear before mentioned but none of those Signs appear nor can appear in Infants therefore we cannot judge they are his Spiritual Seed to whom the Seal of the Covenant of Grace of right does belong Query 6. Whither the Children of Believers are in the Covenant of Grace absolutely or but conditionally if only conditionally what further priviledge have they above the Children of unbelievers Query 7. Whither those different Grounds upon which the right of Infant Baptism is pretended by the Ancient Fathers of Old and the Modern Divines doth well agree with an Institution that is a meer positive right wholly depending on the Sovereign will of the Legislator and whether this doth not give just cause to all to question its authority 1. Some Pedo-baptists asserted it took away Original Sin and such who denyed it were Anathematized 2. Some affirm that Children are in Covenant and being the Seed of Believers are Faederally Holy therefore to be Baptized 3. Another sort of Pedo-baptists say they ought to be baptized by vertue of their Parents Faith 4. Another sort Baptize them upon the Faith of their Sureties 5. Others say by the Faith of the Church as Austin Bernard c. 6. Others say they have Faith themselves i. e. Habitual Faith and therefore must be baptized 7. Some say it is only an Apostolical unwritten Tradition But others deny that and say it may be proved from the Scripture 8. Others say 't is a Regenerating Ordinance and Infants are thereby put into a savable State Others say the Infants of Believers are born therefore safe before in Covenant with their Parents To this Query they say nothing pretending they had answer'd it before Query 8. Whither that can be an Ordinance of Christ for which there is neither precept nor example nor plain and undeniable Consequences for it in all God's Word nor promise made to such who do it nor threats pronounced on such as neglect it Their answer is there About Womens Receiving the Sacrament c. Query 9. Whether in matter of meer positive Right such as Baptism is we ought not to keep expresly and punctually to the Revelation of the Will of the Law-giver They answer yes Reply Then your Cause is lost for God's Word expresly directs us to Baptize only such who are first Taught or made Disciples by Teaching or who make a profession of their Faith and Dipping is the express Act of Baptizing as practised in the New Testament which a great Clound of Witnesses testifie Query 10. Whether the Baptism of Infants be not a dangerous Error since it tends to deceive poor Ignorant People who think they are thereby made Christians and Regenerated and so never look after any other Regeneration or Baptism that represents or or holds forth the inward work of God's Grace They answer They never tell them they are made Christians throughly c. Then I Appeal to all Men who have Read the Old Church Catechism In my Baptism wherein I was made a Child of God a Member of Christ and an Inheritor of the Kingdom of God 11. Since we read but of one Baptism in Water and that one Baptism is that of the Adult i. e. such who profess Faith c. How can Infant Baptism or rather Rantism be an Ordinance of Christ 12.