away with it And what is it that so prevailes with them for the sucking in of this errour why surely nothing more than the high opinion which they have of those who stand up in this cause an opinion of their singular piety zeale knowledge They are knowing Christians forward and Zealous Christians close walking Christians such as desire to come to the Rule and to follow Christ close Such they apprehend them to bee And I will not deny but some such may be found amongst them And hereupon they make their judgements and practise a standard a patterne to themselves Surely say they it cannot bee but that they should bee in the right A knowing people a praying people c. Ans To meet with this Errour doe but looke upon this instance in the Text and see who they were that prohibited these children from comming unto Christ and rebuked those which brought them They were not Scribes and Pharisees They were not superstitious or blinde ignorant or yet wicked and prophane persons No they were Disciples followers of Christ those who by reason of their constant attendance upon Christ and familiar acquaintance with him one would have thought should have understood his minde sooner than any yet they fall into this very errour they would not have children brought unto Christ for which they are reproved of their Lord and Master I doubt not but even amongst that Sect which I am now speaking against there may be some pious devout humble Christians though I feare not many for in most of them you shall see a spirit of pride and disdaine and bitternesse against all that doe not walke by their light but some such I hope there are some Disciples of Christ who do follow Christ according to their light in the simplicity and uprightnesse of their hearts Now what though they debarre children from comming unto Christ and rebuke thâ—se which bring them finding fault with the received practise of all the Churches in Baptizing of Infants What then Shall we presently hearken unto them Nay rather hearken unto Christ so doe these women here in the text The disciples prohibite rebuke them bid them be gone with their children But Christ hee incourageth them hee invits them And to him they harken not to his disciples Suppose the adversaries to childrens Baptisme be some of them disciples of Christ never so pious never so zealous never so eminent for grace for holinesse yet hearken we rather to their master then to them to him inviting rather then to them prohibiting The disciples rebuked those which brought them But upon what ground did the disciples this What did they it out of malice Out of envie Were they unwilling that these Infants should receive any benefit from Christ Surely not so Charitie envies not Grace is communicative willing and desirous that others should have a share in the same Christ and in the same benefits by Christ whence was it then Surely out of Ignorance out of blind-zeale 1 Out of ignorance ignorance of these two things 1. They did not apprehend what need these Infants had of Christ Not being troubled as is most probably with any bodily infirmitie they did not see what should occasion this their addresse The whole need not the physician but the sicke Had they been sick and diseased questionlesse the disciples would have admitted them as readily as they had done others but being sound and hayle they put them back as apprehending them to have no need of Christ 2. As they apprehended that they had no need of Christ so probably they did not conceive how they were capable of any benefit by him Those which came unto Christ ordinarily they came for one of these ends to be benefited by him either in their bodies or in their soules In their bodies by his miracles in their â—oules by his doctrine Now as for the former of these these Infants had no need of it and for the latter they were not capable of it and consequently the disciples could not see what they should be the better for coming to Christ and thereupon repell them keep them back And are not these the very grounds the chiefe grounds that the Anabaptists goe upon at this day in debatting children from the Sacrament of Baptisme 1. They have no need of Baptisme say they And 2. They are not capable of benefit by it 1. They have no need of Baptisme How so In as much as they are free from originall sinne that is the doctrine of the compleat Anabaptist Infants say they doe not stand charged with Adams sinne And as for any sinne of their owne whether originall or actuall they are not guiltie of it Originall sin in Infants faith one of their books it was but a Romish invention 〈◊〉 and set a foot by those Antichristian factors that so they might have an occasion to extoll and deâ—â—â—e their queen of heaven the virgin Mary whom alone amongst all the posterity of Adam they exempt from that common condition Now being free from sin say they from the guilt of sinne and from the staine of sinne what need have they of this laver which is ordained for the washing away of sins Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sinnes saith Ananias to Paul The poole of â—ethâ—sda that miraculous hath it was proper for lepers and cripples and such other diseased bodies as for others they received no benefit by it And so is it with this spirituall this heavenly bath it is appointed for leprous sinsick-soules not for Infants who are not troubled with any such maladies Againe secondly as they have no need of Baptisme so what benefit can they receive by it or from it being void and destitute of understanding of reason and consequently of faith upon which depends the efficacie of this and all other the ordinances of God This it is that qualifieth a person for the Sacrament of Baptisme his faith in Christ If thou believest thou maiest saith Phillip to the Eunuch And this it is that draweth vertue and benefit from the ordinance which without this is rendred wholy ineffectually These are their reasonings and are they not for substance the very same with the supposed reasonings of the disciples here in the text They would not have the Infants brought unto Christ Why They had no need of him being in perfect health free from sicknesse and they could receive no benefit by him being void of understanding Even thus saith the Anabaptist what should children be brought to Baptisme They have no need of it being free from sinne neither can they have any benefit by it being voide of faith Now to both these we may say as our blessed Saviour once did to the Sadduces in an other case when they represented to him their mis-apprehensions touching the Doctrine of the Resurrection Yee erre saith he not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God Surely so did the disciples here
in to debar children from the one who had so undoubted a right to and so long a continued possession of the other How they come to be cut off from this priviledge which was once so firmly intailed upon them Which if they cannot shew then must we still conclude it to be their right As for other alterations wherein Baptisme differs from Circumcision we can shew good warrant for them out of the Scriptures As viz. 1. Why whereas Circumcision was administred only to males Baptisme should be administred to both sexes both to male and female For this we have both the practise of the Apostles to warrant it At Philips preaching to the Samaritanes they beleeving his doctrine were baptized both men and women Act. 8. 11. and we have the Apostles reason for it Gal. 3. 28. As many of you as have beene baptized into Christ have put on Christ For in Christ Iesus there is neither male nor female c. 2. So secondly for baptizing of all Nations Whereas Circumcision was restrained peculiarly to one Nation Baptisme is to be tendred to all For this we have our Saviours owne commission and warrant Gâ—e teach all Nations baptizing them i. e. Not Iewes only but Gentiles also And we have the Apostles reason for it also in the place forenamed For in Christ Iesus there is neither Iew nor Greek c. 3. So againe for the circumstance of time That we do not tye the administration of Baptisme to any certaine day as it was in Circumcision but administer it before the eight day or after For this also we have the Apostles warrant who tells us that it is not for Christians now to observe dayes as the Jewes did reckoning up this amongst those weake and beggarly rudiments as he calls them Yee observe months and dayes and times and years Herein Christians have a liberty a liberty purchased for them by the blood of Christ and that liberty they must stand fast in Thus in what ever other changes and alterations herein we meet with we can still shew good warrant for it out of Scripture Now if our Adversaries can doe the like for this great alteration why Baptisme should not bee administred to Infants as well as Circumcision was then indeed wee will hearken to them In the meane time it is not for them to presse us for a speciall warrant an expresse and particular order and command in this case This we conceive to be altogether needlesse having such a standing order and direction touching Circumcision shewing us to whom this seale of the Covenant belongs and to whom it is to be administred viz. to all that are in Covenant Infants as well as others what needeth any new order in this particular This order for the substance of it is perpetuall of force under the New Testament as well as under the Old Further answer to this question I shall defer till hereafter conceiving this sufficient for the present One allegation is yet behinde which our Adversaries by way of reply here cast in our way I shall only touch briefly and so dismisse this second Argument with it Repl. If this bee a good Argument say they that Infants may be baptized because they were Circumcised then by a like reason they should now be admitted to the Lords Table because under the Old Testament they eat the Passeover The reason say they is a like for both So as if it hold in the one why not in the other Ans To part of this I have in part answered already give me leave now to doe it a little more fully For childrens eating of the Lords Supper whether lawfull or no it hath beene and yet is a Question Anciently it is well knowne it was allowed and practised in the Roman and African Churches Those ancient Doctors Augustine and Cyprian are Advocates in this cause pleading not only for the lawfulnesse but Expediencie of it At this day the practice is or at least lately was as Peter Martyr informes me retained amongst the Grecian Bohemian Moravian Churches How warrantable this hath been or may be is disputable P. Martyr for his part professeth that he will not be zealous in siding with either part in this quarrell As for the custome of those ancient Churches in admitting them he will not he dare not condemne it and as for the practise of other Churches in debarring them he cannot but allow it The latter not so warrantable is amongst us and most of the Churches at this day and that upon good ground as we conceive concluded to be the more safe the more warrantable For their admission Scripture will not beare it out As for that place cited and made use of by those Ancients as a ground for this practice Joh. 6. 53. Except yee eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drinke his Blood ye have no life in you it maketh nothing for it our Saviour there speaking not of a Sacramentall but a Spirituall Communion a Spirituall feeding upon him which is done by faith fetching refreshment nourishment from Christ by the application of his merits unto the soule Much in Scripture that seemeth to make against it Paul telleth us of divers Qualifications requisite in Communicants and divers actions to be performed by them in and about the supper of the Lord which Infants are not capable of as viz. besides the eating and drinking of the Elements which young Infants cannot doe the examining of themselves the discerning of the Lords body the shewing forth the Lords death the doing what they doe in remembrance of him c. All these actions are actually to be performed by worthy Communicants So as there is just reason why Infants though they be baptized yet they should not be admitted to the Supper of the Lord this being as you see an active Ordinance consisting mostly in doing Doe this as oft as you eat it c. Q. But what say we then to the Argument Infants eat the Passeover why not then the Lords Supper as well as be baptized because they were circumcised A. 1. To this we answer i. should it be granted that Infants did partake of the one yet we see good reason why they should not be admitted to the other being not subjects capable of the aforesaid Qualifications 2. But secondly how can it be proved that Infants did eat the Passeover I know it is an opinion that hath been received swallowed downe I suppose without chewing as many other of this nature have been and that by some of note but upon what ground I know not Scripture I am sure will not make it out True we finde an order that there should be a Lambe for a house and in case that one family were too little to eat it up the next family was to be joyned to it they must take it according to the number of the soules saith the Text reckoning
say the Hebrewes ten to a Lambe But that must be understood not universally of all the persons in a family but only such as were meet to eat thereof Amongst which say the Hebrews sicke persons and young children were not to be reckoned no more then persons uncircumcised and uncleane being not fit to eat thereof 1. Not fit to partake in the outward elements This could not young Infants doe eat the flesh and unleavened bread much lesse that unpleasing salade of sowre or bitter hearbes which was to be eaten with it These were no fit food for Infants 2. Much lesse in the second place could they understand the mystery and meaning thereof which as it seemeth they ought to doe before they were admitted to communicate therein So much at least with great probability is collected from the 26. v. of that Chapter where it is said It shall come to passe when your children shall say unto you What mean you by this service Yee shall say It is the sacrifice of the Lords Passeover c. So it seemeth that none were to partake of this Sacrament but such as were of age and capacity to interrogate concerning the meaning of it And that they were to be instructed concerning it before such time as they were admitted to it So much the Iewish Doctours will tell us concerning this Feast viz. That such children as were able to goe up with their parents from the Gates of Ierusalem to the Temple they were to appeare before the Lord that being first catechized in the Commandements they might celebrate the Feast So that this Argument may now be retorted and returned with great advantage against the Adversarie as I finde it by some of our moderne Divines Infants under the Law were circumcised the eight day but not admitted to the eating of the Passeover untill they were of capacity to understand the mystery and meaning of it Even so nâ—w under the Gospel Infants of believing parents may and ought to be baptized but not admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper untill they be able to understand the mystery and meaning of that Sacrament to discerne the Lords Body Which parallel being duly weighed it maketh very much for the clearing of the warrantablenesse of the Churches practise in both these particulars both in administring unto Infants the one Sacrament and in with-holding from them the other But I will no longer dwell upon it Objections Answered MAny other Arguments might yet be produced for the vindicating of this cause but I will not overload it or tire your patience Probably we shall yet meet with some more in returning Answer to the Objections of the Adversary That is the second Act which I propounded to my selfe and promised to you when I first undertooke this Subject Let me discharge my selfe of it with as much brevity as conveniently I may not reckoning up all the shadowes of Arguments that are made use of of which there are divers not worth the naming much lesse the answering but only some of the chiefe and principall which may seem to carry the greatest shew of strength and reason with them Arg. 1. In the first place against the Baptisme of Infants it is alleadged that it is but a humane and that a novel invention a meere device of Antichrist and that of a very late impression not practised in the Church till at least a thousand yeares after Christ first brought in by Pope Innocent Thus it is confidently charged by some who blush not to bring in M. Luther to vouch this their bold assertion A. But herein how grossely if not wilfully ignorant they are it is but too apparent Certainly they who in good earnest charge Paedobaptisme with novelty shew themselves to be little seene in antiquity I told you heretofore that in Augustines nay in Cyprians time who lived in the third Centurie within lesse then three hundred yeares after Christ Children were admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper Surely then much more to Baptisme without which they were not capable of the Eucharist no more then an uncircumcised person was of the Passeover In this cause the testimony of those Ancients are commonly cited Augustine speaking of Infants baptisme calleth it a Common custome of the Church shewing that it was universally received in his time Cyprian in an Epistle sent from himselfe and divers other Presbyters his Collegues met together in a Councell to the number of sixty six to his friend Fidus pleads for it averring and proving that it was not necessary that Baptisme should be deferred till the eight day as Circumcâ—sion was To the same purpose Origen before them who lived in the beginning of the third Centurie not much above two hundred yeares after Christ mentioneth this as a received custome in the Church approving of it and giving a reason for it viz. because even Infants are not free from spirituall pollution and uncleanenesse no though they have lived but one day upon earth So that this cannot be justly charged with novelty that hath these and many more of the Ancients speaking of it and for it Obj. Why but Tertullian who was as ancient as any of them the first Writer of note of the Latin Church he was of another minde disallowing and condemning this practice A. To this it is answered by P. Martyr that so hee did some other things which yet the word hath not condemned as viz. second marriages c. so as his authority in this case is not so much to be regarded he being then when hee wrote that booke fallen from the Church and from the orthodox faith fallen into Montanisme specially seeing he denyed Baptisme not only to Infants but to all others untill they were well stricken in yeares viz. to young men nay to young widowes But even from him as the foresaid Authour observes it may be collected that baptisme of Infants was then in use in the Church otherwise he would never have reprehended the practice of it So it was and before his time So much is testified by some of the Greek Fathers who were before him viz. Irenaeus and Iustine Martyr who lived in the second Centurie about an hundred and fifty yeares after Christ both making mention of it Repl. But it is replied that though it be acknowledged to bee ancient yet still is it a humane invention no divine Apostolicall Ordinance but a meer Ecclesiasticall constitution So saith the Papist and so saith the Anabaptist in this not unlike Sampsons foxes joyned together by the tayles whilest their heads looke severall wayes both asserting the same position though to different ends the one to establish humane traditions the other to undermine a divine Ordinance But how prove they what they say Why the Authours prealledged some of them say as much in expresse words Origen calleth it a Ceremony or Tradition of the Church Augustine a custome of the Church
this means that sacred Ordinance might be freed and kept pure from that pollution so much and that not without cause complained of through a promiscuous participation and so this scandall being removed we might hope that many who are upon this ground departed from the unity of the Church at least have broke off communion with it might in a little time be reduced and brought home againe and others who are staggering might bee confirmed and established 6. And lastly by this meanes also that difference of the times about the formality of a Church-Covenant in receiving in of members as they call them would soone be compremized and taken up There being here the substance of what is there desired and contended for and that better bottomed as I conceive then the former In all which regards besides many other for my owne part I cannot but joyne with Calvin and Chemnitius and divers other of our Divines in desiring the restitution and restoring of this Ordinance to the Church which through the grosse corruption of it in the Church of Rome and too apparent abuse of it amongst our selves it being generally turned into a meer formality hath growne into great dislike and distaste Certainly what ever any through prejudice may think of it were this Ordinance stripped of those rags which superstition hath put upon it and restored to naked purity and simplicity the Church of God should have no cause to bee ashamed to owne it specially seeing the Apostle himselfe in the words of the Text sâ—emeth to give such countenance to it laying it downe for one of those first principles concerning the nature and use whereof children should be instructed and taught Q. But all this while what is this to the purpose in hand what maketh this for Pâ—dâ—baptisme the baptisme of Infants A. Surely yes very much This being granted that there was such an Ordinance in use in the Apostles times practised after the manner that you have heard it may from thence be demonstratively inferred that some children were then baptized in their Infancy To what purpose else should this subsequent act serve wherefore should there be such a publicke confession and such a solemne restipulation and ingagement after Baptisme were it not that Baptisme was administred unto them in their Infancy before they came to yeares of discretion Otherwise had they been able to anser for themselves and to stipulate in their owne persons when they were baptized as those that were adulti did what need would there have beene of such a subsequent solemnity to bring them actum agere to doe that againe which they had once done before But I will not dwell any longer upon it You see now what Precept and what Presidents the Spirit of God in the New Testament will afford us for the countenancing and bearing out of this practice the baptizing of Infants True it is expresse and particular they are not nor yet so demonstrative and convincing but that the Adversary may take up some cavills against them Yet are they such evidences as may give satisfaction to those who are willing to receive it However sure we are they make more for the warrant blenesse of this practice then ought that the Adversary can produce will against it Not so say they for as for Infants they are not subjects capable of Baptisme And why not Why because they are not capable of those qualifications which should dispose them to the receiving of this Sacrament And what are they why Repentance and Faith These are the conditions which the Spirit of God requireth in all persons that are to bee baptized Repentance Repent yee therefore and be baptized saith â—eter to the Iewes Faith if thou beleevest with all thine heart thou mayest saith Philip to the Eunuch concerning his Baptisme A. To these Texts of Scripture it is soon answered that here both Peter and Philip had to deale with persons of yeares and those such as had no other title to the Covenant but such as their owne actuall repentance and faith conferred upon them Now had we to deale with such we should runne the same course not admitting them unto this Sacrament but upon the testification of their Repentance and Faith But in the meane time this is ill applyed to Infants the children of believing parents who have a title to and interest in the Covenant and consequently a right to the seale of the Covenant by vertue of their fathers charter Repl. But it will be replyed This is a generall universall condition required of all that are to be baptized They must first believe Our Saviours owne words say the are expresse for it He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved Mark 16. 16. So that it seemeth faith is a condition absolutely requisite in persons to be baptized and must goe before Baptisme Here is one of the great arguments which the Adversarie putteth a great deale of confidence in But what strength or rather weaknesse is in it will soone appeare A. In the 1. place it is truly answered by P. Martyr and others that Ordo verborum non necessario infert ordinem rerum The order of words doth not necessarily infer the same order in things For instance Mark 1. 4. it is said Iohn did baptize and preach the baptisme of Repentance Here is baptizing put before preaching which may serve to ballance that in the last of Matth. 19. Go teach all Nations baptizing them where teaching is put before baptizing yet will it not thence follow that Iohn baptized before he preached So here in those words of our Saviour believing is put before baptizing in the order of the words Yet it will not thence follow that faith must alwayes goe before baptisme in the reality of the thing Should wee thus precisely stand upon the order of words what should we say to that of our Saviour Ioh. 3. 5. Except a man be borne of water and of the Spirit c. a Text which is brought to ballance that other where water is put before the spirit A. 2. In the second place wee grant it Faith and actuall faith is requisite in persons capable of it before they be admitted to Baptisme And of such only such is that place to be understood He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved Which cannot extend unto Infants as the latter part of the verse will sufficiently evidence Hee that believeth not shall bee damned Which to apply to Infants and so for want of actuall faith which they are not capable of to exclude them from all hopes of salvation I presume it were greater cruelty then the Anabaptists will willingly owne The place it selfe being consulted with maketh it cleare shewing that this is spoken of all and only such as were capable of the Gospel preached to them and consequently capable of faith as the verse foregoing explaines it v. 15. Goe yee into all the world and preach
come to be strengthned and increased To this end it was that our blessed Saviour gave such harsh intertainment to that poore Cananitish woman that came to him in the behalfe of her daughter First bidding his disciples dismisse her send her away Then himselfe shaking her off telling her hee had nothing to doe with her or for her I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel Then giving her tam and course language calling her a dog It is not meete to take the childrens bread and cast it unto dogs All this he did for her probation and tryall to try and exercise her faith These ends God hath in it 2. Satan hath other ends viz. to discourage dishearten the people of God to beate them off and make them desist and leave off their undertakings and therefore he endeavoureth to crush them in the shell and nip them in the bud Take we notice of it and make use of it that being fore-warned we may also be fore-armed against what ever discouragements wee shall meet with Not disheartned by them Alas these are no new or wonted things but such as Gods people have frequent experience of Let them not dull or rebate the edge of our endeavours but rather whet and set them Sowre sauces in the beginning of a meale they whet the appetite Even such use make wee of what ever impediments and discouragements shall encounter us in the entrance upon any pious relgious undertaking Let them be rather as whets to sett an edge upon our resolutions And in particular let it be usefull to new beginners new commers to Christ young Christians At first conversion when they doe but begin to looke towards God and Christ they oftentimes meet with such entertainment as these Infants here did They finde course usage from the world Course language it may bee or an overly carriage from friends and acquaintance mocks and checks from others And happily God himselfe or Satan by his permission may strow some Murices some Caltraps some crosses in their way But let not all discourage still hold on In the end what ever the world doth bee you assured Christ will smile upon you and embrace you as here he doth these Infants To passe on These Infants were repulsed and those which brought them checked But by whom By the Disciples of Christ His Disciples rebuked those which brought them What see we here Even good men holy and gracious men may sometimes be impedements to pious and Religious undertakings It was Peter that assayed to perswade his Master not to goe up to Jerusalem Master favour thy selfe Here was an assay to hinder the best worke that ever was done the worke of our Redemption and that by an eminent Saint an eminent Apostle Here in the Text the Apostles whose office it was to winne and bring all sorts oâ— persons unto Christ yet they prohibite these children and rebuke those which brought them Thus good men sometimes may bee back-friends to good causes This God permits this Satan incites to this holy men yeeld to See a Reason for each First God permits it to the end that our faith as the Apostle speaketh should not stand in the wisdome of men nor yet in the holines of men That we may learn not to make either the Iudgement or Practise of man our Rule our Rule to believe by our Rule to walke by Secondly Satan incites to it the rather making use of these Instruments because least suspected and consequently most prevalent Thus at the first he made use of the Woman in tempting the Man Adam could not naturally suspect his owne flesh hee could not suspect that poyson should bee reached forth to him by such a hand None so likely to perswade with him as his wife was Vpon a like ground it is that Satan maketh use of pious and godly persons in crossing and hindering some pious undertakings Thus hee made use of Peter to take off his Master So much our Saviour there expresseth Get thee behind me Satan It was Satan that spoke in and by Peter making use of him as his Instrument in suggesting and conveying that temptation And wherfore of him Why he thought if any could prevaile with Christ Peter might assoone or sooner than any 3. As God permits and Satan incites so holy men sometimes yeeld and become instruments to God and Satan in these services or rather dis-services in hindering of good and that because they know but in part It was so with the Disciples here In prohibiting these children they act according to their knowledge They did not know their Masters mind concerning them and thereupon they did what they did Thus is it with good and holy men they are sometimes Remoraes back-stayes to a worke that tends to the glory of Christ and good of his Church Whence is it not from any ill-will they beare to either but because they are not fully informed touching the minde of Christ they are not perfectly instructed in the way of the Lord wherein they walke according to their light Make use of it briefly even that which I have already given you a hint of Learne we hence not to pin our faith or obedience upon other mens sleeves not to make the Iudgement or practise of others whatever they be a Rule a Standard for us to believe or walk by A very common errour in these un-setled times How many well-meaning soules are there every where that bottome their faith upon the wisedome or upon the piety and holinesse of men Take wee heed of it Knowing that if we shall sayle by this Compasse we may bee on ground before we are aware You know who spake it Let God bee true and every man a lyar God onely is infallible and his Word an infallible Rule As for men the wisest the learnedest the holiest they are all lyars and that both actively and passively subject to deceive and bee deceived Take wee heed therefore of trying truth by this touchstone of weighing truth in this ballance by these weights To the Word to the Word That will not that cannot deceive Humane judgement humane practise may though in persons never so eminent Take heed then how wee bee prejudiced against truth because such or such assent not to it Take heed how we let in errour because such or such embrace and entertaine it Surely it is one of the prevailing Arguments of the times that hath misled and seduced many to the receiving and embracing of divers dangerous errors even the good opinion and high esteeme which they have had of some who have gone in those wayes I will instance but in one that which the Text leadeth me to viz. The errour of the Anabaptists in denying Baptisme unto children An errour which spreadeth farre and nigh in the Kingdome to the present disquietment to the future danger of the Church Many in all places carried