signifies more then lawfully used as a carnall man may use his meat and drinksoberly and for a good end to fit him for his calling namely it signifies thus much That meats c. not prohibited are sanctified by the Word allowing them to us and giving us believing in that Word a right to them in Christ and by the prayer of faith we sue out a blessing upon them But Mr. T. Objects That it is not said 1 Cor. 7.14 The unbeleeving husband is sanctified in or by the beleeving wife but in or by the wife Nor is it said that the unbeleeving wife is sanctified in or by the beleeving husband but in or by the husband the Apostle purposely so speaking that the reason of sanctification may be intimated to be taken not from the faith of the yoak-fellow but from conjugall relation Answ The Syr. Text prevents all imagination of this conceit reading the Text according to the true meaning thus That husband which is not a beleever is sanctified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the wife 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a beleever And that wife which is not a beleever is sanctified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the husband 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a beleever 2. There are two Greek Coppies that Beza saw have it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the beleeving wife And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Mr. Tombes not forgetting should not slight 3. Hear reason The Apostles purpose sure enough is to comfort beleevers married with unbeleevers And it is as sure that the Apostle layes the ground of that comfort of the beleeving husband in his condition of husband as oppositely distinguished from his unbeleeving wife and the comfort of the beleeving wife in her condition of wife as oppositely distinguished from her unbeleeving husband For saithe he the unbeleeving husband is sanctified in the wife What wife What can we answer but the beleiving wife And so of the husband Now seeing the Apostle layes it in a proper peculiar priviledge which is sometimes in the husband to wit when he is a beleever and the wife not And sometimes in the wife when she is a beleever and the husband not It must needs be that the foundation of the comfort intended by the Apostle is layd in faith peculiar but to one of the couple and not in marriage that was equally common to both And that faith doth rather sanctifie marriage then marriage sanctifie the married persons A harsh phrase for a Christian That civill marriage is a sanctifier either to sanctifie two unbeleevers which by Mr. T. his consequence it must or to more-sanctifie a condition to one that is a beleever But Mr T. observes further That ' Eâ— is not rightly rendred by in the old Latine and our new English Translation as if the faith of the wife were the cause of sanctifying the unbeleeving husband For no man will say the faith of the beleeving wife sanctifies the unbeleeving husband federally so that the unbeleeving husband should be capable of Baptisme by his wives faith which yet by the good leave of such men be it said doth as well follow from this place as that the son is federally holy and capable of Baptisme for the faith of the parent Neither can it be said that the Parent is sanctified with spirituall sanctification by the faith of the wife We Answ To render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by is tolerable seeing the Apostles do very oft Hebraize and make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to answer to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebrew which oft signifies by * Sanctificatâ—â—â— est vir qui infidelis est in uxore fideli iâ—â—â— est per. Hebraismus Sanctificataesi mulier quae estinfidelis in viro fideli id est per. Hebraismus So Tremelius in his Translation of and Notes upon the Syâ— But we regard not whether it be rendred by or in that is in or through the beleiver his faith the unbeleiver is sanctified to him still it will stand good that faith may as well be the instrumentall cause of a lesser thing namely of sanctifying an unbeleeving husband to a beleeving wifes use as it is an instrumentall cause of a greater thing namely of justification Rom. 5.1 And every one may boldly say that the faith of the beleiving wife sanctifies the unbeleeving husband federally in this sence to wit as all outward things that have no holinesse in them meat drink cloaths carnall friends c. may be called federally holy to a beleever that is that they are and shall be for a beleevers good and comfortable use by reason of the Covenant she is in with God though her faith cannot sanctifie her unbeleeving husband federally for the Sacrament of Baptisme 1. Because the line of the Covenant runs not To thee beleeving Woman and thy husband or To thee beleeving husband and to thy Wife But to thee beleeving parent and thy seed 2. Because whiles the woman is a beleiver the husband is said here to be a known unbeleever And whiles the husband is a beleiver the wife is said to be a known unbeleiver according to this 1 Cor. 7.14 And all unbeleevers known to be such by apparent Scriptures are not to be accounted federally holy so as to belong to the Seal of the Covenant 3. Mr Tombes affirmes after that the unbeleeving husband is sanctified TO the beleeving wife The sanctification is not to her as the Covenant of the father is to the Infant but to her the beleever Which three Reasons makes me look on Mr. Tombes his comparison as a very strange one as if not well weighed before it was uttered viz. That it doth as well follow saith Mr Tombes from this place that the unbeleeving husband is federally holy so as to be capable of Baptisme by the beleeving wives faith as that the son is federally holy and capable of Baptisme for the faith of the Parent But let the candid Reader look back on what we have sayd on this 1 Cor. 7. or look forward to the Scriptures and judge whether this be not a very uneven comparison It is further objected by Mr T. that in this 1 Cor. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 IN THE WIFE is more rightly rendred in Latine in the Dative as TO THE WIFE But we aske Mr Tombes in what latin is it so rendred Not in the old lat that is by Not in Vatabl that is also By. Not in Beza that is in Not in the Syr. that is also by If you mean is to be rendred or may or might be rendred better in the Dative TO for which you bring seven instances 1 We answer that those instances may be tolerably at least rendred in the ablative notion IN according to the note there of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In. As Gal. 1.16 To reveal his sonne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 IN MEE that is not onely by the sound of the word to mee but by his spirit and the graces thereof and the effectuall
such after higher things to such little children whiles little children how much more may that which in nature antecedes and goes before these namely baptisme be administred to them whiles such little children For the clearing this of imposition of hands learned Pareus hath these words on Hebr. 6.2 Some saith he conjoyn the two heads of Baptismes and imposition of hands because as there were two ranks of Catechumeni catechized persons so there was a two fold innitiating ceremony 1 Those of ripe yeers of the heathen did before their baptisme recite the Articles of the Creed touching the Christian faith And this was the catechising or doctrine of Baptismes 2. The Infants of Christians who by the right of the promise were baptized in their infancie who being past their childhood were received into the Church by imposition of hands where or at which time they first recited the same heads or Articles of faith before the Church And this was the doctrine of imposition of hands So Pareus So Calvin Bullinger August Marlorat Hofman Theophylact onely they spake more home if you precisely observe their words which are C these The doctrine of Baptismes imposition of hands and of the resurrection of the dead and the last judgement ought to be read conjoynedly with a certain Apposition as the Grammarians call it in this sence Not laying again the foundation of repentance of faith in God of the resurrection of the dead which is the doctrine of Baptisme and Imposition of hands Therefore if you include in a parenthesis these two sentences the doctrines of Baptismes and Imposition of hands the context will run more fluently For unlesse you read it appositively this absurditie will follow that the same thing will be twise repeated For what is the doctrine of Baptisme but that which he here reckons to wit Of faith towards God of repentance of the last judgement and the like The solemnities and standing set dayes of baptizing he cals Baptismes in the plurall numer T otherwise there is but one baptisme in the Christian Church Ephes 4.5 C He joyns together with baptisme the imposition of hands because as there were two orders of catechised persons so there was a double ceremony For those that were forreigners without did not come to Baptisme before they had made a confession of their faith In them therefore catechising was wont to go before Baptisme But as for the children of beleevers because they were adopted from the wombe and by the right of the promise did appertain to the body of the Church they were baptized when Infants But being past infantie after they were instructed in the faith they offered themselves also to catechising which in these followed baptisme But another symbol or signe was applyed to these namely the imposition of hands A. M. of which there was a various use H. For by imposition of hands sometimes Christ sometimes the Apostles cured the sick Luk. 4.10 Mar. 16.18 Sometimes by imposition of hands the holy Ghost was conferred Act. 8.17 B. Also the hands of the Pastors were imposed upon those to whom and to whose faithfulnesse was committed the care of the Church or the Ministerie of the Word 1 Tim. 5.21 C Imposition of hands also was a certain solemn right or manner of praying of which the Apostle here speaks Hebr. 6.2 For by this symbol or signe of laying on of hands they would approve that profession of faith which young youth coming out of childhood did make Therefore this place alone abundantly testifies that the originall of imposition of hands came down from the Apostles Thus far these learned mens words reasons and Scripture-proof See more in Marlo on 1 Tim. 5.21 But we may not omit Mr. Cotton because he is in such credit with Mr. Tombes that he oft respectively quotes him as for himself in his Exercit. Mr. Cottons words on Hebr. 6.2 are these Way of Câ—u of N.E. Chap. 2. p. 27. of 1 edit There be that conceive that not improbable that in ancient time the children baptized in the Church were not received to the Lords Supper nor into the full fruition of all Church-liberties untill that they being grown up to yeers did publickly before the Church professe their faith and ratifie the covenant made for them in baptisme and so were confirmed as they call it in their Church estate which was not done without imposition of hands which some judicious Divines have conceived to be one cause why imposition of hands is reckoned as one of the six principles of the foundation of Christian Religion Hebr. 6.2 For it could not be a principle of the foundation of Christian faith it must therefore be a principle of the foundation of Church estate and order Now then if all the members of the Church were anciently confirmed in the ful fruition of the Church estate by imposition of hands then there were none of the members of the Church but had received imposition of hands much more the Ruling-elders who over and above the former were ordained to their publick office by imposition of hands and so having received imposition of hands themselves they might more freely lay hands on others So Mr. Cotton By all this it is clear that this imposition of hands by Christ on these little children in the texts afore quoted Matth. 17. Mar. 10. Luk. 18. according to the order set down by the Apostle Hebr. 6.2 did succeed and follow after their baptisme as supposed and granted to be baptised afore Obj. But say the Anabaptists it is in the text of such is the kingdom of heaven that is of men like infants Answ 1. We heard afore how Mr. Beza renders it of these and the like as relating to little children And his grave and learned pious judgement is as much to be credited as any Anabaptist in saying it is so or so 2 The Greek Authors do oft take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such for hoc this Bud. Const Plaet 3 If rendred such it s farre more naturall and not so farre fetcht to say of such little children of whom the story is then of such men But fourthly come to reason Christ Mar. 10.16 speaks of them whom he took up in his arms Pass Vessius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an arm Luk. 2.28 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ulna per epenthesin literarum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But he took up not the men but the little children into his arms and laid his hands upon them and blessed them therefore of them he spake and shewed that heaven and the blessing of heaven belonged to them 5 That by discourse upon this v. 15. Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little childe shall not enter therein is also for us For the thing and the comparison must agree in the main scope but men must as little children receive the kingdom of God Therefore little children are in a
and alleadgeth them If it be not so much a necessity as to have witnesses also in the danger The Lord saith indeed forbid them not to come unto me let them come therefore when they grow up to youth c. So Tertullian in the aforesaid book concerning baptisme Upon which place Vossius * Thes Theolog Hist de Paedob saith thus We think that nothing is here denyed but onely the necessity of baptisme when there is no danger of death for that 's the meaning of those words What necessity if there be not so much necessity as c. but in no case did he deny that Infants might be baptized yea and if there be danger least afterwards they be not baptized its plain they ought to be baptized which we do not obscurely discern by that which Tertullian writeth in his booke of the soul and the 39. and 40. chapter and then recited the words which before we quoted and translated to you Thus Vossius Give us but leave to give you learned and pious Iunius his note too on this place of Tertullian and we shall have done with Tertullian The words of Iunius are these Tria hic distinctè proponit Auctor Notae Franc. Junii ad Tertul de Baptis c. that is The Author propunds here three things distinctly which being rightly understood the place is most holy 1. The CONDITION of persons to be baptized is that they be in Covenant whether they be of age or little children 2. DISPOSITION is when they beleeve and obey the Gospell and make profession 3. They are not accounted to be OF AGE which are in covenant for the little children of Godly men are in Covenant but who so professe the faith Therefore when he saith ESPECIALLY CONCERNING LITTLE CHILDREN that must needs be understood of the children of strangers or Forraigners not of the children of those that are in Covenant and so domestick or of the family of the Church as is confirmed by the following Aetiologie or GIVING THE CAVSE namely what necessity is there if there be not so much necessity as for witnesses or God-fathers and God-mothers c. For we know that the first invention of witnesses was for the children whose parents could not be accounted members of the Church Mr T. his objections after against Tertul are prevented here and further answered in the 14 chap. of our Animadversions at the word CYPRIAN in the Margin That this was the mind of these Authours Justin Martyr Irenaeus and Tertullian in this age next after the Apostles will further appear by the consent of the most approved Ancients that followed them in the next succeeding ages which we have thought most proper to defer to the next chapter of our Animadversions upon Mr T. his fifth Argument CHAP. XIIII THE fifth Argument That which in succeeding Ages in which it was in use Exercitat Argu. 4. § 17. The Argument from the wrong originall of Infant-Baptism confirmed against it was in force 1 as a Tradition not written 2 Out of imitation of Jewish Circumcision 3 Without universall practise 4 Together with the error of giving Infants the Lords supper and many other humane inventions under the name of Apostolicall traditions That is deservedly doubtfull But in some ages after the first from the Apostles the tenet and practise of Infant-Baptisme was in use 1 as a tradition not written as appears from Origen Hom. on Rom. 6. Of which book neverthelesse let me add the censure of Erasmus on the Homilies of Origen upon Leviticus But he that reads this work and the enarration of the Epistle to the Romans is uncertain whether he read Origen or Ruffinus And the testimony fetched from these books for Infant-Baptisme is so much the more to be suspected because Augustine Hierom c. rely so far as yet is manifest to me on no other testimony then of Cyprian and his fellow-Bishops in the Councell of which mention is made Epist 59. ad Fidum Secondly out of imitation of Jewish Circumcision as the doubt of Fidus in the 59. Epistle of Cyprian to Fidus intimates though there were also other reasons of Infant-baptisme as the opinion of the necessity of Baptisme to salvation and the greedinesse to increase the number of Christians and perhaps the imitation of heathenish lustration of little ones and some other Thirdly without universall practise for it is manifest that Constantine although borne of Helena his mother a Christian was not baptized till aged as Eusebius in the life of Constantine written by him The same is manifest from the booke of Confessions of Augustine concerning Augustine himselfe whose mother Monica was a Christian The things which may be drawne out of Theodoret Augustine and others concerning Theodosius Alipius Adeodatus and many others although my bookes and notes out of them are wanting to me by reason of the injury of the times unlesse I be deceived will evince that though in the Churches of those times little ones were baptized yet many were not baptized whose baptisme its likely the Church would sooner have dispatched if the opinion of Baptisme that now obtains had then obtained Fourthly together with the error of giving the Lords supper to Infants as is manifest out of the booke of Cyprian de lapsis and others And that many other Inventions of men under the name of Apostolicall tradition out of a wrong likeing of Judaism did then prevail as the Paschall solemnity c. is so obvious to him that reades Fathers and Ecclesiasticall Writers that no man will need proof Ergo. And in very deed as of old because the right of Infant-Baptisme seemed to be of so great moment against the Pelagian heresie and for the authority of the Councell under Cyprian the Councell of Milevis Augustine Hierom and others rather then for any solid argument out of Scripture in former ages Infant-baptisme prevailed so in this last age some moderne men seeme to imbrace this tenet of Infant-Baptisme out of horror of mind least they should go headlong into the pernicious errours of former Anabaptists and their madde furies or least they should seeme to desert the leading-men of the reformed Churches or move troubles in the Church rather then from perspicuous foundation in the Scriptures which they will thinke that I have not said as one that dreames who shall read what Robert Lord Brooke hath in the end of his Treatise concerning Episcopacy Daniel Rogers in his Treatise of Baptisme and others elsewhere We Answer Animadver 1. To the major Take away the captain or leading particular to wit A tradition not written and all the souldiary of the other particulars with the great Rear to wit Many other humane inventions are not strong enough to make a true major proposition For what if according to Mr T. his ad particular of Iewish that Baptisme be an imitation of the Iewish passing through the red sea 1 Cor. 10.1 c. And the Lords Supper an imitation of the
afford some friendly proofes by consequence of iâ— Fourthly the holinesse of the child externall and visible is from their parents who are or ought to be catechized conâ—â—â—tors pâ—nitenâ— and Protestants in trueth which priviledge only open revolt disables them from therefore I say The seed being holy and belonging to the Covenant the Lord graciously admits them also to the seal of it in baptisme Howbeit here a further quaerie arises And because the Sacrament of Baptisme is here handled by us Question How it is capable 1 Pet. 3.21 not a halfe a Sacrament onely including a washing of the flesh but an entire Sacrament holding out and giving an invisible grace by out-ward meanes By what authority shall wee say an Infant may be presented to that whereof it is not capable To that I answer Answer First it 's not meete that Baptisme being the Sacrament of new birth which can be but once should destroy her owne Analogy by frequent administering therefore if but once the most comprehensive way is to do it in the Infancy when the outward admission of a member is allowed to it Secondly although the child be not capable of the grace of the Sacrament by that way whereby the growne are by hearing conceiving and beleeving yet this followes not that Infants are not capable of Sacramentall grace in and by another way Pittifull are the shifts of them that have no other way to stoppe an Anabaptists mouth save by an errour that an Infant may have faith It 's easie to distinguish between the gift conveyed and the manner of conveying it For if the former be the latter in such case will prove needlesse But if the infant be truly susceptive of the substance of Christ none can deny it the Sacrament Now to understand this marke that Infants borne of beleeving parents are of the number of those that shall be saved though dying in their Infancy none of our reformed Churches will deny It is enough therefore that such before death doe partake the benefit of Election in Christ together with the benefits of Christ in regeneration adoption redemption and glory Now that the Spirit can apply these unto such Infants is not doubted of Though the manner thereof to us be as a hidden and mysticall thing yet so it is the Spirit of Christ can as really unite the soul of an Infant to God imprint upon it the true title of a sonne and daughter by adoption and the image of God by sanctification without faith as with it Now if the grace it selfe of Bapâ—â—sme be thus given it why not Baptisme Nay I add further I see no cause to deny that even in and at and by the act of Baptisme as the necessity of the weake infant may admit the Spirit may imprint these upon the soule of the Infant Thus Master Rogers Where by his quotation of Scriptures and discussâ— of arguments you may see what he meant by Apostâ—licall tradition CHAP. XV. Exercitat Argu. 6. §. 19. The argument against Infant-baptisme from humane inventions occasioned by it confirmed THe sixth Argument followes That which hath occasioned many humane inventions partly by which Infant-baptisme it selfe may be under-propped partly the defect in the policy of the Church which in very deed is to be supplied by the lawfull use of Baptisme Of that it is deservedly doubtfull whether it be not in it selfe weake and insufficient for its proper work But the matter is so in the businesse of Infant-baptisme Ergo. The Minor is proved by instances they are 1. The use of suerties in Baptisme which is an humane invention for a shadowy supplement and I had almost said sporting of that profâ—ssion of faith which at first was made by the baptized in his owne person 2. Episcopall confirmation in which the Bishop layes hands or anoints the Catechized that Baptisme or the Baptized may be confirmed and they made capable of the Lords Supper 3. The reformed union by exâ—mination confession subscriptition of the received doctrine in the Church before the communion of the Eucharist of which Parker of Eccles policie l. 3. c. 16. 4. The Church-covenant as they call it afore the admission of members into Church-fellowship of which the New-England Elders in the little booke in English called Church-Covenant which in very deede are devised to supply the place of Baptisme for by Baptisme according to Christs institution a person is exhibited a member of Christ and the Church 1 Cor. 12.13 Gal. 3.27 Ephes 4.5 THe seventh Argument Arg. 7 § 20. The argument against Infant-baptisme from the Errors occasioned by it confirmed That which hath occasioned many errors that is deservedly doubtfull whether it be right But the practise of Infant-baptisme hath occasioned either the birth or fostering of many errors Ergo. It is proved by instances 1. That Baptisme conferres grace by the worke done 2. That Baptisme is Regeneration 3. That Infants dying are saved by the faith of their Parents faith of Sureties of the Church receiving into her lap which is to be ascribed alone to the grace of God by Christ 4. That some regenerate persons may utterly fall from grace THe eight Argument That which hath caused many abuses and faults in Discipline Arg. 8 §. 22. The argument against Infant-baptisme from many abuses caused by it confirmed and Divine worship and Conversation of men that is deservedly doubtfull But Infant-Baptisme is such Ergo. It is proved by enumeration 1. Private baptisme 2. Baptisme by women 3. Baptisme of Infants not yet brought into light 4. Baptisme of Infants of uncertaine progeny whom we call children of the earth and world 5. They are baptized in the name of the Lord who know not the Lord nor have ever consented or perhaps will consent to the confession of the name of our Lord. 6. It hath brought in the admission of ignorance and profane men into the communion of the Church and to the Lords Supper for who can deny rightly the right of the Church to the baptized 7 It perverts the order of discipline that first a man be baptized and after among the catechized 8 The Sacrament of baptisme is turned into a meer Ceremony yea into a profane meeting to feast together 9 Men forget Baptisme as if they were never baptized so that it hath the force of a carnall rite not of a spirituall Institution 10 It takes away or at least diminisheth zeale and industry in knowing the Gospel THe ninth Argument That is deservedly doubtfull Argum 9 § 22. The argument from unnecessary disputes caused by it against Infant-baptisme confirmed that yeeldeth occasion to many unnecessary disputes fostering only contention and which cannot be determined by any certain rule But the tenet or rite of Infant-baptisme is such Ergo. It is proved by instances 1 Of baptizing the Infants of Excommunicated persons 2 Of baptizing the Infants of Apostates 3 Of baptizing the Infants of such Parents as are not members in a gathered Church 4 Of