same qualifications that Mr Cotton intendeth according to Hâ—â—â—erm of Diâ—cipliâ—e Cap. â—2 Sect. 7. The word Continued is indeed added in pag 19. though not so in pag. 〈…〉 that Book but it is added in a Copulative way Continued and Confirmed wâ—ere all the parts must be taken together to make up the truth of such an Axiome Besides that the pâ—râ—ons in question do make soâ—e profession of Faith and Repentance i e. in an Initial and Educational way so as sufficeth to their continuance in the visible Church though it may not at present suffice to full Communion Mr. Cotton was farre from conceiving that such non-scandalous persons as are the Subject of our Question are to be cut off or looked upon as cut off from continuance in the Church as besides what is cited of his in the Synods Preface may appear plainly out of this very Treatise which is well called by our Brethren An Excellent Treatise of the Holiness of Church-members for pag. 3. men â—oning a distinction of Mr. Rutherâ—urds That a Church may be termed no Church no Spouse jure meritò quoad vocationem passivam in respect of bad deserving and their not answering to the Call of God on their parts and yet the same Church remain de 〈◊〉 â—or aliter quoad vocationem Det activam the Spouse and Bride of Câ—rist He saiâ—â— This Distinction I can admit if it be understood of a Church hat hath formerly answered the Call of God and submitted to the Ministry of the Gospel at least in outward propession of the fundamentals of sound Doctrine and pure Worship for such a Churâ—h though they or â—heir children may afterward degenerate and go a wherâ—ng from God in Doctrine and Worship yet God in his patience and bounty is not wont so â—con to cast off â—hem as they cast off him The next generation after 〈◊〉 â—eâ— a â—horing from Goâ— and fâ—rsâ—ck the Lord God of their fathers and served Baalim yet still the Lord accounted them his People and sent them Iudges and Prophets to restore and recover them And pag 19 20. he mentions distinctly by way of Consectary from the Proposition here cited by our Brethren two or three sorts of persons wâ—o are not to be continued in the Churchâ— though born and baptized in it viz. 1. The grosly Ignorant of the first Principles and Foundations of Religion 3. Persons notoriously Scandalous for any gross crime as Iâ—latry Adultery c. but not a word of such an intereâ—ce as our Brethren sâ—em to make viz. the discontinuance or unchurching of such a sort of persons as are the Subject of our Question And it is observable all along in that Book that he pleads not for the un-membering of any that are once in the Church yea though they came in but by a Membership received in Infancy for of such he often expresly speaks and such were the Members of those Churches he disputes upon in Answer to his Opponents but onely such as are scandalous and wicked and deserve Excommunication and he would have them also un-membered by Excommunication and not by a Self-felony onely See pag 8 15 28 32 56 57 60. Preface Renowned Parker steaking of the interpretation of those words Laying on of Hands in Heb 6.2 cites many judicious Writers whose judgement he expresseth in words to this purpose That they who were baptize in minority when they are grown up after that the Church had approved their faith by the Symbol of Imposition of Hands they were admitted Members of the Church this was according to sound Doctrine in the Primitive times as Parker saith Now we demand how they can be admitted as Members who are already as compleat and perfect Members as any in the Churâ—h But the Ancient Doctrine was That Children who were baptized in minority after they shall come to proâ—ess their faith so as to be accepted of the Church may be admitted as Members Therefore according to the Ancient Doctrine such Children are not as compleat and perfect Members as any in the Church Answ. Whether the words Tanquam membra Admittehantur be Parkers own words or Calvins for he speaks as if he cited only Calvins words yet we â—inde not those expressions used by Calvin either on Heb. 6.2 or in his Institutions De Confirmatione though in both places is the substance of the thing which Parker alledgeth from him the matter is not great It is manifest from the whole discourse that Parker is there speaking of such as are admitted to full communion as we call it If he there used the term Members for Persons admitted to the Lords Table and to all Church-priviledges it is no harder phrase then hath been used in this Country for many years yet that argues not that we do or that Parker did think Children to be no members before It is observed of the Ancients that they spâ—ke more securely before the Rise of Pelagius men are less curious in Expression when they speak about Points of which no Controversie is moved and wherein their judgements are otherwise sufficiently known As what is more abudantly and universâ—lly agreed on among all our Divines then this that The Children of Believers are Members of the Church or a part of it Parker within six Lines of the place cited calls them in Ecclesiâ nati Born in the Church and opposeth them to Extranei i. e. to such as are without Dr. Ames gives it as the Doctrine of the Protestants The Infants of the faithful unless they were to be accounted Members of the Church they cuâ—â— not to be baptiâ—ed Vrsin and Pareus say Omnes iique soli c. All and onely thâ—â—e are to be baptized by Christs Command who are his Disciples Mat. 28.19 i. e. those that are and one to be accounted Members of the visible Church whether they be adult persons professing Faith and Repentance or Infants born in the Church Again The Infants of Christians do as well as the adult belong to the Covenant and Church of God and are therefore to be baptized because the whole Church ought to be baptized C. techet Explicat pag. 367. This truth is joyntly 〈…〉 Protestant aâ—d Reformed Churches as appears in the Harmony of their Confessions The Children of tâ—e faithful are Gods peculiar people and in the Church of God 〈…〉 pag 397. Reckoned in the number of Gods people Bohemian 〈◊〉 pag. 399. God doth together with the Parents account their posterity also to be of the Church Fâ—â—nc C. â—â—mon pâ—g 401. They condemn the Anabaptists who hold tha◠〈◊〉 â—e no◠〈◊〉 the Church â—f God Confession of Auspurg pag. 404. Infants belong to the Covenant anâ— Church of God as well as the adult saith the Palâ—tinate Catechism Queâ—â— â—4 Now â—â—is being so that it is the manifest Doctrine of all our Divines that Children are Meâ—bers â—f the Church and neither did they imagine that when â—dâ—lt they drop â—ff by a Self â—â—lony or we know not how For
pag. 17. Now it 's evident that even in the Apostles times sundry were baptized that had not so received the holy Ghost Acts 8 15 16 17. 19 2 6. But there are sundry further Evidences at hand were there room here to insort them which show that in those first Ages of the Church there were many within the Church 〈◊〉 were debarred from the Lords Supper whâ— yet had their Children baptized In after 〈◊〉 how large Baptism was may easily be gathered But that there was though tâ—o much lâ—xness some more restraint in the Lords Supper appears by the Canonists old Verse Ebrius infamiâ— erroneus atque Furentes Cum pueris Domin non debent sumere corpus As for the times since the Reformation it is most evident that Godly Reforming Divines have in their Doctrine unanimously taught and in their Practice many 〈◊〉 then endeavoured a strict Selection of those that should be admitted to the Lords Supper when yet they have been 〈◊〉 large in poiâ—â— of Baptism and they still â—o upon this Principle that Not all Christians nor aâ— baptized and generaâ—â—y-professing Christians but onely such as are able or may be reputed able and careful to examine themselves and discern the Lords Body are to be admitted to the Lords Supper But they reckon that All Christians aâ— that are in their account within the visible Church are to have their Children baptized Be it that in Practice they were many of them too lax and large in both the Sacraments chiefly through want of a due and effectual use of Discipline by defect whereof many were sinfully tolerated in the Church who should have been cast out and cut off and many suffered to come to the Lords Table who should have been debarred and suspended of which themselves do 〈◊〉 sadly complain Yet it shews thus much which is that we aim at that they held a different Latitude of the two Sacraments as to the Subjects thereof even in the very sense of our Question denying the Lords Supper to many Parents whose Children yet they scrupled not to baptize This goes for currant among all our great Divines as a granted Principle whereof many large and full Testimonies might easily be produced Calvin in his Geneva-cateâ—hism to that Question Whether Pasters may give the Sacraments to all Answers â—uod ad Baptisâ—um pertinet quia non nisi Insantibus 〈◊〉 confertur dâ—screâ—â—o â—â—cuâ—â—non habet in Canâ—â—ero tavere dehet Minister ne cui ipsam porrigat quem indignum esse palà m constet If Calvin would Baptize all Children born among them without difference looking upon them as born within the visible Church and yet not give the Lords Supper to all then he would Baptize some Children whose Parents he would not adâ—it to the Lords Supper Luâ—oâ— Crâ—â—ius describing the Subjects of Baptism saith Infantes verò omnes c. All such â—nfants as are either born of Christian Parents or brought into the society of Christians are to be Baptized But of the Lords â—upper Sâ—lt quidem Christians c. Onely Christians are to be admitted to the Holy Supper yet not promisâ—uâ—usty all Christians but onely those who both can and will examine themselves rightly discern the Lords Body and celebrate this Sacrament unto a Commemoration of the Deaâ—h of Chirst but there are many in the Christian Church that either cannot or will not â—o those things and these are not to be admitted 〈◊〉 touching the Lords Supper saith Est Sacramentum c. It is a Sacrament appointed for such in the Christian Church as are already baptized and Adult and do examine themselves And in another place unto this Question To whom is the Lords Supper to be given He answers To all the Faithful Members of the Church who can examine themselves and are instructed in the Ministery of Faith and can 〈◊〉 forth the Lords Death For unto this Mystery there is required examination of ones self and Annunciation of the Lords Death And therefore it is not to be given to Vnbelievers not to Infants not to distracted persons not to those that are ignorant of the mysteries not to the impenitent not to those that are by the orderly judgement of the Church excommunicate not to such as are polluted either with â—anifest errours or with any notorious wickedness until they have first satisfied the Church and gâ—ve Testimony of their Repentance Compare herewith his Latitude for Baptism exoresly grantiâ—g that so sundry of thosâ— sorts to whom he denies the Lords Supper â—ezâ— concerning the Question who are to be Baptized saith All that are comprehended within the Tables of the Covenant c. But to that Question Would you admit all sorts to the Lorâ—s Supper He Anâ—wereth with great zeâ—l for 〈◊〉 and care therein and among other expreâ—â—â—ons Thâ—se saith he whose 〈◊〉 age sheweth them not to be of ability to examine themselves 〈…〉 not as unworthy but as not yet fit â—ut of the adult no one is to be 〈◊〉 except he have one may or other so given account of his Faith at that the Paster may probably gather not onely that he was born in the Church but also that he is indeed a Christian Pelanius touching the Subjects of the Lords Supper saith Vnto the Lords Supper maybe admitted onely Christians 〈◊〉 Baptized and adult and such as can examine their 〈◊〉 with thank 〈…〉 remember Christ and shew forth his death But of Baptism All that are in Covenant with God Infants born of Christian Parents are to be baptized Geâ—kâ—r in his Câ—â—mon Places aâ—â—erts â—hat Soli Christiani c. Onely Christians i. e. such as embrace the Doctrine of Christ as have received the Sacrament of baptism and are implanted into the Christian Church yet not 〈◊〉 Christians are to be admiâ—â—ed to the holy Supper but according to Paulâ—s Rule these onely 〈◊〉 examine themselves 〈◊〉 the Lorâ—s Body aâ—â— shew â—â—rib the Lords 〈◊〉 1 Cor 11.26 28 29. All 〈◊〉 therefore are excluded who either will not 〈…〉 examine themselves Buâ— he extends Baptism to all Children born of one or both Christian Parents oâ— that come into the power of such The like may be observed in the Confessions of the Reformed Churches when as they declare for a special selection of those whom they admit to the Lords Supperâ— see the Confeâ—â—â—â—â— of Bohemia Harmony of confess Pag. 421. of Belgia Pag. 432. of Ausâ—â—ge Pag. 438 440. or Saxony p. 447 44â— â—nd the confession of Scotland in the end of that Harmony Pag. 24. comparing this with the deep silence of them â—ll touching any such Selectioâ— in point of Baptismâ— as to the Children that are born among them and it is knoâ—n to be their ordinary practice to Baptize many Children whose Parents they would not admit to the Lords Supper All which with many more Testimonies that might be alledged do abundantly shew it to have been the concurrent judgement of Protestant Divines that
alone gives Right for God hath made it one Commandment of four to provide for the manner of his Worship requiring that all his holy Ordinances be attended in a Solemn Humble Reverent and Profitable manner and it cannot be denyed to be meet and needful that persons should both know and own the Covenant-state they are in and the state of subjection to Christs Government which the Covenant placeth them in especially when they partake of such a fruit of the Covenant as Baptism for their Children is that they should do Covenant-duties when they come for Covenant priviledges that they should both seek and attend the Lords holy Ordinance though it be their Right never so much in Humility and Fear and it being one Branch of the Covenant that they give up their Children to the Lord and do promise to take care for their Christian Education it must needs be suitable that they be minded of it when they present them to Baptism and the more explicitely they do so promise it is the better Hence all Reformed Churches do in their Directories and Practices require Professions and Promises of Parents or those that present the Childe to Baptism and appoint a solemn manner of Administration and stand upon it as a needful duty Though they unanimously own and grant that the Childe hath a full and clear Right to Baptism by its being born within the visible Church See English Leiturgie of the administration of Baptism Directory pag. 31. Late Petition for Peace pag. 61 c. Zepperi Polit. Ecces pag 128. pag. 147 150. Alasco pag. 121 137. Ratio Discipl Bohem. pag 43. Hence also no man will doubt but that it is a comfortable and desireable thing that the Parent do address himself in the most solemn serious and spiritual manner to draw nig◠to God upon such an occasion as the Baptizing of a Childe by humbling himself before God for all neglects and Breaches of his Covenant by taking hold of the incouraging promises of Grace in Christ in reference unto the Children of the Covenant and by pouring out earnest Prayer to God for his Childe and for an heart to do the duty of a Christian Parent toward his Childe as doth become him c. And such things as these Parents may and ought to be stirred up unto in the Ministry of the Word as their duty But still we must distinguish between what belongs to the manner of Administration or to the better and more comfortable attendance thereof and between what is essentially requisite to give right and title to the Ordinance before the Church This latter meer Membership or Membership alone doth A state of Membership in the visible Church is that unto which the right of Baptism is annexed as not onely the Synod but the Scripture teacheth And so 2. The Assertion before-mentioned viz. That it is not meer Membership but qualified Membership that gives right to Baptism in the sense above given is also Antiscriptural 1. Because it directly overthroweth Infant-baptism which the Scripture establisheth for what have Infants more then Membership or Federal holiness or Covenant-interest to give them right to Baptism i. e. What have they more then this that they are regularly by the Rules of Gods Word and his Institution therein within the visible Church If this will not suffice but there must be some other qualifications besides and superadded unto this what shall become of them For our parts we know no stronger Argument for Infants-baptism then that Church members or Foederati are to be baptized the Infants of the Faithful are Church-members or Foederati Ergo. But if the foresaid Assertion hold this Argument fails and falls short for now Church-membership or to be in Covenant or Federal holiness will not serve the turn but there must be more then this to give right to Baptism How the sinews of the strongest Arguments of the Synod for Enlargement of Baptism will fare we know not but sure we are that this cuts in sunder the sinews of the strongest Arguments for Infant-baptism which must fall if this stand But fall it never will through Grace while the Lords Appointment in the Covenant of Abraham stands viz. to have the Initiating Seal run parallel with the Covenant Gen. 17. or Christs Commission Matth. 28.19 viz. to Baptize all Disciples or all Members of the visible Church under the New Testament Let this Assertion therefore fall which makes the extent of the Initiatory Seal shorter then the Covenant and denies Baptism to run parallel with Church-membership under the Gospel Hence 2. It contradicts that which the Harmony of Scripture and all Orthodox Divines acknowledge for a Principle viz. That the whole visible Church i. e. now under the New Testament ought to be baptized or that all Church members are Subjects of Baptism for if not meer Membership or Membership alone but qualified Membership gives right to Baptism then not all Members but some onely viz. those that be so and so qualified are to be baptized If Baptism do not belong to meer Membership or to a Member as such then not to all Members as à quatenus ad omne so à non quatenus ad non omne valet consequentiae This denies not onely in the Fifth but the First Proposition of the late Synod which yet the Antisynodalia pag. 17. seem to consent unto But let the Arguments that are given from Scripture to confirm that First Proposition be duely weighed and they will be found to be of greater weight then to be shaken by this Assertion Now for the Proof of this Assertion viz. Because John 's Baptism which was Christian Baptism might not be applied to some who were standing Members of the visible Church because they were not qualified with Repentance Luke 3.8 7.30 Therefore Christian Baptism is not to be applied unto such as stand Members in the visible Church if they be not qualified with fruits of Repentance Answ. Let this be answered with reference to Infant-baptism which lies upon our Brethren to do as well as on us seeing they above declared Antipoedobaptism to be a sinful Opinion and do profess to hold and maintain the baptizing of Infants though indeed the Reader could not gather so much from these words Christian Baptism is not to be applied unto such 〈◊〉 stand Members in the visible Church if they be not qualified with fruits of Repentance This seems directly to gainsay Infant-baptism for Infants do indeed stand Members of the visible Church but how do they or can they shew that they are qualified with fruits of Repentance for it seems that neither is Repentance it self sufficient without Fruits of Repentance But we are to suppose our Brethren do not intend to oppose Infant-baptism and therefore that their meaning is not to require these fruits of Repentance or qualifications superadded to Membership of the Children or person◠to be baptized but of their Parents though it be not so expressed But let this Argument
Anabaptist's onely reason why they dislike Infant baptism is Because they fancy to themselves that the Church would be more pure if we baptized none but the adult and such as hold forth evidences of the Spirit and so they think but a few would have place in Churches But by this means doubtless it would come to pass that many of Christs Sheep would be neglected as Goats neither would all Parents be so careful as they think in educating their Children unto piety And yet this humane thought which savours of too much esteem of our own works doth so possess them that they bring all to this and turn off all that can be said and hereby they run themselves into very great errours I called it an humane thought for no Scripture doth command such a curious circumspection lest any Goats should be received into the Church The Apostles often baptized persons with whom they had scarce had an hours speech concerning Christ because according to the Parable of the Gospel they would bring in all they met with to the Marriage Mat. 22.10 For by Baptism they only took them into the School of Piety and Trained-hand of Christians and they were wont then to cast them out again when it was evidently enough perceived that to labour in teaching them was in vain Ibid. fol. 53. As for Parker his speaking mainly against the admitting or tolerating of Manifestarii peccatores The notoriously wicked and pleading to have them debarred from the Lords Table or cast out by the use of Discipline His frequent approbation of the Principles of the Reformed Churches And in special his approving of their admitting Members not before of their Body upon such like qualifications as are contained in the Synods fifth Proposition Also his earnest and peremptory rejecting the Opinions and Principles of the Anabaptists and Separatists and declaring himself and the Non-Conformists whose Cause he acted to be farre from them These and such like do clearly shew that Worthy man to be no Opponent of such an extent of Baptism as is contained in the Conclusions of the Synod But here our Brethren will needs take notice that the judgment of that worthy and for ever famous Mr. Cotton was as theirs is because he hath these words in Holiness of Church-members pag. 93 I conceive under favour more positive fruits of Regeneration are required in the Church-members of the New Testament then of the Old Ans. The Reader will take notice of what hath been before said and cited to shew Mr. Cottons judgement in the Points controverted between our Brethren and the Synod and will easily thereby judge whether Mr. Cottons judgement was as theirs is but It is strange they should make such a Collection from what is here set down Mr. Cotton might say those words that are here expressed and yet his judgement be farre enough from being as theirs is in any of the Points that are controverted for we shall not gainsay this Conception of Mr. Cottons That more positive fruits of Regeneration are required in the Church members of the New Testament then of the Old but concur with it in two respects or for two causes 1. Because the Light now is greater and clearer then it was then and where more is given more is required Luke 12.48 2. Because the Discipline appointed under the Old Testament was mostly Ceremonial Ames Medul lib. 1. c. 38. Thes. 41. And whether Excommunication for Moral evils was then used at least out of the National Church is by some doubted As also whether persons were debarred from the holy things simply for Moral evils if they were ceremonially clean as Mr. Cotton in the place here alledged saith It is true that it is a question whether sins very scandalous did keep men ceremonially clean from the Temple and Sacrifices But under the New Testament we have a plain and undoubted Rule for the Censure of Excommunication for Moral evils persisted in hence persons might haply run further into Moral evils and so further off from the fruits of Regeneration then and yet not be put out of the Church yea haply not be debarred from the holy things then they can do now But what is all this to the matter in hand for still it is not secret irregeneration nor the bare want of such and such positive fruits of Regeneration without positive and palpable â—ruits of Irregeneration that will according to any Rule God hath given us put any man out of the Church when he is once in Nay Mr. Cotton in the very place here cited expresly saith that Irregeneration alone will not keep a man out His words are these Neither amongst us doth Irregeneration alone keep any from Church-fellowship with us not Irregeneration alone I say unles it be accompanied with such fruits as are openly scandalous and do convincingly manifest Irregeneration Moreover still the parallel between the Church of the Old and of the New Testament stands and holds in this that when a person is once by Gods appointment taken into the visible Church whether in adult age or in infancy it comes all to one for that he continues in it and doth not lose his Membership till by some Rule or Appointment of God in his Word he be cut off or cast out What the particular Rules and wayes of cutting off were in the Old Testament we need not here dispute but to be sure the plain Rule in the New Testament for the cutting off of particular persons is by the Censure of Excommunication for Moral evils But while we grant that in some respects more positive fruits in regard of degree might be required in the Old Testament let none so understand it as if Regeneration was not required as all unto the Constitution and Continuation of the visible Church in the Old Testament but that a meer carnal succession was then allowed of without regard to Regeneration For they stoâ—d by Faith and were brâ—ken off by Vnbelief as well as we Rom. 11. Circumcision was a Seal of the Righteâ—usness of faith as well as Baptism Faith and Repentance do not now more constitute the Covenant of God then it did in the time of Abraham who was the Father of the Faithful saith Dr. Ames Yea our brethren do in their Antisynodalia pag. 17. expresly say That the Covenant made with Abraham and the Circumcision of his seed was appointed upon the same terms that Baptism was i. e. that he should walk with God by Faith and Obedience And it is observeable that no where is Regeneration and the fruits thereof required of Gods Covenant people in stricter and fuller terms then in the Old Testament Gen. 17.1 Deut. 10.12 26.16 17. 1 Kings 8.23 Psal. 103.17 18. Isa. 56.4 6. And yet the Lord who is the best interpreter of his own Rules continued them in the Church and accounted them among the number of his holy people till palpallâ— and incorrigible fruits of Irregeneration were found