been unbelievers Had St. Paul taught a contrary Doctrine or any other of the Apostles viz. That the Children of Christian Parents had no more right to Baptismal Initiation than those of Heathen Idolaters it would certainly have offended them more than all they preached against Circumcision and keeping the Ceremonial Law Page the 17. He hath these Words The nearer you are to the Truth the further off you are from the Papists and the further off from the Truth the nearer to them Which is so false that 't is not in the least deserving a confutation since they hold most if not all the fundamental Articles of Faith how e're they may endanger the Foundation by their building Hay and Stubble thereon But it signifies nothing it seems to retort upon them for symbolizing with the Papists tho' in points diametrically opposite to the Protestant Religion it don't affect them as he gives us to understand in the Words just before neither will they be concern'd to take notice of any such charge At this rate they themselves may fall into the grossest Principles of Popery and yet be nearer the Truth and it must pass for sound Protestant Doctrine And no reflection must be made as if they had a Prerogative peculiar to their Sect that whatsoever opinion they espouse they are so infallible in their Tenets though it be never so Erroneous and Popish it immediately commenceth Orthodox To my saying and proving that Antiquity is on our side instead of answering the Authorities he says Page 23. that 't is my great Mistake and wonders how I could assert such a thing since they can go back as far as John and Christ and his Apostles Now I must and do acknowledge that no Argument or Antiquity is equal to the Scriptures when the Interpretations are not doubtful yet when they are so I appeal to any sober Dissenter of whatsoever Sect or Party whether the harmonious Practice of the ancient Churches and the undivided consent of Apostolical Fathers be not the most sure and authentick Interpreters that can be betwixt Men and Men they thought Infant Baptism lawful and valid and no abuse of the Ordinance of Baptism And let any modest or moderate Man judge whether it be likely that those famous Saints and Martyrs so near the Apostles times should fall into such a delusion as as to conspire in the Doctrine and practice of a Mock-Baptism and of making multitudes of supposititious Christians and Churches Or whether it be not more probable that a little Sect repugnant to all the Ancient as well as modern Churches should be in an Error The very Scriptures whose sufficiency we admire as well as they cannot be proved to be the Word of God without Tradition and though they are sufficient where they are understood to determine any Controversie yet the right Understanding and Interpretation of them in many Points the practice of the Church is as requisite as the practice of the Court is to understand the Book of the Law I may further observe to them that they themselves cannot defend according to their own Postulatum the baptizing of such grown Persons as were born and bred in the Church from the Scripture for that the very Institution there of Baptism hath a special regard to Proselytes who from Judaisme or Gentilisme were coming over to the Christian Faith Neither can they produce a Precedent of such an one baptized in the New Testament but all the baptized Persons we read of in it were Jews or Gentiles of an expiring or false Religion newly converted and therefore according to their own demands if to justifie their own practice they must produce such a particular Distinct Precept or Example they cannot defend themselves against the Quakers who for this and other Reasons have quite laid aside Baptism nor against the opinion of the Socinians who use this very way of Argumentation for the Non-necessity of Water-Baptism Though they think good in their present Circumstances to practise it * Vid. Johannis Volkelii Misnici de verà Religione Lib. 6. Cap. 14. de Aqua-Baptismo ab Apostolis Usurpato pag. 663. In the same Page he saith 't is strange reasoning to Argue that 't was not likely that St. Paul was dipt when he was baptized seeing he was Sick and Weak having fasted three Days c. Methinks he should rather have said strong reasoning being it would be so unsuitable to the easiness of Christ's Yoak who will have Mercy and not Sacrifice Ay but saith this Answerer he being commanded to be baptized closed with the Command and did not consult with Flesh and Blood Very good it would ill become him to dispute God's Commandment but was the manner prescribed That it must be by dipping the whole Body under Water or plunging it as they do with their Cloaths on which would be rather a baptizing of Garments than of Bodies nothing of this appears All Circumstances agree that he was not so baptized Such a penance to St. Paul in his Condition had perhaps been more Unsupportable than Circumcision and more dangerous than whatever the Ceremonial Law required to those therefore who are such stubborn Assertors of the Doctrine of dipping that of St. Peter may be well applyed Why tempt ye God to put such a Yoak on the Necks of Christians that are not able to bear it And let them fear who submit thereto that God say not unto them at last who hath required this at your Hands What he saith to the Instance of the Goaler is in short this If they had not gone forth out of his House how could he say when he had brought them into his House As if the Keeper had not or might not have an Apartment in the Prison peculiar to himself and distinct from that of the Malefactors He is again with my strange reasoning Page 24. about the manner of Philip's baptizing of the Eunuch It seems 't was too difficult for him to Answer to any purpose and therefore he bids me to leave off such Carnal Reasonings But what doth he seem to say to it he endeavours to shew that Philip and the Eunuch's meeting could not be accidental as I had observed for this very Reason Because it was eminently Providential which argues that he is so very Simple and Ignorant that he understands not what accidental Means or that he most erroneously thinks that some things may happen or fall out without the Divine Prescience and in which the Providence of God is not concern'd He hath a mere Figment of his own Invention though he don't apply it which would argue that their Meeting was not altogether accidental but that Philip at least had some previous Knowledge thereof for he says Act. 8.26 The Angel of the Lord bids him arise and go to meet him When as there is no such thing in the Text. And therefore he may justly fear lest that Curse he more than once causelesly alludes to Page 22. as of so tremendous and
and made a sign of that Administration and Covenant in which he had to do Wherefore if the Law ceased Circumcision could not continue seeing whosoever was circumcised became a Debtor to keep the whole Law and so it would infer as if Christ were not come in the Flesh Nor can the abrogation or cessation of Circumcision be understood to be any diminution to the Promises forasmuch as it was applied to the Legal Covenant out of a gracious Consideration as Doctor Burthog well observes not in the derogation of the Promises or of any Priviledges or Duties arising from thence but in confirmation of them God taking the token of the Covenant of Promise and putting it upon the Legal Covenant shews he had the Covenant of Promise still in remembrance for doing so he could never look on or so much as think on the Law but he must also remember the Promise the sign and memorial of the Promise being thus annexed and put to the Law So that here is an express command for baptizing Infants or little ones tho' not in the very term Baptism yet under this general Notion as 't is now the oken of the Covenant for God's Covenant with Abraham still continues 't is an everlasting Covenant * Gen. 17.7 in which blessedness was promised in and thro' Christ the promised Seed and by virtue whereof the blessing of Abraham or the Promise made to that Patriarch in like manner came on the Gentiles as the Apostle asserts Gal. 3.14 therefore 't is said the Gospel was preached to Abraham †Ib. v. 8. and as it was long before the Law and not disannull'd by the coming of the Law so 't was to endure till the Seed should come to whom the Promise was made and consequently to the end of the World because Christ came to establish the Covenant made to the Fathers ‖ Rom. 15.8 Now if the Covenant be the same the Promises of it must needs be continued in the same Tenure in which they were at first made and run in the same latitude and extent taking in Children with their Parents unless God himself had made any alteration or restriction or passed any Act of Exclusion But 't is remarkable the Apostle doth not say the Promise was but is * Act. 2.39 And the Grace of the Gospel is now more ample than before under the Law being then in its ordinary Dispensation appropriated to the Jews they were God's Favourites to whom his Grace in Christ was manifested but now it reacheth to the Gentiles also having appeared to all Men to all sorts and ages Surely therefore Infants being in Covenant then are not to be excluded now which if they be let it be shew'd how and when they were ejected How this Magna Charta came to be forfeited How they who were once Members of the mystical Body came to be cut off The Common Wealth indeed of Israel is at an End and the Scepter is departed from Judah but the Olive-tree the Church continues tho' under a different Administration the Partition-wall is broken down but the very Church is not destroyed And for this see and consult Rom. 11. where the Apostle compares the Jews to an Olive-tree and the rejecting of them for a season to the lopping off its natural Branches as Branches which bore no Fruit and the calling of the Gentiles he resembles to the grafting upon that old Stock which growing again a-fresh makes up one entire Olive-tree whose Root and Branches are nourished by the same Sap which Similitude plainly intimates that Jews and Christians make up but one Universal Church of which our Lord Jesus is the Head and that Faith in him is the Sap which gives Life and Nourishment to it the consequence whereof is this that the same Spiritual Priviledges which belonged to the Children of the Jews do belong to the Children of Christians and that if the former were to be initiated into the Church by Circumcision so are the latter by Baptism for being of the same Church and within the same Covenant they should receive a-like the Seal thereof which tho' now changed from Circumcision to Baptism yet the Church and Covenant is the same still and therefore Church-membership is as extensive and comprehends Infants under the Gospel as it did once under the Law and unless a Law can be shew'd which confines Infants Church-membership to the Jewish-State and excludes them the Christian there is no reason why we should be frighten'd from our laudable Practice of initiating Infants into the Christian Church What saith our Saviour Joh. 3.5 If one be not Born again of Water and the holy Ghost he cannot inherit the Kingdom of God Where we see not only the unregenerate are excluded Heaven but as the Text is interpreted * Nisi enim renatus fuerit ex aquâ spiritu Sancto non potest introire in regnum dei utique nullum excipit non Infantem non aliquâ praeventum necessitate D. Abros de Abrah Patriarch l. 2. c. 11. vid. etiam de voc Gent. l. 2. c. 8. D. Aug. l. 10. de Gen. ad literam c. 14. We hold says Bishop Andrews the same necessity of Baptism that the Fathers did hold which is Viâ ordinariâ yet non alligando gratiam dei ad media no more than the Schoolmen do Bishop Andrew 's Answer to Peron p. 12. by some even the unbaptized with respect to the ordinary means of Salvation and so far forth as the omission of an instituted Rite or positive Duty may be said to do so now forasmuch as we cannot be too sure but that this may be the true sense of the Place and the mind of our blessed Saviour and seeing he speaks it indefinitely we cannot know for certain but he had reference to unbaptized Infants as well as others therefore unless God had plainly declared his Mind against the baptizing of such and expresly excluded them from that Ordinance how can we chuse out of mere compassion and zeal for their Salvation but administer it to them Though then there be some so prepossest with prejudice that they cannot so earnestly believe with our Church the interest Children have in Baptism yet since their not so believing cannot alter the Infant 's Case neither can they be so sure but as it hath been said they may be comprehended in that of St. John according to the aforesaid Interpretation therefore upon that other principle exprest by our Church in the same Paragraph * Vid. Office for publick Baptism in the exposition upon the Gospel they should look upon it as a charitable Work to bring such to Baptism But to return to the Argument and to illustrate it and render it more convincing suppose there were an Act of Parliament wherein certain civil Priviledges are granted to all English Subjects and their Children without any limitation of time for their continuance and afterwards there comes a New Act of Parliament wherein more
speaking of the Church's Authority in this Case of Paedobaptism that it was without all question delivered by the Lord and his Apostles p l. 1. De peccat merit remiss c. 16. Proculdubio per Dominum Apostolos traditum The word Tradition the Fathers understood not in the Popish Sense for that which hath been delivered in Doctrine from Age to Age above what is written to supply the supposed defect of the Scripture but for the very written word it self by which they delivered the truth and for their examples and report thereof tending to the explication of their Doctrine and not to the adding any new Doctrine Calvin affirms the baptizing of Infants to be a holy Institution observed in Christ's Church q Instit 4. c. 16. Sect. 6. All the Reformed Churches use it as you may see by the Harmony of their Confessions r Th. à Jesu de Convers omnium Gentium l. 7. pag. 506. The Greek Church who yearly excommunicate the Pope Baptize their Infants s Pagit of Heresies pag. 17. so the Cophti or native Christians of Egypt who have no Communion with the Roman Church And the practice being so general and Primitive Erasmus wondered what evil Devil entered them who denyed the Baptism of Children used in the Catholick Church above 1400 Years and he might the rather for that it hath been the general Consent and almost universal Practice not only of all Christendom but of all the World Jews Gentiles Mahometans Christians of all Sects Protestants Papists Greeks Armenians Muscovites Mengrelians Indians of St. Thomas Abyssines c. as a modern Author observes to use some solemn initiating Ceremony to admit their Children not yet adult into the Society and Communion of their Religion These Authorities with others cited in the Margin * Constit Clementis there 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptize your Infants l. 6. c. 19. Concil Melevit can 2. apud Magdeb Cent. 5. cap. 9. col 835. Caranz fol. 123. Ambros l. de Ahrah Patriarch Hier. contra Pelag. lib. 3. Ut Christus Infantes ad se venire jussit ita nec Apostoli eos excluserunt à Baptismo quidem dum baptismus Circumcisioni aequiparat Paulus Col. 2. aperte indicat etiam Infantes per baptismum Ecclesiae dei esse inferendos c. Magdeb. Cent. l. 2. c. 4. Magdeb. Cent. 2. 't is said nec usquam legitur Infantes hoc seculo à Baptismo remotos esse We don't read they were then excluded Baptism c. 4. p. 48. de Baptismo nor as 't is said until the 6th Cent. when 't was excepted against by one Adrianus That Terull himself was for Infant Baptism appears in that in his Book De anima cap. 39. He presseth it when the Child is in danger of Death and gives his reason lib. de Bapt. cap. 12. praescribitur nemini sine Baptismo competere salutem Council of Trullo Can. 48. requires that all the Grecian little ones without delay should be baptized One of the 8 Cannons in the Council of Carthage concluding against Pelagius decreed that whosoever denyed Baptism for the remission of sins to a new Born Infant should be anathematiz'd see Craggs Arraigment and Conviction of Anabaptism against Tombs pag. 85. Photius a learned Greek produceth an Imperial Constitution wherein it was decreed that all baptized Samarit and Grecians should be punished who brought not their Children to holy Baptism apud Craggs ibid. I lay down as I might have done many more not to tye the Baptism of Children to the Testimony of Men but as a Martyr for the Protestant Religion did to shew how Mens Testimonies do agree with God's Word w In a Letter that Mr. Philpot writ whilst he was in Prison and that Antiquity is on our side and that the Anabaptists have nothing but false and new Imaginations who feign the Baptism of Children to be the Pope's Commandment or any late Invention or Innovation Nor is our manner of administring this sacred Rite by sprinkling or pouring on of Water novel as I said or unjustifiable for the word to Baptize usually signifies as much which as Dr. Featly x Dipper dipt pag. 33. See Wells also in his Answer to Danvers pag. 242. Printed Anno 74. and Walker's Discourse of dipping and sprinkling wherein is shewn the lawfulness of other ways of Baptization besides that of total Immersion Printed Anno 78. says Hesychius Stephanus Scapula and Budaeus those great Masters of the Greek Tongue makes good by many Instances and Allegations out of Classick Writers And in this sense is it used in Scripture So the Fathers were baptized in the Clould not dipt therein for they were under the Cloud * 1 Cor. 10.2 but were wet or sprinkled therewith So Nebuchadnezzar was wet or sprinkled or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Septuag hath it baptized with the Dew of Heaven Hence we read of diverse washings or Baptisms as the word is And what were those but sprinklings Sometimes Blood was sprinkled †Hebr. 9.10 sometimes Water was poured forth No Person was dipt or plunged in Blood yet those sprinklings were called Baptisms So Mark 7.4 except they wash the Original is except they be baptized and the manner of their washings before Meat was not by dipping but by pouring on of Water ‖ 2 Kings 3.11 We read also of washing or baptizing Tables * Mark 7.4 in the Margin beds vid Lightfoot vol. 2. p. 345. and other things many times a Day which if done by dipping would make the labour of the Jews intolerable besides many other inconveniences And 't is but reasonable that the outward Baptism should have allusion to and an Analogy with the inward We are said to be baptized with the Holy Ghost but not dipt into the Holy Ghost or his Graces but to be sprinkled therewith as with clean †Ezek. 36.25 Water in our Baptism and to have the Holy Spirit poured on us * Isaiah 44.3 And it had been more properly translated baptized in Water if it had been done only by dipping rather than baptized with Water Again if we take a Survey of the several Instances and Examples of Persons baptized in Scripture we shall find that 't was probably done by sprinkling or pouring on of Water rather than by dipping St. Paul was baptized by Ananias when Sick and Weak having fasted three Days and was not strengthened till he received Meat which was after he was baptized †Act. 9.18 19. and according to all Circumstances it was done in his Lodgings So when the Goaler and those that belonged unto him were baptized it was at a time and place that there could be no accommodation for Water and other Conveniences for plunging and dipping as the manner of some is for 't is not likely that the Apostle should carry the Goaler and all his in the dead of the Night to a River or Pond to Baptize them 'T is said
Junius conceives the word to be there taken with reference only to the Sex not to the Age shall be cut off not in his Infancy but afterwards when he comes to Years of Discretion if then he approves his Fathers or Guardians neglect and neglect Circumcision himself Which Junius makes good by two Arguments First From the Original which may be rendred as well and rather actively than passively according to the different Radix it may be derived from thus who shall not circumcise his fore-skin Secondly From the Reason that God himself there gives for he hath broken my Covenant Which is not incident unto Children and therefore the threaten'd Punishment was very unlikely to be inflicted on them who could not commit the Offence We read that Moses was in danger of being slain by the Angel for neglecting to circumcise his Son †Exod. 4.24 but nothing is said of the excision of his Son but that afterwards he was circumcised though the eighth Day was past I have already observed in the beginning of this Reply how absurdly he has gone about to prove that by Children in Act. 2.39 are not meant Children as they are in a state of Infancy making no difference between the Persons the Apostle spoke to and those he spoke of but implying that all those whom the Apostle asserted to have an interest in the Promise must necessarily be only the very same Persons he was discoursing to and therefore the Children as the Answerer explains himself must be such as should be able to imbrace the precept to repent A Conclusion that can in no wise follow from his premises and 't is impossible it should from any other since it would argue the Apostle himself to be guilty of vain tautology and impertinence if no more were meant of their Children than of all the World Besides there was no occasion for naming Children at all but the sense had been as full without it But this Answerer not contenting himself with such absurd Arguing as I have already noted begets here a superfetation of absurdities and further to shew his excellent faculty of quidlibet ex quolibet closeth as it were every Paragraph of this long Ramble of almost three Pages with this fancy'd Inference So from this Infants ought not to be baptized repeating it no less than six times without hardly varying one Word not weighing how 't is reduced or brought in Head and Shoulders so long as it may serve any way to amuse that poor ignorant misguided Sect. There is a parcel more of the like impertinent Stuff for almost a Page and half immediately following which seeing it don't so nearly touch the main matter in controversie that I may not be too tedious I will pass over in silence though he has deserved other Returns for his groundless Censures and Upbraidings which he is forced to make use of for want of Reason In the next Words Page 14. he brings me in saying so that excluding Children from the Covenant and debarring them of the Sign puts a sacrilegious restraint thereon and excludes them from the ordinary way of Salvation Whereto he returns this Answer You put more stress upon it than it will bear but what doth he mean by that Doth he deny the Proposition That it doth not put a sacrilegious restraint upon the Covenant No such thing Or doth he deny the Consequence that it excludes them from the ordinary way of Salvation Not at all What then Doth he instance in any ordinary means whereof they are capable Not so neither He mentions that of Rom. 10.14 15. but himself hath observed Page 11. that that goes beyond their capacity to make use of And 't is yet he says to prove that Baptism is an Ordinance of Christ for Infants What then Why he even makes the matter of no consequence at all whether there be allowed them any ordinary means or no tho' at the same time they allow them to have original Sin There is then according to him no ordinary way left for the Salvation of Children For as he intimates in the beginning of this Page a believers Child hath no Priviledge more then the unbelievers to any Ordinance of Christ But how contrary is this Doctrine to that of our Saviour Mark 10.14 Where he says of such is the Kingdom of God which signifies their having an interest in Heaven hereafter and consequently must imply their capacity of being of the visible Church here And it must be primarily meant of Children and not such only as are humble and innocent like them otherwise the sense cannot be coherent For what is the innocency and humility of such to Children that they should be suffered more than Lambs or the like humble and innocent Creatures to be brought to Christ to be received into his Arms Who might better have been propounded as patterns of more perfect Innocency having no original Guilt unless Christ had meant to be thus understood Bring little Children to me for to them and such as are like them belongs the Kingdom of Heaven * Talium dicit non horum quia comprehendit tam puellos quam eorum similes saith Musculus hac ergo voce Christus parvulos horum similes ad se pertinere testatur So Calvin giving for a Reason which St. Mark and St. Luke add verily I say unto you whosoever shall not receive the Kingdom of God as a little Child c. insulse enim as Marlor sets down further Anabap. pueros excludunt à quibus initium fieri debebat And elsewhere piorum liberos dicimus Ecclesiae filios nasci ab utero reputari in Christi membris quia hac lege deus nos adoptat ut sit etiam seminis nostri pater Again what ground of comfort can such as he give to their Parents in case of their Death that they sorrow not as Men without hope Seeing they don't appear to such to belong to Christ And if withal they have no means to bring them to Christ they may well be thought to be in a desperate Estate while in their Infancy Certainly it hath been lookt upon as a great advantage to be in God's ordinary way of Salvation In the time of the Jews before and under the Law 't was a great preference to be of the number of God's People members of the visible Church Branches of the Olive-Tree and is it not now as great a Priviledge and Advantage to be in a like Covenant-relation grafted into the same Olive-Tree Or can it be reasonably supposed that God would so often and so emphatically make Promises to the Righteous and their Seed to be a God to them and theirs if there was not somewhat of peculier preference intended them beyond those of the Wicked or those that are out of God's visible Church But if no more be intended but upon condition of Faith and Repentance this is equally true of the Children of the most profligate and of Heathens as of Jews and Christians
to go up to Mount Calvary for to enter into his Sepulchre you are entered into it and buried with him if by Faith you do mortifie and destroy the Body of Sin to this end we are baptized Nor is it a whit the more necessary for having part in his Resurrection to go and kiss the last Print of his Feet upon M. Olivet We are risen with him if being affected with the glory he brought out of his Tomb and convinced of the truth of the discoveries he made of a blessed Immortality we live as becomes the Gospel in all holy Conversation all the Graces and Priviledges of which Baptism is a sign and seal on God's Part are continued to us upon performance of that Duty to which Baptism is an Engagement on our Part and there is no Grace of God but tends to lay an Obligation on us The Grace which hath appeared unto us in the Gospel teacheth us to deny ungodliness and worldly Lusts and to live righteously and holily for 't is naturally inconsistent that we should be happy partakers of the blessed effects of God's Love and Favour and the merits of Christ unless we be holy and therefore as we have the priviledge to be buried with Christ in Baptism or to be baptized into him so 't is necessary that we put on Christ as our great Lawgiver and Example to live according to the rule of his holy Doctrine and Precept and to walk in that way which he hath trod before us For in the Institution of Baptism our Lord did not only design a benefit to us so as to make it an Instrument of Advantage in a way of Grace but also to bring us under an Obligation of Duty As then we value the Priviledge let us not neglect the Duty As we are glad of the mercy offered So let us mind the Stipulation on our Part what an obligation lies upon us to live a Christian life solemnly to resolve upon the profession and practice of the Law of Christ according to our utmost Capacity and the Ability God hath given us So that tho' in our Infancy the faith and repentance of our Parents or Proparents such I mean by whom we are adopted may be reckoned as ours by vertue of God's Promise to Believers and their Seed Yet if in due time we do not personally believe and repent our Baptism is made frustrate and vain 't is then in our Choice either to rescind or annul our Baptism and to turn Heathens or Apostates Or to ratifie and confirm the same If we disclaim and renounce our Baptism We do in effect disclaim and renounce all Right and Title claim and interest in the promises of Christ we cast him off tread his Blood under Foot as an unholy Thing Neither can we expect any strength from him against Temptations but are left in the Power and under the dominion of all Sin and Villany We renounce the Article of remission of Sins and the claim and right which otherwise we might have to everlasting Life But if we submit to the terms of the Covenant and embrace the Conditions we stand obliged and bound to lead a mortified and a Holy Life to be implanted into the similitude of Christ's Death and Resurrection or we make void the Grace of God and most unworthily forfeit and reject it by breaking Covenant with him These things being considered we cannot chuse but confess that as it was a great act of Charity in our Friends so early to engage us in so beneficial an Indenture So we are bound to stand to their Engagement which they made in our Name and to observe the Conditions of it through the whole course of our Lives especially considering that as God hath by his own Institution and Appointment put us under a strict Obligation of Duty so we have by our Baptism submitted to the terms and actually undertaken the Conditions Having to this purpose entered into a most solemn League and Covenant and as it were subscribed thereunto promising and vowing unto God to answer our Engagement to our utmost Ability So that the Vow and Covenant of God is upon us to live as his Servants as Men who are dead to Sin and alive unto God Know you not was the sharp and cutting expostulation of St. Paul to all licentious Christians Rom. 6.3 who presume when once they are baptized into the Church of Christ and profess themselves Christians and partake of the Ordinances they may then live as they list and be saved however This is intimated in the first Verse of that 6th to the Romans where 't is said Let us continue in sin that grace may abound as if some had thus flattered themselves that though they continued in the course of their Sins yet however grace and mercy from Christ would abound towards them and save them But the Apostle as startled at such an Imagination crys out God forbid God forbid such a horrid thought should possess any of our Hearts and then subjoyns the impossibility that any such foul imagination should prevail upon the Heart and life of any regenerate Christian which would be as strange a Prodigy as if the dead should rise out of their Graves and Walk and Live as they did in their life time and thereupon he bids them to look to their Baptism for that they cannot be Ignorant that when they were baptized into Christ Jesus they were baptized into his death and here in my Text buried with him in Baptism And doth the Death the Burial of Christ stand for a Cypher Hath Christ his Death and Burial no tye upon us in this holy Sacrament Hath it no Power Vertue or Influence Certainly it hath done us little good if we exemplifie it not in the death and mortification of Sin This is the duty of every baptized Christian So far necessary that we can have no benefit by our Baptism no portion in Christ or in his Death and Burial but by our being dead and even buried unto Sin If it be said how must we be thus dead to Sin to have any share in Christ and his Death For we cannot say we are dead to it we find it still lively and stirring in us and too much prevailing with us I answer We are then dead to Sin when we live not any longer therein And that is to expound the Apostle's meaning First When we do not only refrain and forbear our Sins for a while but do really aim at no less than the mortification of our Lusts Secondly When though we are not quite dead to Sin yet we are not dead in Sin but are sensible of the Venom and Sting of it Thirdly When though we cannot live and not Sin yet we do not live in it 'T is not as our Life so far from that that 't is grievous to us 't is as Death Lastly When though our Sins be not quite dead yet they are languishing and decaying in a lingering and dying state and if we commit Sin