Christians 'T is most likely those who baptize Infants baptize Heathens for we are all the Children of Wrath by Nature Eph. 2.3 It is you plead for Baptizing Heathens we plead for Baptizing Believers and Christians Object 11. There is no express Command for Womens receiving the Lord's Supper yet there may be good Consequences to prove it lawful so of Infant-Baptism I Answer Who will say there 's no Command for Women's communicating so long as that stands upon Record 1 Cor. 11.28 But let a Man examine himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Common Gender and so let him eat The Learned do know the original word signifieth Man or Woman The Apostle saith There 's one Mediator between God and Man 1 Tim. 2.5 the word signifieth Man or Woman Gal. 3.28 Male or Female all one in Christ it is the same word with the former in the Original Moreover we read of Women who believed and were Baptized Acts 8.12 so are fitly qualified for the Lord's Table We have also an Example of Women's communicating in Act. 1.13 14. we read Mary and other Women with the rest of the Disciples were altogether And in Act. 2.44 it 's said all that believed were together and in ver 42. these continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and in Fellowship and in breaking of Bread and in Prayer So that here is a Command and an Example for Womens communicating tho none for Infants Baptism therefore the Objection is false and weak Object 12. Infants are Disciples therefore they may be Baptized I Answer This Objection being grounded on Act. 15.10 11. we shall shew the Occasion and Scope of it and see whether it can prove Infants Disciples or that they ought to be Baptized Some having asserted who came from Judea Vnless a Man was Circumcised he could not be saved Then the Church of Antioch determined that Paul and Barnabas with certain of the Church should go to Jerusalem to the Apostles and Elders concerning this Question which when they came together to consider this Matter Peter rose up and said Why tempt you God to put a Yoke upon the Necks of the Disciples Acts 15.10 This proves not Infants Disciples neither that they ought to be baptized which neither our Fathers nor we were able to bear The Meaning of the Apostle is Why should we impose the Yoke of Circumcision upon the Necks of the Disciples viz. Believing Gentiles which are by no Law obliged unto it this is to bring us unto that Bondage God hath delivered us from Now how this doth prove Infants Disciples and so ought to be Baptized I leave to all judicious Considerers Object 13. Circumcision nor Vncircumcision avails any thing but a New Creature We fear Persons lay too much stress upon Circumstantials not minding the Power of Godliness I Answer Those who lay too much stress upon Circumstantials 't is doubtless their Evil But can any lay more stress upon it than our Saviour who though unspotted yet would not live without it Tho Circumcision be nothing which is abolished is Baptism nothing which is called Righteousness and the Counsel of God and calls it Righteousness The laying the stress of our Happiness upon Christ should not hinder but further Obedience and always doth where the Faith is of the right Kind And whereas the Apostle saith Circumcision avails not any thing it did avail something when God threatned Moses with Death for not circumcising his Son Exod. 4. And when God said Whoever was not Circumcised should be cut off from among the People Gen. 17.14 The Apostle never intended to undermine Gospel-Commands by saying Circumcision nor Vncircumcision avails any thing for in 1 Cor. 7.19 he adds but the keeping the Commands of God What tho Circumcision is nothing because abolished is Believers Baptism nothing which is a standing Ordinance What tho some Jews might lay more stress upon Circumcision than upon the Lord Jesus for Salvation which might be the principal Cause of the Apostle's thus speaking I hope Persons have more charity than to conclude we lay more stress upon Baptism than our Lord's Merits Object 14. If Children may not be Baptized under the Gospel their Priviledg is less than under the Law I Answer The Priviledg under the Law and under the Gospel is the same to Infants as to the Covenant of Grace and as for Circumcision it was indeed a Priviledg to the Jews in comparison of the Heathens but called a Yoke in comparison of them under the Gospel We grant Why should this be esteemed the loss of a Priviledg more than not enjoying literally a holy Land a holy City Temple or Succession of a High Priest and Priesthood by Generation it 's a great Mercy for Children to have Godly Parents having the advantage of a good Education Prayer and good Examples But what benefit can Infants have from Baptism when God never appointed it for them nor made any Promise to them in it but most glorious ones are made to such as believe and are baptized namely Remission of Sins the Gift of the Holy Ghost and Eternal Salvation Mark 16.16 Object 15. The Children of Believers are Holy therefore they ought to be Baptized I Answer By explaining the Scripture upon which the Objection is grounded 1 Cor. 7.14 The Apostle is here giving an answer to a Case of Conscience that is Whether it were lawful for the believing Husband or Wife to leave or depart from the unbelieving Wife or Husband The Apostle in the Negative answers By no means for these Reasons First Now your Children are Holy viz. lawfully begotten in Wedlock but if the Husband leaves the Wife The Greek Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is well translated to by the Geneva or Wife the Husband every one will count your Children unclean that is Bastards therefore don't part but live together because the unbelieving Husband is sanctified or set apart by God's Ordinance to the use of the Wife and the Wife to the use of the Husband in a matrimonial way 1 Cor. 7.14 This is not an inherent spiritual nor a federal Holiness as some would beg and therefore argue for Baptism this Holiness is a legitimate Holiness And there can be no more concluded because these Children are said to be Holy therefore to be baptized than the Baptizing Zacharias's Bells or Pots in the Lord's House because they are said to be Holy Zach. 14.20 Object 16. All Nations are to be Baptized Infants are a part of the Nation Ergo Infants may be baptized I Answer The Lord Jesus Christ saith Mat. 28.19 20. Go ye therefore and teach all Nations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Disciple all Nations but that must be first by Preaching and Instructing them in the Principles of the Christian Faith And addeth I cannot be of their mind who think that Persons may be baptized before taught Pool's Synopsis on Mat. 28. Baptizing them c. Never intending any should be baptized but what
Believers-Baptism from Heaven and of Divine Institution Infants-Baptism from Earth and Human Invention Proved from the Commission of Christ the great Law-giver to the Gospel-Church With a Brief yet sufficient Answer to Thomas Wall 's Book called Baptism Anatomized Together with a brief Answer to a part of Mr. Daniel Williams's Catechism in his Book unto Youth By Hercules Collins a Servant of the Servants of Christ Luke 7.29 30. And the Publicans justified God being baptized with the Baptism of John But the Pharisees and the Expounders of the Law rejected the Counsel of God against themselves in not being baptized with the Baptism of John London Printed for the Author and sold by J. Hancock in Castle-Alley near the Royal-Exchange 1691. THE CONTENTS CHap. 1. An Introduction Page 5 Chap. 2. Contains the Doctrines Page 8 Chap. 3. That Baptism is Dipping Page 11 Chap. 4. Shewing Believers only are the proper Subjects of Baptism Page 20 Chap. 5. Answer to Objections Page 27 Chap. 6. Natural Inferences Page 63 Chap. 7. Arecital of those Scriptures speaking of Baptism Page 72 Chap. 8. Of great Sufferings undergone for maintaining Believers and denying Infants-Baptism Page 76 Chap. 9. The Book epitomized in comparing Believers-Baptism and Infant-Baptism together Page 81 Chap. 10. The Miscarriage of the German Anabaptists falsly so called examined and the Reproach from thence reflected upon that way removed Page 95 Chap. 11. A brief but sufficient Answer to Tho. Wall 's Book called Baptism Anatomiz'd Page 108 Chap. 12. A brief Answer to a part of Mr. D. Williams his Catechism in his Book unto Youth Page 128 ERRATA In Page 108 114 115. for John Wall read Thomas Wall THE PREFACE Courteous Reader MY desire is that Thou would'st spend one Hour or Two seriously to read this small Book first of all begging of God it may be sanctified to thy Soul Read it without prejudice or partiality and as one that is willing to receive the Truth and entring into another World be like the Noble Bereans search the Scriptures to see whether these Things be so or no Take nothing from Man tho never so Learned and Holy upon trust without trial With what confidence may a Man die when he hath Thus saith the Lord for his Faith and Practice This is all from him that wisheth your Soul's welfare H. C. Water-Baptism Discours'd From St. Mark 16.16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved CHAP. I. IT was God's Command unto the Prophet Ezekiel Ezek. 43.11 to shew his People the Form of his House with the goings in thereof c. Know therefore ye Servants of the Lord as Circumcision was the Door into the Jewish Church which was National so Baptism is the Door into the Gospel-Church which is Congregational Hence St. Luke saith They that gladly received the Apostles Words were baptized and added unto the Church in number about three thousand Souls Acts 2.41 The Ancients call Baptism * Janua Sacramentorum As Listing is the solemn engaging Sign into an Army so is Baptism into the Church Mr. Baxter Baptism is a sign of entring into the Church Ursinus Baptism is the solemn admission of the Party into the visible Church Assemb Catechism the Gate of the Sacraments because by it we enter into the Church and have Communion with Saints In the Jewish Church they became Members as they were the fleshly or natural Seed of Abraham but now Members of the Gospel-Church as the spiritual Seed of Abraham Now we must not reckon from Abraham unto Christ but from Christ to Abraham If we are Christ's then are we Abraham 's Seed Gal. 3.29 not Christ's because we are Abraham's or our Parents Believers Under the Old Testament Persons became Members of the Church by Generation under the New by Regeneration Baptism is a Foundation-Principle of Church-Constitution Heb. 6.1 2. But the Foundation-Principle of Salvation is Faith in Christ or at least a Profession of it Hence we read Persons were first Converted then Baptized after added unto the Church Acts 2.41 My Intent is to display this Sacrament in its Apostolick Primitive Purity free from the Adulterations of Men a Sin which God charged upon the Learned Jews that they made void the Commands of God by their Traditions O that none of the Learned among the Gentiles especially those of the Reformed Churches may be chargeable with setting up Mens Inventions in the room of Christ's Institutions Mat. 15.6 9. CHAP. II. THis Text He that believeth and is Baptized is a great part of the Commission which is the Foundation and Warrant for all Gospel-Ministers Preaching and Baptizing unto the end of the World ☞ Obedience is to be grounded upon the Majesty of the Commander not the Judgment of the Subject The Architect was rewarded with a bundle of Rods for bringing as he thought a fitter piece of Timber than was commanded by the Roman Consul And it cost a Roman Gentleman his Life his own Father being Judg tho conquering an Enemy being done contrary to his General 's Command Remember Nadab and Abihu It 's worth our noting Here is first Faith then Baptism Therefore to baptize before there be any appearance of Faith is directly contrary unto this unerring standing Rule and doth reflect upon our Lord and Lawgiver as if he spoke rashly and inconsiderately putting that first which should be last and that last which should be first And so in the parallel Text Mat. 28.18 there is first Teaching before baptizing not first baptized but taught first From this part of our Lord's Commission we collect these Truths Doct. 1. It 's the unalterable Will of Jesus Christ who is King and Law-giver to his Gospel-Church that all Persons believe before they are baptized Doct. 2. It 's the indispensable Duty of all true Believers to be Baptized I call it an indispensable Duty because I know no Place where our Lord hath left this to the Liberty of Believers to do it or leave it undone as best pleaseth them Therefore if this be your Lord and Saviour's Will Believers pray obey him In your Prayers you desire you may be enabled to do his Will on Earth as it is in Heaven This is one part of his Divine Will Your Redeemer was willing to be baptized in Blood for your Salvation and will not you be baptized in Water in obedience to his Commission Moreover Christ calls it Mat. 3.15 a fulfilling of all Righteousness I am perswaded should God have commanded some great Thing as was once said to Naaman the Syrian 2 Kings 5.13 it would have been done by many in the Reformed Churches before now How much rather when he only saith Go wash and be clean Or as Ananias unto St. Paul Arise and wash away thy Sins viz. Sacramentally and Symbolically as it is in the Lord's Supper Take heed my Friends you are not guilty of Contempt looking upon Christ's Ordinances as mean low and little things for nothing is mean
were first taught 'T is as if a King should give a Commission to an Herauld to proclaim throughout his Dominions whoever in the Nation Male or Female would go to School and learn the Greek Tongue should have a Wedg of Gold Doth this follow that every one in the Nation should have a Wedg of Gold because a part of the Nation No not unless they do learn the Greek Tongue So in like manner A dreadful piece of Infant-Baptism appeared when the Heads of 6000 Infants were found murdered and buried in a Warren near a Monastry no more in the Nations are to be baptized than what are first taught and learn Christ Christ did no more intend that every one in the Nation should be baptized than the Prophet Haggai did So superstitiously zealous were some in the 7th Century for Infant-Baptism that a dead Child was taken from the Grave and Christened its Father's Name given unto it that every individual in the Nations of the World would desire our Lord's coming because he saith the Desire of all Nations should come Hag. 2.7 which is only the Believers in all Nations God did not intend Infants had robbed him when he said Ye have robbed me even this whole Nation they being not capable of it No more are Infants of Baptism tho a part of the Nation being not first taught and made Disciples according to the Commission Object 17. Men of Years were first Circumcised afterwards Infants So in the Gospel Baptism was first administred unto Men and Women but afterwards Infants were Baptized I Answer You say well Men and Women were baptized first Infants were never baptized by virtue of a Commission from Christ tho Believers were and it was about three hundred Years after Christ before any Infant was Sprinkled Danvers on Baptism p. 204. Christ's Commission was to baptize Believers now unless any can show where this was abrogated and a new Commission for Baptizing Infants given this remains and will to the end of the World Indeed Abraham was Circumcised when he was old as a Seal of the Righteousness of his Faith to assure him he should be a Father of many Nations a Spiritual Father unto Believers Jews and Gentiles And after this God commanded him to Circumcise his natural Seed and when any can shew us as plain a Command for Believers to Baptize their Infant-Seed as Abraham had to Circumcise his the Controversy shall end Object 18. Infant-Baptism is an Apostolical Tradition Tho this Tradition be not written in any Apostolical Book yet it is of no less Authority with us than the Scripture Bellarmine and though the Scripture be silent in the Case the uninterrupted Tradition and Vsage of the Church makes up that Defect I Answer Tradition ought to be proved by more than one Evidence viz. Origen whom all other Ages have condemned of Errors Dr. Taylor And whose Works are so spurious that he that reads them knows not whether he reads Origen or Ruffinus Erasm With Dr. Taylor Tradition saith he must by all means supply the place of Scripture and there is pretended a Tradition Apostolical that Infants were Baptized But at this saith he we are not much moved for we who rely upon the written Word of God as sufficient to establish all true Religion do not value the Allegation of Tradition The pretended Proof for Infant-Baptism being an Apostolical Tradition from Dionysius the Areopagite Justin Martyr's Responses Origen's Homilies Cyprian in an Epistle to one Fidas a Priest have been examined refuted and found fabulous and forged Danvers on Baptism pag. 133 to 150. It is very improbable that Infant-Baptism should be an Apostolical Tradition when decreed by several Councils in the 4th Century the Council of Carthage of Neocesarea and Laodicea c. they did hold forth the necessity of Confession and Profession before Baptism In short It is against the Reason of a Man to conclude this an Apostolical Tradition because this were to make the Apostles act beyond their Commission which were to Baptize only Believers Object 19. Infants were once Church-Members and that Law was never abrogated neither do we find they were cut off I Answer John the Baptist abrogated this sufficiently when he told the Pharisees and Sadduces it was a vain Plea to say Abraham was their Father that was a good Argument for Infant-Church-membership under the Law by Circumcision but signified nothing to Church-membership under the Gospel by Baptism now the Dispensation is alter'd If any bring not forth good Fruit in his own Person the Ax being laid to the Root of the Tree it is to be hewn down and cast into Eternal Fire The Apostle Paul in Rom. 11.20 ends this Controversy plain enough where he asserts the natural Branches were broken off by Unbelief and if they come to believe they may be grafted in again Who can shew any Instance where Infants were accounted Members of the Church under the Gospel but until then they remain broken off and that Law of Infant-Church-membership is as plainly abrogated under the Gospel as the Passover and Circumcision c. which all grant is void tho not so formally done as once commanded there being no need the Substance being come necessarily Shadows cease Object 20. In Mat. 3.11 John Baptist said I Baptize you with Water unto Repentance And in the 6th Verse Were Baptized of John in Jordan confessing their Sins Here say some is Baptism before Confession or Repentance in the order of words therefore we being Baptized in our Infancy if we repent and confess our Sins afterward 't is sufficient and we need not be Baptized again I Answer 1. If you were only sprinkled in Infancy you were never yet Baptized 2. 'T is said they were Baptized in Jordan confessing their Sins but I never heard of an Infant confess Sin in the Act of Baptism as these did I will gladly Baptize any Souls that shall truly confess themselves Sinners in the very Act and Administration of that Ordinance to the Glory of the Messiah who came to save Sinners 3. Tho the Text says I Baptize you unto Repentance none dare say that John Baptized them before they did manifest Repentance because when many of the Pharisees and Sadduces came unto John's Baptism he said O Generation of Vipers John's Baptism is called The Baptism of Repentance for Remission of Sins because Christ preached Remission of Sins to the Penitent Believer Piscator on Mark 1.4 bring forth Fruit meet for Repentance and think not to say you have Abraham to your Father 4. John's Baptism is called the Baptism of Repentance Mark 1.4 Can any other be the meaning than this that John was appointed of God to demand Repentance from dead Works of all that were Baptized and Faith also in him that was to come Acts 19. and upon this John did preach unto them the Remission of Sin I think it never did enter into any Man's Heart that John did first Baptize
before he examined them of Repentance and Faith in the Messiah to come 5. To Baptize unto Repentance the sense can be nothing else than my Baptism being the Baptism of Repentance I Baptize them for my Baptism is the Baptism of Repentance I must see something of that else I have no Commission to Baptize 6. Penitent Souls may well be said to be Baptized unto Repentance Should I say Sir Walter Rawleigh was beheaded in Palace-Yard and made an excellent Speech none would understand that he spoke after he was dead because Beheaded is first and Speech after c. So tho John say I baptized to Repentance it could not be he baptized first because he required Repentance and Faith according to Christ's Commission as necessary to Baptism because 't is an every day's Work after his Baptism to amend and reform However John's words may be placed the scope of the Place sheweth they must repent before they were baptized because when the Pharisees and Sadduces came to his Baptism that is to be baptized said he O Generation of Vipers bring forth first Fruits meet for Repentance or unto or according to the nature of true Repentance and then I will baptize you and not without it Object 21. Water-Baptism is John's Baptism Paul was not sent to Baptize We have the Substance we need not the Shadow we are baptized with the Spirit we need not that of Water I Answer Cornelius and his Houshold were baptized with the Holy Ghost to that degree as they spake with Tongues Acts 10. yet thought it not beneath them to submit to Christ's blessed Ordinance of Water-Baptism I know not but this Scripture may be an everlasting Testimony against some which pretend to the Spirit who have it in that degree as now Cornelius and his Houshold Where the Spirit is Acts 10.44 to 48. there is Obedience to the Command I marvel any who pretend to great degrees of the Spirit should call God's Ordinances Shadows and Shells Is it a Command of Christ and a Shadow did Christ ever call it so Thou may'st as well say all other Ordinances are Shadows as Prayer Preaching c. And where wilt thou run is it a Command hath it a Divine Stamp if so dispute not Christ's Authority Are you wiser than he who subjected himself to it or can you think you have more of the Spirit than him who had it without measure and yet was was baptized in Water Whereas it is Objected Christ sent not * Bullinger in his House-book saith of 1 Cor. 1.17 'T is not slightly to be understood as if Paul was not sent to baptize at all but that Teaching should go before Baptism for the Lord commanded both Teaching and Administring Sacraments Paul to Baptize but to Preach Paul did baptize several either he did it by Commission or Presumption surely not by the latter therefore the former His meaning is that Baptism was not his first and principal Work he was sent to preach and Baptism fell in as a part of his Preaching-Office None are fit for Gospel-Ordinances until they have the Spirit of God Doth Cornelius and his House submit to Water-Baptism after Baptized eminently with the Spirit then that can be no Argument we are Baptized with the Spirit and need no Water This is cleared by our Lord's Word who said I am not sent but to the lost Sheep of the House of Israel not but he came also to be a Light to the Gentiles he was first to preach to them hence called the Minister of the Circumcision And whereas Water-Baptism is called John's Baptism I query the Baptism of John Was it from Heaven or of Men If from Heaven as it was for God sent him to Baptize then let all keep silent I know no difference between John's Baptism and that Christ gave his Apostles but that the former Baptized in the Name of Christ to come the latter in his Name being come Whereas some urge John said He must decrease Christ increase This hath no reference to the ceasing of Gospel-Ordinances but unto the Splendor and Glory of Christ in the World above what John's was in Holiness and Miracles for John did no Miracle John 10.41 Object 22. There are no fit Administrators therefore for the present Sacraments and Church-Ordinances cease I Answer When Christ gave Commission to Preach he gave Power in the same to Baptize Mat. 28. How comes this to pass that those very Persons which thus object do Preach which requires as great Ability and Sanctity to the due performance of the one as of the other I know some object that Commission Mat. 28. lasted no longer than to the end of that Age. To which I Answer Then Preaching ended too Christ commands his Disciples to teach all Nations all things which he commanded them Now Christ's Commands were Holiness Repentance and Faith was this to be no longer than to the end of that Age was Christ's Promise of his Presence but to the end of that Age this would be uncomfortable Doctrine The Promise is I will be with you to the end of the World the Learned know it 's the same original Word as in Matth. 13.39 40. where it is said The Harvest is the end of the World As the Tares are gathered together and burnt in the Fire so shall it be in the end of the World All conclude I think or ought that this hath respect to the final end of all things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this being the same word in Mat. 28. We conclude teaching the Gospel baptizing them which are taught and the gracious Presence of Christ If Baptism ended in the Apostles Age then preaching of Repentance Faith and Holiness ceased also because all in the same Commission Yea the promise of Christ's Presence must cease also in the end of that Age a more uncomfortable Doctrine cannot be is to remain in his Church till the World's end that is till the final end of all things Moreover Paul asserts Ephes 3.21 that Christ will have a Church and glory in the Churches throughout all Ages World without end From whence I argue if God have a Church in all Ages he must have Ordinances there because no Church of Christ can be constituted without them If there be Ordinances in the Church in all Ages there must be some to administer them or else they would be insignificant But that he hath fit Administrators in the Church and will have Paul asserts in Ephes 4.12 13. He gave some Apostles some Prophets some Evangelists some Pastors and Teachers For what end for the perfecting of the Saints for the Work of the Ministry for the edifying the Body of Christ How long till we all come to the Vnity of the Faith and of the Knowledg of the Son of God unto a perfect Man unto the measure of the Fulness of Christ Let Men take heed how they put a slight upon the Ordinances of God in crying up the Spirit with
the Parties Reputation but their Principle also And one thing which caused this People called Anabaptists to be misrepresented was their Community of Goods which they alway had at Munster which was no other than the old Waldenses did and their Disciples do to this day in Poland Hungary Transylvania and many parts of Germany living in Colledges casting all into one Common Stock done by them both from Conveniency and having respect unto the Example of the Apostles and Primitive Christians as it is written in Acts 4.32 34 35. And though we do not believe Christians are now under that Obligation yet I cannot have a hard thought of any that should so do acting from the same Primitive Spirit And it would be very unchristian to conclude that such allow a Community of Women because they had their Stock and Goods in common as I fear some have uncharitably asserted from this innocent Apostolical Primitive Practice To conclude Suppose it should be granted there were some foolish Virgins in Germany under this Denomination of Anabaptists it is no more than what Christ hath told us will be Have not the Churches in all Ages had their Achan's Corah's Dathan's Abiram's their Diotrephaes But is it good Logick to say Judas had a Devil therefore all the Apostles had Devils Hath there not been always some bad in the most pure Churches of Christ For any to say there are no good Men nor good Principles in the Communion of the Church of England because some of that Communion are Executed almost every Sessions as they confess themselves to be at Tiburn this would be unjust and uncharitable And it argueth weakness for any to run upon Extreams because of others Errors As some of the Ministers in Holland the Followers of Meno Symonis and Theodoricus upon the Munster Report have refused the bearing Arms Offensive or Defensive or taking any Oaths or bearing any Rule Office or Government in the Common-Wealth lest they should seem to abet such Principles It is good to keep the golden Mean between both Extreams Now let us all labour to put on Charity the Bond of Perfection think no Evil nor speak Evil of no Man Judg not that ye be not judged Why dost thou judg thy Brother or set at naught thy Brother We shall all stand before the Judgment-Seat of Christ Let that great Instance of Despair in John Child never be forgotten that which lay with the most weight upon his Conscience before he hang'd himself was the Sin for his Writing and Speaking against this very People as may be seen in that Book of his Despair And those Scriptures were of great weight upon his Soul He that offends one of these little Ones which believe in me it were better a Mill-stone were hanged about his Neck and he cast into the midst of the Sea O said he I have touched the Apple of God's Eye and says he this deserves a tearing in pieces to sit and speak against thy Brother and slander thy own Mother's Son Psal 50. Let all the People of God have such Thoughts speak such Words use such Carriages one toward another and one of another as we may have no occasion to repent of when every secret Thing shall be brought into Judgment CHAP. XI Containing a brief but sufficient Answer to John Wall 's Book called Baptism Anatomized that he may never more boast as formerly that none have answered him I Query 1. Whether this Man doth not act against the Light of Conscience Experience and Holy Scripture when he asserts indefinitely The Infants of Believers have by the free Gift of God in the Covenant of Grace a right to Remission of Sins and so a right to Baptism Come and stand before the Bar of God's Word and make answer Had Cain Ishmael Esau Absolom Samuel's Sons of Belial all Children of Believers a right to Remission of Sins Query 2. Whether there is not good ground given unto Persons to believe in reading a great part of this Book from pag. 25 to 41 168. that he is of Origen's Opinion The whole World may be saved at last and then why not the Devils too For saith he pag. 168. if all Infants sinned in Adam 's Loins when Adam was restored they were restored in his Loins and when born they were born in a Gospel-Covenant In Pag. 26. God freely forgave Adam and his Posterity in him their Sin Now we know the whole World is Adam 's Children then the whole World is in the Covenant of Grace and so the whole must be baptized and if in the Covenant of Grace for any thing I see the whole World may be saved Abundance of these Assertions he hath in his Book But behold it is a Babel a Book of Confusion for though he tells us when the Parents believe pag. 27 28. their Baptism is a sign of the Remission of Sin to their Infants as to themselves and that their Infants are in the Covenant of Grace with them it being made to Adam and his Posterity Yet Cain Ishmael Esau he asserts were cast out of this Covenant of Grace when grown up and have no Remission of Sins What have Believers Infants Remission sealed unto them yet no Remission Will Men tell a Lie in the Name of the Lord to tell us that Baptism is a sign of Remission of Sin and yet to tell us this very Person may be damned Are not these Self-contradictions and holy Scripture-contradictions which saith Whom God justifieth and pardoneth them he glorifieth Rom. 8.30 In my Book this is more fully answered pag. 29. Query 3. Whether his Language favours not more of Ashdod than Canaan and whether it be not full of hard Speeches against those which John Child paid dearly for and of whom Christ saith It were better a Mill-stone were tied about his Neck and he cast into the midst of the Sea For in his Preface he accounts the Ministers of Christ Ministers of Satan transform'd to deceive the Souls of the Simple And in pag. 3. falsly saith if not maliciously The Anabaptists deny Infants to be redeemed with Christ's Blood p. 31. And p. 55. he saith The Anabaptists hold Christ hath no Lambs in his Fold but all Sheep because we will not own Pedobaptism And pag. 65. What a wicked Principle are those Men of that deny Infants the sign of Remission of Sins and that we make an Idol of Baptism is his Assertion And because we assert Christ was baptized about thirty Years of Age as our Example Behold saith he what windings and turnings by any cover of vain deceit Men lie in wait to deceive by turning away from the Truth and turning unto Fables And further saith pag. 10. We hypocritically plead for that we practise not Whether this Man's Discourse favours as being under the Power of a divine or diabolical Spirit is left to the Godly to judg and whether any heed ought to be taken of such a Person 's Writing In pag. 139. he asserts We damn
for Men go down into the Sea So accordingly it was practised in the Apostles Time they went down into the Water which if it had not been to be dipp'd in it they need to have gone only unto it therefore how vain is that he asserts John baptized standing at the brink of the River Jordan pag. 8. This is to contradict the Word of God which saith plainly Philip and the Eunuch went both down into the Water not to the brink of it and came up out of the Water In pag. 4 5. his great Ordnance by which he thinks to do the most Execution is from 1 Cor. 10.1 2. where it is said All our Fathers were baptized unto Moses in the Cloud and in the Sea Answer 1. Consider it is said the Fathers not the Children were baptized 2. If you will have it the Children also then you must include there Beasts and Cattel for the Cloud poured Water upon them all 3. Where-ever the word Baptism is used whether it be applied to the Spirit to Sufferings or to Water it always sheweth some large measure of all So here they were baptized in the Cloud and in the Sea not properly baptized for that Ordinance was not in use then but the scope of that place is the Apostle thought fit to borrow that word Baptize for to show God's gracious protection of them in the Red-Sea as in the Wilderness he fed them with Manna from Heaven and gave them Water out of a Rock So he left them not in the Red-Sea but encompassed them about in safety by his Divine Providence with Water on each side of them and the Cloud over them as Persons are encompassed with that Element when baptized Again for the true understanding of the Word we must have recourse to the common Acceptation of it and not imagine the Spirit of God doth contradict the common Acceptation of Words among Men. When the Prophets wrote by Inspiration and the Apostles they always used such words as were vulgar and commonly accepted amongst Men so that the common acceptation of the Hebrew word Tabal among the Hebrews and Baptizo among the Greeks always signifying to dip there being other words to signify sprinkle or pour How then can pouring Rain from the Cloud be called Baptism as John Wall would needs have it though he beg for it because it can never be proved see my Book pag. 16 17. And is he not full of audacity or boldness to tell the World in pag. 8. That there is not one word that any by John or Philip were dipped when the very word properly signifieth dipping Hence the Dutch call John the Dooper And our Translators might as well have rendred baptize dip in all the places where it is as to render Judas sopt dipp'd and Christ's Vesture dipp'd in Blood being all from the same Original Word And whereas he tells the World pag. 16 17. Though the Scripture say they baptized in Aenon because there was much Water He saith It would not be enough to dip half the Body in 1. I suppose he never was there to see it but speaks by an implicit Faith 2. Common sense directs us to believe there was need of much Water to the due performance of that Ordinance or else the Holy Spirit would not have mentioned it as commodious for that Work because much Water there a little Water will sprinkle hundreds but much Water is necessary unto the due performance of this Ordinance of Baptism because it must be so done as to figure out the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ Now I would fain know how sprinkling or pouring Water upon the Face doth figure out Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection Rom. 6.1 2 4. In pag. 9. how disingenuously doth he deal with Coloss 2.12 We are buried with Christ in Baptism To follow their natural Fancy saith he the Person buried is wholly passive and must be taken in Arms laid upon the Water then Water cast upon him till covered as Earth is upon the Dead Answer This way of discourse is a kind of trifling with God's Word You are to know Similitudes do not run upon all four as we say but respect must alway be had to the chief intent and design of a Metaphor which in this Text is to hold forth the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ for our Justification and also holds forth our Death to Sin and Resurrection to a new Life This being the prime scope of the Apostle his way of discourse is nothing but to evade the strength of the Argument Whereas in pag. 10. he saith The Person baptizeth part of himself because he goeth into the Water We answer That is false because he doth not lay himself down in the Water but that is done by the Administrator he lays him along as one buried under the Water his whole Body not the upper part only to figure out Christ's lying in the Grave for as the Persons stands upright in the Water that is not Baptism but when laid along under the Water by the Administrator using the words of Institution I baptize thee in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost this is Baptism In pag. 14. he saith The Person is not baptized but his Cloaths Those things are not becoming Modesty to discourse of Let that vain Man know we do not baptize the Cloaths in the Name of the Blessed Trinity but the Person and should we baptize otherwise I fear this poor Man would be the first would reproach the Interest of Christ upon that account Whereas he chargeth B. K. pag. 80. with the whole Assembly of Baptized Believers that they were forced to try their Wits for want of those literal words Remember you keep holy the First Day Answ Our Arguments for observing the First Day do greatly satisfy our Consciences being grounded upon the Word of God Also our Arguments against Pedobaptism and for Believers Baptism also being proved from the same Divine Revelation But alas how are Men put at their Wits end to find Arguments for Pedobaptism or else they would never prefer a dark Consequence before a plain Command which is beneath the Reason of a Man nor run to the Law to prove a Gospel-Ordinance and reject God's Institution and set up Man's Invention Could he say as much for Pedobaptism as we can for the Lord's Day the Controversy would not have held so long Could he give us such Examples of Infant-Baptism as we can for our religious observing that Day we shall give him thanks And whereas in pag. 104. he quarrels because we do not Baptize always upon the First Day We do not judg we are confin'd to that Day The Lord's Supper Christ himself did institute it and practise it with his Apostles on another Day than the First Day of the Week Although we do grant it is very commendable to do such Work on such Days when retired from our Labour yet we do not think we are confin'd to that Day for
in the late Persecution the Churches of Christ some of them did find it very convenient to break Bread upon a Week-Day yet we alway think it best on the First when it may be And as for Baptism we do not find the Apostles tarried for the Revolution of the First Day but as occasion offered they did it upon any Day Page 69. he insists upon the order of words Mat. 3. I baptize to Repentance See this answered in my Book p. 54 55 56. That is a false Argument he so largely insisted on pag. 44. If Persons have a right to Remission of Sin they have a right to the Sign Baptism This Argument I have handled in p. 36. Infants are not called Disciples as he supposeth pag. 43. from Acts 15.10 and upon his Request we will shew him a Command and Example for Womens communicating at the Lord's Table p. 42 43. For answer to pag. 21. where it 's asserted That many of the 3000 whom the Apostles batized in Acts 2.39 were Children seing the Pardon of Sin was by the Apostle Peter applied to their Children O horrible perverter of the Word of God! these Children whom he speaks of were no more as yet baptized than the Gentiles which were afar off uncalled 2. Suppose some of their Children were baptized it must be believing Children not Infants my Child is my Child though thirty or forty Years old for you cannot think the Apostle would go beyond his Commission to baptize an ignorant Infant in the room of an understanding Believer O how sophistically doth this Man reason see pag. 29 30 31. of this Book Lastly I refer you to Mr. Cary's Solemn Call which clears up the Covenant made with Israel at Mount Sinai Exod. 19.20 and that in the Land of Moab Deut. 29. as also the Covenant of Circumcision made with Abraham Gen. 17. are plainly proved to be three several Editions of the Covenant of Works Though Mr. Wall will have it to be a Covenant of Grace in Christ And though he spends many Leaves of his Book about it 't is as far from being proved as Believers-Baptism is a Sign to the Infant of the Remission of Sins and being in the Covenant of Grace which yet is confest a few Years after he is neither in the Covenant of Grace nor yet one Sin pardoned These are some of this poor Man's Self-contradictions is he not Felo de se a Self-destroyer Whereas he saith pag. 117. Mr. Ainsworth's Book called A Censure upon a Dialogue of the Anabaptists was never answered That in Abraham 's Seed all Nations should be blessed This Grace Abraham 's Infant-Seed had this Grace Christ gave to little Children See your self and Mr. Ainsworth both answered in pag. 37 38. and p. 34 35. CHAP. XII A brief Answer to a part of Mr. Daniel Williams's Catechism in his Book of the Vanity of Childhood and Youth IN pag. 131. he propounds these Questions What if a Child will not agree but refuse to agree to the Covenant to which his Infant-Baptism engaged him Himself makes this astonishing Answer 1. It 's a rejecting Christ our Saviour and a renouncing the Blessings of the Gospel 2. It 's the Damning Sin 3. It 's the Heart of all Sin 4. It 's Rebellion continued against my Maker 5. It 's Ingratitude and Perjury to my Redeemer 6. It 's gross Injustice to my Parents 7. It 's an Affront to all the Godly 8. It 's self-killing Cruelty to my own Soul Here are hard and dreadful Words to make up the defect of weak Arguments for â—hen some Persons want Arguments 〈…〉 to perswade into an Error they do use some terrible Words and Ways to fright People thereinto Pray Sir shew your Hearers where you have Divine Authority for your Assertions or else there is no ground to be concerned at all about it though laid down in a formidable way Though I know 't is the Duty of Parents to pray for their Children give them moderate Correction good Education and good Examples yet God never made it the Duty of any Parent to dedicate their Child in Baptism nor the Duty of any Child to Engage and Covenant with God in their Infant-State being altogether uncapable therefore the not heeding it cannot be any Sin much less a damning Sin and if so be Persons do then ingage against the Custom of this World as you say they do then they must engage against Infant-Baptism being a worldly Custom I shall speak briefly to all these Particulars 1. Not to agree or to refuse to agree to the Covenant made in Infant-Baptism is no Sin because Where there is no Law saith the Apostle John there is no Transgression Now if this Gentleman can shew us any Law of God for Parents to dedicatâ— their Children in Baptism or Children to covenant with God in Baptism I will give him the Cause but if this cannot be done I think he can do no less than make a publick Recantation of his Assertions to undeceive those whom he in ignorant Zeal may have deceived 2. It 's no Rebellion against our Maker because Rebellion is interpreted in the holy Writ to be a wilful breach of God's Law and Command as you may see in Numb 20.24 Ye rebelled against my Word Chap. 27.14 Ye rebelled against the Command of the Lord so Deut. 1.26 Now then let this never be more called Rebellion except it can be proved to be against the Command of the Lord. 3. It can be no Ingratitude nor Perjury to my Redeemer 1. No Ingratitude because to own a thing he never appointed and is the ready way to thrust out his own Appointment will never be accounted by Christ Ingratitude 2. Neither can it be Perjury Mr. Pool on 1 Tim. 1. saith Perjury is a false Swearing or swearing to an untrue thing Now I suppose this is not Mr. Williams's meaning by Perjury for the Propositions were true if any which were promised in Infant-Baptism But I suppose he means the Covenant the Child made in Baptism against being governed by Satan and the Flesh taking up this World's Goods as my Portion and against the Customs of the Men of the World as my Guide when grown up and found walking in the Ways of the Devil the Flesh and the World contrary to God's Command and his own Vow This I supose he calls Perjury to the Redeemer But let it be considered a Man must first make a Vow or take an Oath before he can be said to break it and be perjur'd Now if the Child never made any Vow or Covenant in Baptism it being impossible how then can he be said to break Covenant and be guilty of Perjury to his Redeemer 4. It cannot be Injustice much less gross Injustice to my Parents because what is accounted Injustice to my Parents the Word of God makes it appear to be so some-where or other but the Word of God doth not any where call that Child an unjust Child that doth not own its dedicating