than wilful The Apostle was reproving some of the Hebrews for their slender Proficiency in the Knowledge of the Gospel And that he cou'd not lead them to the Higher Mysteries they hardly yet being well fixed in the very Rudiment and Fundamentals of Christianity As if one shou'd say That he would make an ill Doctor of Divinity who had not yet learned his Catechism For the Apostle in the former Chapter having treated of the Mysterious Parallel 'twixt Christ and Melchisedec he stops short Ver. 11 upon the account of their Incapacity of whom that is of Christ and Melchisedec we have many things to say and hard to be uttered seeing ye are dull of hearing For when for the time ye ought to be Teachers ye have need that one teach you again which be the first Principles of the Oracles of God Then he goes on to provoke them to a further Proficiency in the words of the Text we are now considering Therefore says he leaving the Principles of the Doctrin of Christ let us go on unto Perfection not laying again the Foundation of Repentance from dead Works and of Faith towards God of the Doctrin of Baptisms and of laying on of Hands and of the Resurrection of the Dead and of Eternal Judgment And this will we do if God permit Here is the Doctrine of Baptism placed in the very Heart of the Fundamentals of Christianity yet the Quakers would filch it out from amongst all the rest and refer it alone to the Ceremonials of the Law spoken of in the former Chapter This was drop'd at a venture for the former Chapter treats only of the Melchisedecal Priesthood which was no Part of the Law and there are none of the Legal Types or Ceremonies so much as mention'd in it Yet Baptism in the next Chapter must refer to them There cannot be a greater Confession to Baptism than this Objection of the Quakers nor a stronger Proof for the Necessity of it than to see it rank'd with these most-acknowledg'd Foundations of Christian Religion and call'd one of the First Principles of the Oracles of God III. And as to the word Leaving upon which this Author lays so great a stress in this Text as if it meant Forsaking and Abandoning it is strange that he should bring in the Apostle Exhorting to Leave off and Forsake the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ But Leaving there is very plainly meant of leaving or intermitting as the Vulgar renders it to treat further at that time of these Principles which the Apostle is so far from forsaking that he fixes them as the Foundation which he says he will not lay again as supposing it laid already but built further upon it improve and carry up the Superstructure So that this Leaving is only leaving or ceasing to Discourse further upon these Principles Intermittentes Sermonem intermitting or breaking of the Debate Which is litterally according to the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leaving that Word or Subject of which he then spoke he went on to discourse of other things The Reader could not forgive this Trifling in me to prove things which are self-evident if he did not see that I am forc'd to it However this Advantage is gain'd by it to see the very slender Foundations upon which the Quakers build their Objections against Baptism which they must either grant to be one of the Principles of Christianity or that Faith and Repentance are not IV. But indeed it is frightful to say it I pray God they may seriously consider of it they have together with Baptism thrown off all the other Principles of the Doctrin of Christ See The Snake in the Grass 1st Part or Preface p. 313 314. 2d Part p. 40 41 61 62. which are mention'd in this Text. 1. Repentance Against this they have set up a Sinless Perfection which needeth no Repentance They never beg Pardon for Sin supposing they have none and mock at us for saying Lord have Mercy upon us and upbraid our Liturgy for having a Confession of Sin in it Edward Burrough pag. 32. of his Works Printed 1672 says That God doth not accept of any where there is any failing or who doth not fulfil the Law and doth not Answer every Demand of Justice Part 1. p. 330 331. 2. Faith towards God This is the Christian Faith or Faith in God through Christ But the Quakers say That they can come to God Immediately without the Mediation of Christ and therefore they do not Pray to Christ whom they utterly deny to be that Person who suffer'd for them upon the Cross as Mr. Penn in his Serious Apology p. 146. They make Christ to be nothing else than what they call The Light Within which they say is sufficient of it self without any thing else to bring us to God and that whoever follows it needs no other Help Now they say That all the Heathens every Man that is born into the World has this Light Within that is Christ and that this Light Within is sufficient for his Salvation without any thing else Whereby they take away any Necessity of an Outward Christ to dye for our Sins and make the Heathen Faith as good as the Christian And therefore they have taken away that Christian Faith towards God which is the Second of the Principles mention'd in this Text. The Third is Baptism which they openly disclaim The Fourth is the laying on of Hands that is the Ordination Confirmation and Absolution of the Church which are all perform'd by laying on of Hands And how much soever the Quakers and others do despise them yet the Apostle here reckons them among the Fundamentals For the Government and Discipline of the Church are Essential to it as it is a Society it could not otherwise be a Society Num. 16 17 Ch The Sin of Korah was nothing but concerning church-Church-Government And Aaron's Rod that Budded in confirmation of his Priesthood was ordained to be kept for ever in the Ark for a Token against the Rebels so are they call'd who Rebell'd against that Priesthood which God had then appointed by Moses and the Sin cannot be less to Rebel against that Priesthood which Christ himself appointed Which is shewn more at large in the Discourse mention'd in the Advertisement Now if Aaron's Rod that is Church-Government was one of the Three sacred Depositums which were ordain'd to be kept in the Ark why should we wonder to see it hear placed among the Fundamentals of Christianity Heb. ix 4. The Pot of Manna Aaron's Rod and the Tables of the Covenant were all that was kept in the Ark. Which shews Church-Government to be Necessary next to our Manna the very support of our Life and the best Guard to preserve the Decalogue i. e. our Duty to God and Man V. And tho' the Quakers cry down Church-Authority in others yet they magnifie it as much in themselves as any Church whatsoever The Ingenious W. P. in his Judas and
21. is an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Type or Figure therefore it must be the Outward and Water-baptism which is here meant For the Inward and Spiritual Baptism is not the Type or Figure but the thing signify'd And thus Rob. Barclay's Argument and Criticism has turn'd into a full Demonstration of the direct contrary of that for which he brought it And has thoroughly Established the Divine Institution of the Outward or Water-Baptism FINIS The Contents of Episcopacy SECT I. The necessity of an Outward Commission to the Ministers of the Gospel The Case is Stated as to those Quakers for whose satisfaction this is intended page 1 I. Of Personal Qualifications requisite in the Administrators of the Sacraments page 2 II. Of the Sacerdotal Qualification of an Outward Commission as was given to Christ by God III. By Christ to the Apostles c. IV. By the Apostles to others V. Those others impower'd to give it to others after them SECT II. The Deduction of this Commission is continu'd in the Succession of Bishops and not of Presbyters I. Either way it operates against the Quakers page 5 II. The Continuance of every Society is deduc'd in the Succession of the Chief Governours of the Society and not of the Inferior Officers ibid. III. This shewn in matter of Fact as to the Church and the Succession of Bishops from the Apostles times to our Days particularly here in England IV. The Presbyterian Plea consider'd that Bishopricks were but single Parishes and consequently that every Presbyter was a Bishop and their vain Logo-machy upon the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 page 8 V. Argu'd from the Type of the Levitical Priesthood which shewn to be the Method of Christ the Apostles and Primitive Fathers page 11 VI. Whence the Case of Korah and the Presbyterians shewn to be the same And the Episcopal Supremacy as Plainly and Fully Established as was that of Aaron and his Successors page 12 VII No Succession of Presbyters can be shewn from the Apostles page 14 VIII The Pretence of Extraordinary Gifts no Ground or Excuse for making of a Schism page 17 SECT III. Objection from the Times of Popery in this Kingdom as if that did un-Un-church and consequently break the Succession of our Bishops I. This shewn to be a Popish Argument page 27 II. That Idolatry does not Un-church Prov'd 1. Because a Christian may be an Idolater ibid. 2. From the Type of the Church under the Law page 29 III. Episcopacy the most opposite to Popery page 30 IV. Male Administration does Forfeit but not Vacate a Commission till it be Re-callâ—d page 34 V. Defects in Succession no Bar to the Possessors where ther are none who Claim a Better Right page 36 SECT IV. The Assurance and Consent in the Episcopal Communion beyond that of any other I. The Episcopal Communion of much greater Extent and more Universal than all those who oppose it page 37 II. And then the Church of Rome if join'd with them page 38 III. The Dissenters from Episcopacy do all Deny the Ordination or Call of eath other page 39. IV. If the Quakers receive Baptism from any of these Dissenters they have no Reason to expect the same Allowances as may be given to those of their own Communions ibid. V. The Episcopal Ordinations and consequently their Right to Baptize is own'd by both Papists and Presbyterians page 40 SECT V. The Personal Sanctity of the Administrator of the Sacraments tho' highly Requisite on his Part yet not of Necessity as to the Receivers to convey to them the Benefits of the Sacraments Because I. The Vertue comes not from the Minister but from God alone page 41 II. For this Cause among others Christ chose Judas to be an Apostle page 42 III. God's Power is Magnified in the Meaness of his Instruments ibid. IV. St. Paul rejoyc'd at the Preaching of Evil Men. page 43 V. This confirmed by daily Experience ibid. VI. The Argument stronger as to the Sacraments page 45 VII The Fatal Consequences of making the Personal Holiness of the Administrator Necessary towards the Efficacy of the Sacraments page 46 1. It takes away all Assurance in our Receiving of the Sacraments ibid. 2. It renders the Commands of Christ of none Effect ibid. 3. It is contrary to the tenure of God's former Institutions and puts us in a more uncertain Condition than they were under the Law page 47 4. It was the Ancient Error of the Donatists and Borders upon Popery ibid. VIII As great Sanctity to be found in the Clergy of the Church of England as among any of our Dissenters page 49 IX Ther is at least a Doubt in Receiving Baptism from any of our Dissenters Which in this case is a Sin Therefore security is only to be had in the Episcopal Communion page 50 X. The Advantage of the Church of England by Her being the Established Constitution ever since the Reformation page 51 XI That therefore nothing can excuse Schism from Her but Her Enjoyning something as a Condition of Communion that is contrary to the Holy Scriptures which cannot be shewn page 52 XII Therefore to Receive Baptism from the Church of England is the greatest security which the Quakers can have of Receiving it from Proper Hands ibid. XIII An Answer to the Objection That Baptism has not such Visible Effects amongst us as the Quakers wou'd desire page 53 The Supplement I. Some Authorities for Episcopacy as Distinct from and Superior to Presbytery taken out of the Fathers and Councils in the first 450 Years after Christ page 5 II. That the whole Reformation even Calvin Beza and those of their Communion were zealous Asserters of Episcopacy
FIVE DISCOURSES BY THE AUTHOR OF THE Snake in the Grass VIZ. On Water-Baptism Episcopacy Primitive Heresie of the Quakers Reflections on the Quakers A Brief Account of the Socinian Trinity To which is added A PREFACE to the Whole LONDON Printed for C. Brome W. Keblewhite and G. Strahan 1700. THE PREFACE THE following Treatises being out of Print it was thought best to Re-print them in the same Volume with The Snake and Defence that that Author's Works upon this Subject might be all alike and more portable So that if others of them should be Re-printed or New Added it will be no prejudice to them who have this There is one small thing added to this which was wrote before that Author did engage with the Quakers It is a Letter concerning the Socinian Trinity But it is as proper for the Quaker as the Socinian Controversy for they are all one upon this Point And the Quakers have the same Salvo's as the Socinians to reconcile their Trinity making it only Three Manifestations or Operations And are answerable in the same manner as the Socinians for the many Absurdities and Blasphemies of this their Notion of the Trinity which they have taken up to avoid the far less Difficulties which they apprehended to be greater in the Catholick Doctrine of Three Persons in One and the same Pure Essence and Substance This small thing being only a Letter to a Private Friend which he procur'd to be printed was not meant to comprehend all that Controversy but to give in short a Summary View of it To shew the unreasonableness of their Exceptions And that they are divided into more and more Contradictory and Fundamentally Material Different and Opposite Hypotheses than what they object in the several Explanations of the Orthodox upon that Unfathomable and Glorious Mystery But if it please God to lend that Author Health and Ability he intends to consider of that Controversy with greater Care He not thinking it sufficient to have proved the Quakers to be Socinians though many of them know it not without likewise shewing the Falacy and Weakness of those Principles and Prejudices upon which both of them do proceed Which was not the Business of his Works against the Quakers they denying themselves to be Socinians and laying that Imputation upon others with great Contumely and Contempt as is shew'd in The Snake Sect. XI It was enough upon that Point to let them and the World see that they were Real though not Nominal Socinians But if God shall so bless his Labours as to speak to the Heart of the Socinian Heresie then will not only They and the Quakers be detected for meerly Nominal Christians but the Truth of the Christian Religion will be more and more vindicated and we be still further Confirmed and Built up in our most Holy Faith Quod faustum faxit Deus A DISCOURSE Proving the DIVINE INSTITUTION OF Water-Baptism Wherein the Quaker-Arguments Against it Are COLLECTED and CONFUTED With as much as is Needful concerning The Lord's Supper By the Author of The Snake in the Grass The Second Edition If ye Love me keep my Commandments Joh. xiv 15. LONDON Printed for C. Brome at the Gun at the West-End of St. Paul's W. Keblewhite at the White Swan in St. Paul's-Church-Yard And G. Strahan at the Golden Ball over-against the Royal-Exchange in Cornhill 1700. THE PREFACE CONTAINS I. A Short Proof for Infant-Baptism II. The several sorts of Contemners of Baptism amongst us III. The Presbyterians in Scotland IV. In Ireland V. In England VI. Too many of the Communion of the Church of England VII Whence this Discourse useful to others besides Quakers VIII The Particular Occasion of Writing this Dicourse THE CONTENTS OF THIS DISCOURSE Sect. I. THat Matth. xxviii 19. was meant of Water-Baptism Page 1 Sect. II. That Christ did Practice Water-Baptism 2. That the Apostles did it after Him 3. That the Catholick Church have done it after Them p. 4 Sect. III. That Baptism must be Outward and Visible because it is an Ordinance appointed whereby to Initiate Men into an Outward and Visible Society which is the Church p. 11 The Arguments of the Quakers against the Outward-Baptism Sect. IV. 1. That the Baptism commanded Matth. xxviii 19. was only the Inward or Spiritual Baptism p. 16 Sect. V. 2. That Water-Baptism is John's Baptism and therefore Ceased p. 18 Sect. VI. 3. That Christ and the Apostles did Baptize with John's Baptism p. 21 Sect. VII 4. That Paul was not sent to Baptize 1 Cor. i. 14.17 p. 31 Sect. VIII 5. That Baptism is not the putting away the Filth of the flesh but the Answer of a Good Conscience 1 Pet. iii. 21. Therefore that it is not the Outward but the Inward Baptism which the Apostles Preached p. 48 Sect. IX 6. That there is but One Baptism Eph. iv 5. therefore not both Outward and Inward p. 50 Sect. X. 7. That the Outward Baptism is to be left behind and we to get beyond it Heb. vi 1. p. 54 Sect. XI 8. That there are no Signs under the Gospel p. 63 Sect. XII The Conclusion Shewing the Necessity of Water-Baptism p. 84 A PREFACE AS Baptism is putting on Christ giving up our Names to Him being Admitted as His Disciples and a Publick Profession of His Doctrin So the Renouncing of our Baptism is as Publick a Disowning of Him and a Formal Apostasy from His Religion Therefore the Devil has been most busie in all Ages but has prevail'd most in our latter Corrupt Times to Prejudice Men by many false Pretences against this Divine Institution Having been able to perswade some quite to throw it off as Pernicious and Hurtful Others to think it only Lawful to be done but to lay no great stress upon it and so use it where it is Enjoyned as a thing Indifferent Others deny it to Infants upon this only Ground That they are not suppos'd Capable of being Admitted into the Covenant of God which He has made with Men For if they are Capable of being admitted into the Covenant there can be no Reason to deny them the outward Seal of it But this being Foreign to my present Vndertaking which is to Demonstrate to the Quakers the Necessity of an Outward or Water-Baptism in the General for as to Persons capable of it we have no Controversie with those who deny it to All therefore I have not digress'd into another Subject which is that of Infant-Baptism in the following Discourse 1. Yet thus much I will say of it in this place That Infants are Capable of being admitted into the Covenant and therefore that they cannot be Excluded from the outward Seal of it The Consequence the Baptists cannot deny And that they are Capable I thus prove They were Capable under the Law and before the Law of being admitted as Members of the Covenant in Christ to come made with Abraham by the Seal of Circumcision at the Age of Eight Days And therefore there can be
is plain that the word Baptism and the word Washing tho' not the same word have yet the self-same meaning 2. It is true that the word Baptism is often taken in a Figurative and Allegorical Sense to mean the INWARD BAPTISM the Washing or Cleansing of the Heart But so is the word Washing also as often as Jer. iv 14. c. And there is scarce a Word in the World but is capable of many Figurative and Allegorical Meanings Thus Circumcision is very often us'd for the Inward Circumcision or Purity of the Heart And Fire is taken to express Love and likewise Anger and many other things But it is a receiv'd Rule for the Interpretation of Scripture and indeed of all other Writings and Words that the plain Literal Meaning is always to be taken where there is no manifest Contradiction or Absurdity in it as when a Man is said to have a Fire burning in his Breast it cannot be meant of the Literal Fire So when we are commanded to Wash or Circumcise our Hearts and the like But on the other hand if any Man will take upon him to understand Words in a Figurative Sense at his own will and pleasure without an apparent Necessity from the Scope and Cohenrence he sets up to Banter and leaves no Certainty in any Words or Expressions in the World Therefore I will conclude this Point of the natural Signification and Etymology of the word Baptize And unless the Quakers can shew an apparent Contradiction or Absurdity to take it in the Literal Signification in this Text Matth. xxviii 19. then it must be meant of the OUTWARD WASHING or BAPTISM because that is the only True and Proper and Literal Signification of the Word And it will be further Demonstrated in the next Section that there can be no Contradiction or Absurdity to take it in a Literal Sense because the Apostles and Others thereunto Commissionated by them did Practise it in the Literal Sense SECT II. I. That CHRIST did Practise Water-Baptism II. That the Apostles did it after Him III. That the Catholick Church have done it after Them I. THat Christ did Practise Water-Baptism It is written John iii. 26. And they came unto John and said unto him Rabbi He that was with thee beyond Jordan to whom thou barest witness Behold the same Baptizeth and all Men come to him That this was Water-Baptism there can be no Doubt because 1. The Baptism with the Holy Ghost was not yet given For that was not given till the Day of Pentecost fifty Days after the Resurrection of Christ as it is Recorded in the Second of the Acts. This Spiritual Baptism was promised John xiv 16 26. xv 26. xvi 7. And the Apostles were commanded to tarry in the City of Jerusalem till it should come upon them Luke xxiv 49. 2. The Quakers allow that John did Baptize with Water and there is no other sort of Baptism here mentioned with which Christ did Baptize and therefore these Baptisms being spoke of both together there can be no Reason to interpret the one to be with Water and the other not It is said John iv 1. The Pharisees heard that Jesus made and baptized more Disciples than John How cou'd the Pharisees hear of it if it was not an Outward and Visible Baptism For as before is said the outward and miraculous Effects of the Baptisms with the Holy Ghost were not then given And since it was an Outward it must be the Water-baptism for there was then no other Obj. But the Quakers start an Objection here That it is said John iv 2. Jesus himself baptized not but his Disciples 1. Ans Tho' Jesus himself baptized not yet it is said in the Verse foregoing that He made and baptized i. e. those whom His Disciples by His Order Baptized For if it had not been done by His Order it cou'd not be said that he had Baptized those whom his Disciples Baptized But because He that doeth a thing by Another is said to do it Himself therefore Christ himself is said to have Baptized those whom his Disciples by his Order did Baptize 2. Ans That Baptizing which Christ is said to have Administred himself John iii. 26. might have been at another Time than that which is mention'd in the 4th Chapter And then the consequence will only be this That at some Times Christ did Baptize Himself and at other Times he left it to his Disciples Tho' as to our Argument it is the same thing whether he did it Himself or commanded his Disciples to do it For either way it is his Baptism his Onely his Disciples did but Administer what he commanded II. As Christ himself did Baptize with Water and his Disciples by his Commandment while he was with them upon Earth so did his Apostles and Others thereunto by them commissionated after his Death and Resurrection by vertue of his Command to them Matth. xxviii 19. after he was risen from the Dead What is said above of the Etymology and true Signification of the word Baptize is of it self sufficient to prove that by Baptism in this Text the outward Baptism with Water is meant especially till the Quakers can shew any Contradiction or Absurdity in having the word taken in the Proper and Literal Sense in this and the other Texts which speak of it And this will be very hard to do since as it is just now proved that Christ did Baptize with Water as well as John And what Absurdity or Contradiction can be alledged that his Apostles shou'd Administer the same sort of Baptism after his Death as he had Practised and Commanded during his Life Nay rather what Reason can be given why they shou'd not be the same since the same word i. e. Baptize is us'd in Both and no new Sense or Acceptation of the word is so much as hinted And therefore to put any new Sense or Acceptation of the word must be wholly Arbitrary and Precarious But as I promis'd I will Demonstrate yet more fully and plainly that the Apostles did Practise the Outward i. e. Water-baptism after CHRIST's Death Acts x. 47. Can any Man forbid Water that these shou'd not be Baptized Acts viii 36. As they Philip and the Eunuch went on their way they came to a certain Water and the Eunuch said See here is Water what doth hinder me to be Baptized And Verse 38. they went both down into the Water both Philip and the Eunuch and he Baptized him And when they were come up out of the WATER c. Acts xxii 16. And now why tarriest thou Arise and be Baptized and Wash away thy sins And to save more Quotations the Quakers do own that the Baptism of the Corinthians mentioned 1 Cor. i. 14. and 17. was Water-baptism Therefore I will conclude this Point as undeniable That the Apostles did practise Water-baptism And the Argument from thence will lie thus The Apostles did practise that Baptism which Christ commanded Matth. xxviii 19.
was the Form of Making them such If any will say that he Baptized them to be Disciples to John that will be answer'd Sect. VI. But as to the present Point it is the same thing whose Disciples they were made for we are now only to shew that Baptism in the general was an Initiated Form And when Christ practised it as well as John as this Text does expresly declare no Reason can be given that he did not use it as an Initiating Form as well as John especially when the Text does express that he did make them Disciples by Baptizing of them as above is shewn And pursuant to this when Christ sent his Apostles to convert all Nations his Commission of Baptizing was as large as that of Teaching Matth. xxviii 19. Go TEACH all Nations BAPTIZING them c. i. e. Baptizing all who shall receive your word And accordingly it is said Acts ii 41. They that received the word were baptized Pursuant to what the Apostle had preached to them Verse 28. Repent and be Baptized And accordinly we find it the constant Custom to baptize all that were converted to the Faith Thus Paul tho' miraculously converted from Heaven was commanded to be baptized Acts xxii 16. And he baptized Lydia and the Jaylor and their Housholds as soon as he had converted them Acts xvi 15 33. And the Corinthians Acts xviii 8. And the Disciples of John who had not yet been made Christians Acts xix 5. Philip did Baptize the Eunuch as soon as he believed in Christ Acts viii 37 38. And Peter immediately upon the Conversion of Cornelius and those with him said Can any Man forbid Water that these shou'd not be baptiz'd Acts x. 47. It wou'd be endless to enumerate all the like Instances of Baptism in the New Testament And it was always us'd as an Initiating Form 3dly Baptism was not only an Initiating Form But it serv'd for nothing else For it was never to be repeated As a Man can be born but once into this World so he can be but once regenerated or born into the Church which is therefore in Scripture call'd the New Birth It is said of the other Sacrament of the Lord's Supper as often as ye eat this Bread c. 1 Cor. xi 26. This was to be often repeated Baptism is our Admission Initiation or Birth into the Society of the Church and accordingly once only to be administred The Lord's Supper is our Nourishment and Daily Food in it and therefore to be often repeated And as of our Saviour's so of other Baptisms of John's and the Jews they being only Initiating Forms they were not repeated The Jews did not Baptize their Proselites more than once And John did not Baptize his Disciples more than once So neither were Men twice Baptized into the Christian Faith more than they were twice Circumcised or Admitted into the Church before Christ Thus having proved First That the Church is an Outward and Visible Society 2dly That Baptism was the Initiating Form of Admitting Men into that Society 3dly That it was only an Initiating Form I think the Consequence is undeniable that this Baptism must be an Outward and Visible Form Because otherwise it cou'd be no Sign or Badge of an Admission into an Outward and Visible Society for such a Badge must be as Outward as the Society Again Acts of inward Faith are and ought to be often repeated Therefore this Baptism which cou'd not be repeated cou'd not be the Inward but the Outward Baptism And thus having prov'd that Baptism commanded Matth. xxviii 19. to be the Outward that is Water-baptism 1st From the true and proper Etymology and Signification of the Word 2dly From the Practise of CHRIST and his Apostles and the whole Christian Church after them And 3dly From the Nature of the Thing Baptism being an Ordinance appointed only for Initiating Men into an Outward and Visible Society and therefore never to be repeated Having thus prov'd our Conclusion from such plain easie and certain Topicks I will now proceed to those Objections such as they are which the Quakers do set up against all these clear Demonstrations And shall accordingly in the first place take notice of their groundless Pretence in making that BAPTISM commanded in the Holy Gospel and proved and ORDINANCE External and Visible to be understood only of the Inward and Spiritual BAPTISM not with WATER but the HOLY GHOST SECT IV. Quakers say 1st That the BAPTISM commanded Matth. xxviii 19. was only meant of the Inward and Spiritual Baptism with the Holy Ghost THey say this and that is all They neither pretend to answer the Arguments brought against them such as these before-mentioned nor give any Proof for their own Assertion Only they say so and they will believe it and there is an End of it And truly there shou'd be an End of it if only Disputation or Victory were my Design For to what non plus can any Adversary be reduc'd beyond that of neither Answering nor Proving But because the Pains I have taken is only in Charity for their Souls I will over-look all their Impertinency and deal with them as with weyward Children humour them and follow them thro' all their Windings and Turnings and submit to over-prove what is abundantly prov'd already Therefore since they can give no Reason why that Baptism commanded Matth. xxviii 19. shou'd be meant only of the Baptism with the Holy Ghost and wou'd be content that we shou'd leave them there as obstinate Men and pursue them no further but let them perswade those whom they can perswade By which Method unhappily yielded to them they have gain'd and secur'd most of their Proselites by keeping them from Disputing or Reasoning and by perswading them to hearken only to their own Light within To rescue them out of this Snare I will be content to undertake the Negative tho' against the Rules of Argument and to prove that the Baptism commanded Matth. xxviii 19. was not the Baptism with the Holy Ghost For First To Baptize with the Holy Ghost is peculiar to Christ alone For none can Baptize with the Holy Ghost but who can send and bestow the Holy Ghost Which is Blasphemy to alcribe to any Creature Christ has indeed committed the Administration of the Outward Baptism with Water to his Apostles and to Others by them thereunto ordained and has promised the Inward Baptism of the Holy Ghost to those who shall duly receive the Outward Baptism But this cannot give the Apostles or any other Ministers of Christ the Title of Baptizing with the Holy Ghost tho' the Holy Ghost may be given by their Ministration For they are not the Givers that is Blasphemy And pursuant to this it is observable that none is ever said in the Scripture to Baptize with the Holy Ghost but Christ alone The same is he who Baptizeth with the Holy Ghost John i. 33. And therefore if that Baptism commanded Matth. xxviii 19. was the Baptism
And for the saying Then answered Peter There is nothing more familiar in the New Testament than that Expression when no Question at all was asked See Matth. xi 25. xii 38. xvii 4. xxii 1. Mark xi 14. xii 35. xiv 48. Luke vii 40. xiv 3 4 5. xxii 51. John v. 17 19. 6. Granting a Question was ask'd and that Cornelius as well as the Ethiopian had desir'd Baptism why must this be constru'd of John's Baptism Especially considering that Peter in that same Sermon which Converted Cornelius Acts x. 37. told them that the Gospel which he Preached unto them was that which was published after the Baptism which John Preached What Argument was this for Cornelius to return back again to John's Baptism Or if he had desir'd it why shou'd we think that Peter wou'd have Comply'd with him and not rather have reprov'd him and carry'd him beyond it to the Baptism of Christ as Paul did Acts xix to those who had before receiv'd the Baptism of John 7. But as to the Compliance which the Quakers wou'd have to John's Baptism and which they compare to Paul's Complyance in Circumcising Timothy I will shew the great Disparity First The Law was more universally receiv'd than John's Baptism For many and the Chief of the Jews did not receive John's Baptism as above-observ'd Secondly The Law was of much longer standing John's Baptism was like a Flash of Lightning like the Day-Star which usher'd in the Sun of Righteousness and then disappear'd But the Law continu'd during the long Night of Types and Shadows many hundreds of Years Thirdly John did no Miracle John x. 41. But the Law was delivered and propagated by many Ages of Miracles 'T was enjoyn'd under Penalty of Death to them and their Posterities whereas John's Baptism lasted not one Age was intended only for the Men then present to point out to them the Messiah then already come and ready to appear And no outward Penalties were annexed to John's Law People were only Invited not Compell'd to come unto his Baptism But to neglect Circumcision was Death Gen. xvii 14. Exod. iv 24. The Preaching of John was only a Warning let those take notice to it that wou'd Whereas the Law was pronounced by the Mouth of God Himself in Thunder and Lightning and out of the midst of the Fire upon Mount Sinai in the Audience of all the People And so terrible was the Sight that Moses said I exceedingly fear and quake Heb. xii 21. For from God's Right Hand went a Fire of Law for them Deut. xxxiii 2. From all these Reasons we must suppose the Jews to be much more Tenacious of the Law than of John's Baptism and to be brought off with greater difficulty from their Circumcision which had descended down to them all the way from Abraham 430 Years before the Law Gal. iii. 17. than from John's Baptism which was but of Yesterday and never receiv'd by the Chief of the Jews And therefore there was much more reason for Paul 's Complying with the Jews in the Case of Circumcision than in that of John's Baptism as the Quakers suppose When Christ came to fulfil the Law he did it with all regard to the Law Matth. v. 17 18 19. He destroy'd it not with Violence all at once but fulfill'd it leasurely and by degrees Vt cum honore Mater Synagoga sepeliretur The Synagogue was the Mother of the Church and therefore it was fitting that she shou'd be bury'd with all Decency and Honour This was the Reason of all those Complyances with the Jews at the beginning to wear them off by degrees from their Superstition to the Law Tho' in this some might Comply too far And there want not those who think that Paul's Circumcising of Timothy Acts xvi 3. was as faulty a Complyance as that which he blam'd Peter Gal. ii For that of Paul's is not Commended in the Place where it is mentioned And now I appeal to the Reason of Mankind whether Objections thus pick'd up from such obscure and uncertain Passages ought to over-balance Plain and Positive Commands which are both back'd and explain'd by the Practise of the Apostles and the Vniversal Church after them All which I have before Demonstrated of Baptism 8. But however the Quakers may argue from Paul's Complyance with the Jews the Reader has reason to complain of my Complyance with Them For after all that has been said there is not one single Word in any Text of the New Testament that does so much as hint at any such thing as that Peter's Baptizing of Cornelius or Philip's Baptizing of the Eunuch was in any sort of Complyance unto John's Baptism This is a perfect Figment out of the Quaker's own Brain without any Ground or Foundation in the World And therefore there was no need of Answering it at all otherwise than to bid the Quakers prove their Assertion That these Baptisms were in Complyance with John's which they cou'd never have done Whereas it is plain from the Words of the Text Acts xvi 3. that Paul's Circumcising Timothy was in Complyance with the Jews It is expresly so said and the Reason of it given because tho' his Mother was a Jewess yet his Father was a Greek and therefore because of the Jews which were in those Quarters says the Text he Circumcised Timothy that these Jews might Hear and Receive him which otherwise they wou'd not have done Now let the Quakers shew the like Authority that the Baptisms of Cornelius of the Eunuch and of the Corinthians Acts xviii 8. For that too they acknowledge to have been Water-baptism as I will shew presently let the Quakers shew the like Authority as I have given for the Circumcision of Timothy being in Complyance with the Jews let them shew the like I say that the foresaid Baptisms were in Complyance with John's and then they will have something to say But till then this Excuse or Put-off of theirs is nothing else but a hopeless Shift of a desperate Cause to suppose against all sense that these Gentiles Romans Ethiopians and Corinthians desir'd John's Baptism who rejected all the Laws and Customs of the Jews SECT VII The Quakers Master-Objection from 1 Cor. i. 14. I thank GOD that I Baptized none of you but Crispus and Gaius And ver 17. For Christ sent me not to Baptize but to Preach the Gospel FRom this Passage they argue That Water-baptism was not commanded by Christ because here St. Paul says That he was not sent to Baptize and that he thanks God that he baptized so few of them But In Answer to this I will first of all premise That a bare Objection without some Proof on the other side does neither justifie their Cause nor overthrow ours For when a thing is Proved Affirmatively it cannot be overthrown by Negative Difficulties which may be Objected You must dissolve the Proofs which are brought to support it Nothing else will do For what Truth is there so evident in