those very Benefits which are signified by Baptism are often set out by the Expression of sprinkling And if the thing signified may be sufficiently express'd in this way Cyprian Epist ad Magnum then surely it is sufficient that the Sign should be so used as to represent or express the same For the Sign is but for the sake of the thing signified Thus the Expiation of Sin by the Blood of Christ and the Communication of the Benefits of his Death is set out by Sprinkling 1 Pet. 1.2 Through Sprinkling of the Blood of Jesus Christ And Heb. 12.24 This is that Blood of Sprinkling that speaketh better things than the Blood of Abel And so Heb. 10.22 we come to have our Hearts sprinkled from an evil Conscience And the Communication of God's Grace and Assistance of his holy Spirit for the Sanctification of our Hearts and Lives is set out in the same manner Thus we have that Prophecy with respect to Gospel-times Isa 52.15 He shall sprinkle many Nations that is by bestowing his Word and Spirit upon them to convert and bring them to an holy Submission to himself And so Ezek. 36.25 Then will I sprinkle clean Water upon you and ye shall be clean from all your Filthiness and from all your Idols will I cleanse you And thus we find the manner was in the Ceremonial Cleansings as in cleansing of the Levites Numb 8.7 Thus shalt thou do unto them to cleanse them sprinkle clean Water of purifying upon them And so when any one was unclean with any Ceremonial Uncleanness he was to be purified by sprinkling the Water of Separation Numb 19.13 So that it seems that all sorts of Purification or Cleansing may be sufficiently express'd by sprinkling of Water or Blood So that the Sprinkling of Water in Baptism is likewise sufficient to express or signify what is to be signified thereby It being not the Quantity but the cleansing Nature of Water that is intended in it as a Sign to the Purposes to which it is designed As in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper it is not the Quantity of Bread and Wine that is necessary to the Significancy intended therein of strengthning and refreshing our Souls by the Body and Blood of Christ but Bread and Wine used in any Quantity whatsoever So the Significancy and End of Baptism doth not depend upon the Quantity of Water used therein but only upon that Use of it whatever Quantity it be in But say our Brethren of the other Perswasion that the Significancy of Baptism is not sufficiently express'd unless according to the Apostle we are buried in Baptism under Water as they understand that Place Rom. 6.4 We are buried with him by Baptism into Death Which Place they produce both to prove the manner of Baptism by Dipping and also the Necessity of it Whereas I think that neither one nor the other can be proved from it The Apostle's Design in that Place is to engage Christians to a Forsaking or Renunciation of Sin And the Argument he useth is taken from their Baptism because they are baptized in their Baptism into the Similitude of Christ's Death and so are buried with him by Baptism into Death so as to die to Sin That as Christ died for Sin so we by our Covenant-Engagement in our Baptism undertake avowed Death to Sin evermore to renounce and forsake it and to live a new regenerate Life answerable to Christ's Resurrection And this is to be planted together with Christ in the likeness of his Death Ver. 5. and so we are to be in the likeness of his Resurrection And our old Man is crucified with him Ver. 6. that the Body of Sin might be destroyed that henceforth we should not serve Sin Ver. 11. And therefore we must reckon our selves by this our Covenant-Engagement to be dead indeed unto Sin and alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord to live a Life of Holiness according to the Will of God So that 't is a departing from Sin which the Apostle here intends and argues from Baptism as an engaging Covenant-sign thereunto and makes use of the several Metaphors of Death and Burial and planting into Death and Crucifixion to express this departing from Iniquity to which by Baptism we are engaged But say they The Apostle alludes to the Practice or Custom of baptizing by dipping under Water But how doth that appear they must prove the Custom before they can prove that this is an Allusion to the Custom For an Allusion to a Custom supposeth it which must be made out some other way For it must first appear that that was the Custom before it can appear that this is an Allusion to it so that this Text alone doth not prove the Custom And we see that the Apostle's Discourse may be very well understood without supposing such an Allusion And yet if the Custom be owned and the Allusion be granted the Apostle's Allusion doth not prove the Necessity of it In other Scriptures we see there is an Allusion to Sprinkling yet we don't argue the Necessity of Sprinkling from such an Allusion Nor can the Necessity of Dipping be argued from this For the Force of the Apostle's Argument doth not lie in this that they were buried under Water though it be admitted they were so but that they were obliged by their Baptism as an engaging Sign to depart from Sin which they may be as well if Baptism were administred by Sprinkling so that the thing designed is equally attained this way though not under the Notion or Metaphor of Burial yet under another Notion that signifieth the same thing though not in the same manner And it is the thing it self that is to be respected and not as it is express'd under such or such a Metaphor And therefore I can never think that there should be so much Stress laid upon a Practice only for the sake of a certain Metaphor to be built upon it when the thing it self may be argued without it or under any other as well as that Thus I hope I have made out that there is no Necessity of baptizing by Dipping to be proved by Scripture And no body pretends as I know the Necessity of any other particular determinate Form Inference 1. And hence then I infer that the particular Mode or Form of Baptism is a thing indifferent as not coming under any Precept or being any way essential to the Ordinance As the Anabaptists do allow that it is indifferent whether Persons be baptized naked or in their Clothes though I think that that may fairly admit of a Dispute there being as they think no positive Rule for either So for the same Reason shall I make the like Conclusion concerning the Mode of the Administration whether by Dipping or Sprinkling 2. And then if the particular Form or Mode be indifferent then to lay such a Stress upon it as if the Worship or Ordinance could not be otherwise acceptably performed or observed can be nothing else but an unreasonable Superstition 3. And if it be indifferent then to make a Breach and Schism in the Church for the sake of it to cry down all other Baptism for a Nullity besides their own and to condemn all other Churches as no Churches and their Ordinances as no Ordinances and their Ministry as no Ministry for the sake thereof and to promote continue and carry on with so much Importunity a causless and uncharitable Separation and Division by means thereof must needs be very highly criminal I shall conclude all with the Apostle's Exhortation to the Romans Let us follow after the things that make for Peace Ch. 14.19 and things wherewith one may edify another 2 Cor. 13.11 And that to the Corinthians Finally Brethren farewel Be perfect be of one Mind live in Peace and the God of Love and Peace shall be with you THE END ADVERTISEMENT THere is lately published A Survey of the Bible or an Analytical Account of the Holy Scriptures Containing the Division of every Book and Chapter thereby shewing the Frame and Contexture of the whole Much conducing to the clearer Understanding thereof By way of Supplement to the Annotations on the Bible By Samuel Clark M. A. sometime Fellow of Pembrook-Hall in Cambridge and afterwards Rector of Grendon-Vnderwood in the County of Bucks Printed for Jonathan Robinson
thou and thy Seed after thee in their Generations And then follows the Institution of Circumcision ver 10 11. And ye shall circumcise the Flesh of your Foreskin and it shall be a Token of the Covenant between me and you And he that is eight Days old shall be circumcised among you Because God had chosen them and taken them into Covenant and into a near Relation to himself as his peculiar People so that they were thereby separated and distinguish'd from all the rest of the World therefore he appointed that they should have Circumcision as a Badg and Mark of this Call and Distinction and for a Seal and Token of the Covenant between God and them And when God hath continued the same Respect and Privilege to some Children now under the Gospel and hath appointed the Ordinance of Baptism to the same Ends and Purpose which all those that are his People and called Ones should partake of is it not reasonable to infer that Children who are called to the same Privileges and have the same Respect from God should partake of Baptism as the common visible Badg of his chosen and peculiar People and as a Mark and Seal of God's Covenant now as they did formerly partake of Circumcision which was the Token of the Covenant for the time being If Baptism be of the same Use and to the same purpose now as Circumcision was then is it not a reasonable Conclusion that Infants should now partake of Baptism to the same end to which formerly they did partake of Circumcision there being the same Ground for this as there was for that viz. God's Election of them into the Number of his peculiar People and his Covenant with them For the Covenant as we have heard is the same for Substance both then and now and there are the same Parties in the Covenant now as there were then as hath been proved likewise and Baptism is the Seal of that Covenant now which Circumcision was a Seal of then and the Church is radically and fundamentally the same both then and now and Circumcision then and Baptism now the Sacraments of Initiation into it And what though the Token be changed as long as the Covenant Church Church-members and Parties in it are the same and little Children are of the Number it is reasonable sure that they should partake of that Mark and Token now which is for Initiation into the visible Church and for Confirmation of the Covennant as they did of that which was then so for the time being and so that now Children should be baptized as then they were circumcised there being the same Ground and Reason for the Administration of either of the Signs viz. their being alike Church-members and Parties in the same Covenant The Apostle tells us that Circumcision was a Seal on God's Part of spiritual Benefits to Abraham and so consequently to all Believers then Rom. 4.11 And he received the Sign of Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith which he had being yet uncircumcised that he might be the Father of all them that believe though they be not circumcised that Righteousness might be imputed to them also Just as Baptism is now of the Remission of Sin and the taking off the Guilt of Death which cleaved to it and so of Justification which is the same in other Terms with that Righteousness of Faith then imputed to Abraham And so Circumcision was a Sign on the Part of Abraham and his Seed of their Covenanting and Obligation to be the Lord's and to labour after the Circumcision of the Heart as Baptism is now a Mark or Seal of Obligation to the Service of Christ Hence Moses exhorts the People Deut. 10.16 Circumcise the Foreskin of your Hearts and be no more stiffnecked as being that which was signified by the outward Circumcision And so the Prophet Jeremy in like manner chap. 4.4 Circumcise your selves to the Lord and take away the Foreskins of your Hearts This being that it seems which the Circumcision in the Flesh obliged them to And for this God's Assistance is promised them in the same Form of Words Deut. 30.6 The Lord thy God will circumcise thy Heart and the Heart of thy Seed to love the Lord thy God c. So that Circumcision then was for circumcising them to the Lord that is for the Dedication of them to his Service as their God Just as Baptism is now for the like solemn Dedication and Consecration of them to the Service of Christ and to depart from all the Filthiness of Sin and a Sign of Obligation and Engagement of Christians to the same Yea the Apostle shews that as the chief thing in Baptism now is not the putting away the Filth of the Flesh but the washing of Regeneration which is signified thereby so the Circumcision of the Heart was the principal thing intended in Circumcision without which that in the outward Ceremony was of no Value Rom. 2.28 For he is not a Jew that God will accept as the Seed of believing Abraham which is one outwardly only in the Ceremony neither is that the acceptable Circumcision which is outward in the Flesh but he is a Jew accepted by God as his Peculiar which is one inwardly and Circumcision is that of the Heart in the Spirit and not in the Letter whose Praise is not of Men but of God who searcheth the Heart In a word the Apostle intimates to us elsewhere that Baptism is now in all these Respects of the same Use and Significancy with Circumcision then so that what Circumcision was then Baptism is now and there is no need of Circumcision now to these Ends because Baptism doth fully serve to the same Ends and therefore is enough without Circumcision This is the Apostle's Argument Col. 2.10 11 12. Ye are compleat in him that is Christ In whom also ye are circumcised with the Circumcision made without Hands in putting off the Body of the Sins of the Flesh by the Circumcision of Christ and have the outward Seal thereof too in Baptism being buried with him in Baptism So that you have no need now of the literal Circumcision having both the inward Grace of it by Christ and the outward Seal of it likewise in Baptism as ye had before in the literal Circumcision And therefore hereupon the believing Jews might well be satisfied with the Abolishment of Circumcision when Baptism served to the same Ends and Purposes And it is no wonder therefore that the Jewish Believers that had a right Understanding of things acquiesced in having the Ordinance of Baptism to the same Use as Circumcision was and so that they made no Debate nor Quarrel about the want of an outward Sign to their Seed because they took Baptism to be of that Use that Circumcision was before which their Children likewise might to the same purpose partake of Whereas when Circumcision was abolish'd which they were so fond of because it was the Token of the Covenant
descended from nothing else than Apostolical Tradition And such was the case of Infant-Baptism And this Custom and Practice is still continued in the Churches of Christ Vid. Dr. Walker's Plea for Infant Baptism c. 27. though of several Denominations unto this Day All the Protestant Confessions of Helvetia Bohemia Belgia Auspurg Saxony Wittenberg Sweveland France and Piedmont do universally give their Testimony to it And Histories give us the same Account of the Practice of it among the Russians Muscovites the Christians of St. Thomas in India those in Syria Cyprus Mesopotamia Babylon Palestine amongst the Cofti in Egypt the Abassins in Africa the Armenians in Turky the Maronites inhabiting Aleppo Damascus Tripoly of Syria Cyprus and Mount Libanus And many of these Churches are at vast Distance one from another and therefore can have but very little Intercourse or Communication one with another And as for the Abassine and Indian Churches they seem in all Probability to be Original Plantations and not to have derived their Faith and Practice from any other Churches and yet all retain and continue the Practice of baptizing Infants These things one would think should be enough to sway with all modest Persons And they would learn not to prefer the new upstart Opinions of those who because of the Smalness of their Number are fain to call themselves the little Flock before the universal consentient Practice of all the Churches of Christ besides in the World An humble Person should far more highly esteem of Godly Antiquity and the Universal Church than of such late and novel Singularity Objections against Infant-Baptism answered HAving thus with all possible convenient Brevity endeavoured to clear up and confirm the Doctrine and Practice of Infant-Baptism I shall now consider the Objections that use commonly to be raised against it and shall endeavour to give them a satisfactory Answer Object 1. That Infants are not capable of the Ends of Baptism that it doth them no Good but they are as well without it as with it because there is no Benefit that they can receive thereby Answ The contrary to this is most true For 1. They are capable of Baptism as it is an outward Badg or Mark of their Relation to God as his Children and peculiar People and of God's gracious Respect to them and owning them for such and so as it is a visible Rite of their Admission into the visible Church of Christ This is one of the Ends of Baptism and Infants are capable of this because for this End it may be administred to those that are meerly passive and do not understand any thing of the Matter As Infants are capable of Civil Adoption and of being entred into any Family Tribe College or other Society by such a Rite as shall be appointed for that end And thus Infants in the Jewish Church were baptized to this end together with their proselyted Parents as we have seen before and we do not find that ever any of the Prophets or our Saviour or the Apostles did find fault upon the Account of Infants Incapacity or otherwise therefore we may conclude that they were capable of Baptism and that their Baptism was likewise well approved of And so by God's own Appointment and Institution Infants were circumcised to the aforesaid Ends and Purposes And how are they uncapable then of Baptism to the same Ends to which they were capable of Circumcision 2. Infants are capable of Baptism as it is a Sign or Note or Seal on God's or Christ's Part to assure us of his gracious Favour to us and to consign over to us the Benefits of the Covenant of Grace Thus Infants are capable of Baptism as it is a Mark or Seal of the Remission or doing away that original Guilt and Obligation to Death which they derived from the first Adam and of their being brought into a new State of Regeneration and Life by Christ Jesus And so as it is a Seal of the Promise and Gift of the Spirit for the sanctifying and renewing them hereafter though for the present they understand nothing of it For it is sufficient also for this that they be meerly passive in the Administration As Baptism is to the Adult a Sign or Seal of the Remission or washing away of that original Guilt which they have from Adam and also of that which they have contracted by their own actual Sin so may Baptism be a Sign or Seal of the washing away of the original Guilt to Infants derived from Adam though they have no Guilt at all of any actual Sin of their own to be remitted or wash'd away And yet as Baptism is a Sign or Seal of the new Covenant for the Remission of all Sin to Believers not only of what is past but also of what is to come when they come to repent of it and to perform the Terms of the Gospel required to such Remission so may Baptism be to Infants a Sign or Seal of the Remission of all the actual Sin that shall ever be committed by them upon their future performing of the same Terms And so as Baptism is to the Adult a Sign or Seal of their being brought into a new Regenerate State and of having a Right to Life by virtue of their Adoption their Sin being done away by the Blood of Christ so may it likewise be to Infants a Sign and Seal of God's gracious Favour in giving them a Right to the Heavenly Inheritance As Infants by virtue of any Civil Adoption may be Heirs to a Temporal Estate and are capable of any Acts of Favour from Man and to be instated in any Privileges Case of Infant-Baptism p. 34. before they come to understand what they are As suppose the King should send for a Traitor's Child out of the Cradle and in the Presence of several Persons assembled for that purpose should say You know the Blood of this Child is attainted by his Father's Treason and by Law he hath forfeited all Right to his Ancestors Estate and Titles and is quite undone though he be not sensible of his wretched Condition But I will pardon this Infant freely and here I restore him to all his forfeited Rights I justify him freely and declare my self reconciled unto him and moreover do adopt him into my Royal Family and do settle part of my Dominions upon him and as a confirmatory Sign of this my Respect unto him I do order and command before you all that he be washed with pure Water to signify that he is cleansed from his original Attainder and Corruption of Blood and that I am perfectly reconciled unto him Who would say that this were an insignificant or useless Sign because the Child did not understand the meaning of it Or who could say that the Child who was capable of the thing signified viz. the removing the Attainder and being vested in a Right and Title to a noble Inheritance should be uncapable of the washing with Water for a Sign
be thought unreasonable If God is pleased to own and adopt little ones for his why should our Eye be evil because his is good Or why rather should we not rejoice in his Mercy and Grace in behalf of our little ones If Infants may contract Guilt or lie under an Obligation to Death by the Sin of their Parents why may it not likewise be supposed through the Grace and Goodness of God by Christ that they may be invested with a Right and Title to certain Privileges and partake of the Mark and Seals of them through the Faith of others So that as God visits the Iniquity of the Fathers upon the Children unto the third and fourth Generation of them that hate him so he may also shew Mercy to Thousands of them that love him and keep his Commandments Mat. 8.13 Mark 9.23 John 4.50 And as some were brought to be healed by Christ and were healed through the Faith of others so why should we not think that Infants may partake of the Favour of God through Christ and of the Badg or Sign of this Favour with respect also to others Faith So that the Faith of their Parents may be said to be their Faith whilst they are in their Infant-state they being as Parts of their Parents and having no Use of Power Understanding or Will to provide for themselves till they come to Years of Discretion As the Parents Act in taking a House or making a Bargain or Covenant may be called the Child's Act as no less beneficial and obliging to the Child than to the Parent and binding the Child to the Performance of the same Conditions And what indeed is more common than for such things to be required of Parents before they be admitted to certain Privileges that when they are admitted to belong alike to their Children though they could not do those things Thus those of a foreign Nation must take the Oaths of Allegiance required to a Prince before they become his naturalized Subjects or partake of the Privileges of such but after they have taken the Oaths and are admitted to the Privileges of Naturalization their Children also are admitted to the same Privileges though they cannot take the Oaths so that their Parents Act is imputatively theirs or to their Benefit or Advantage And so why may it not likewise be here And as those that are born of Parents that are admitted into a Corporation shall partake of the Privileges likewise of that Corporation which those that are born of other Parents shall not so if such be the Grace and Goodness of God may the Infants of Covenant-Believers likewise partake of their Privileges which the Infants of Heathens and Aliens are to have no Right unto And yet all this while the Infants understand nothing of the Matter but are vested in these Benefits before they come to Understanding 2. Therefore I say as to those things that are said to be pre-required to Baptism that either they have no need of them at all in their Infant-state and so may be baptized without them or by virtue of God's Grace and Covenant they have the same Benefit without them to qualify them for Baptism which others have by them and therefore may be baptized without them though others cannot As for Regeneration in the most common Sense of the Word it would be very rash in any to say that they cannot have it in the Seed or Root of it For who can tell what the Operations of the Holy Spirit are or can be upon them But though they should not or could not have it in that Sense that we commonly take it viz. for an internal Change and Sanctification of Heart and Mind yet they have that which may denominate them regenerate Persons and so they may be mark'd and signed as such as being brought into a new and saving State by the Death of Christ which they shall not fail of the Benefit of unless they fall from it by their own actual Rebellion afterwards They may be said to be delivered from the Death of Sin or from the prevailing Power of that Death which Sin brought in there being the Forgiveness or Dissolution of that Death to them And so they may be said to be quickned together with Christ and so to partake of a new Birth by being put into a new State wherein they have through Christ as immediate a Right and Title to Salvation as those have that have been regenerate in the common Acceptation of the Word And why may they not then be qualified for the Sign or Seal hereof For how can there be any more required to qualify for the Sign than for the Thing signified which they possess or have a present Right to And though they have not Faith properly speaking yet being brought into the same Condition of Sonship and put into as immediate Capacity for Salvation as adult Believers are through Faith why should they not partake of Baptism which is the Seal of these Blessings as they do For though they have no Faith properly speaking yet being by Christ redeemed from Death and put into a State of Sonship and Life as actual Believers are though without actual Faith till actual Sin takes place they may be numbred in respect of the Benefits of Faith with Believers And if Believes are baptized to seal the great Grace of Adoption to them through Faith why should not they likewise be baptized for the Sealing and Confirmation of the same Grace seeing in that respect they may well be reckoned with Believers as partaking of the same Favour with them through the Grace and Covenant of God in Christ towards them For what Faith is to adult Persons through the Covenant and Grace of God in Christ that the Covenant it self is to Infants without Faith And so what Baptism is to adult Persons upon their Faith that it may be to them without Faith through God's Covenant with them alone by the Blood of Christ So that upon the Account hereof they may full as well be baptized as those that do believe because they have the same Privileges without Faith as Believers have by their Faith It being not Faith it self or Profession of Faith that is to be the immediate Ground of Baptism but that Sonship or Relation to God of which Faith is the Means or Evidence and when this can be evidenc'd without Profession of Faith there being no necessity of that Profession to qualify for Baptism as was shewn before in Cornelius and his Company And then as for Repentance while they are in their Infant-state they have no need of it and therefore may be baptized without 〈◊〉 they have no need of Repentance for Sin because they have no actual Sin to repent of and therefore their want of Repentance can be no Bar to their Baptism To those indeed that have actually sinned Baptism is a Baptism of Repentance signifying it already to be in some measure and obliging to it farther But where there