Sir what reason do you give for this have you any ground to run that parallel from any Text of Scripture Is it not of your own making and devising But since you are for plain Texts of Scripture for every thing pray where do you read that any Man or Womanâ— Face or Head was only Baptised or that â—ver John Baptists or Christs Disciples Baptised any person naked You tell us of the immodesty and evil of such a practice and that it may tend to gratifie the Devil and to the sin of Adultery certainly such a thing is utterly to be condemned and never was practised you know well enough by us whom you reproachfully call Anabaptists As touching what Mr. Baxter to which you might have added Dr. Featly hath said concerning Baptizing persons naked we know they as well as you were too much guilty of backbiting vâ—lifying and reproaching of us yet they had no ground in the least to cast this odium upon us we challenge all Men or any person living to produce one instance that ever any Man or Woman by any of our perswasion was Baptized naked As to what Mr. Tombs said to Mr. Baxter of a former custom in some nations of Baptizing naked it affects not us nor do I believe there was ever any such custom used among any godly Christians Nor did Mr. Tombs ever so Baptise any Maids in Bewdeley nor any where else If he said he could do it it was doubtless his weakness so to speak but I am not bound to believe all that Mr. Baxter hath wrote of worthy Mr. Tombs but since they are both dead we will say no more to that but any thing you can catch up you resolve 't is plain to make the greatest use of imaginable to reproach your godly Neighbours and the truth of Christ. In Pape 15. the Anabaptists you say make a great deal of pudder and stir about the Apostles words in Romans 6. 3 4. and have pressed them into their service the words are as followeth therefore we are buried with him by Baptism they will say you have it that this respects burying in Water over Head and Ears in Baptism and therefore they make it an argument for Dipping The Apostle you say seems to have been stirring them up and puting them in mind of their Baptismal vows and Obligations It may be as well to Children of believing parents that were grown up as to themselves for in vers 3 saith he know ye not that so many of us as were Baptised into Christ were Baptized into his Death that is say you as they were Baptized into all the priviledges that were purchased by the Death of Christ so they were baptised also into the sufferings of Christ for they were obliged by their Baptismal Covenant to take up their Cross and follow the Lord Jesus Christ c. 1. Answer You shall now see whether 't is only those whom you call Anabaptists that make such improvement of this Text you say pudder and stir about it or whether others who were and are Pedo Baptists do not make the like use of it viz. to prove Baptism is an Image Symbol or representation of Christs Death and burial and Resurrection together with our Death unto sin and vivification to a newness of Life But before I shall quote the Authors I must tell you the Apostle is not in the context speaking of the sufferings of believers not a word of bearing the Cross Therefore from the Scope and coherence of the Text you cannot infer any such conclusion as you do Pray Reader take notice of the 5th Chapter and the beginning of this 6th and see if I or this Man speak the truth of the Texts in vers 1. of this Chapter the Holy Apostle says thus i. e. What shall we say then Shall we continue in Sin that grace may abound God forbid how shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein vers 2. Know you not that so many of us as have been Baptized into Jesus Christ were Baptized into his Death vers 3. Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into Death That like as Christ was raised up from the Dead by the Glory of the Father even so we also should walk in newness of Life vers 4. For as we have been planted together in the likeness of his death we shall be also into the likeness of his Resurrection vers 5. Is here a word of the Cross or suffering for Christ or that we are Baptized to shew we must suffer Martyrdom with Christ no no unless it be the Death or mortification of sin or the old Man Tho' I deny not but such that are Baptized must look for suffering You say our Saviour calls his suffering his Baptism and a Blood Bloody Baptism it was but I have a Baptism to be Baptized with and how am I straightned till it be accomplished now you say the Apostle draws his argument from the premises in verses 4 5 p. 16. Answer 'T is very true the Apostle doth draw his argument from vers 4 5. c. but not from Luk. 12. 50. the Text you mention about Christs Baptism of suffering so that 't is evident to all you have abused this Sacred Text also and prest it in to serve your purpose Pray read all the Annotators you can get on the place particularly Mr. Pools and see if any favour your exposition of it 2. Tho' I have said enough to silence this Man or any other upon this Text Rom. 6. 3 4 5. in two Treatises yet left they come not into the Author or Readers Hand I shall repeat some passages once again Let all Men consider in the fear of God and take notice of the gracious design and condescention of our blessed Saviour in his instituting of the two great ordinances of the Gospel viz. the Lords Supper and Baptism for as that of the Lords Supper doth in a lively Figure represent the breaking of his Body and the pouring forth of his Blood so the ordinance of Baptism doth as clearly if rightly Administed represent or hold forth the Death Burial and resurrection of the same Lord Jesus Together with our death to sin and rising again to walk in newness of Life and that this appears from this Text and that in Col. 2. 12. shall God assisting be evinced The whole Church of the Romans and every member thereof were to reckon themselves dead to Sin and were bound to live no longer therein because by Baptism as in a lively Figure they had held forth the same thing nay by that Baptismal covenant they were obliged to live and walk in newness of life See Pools Annotations on the place where you will find these words viz. he seems to allude to the manner of Baptizing in those warm Countries which was to Dip or plunge the party Baptised and as it were to bury him for a while under water See the like Phrase Col. 2. 12. Baptism doth not only represent
for the House in which this was done was filled with the Holy Ghost so that the Apostles might seem to have been plunged into it as in a large fiâ—h-pond See Dr. Duveil on Acts 1. 4 5. The learned Casaubon was a Pedo-baptist yet knew better than to assert Baptizo is to Sprinkle or Pour but to Dip or Plunge as you here Friend what do you mean by saying All those metaphorical Baptisms are nearly related to the Ordinance of Baptism if you intend both signifies Sprinkling I deny it for both of them signifie Dipping or Overwhelming and so doth the Baptism of Afflictions also 't is not every small degree of Suffering that is the Baptism of Suffering Great Afflictions are so called and that from the literal and genuine Signification of the Word Baptizo to dip to plunge under and hence as I have elswhere shewed Vossius notes That every light Affliction is not the Baptism of Affliction but like that of David Psal. 32. 6. He drew me out of deep Waters hence also Sufferings and Afflictions are called Waves Thy Waves and thy Billows are gone over me Psal. 42. 7. it refers to Christ's Sufferings who was overwhelmed with Afflictions even unto Blood and Death The same as I have hinted is to be noted as to the Baptism of the Spirit it signifies the miraculous effusion of the holy Spirit like that at the Day of Pentecost Acts 2. 1 2. Now in this respect the Metaphorical Baptisms are nearly related in Signification with the Ordinance of Baptism I do confess for to Baptize in the Name of the Father c. is to dip in the Name of the Father c. and for a more full and clear Demonstration of this from a multitude of learned Men both Ancient and Modern See my late Answer to Mr. Burkiâ— entituled The Rector rectified from page 157. to page 206. Scapula and Stephens Two famous Men for their great Learning and accounted Masters of the Greek Tongue tell us That Baptizo from Bapto as to the first and proper Signification signifies Mergo Immergo item tingo quod fit immâ—rgendo inficere imâ—uere viz. to dip plunge and overwhelm put under cover over to die in Colours which is done by Plunging Grotius saith it signifies to dip over Head and Ears Pasor an immersion dipping or submersion it appears you neither know nor enquire after the proper literal and genuine Signification of the Word if you did you would certainly not say You think there is more to be said for Sprinkling for I would have you ask such as can tell you Whether in those Places in the Hebrews where Sprinkling is mentioned the Word signifies Baptizing or whether it is not rantizing another Word and of another Signification And as you regard not the literal so you mind not the mistical Signification of Baptism which is not chiefly to represent the Sprinkling of Christ's Blood but to hold forth in a lively Figure his Death Burial and Resurrection together with our Death unto Sin and rising again to walk in newness of Life as will farther appear in its proper Place See our late Annotators on Matth. 3. 6. And were baptized of him in Jordan A great part of those who went out to hear John say they were baptized that is dipped in Jordan Tho' they would have the Word to signify washing also which we deny not but then say we 't is such a Washing as is by Dipping always when applyed to this Ordinance 5. You seem very bold in saying Dipping over Hâ—â—d and Ears is more like a Punishment of Criminals than the solemnizing of an Ordinance of God 'T is no marvel you reproach us when you dare cast such contempt upon Christ's Sacred Institution it is to me a trembling Consideration thus to arraign the Wisdom of God Nor will it salve the matter should you say You do not think Baptism is Dipping for it may be so as far as you know and if you had read what a multitude of learned Men who were Pedo Baptists do affirm it is Dipping you would not sure have adventured to assert such a thing Suppose it be found at the last Day to be Dipping the Lord give you Repentance that you may have this Evil and all others done away through his Blood Sure there was as much nay more cause for during Men to have cast such a Reflection on that legal ordinance of Circumcision But you say Page 6 7. We do not find that there was either a River or Pond of Water in the Jaylors House for himself and all his Houshold 〈◊〉 be Dipped oâ— Ducked under Water for they were all Baptized the same hour of the Night c. 1. Answer Sir you should take more heed to your words and to what you assert Is it said they were baptized in the Jaylors House if it 〈◊〉 been done in a House our Saviour needed not to have gone to the River Jordan to be Baptized much less into Jordan Nor was there any reason for Philip and the Eâ—â—â—ch to have gone into the Water 2. Moreover doth not the Holy Scripture tell you that John also was Baptizing in Aenon near Salim because there was much water John 3. 23. Pray Reader note this well mind the reason why the Holy Ghost â—aith he Baptized in Aenon 't is poâ—sitively affirmed because there was much Water in that place intimating clearly that a little Water will not serve to Baptize Persons in Also observe what Mr. Pools Annotations say on this place of Scripture thus you will find it expressed viz. It is from this apparent that both Christ and John Baptized by Dipping the Body in Water else they need not have sought places where had been great plenty of Water These are his words that wrote those Annotations And if it be so apparent 't is as apparent you have been too bold to say that Dipping is more like a punishment of Criminals than an ordinance of God 3. What though we do not read that the Jaylor had a River or Pond in his Yard or near his House 't is rediculous to talk of a River or Pond in his House yet we ought to believe there was Water enough by or near his House to Baptize him and all his who believed You see it is granted by your own worthy Brethren Baptizing is Dipping there was nâ— need for the Holy Ghost to speak of the place where this Water was or whether it was a Pond or River And certainly they did not Baptize some and sprinkle or â—antize others Gospel-Baptism being but one and the same as to the subject and mode of Administration 4. How can you say Page 7. that they were all Baptized in his own House when the Text speaks not any such thing 2. How can you presume to assert that they did not go out of the House Reader observe the Text well Acts 16. 30. And brought them out and said Sirs what must I do to be saved Vers. 31. And they said
our Mortification and death unto sin but our progress and perseverance therein Burial implies a continuing under death so Mortification is a continual dying unto sin Look as after the Death and Burial of Christ there followed his Resurrection so it must be with us we must have Communion with and conformity to the Lord Jesus Christ in his Resurrection as well as in his Death both these are represented and sealed to us in the Sacrament of Baptism c. thus Pools Annotations The Assembly also in their Annotations on this Text say much the same things viz. In this Phrase the Apostle seems to allude to the Ancient manner of Baptizing which was to Dip the party Baptized and as it were to bury them under Water for a while and then to raise them up again out of it to represent the Burial of the old Man and the Resurrection to newness of Life Diodate in his Annotations saith the same Cajetan upon the place says we are buried with Christ by Baptism into death by the ceremony of Baptism because he that is the party Baptized is put under Water and by this carries a similitude of him that was buried who was put under the Earth Now because none are buried but dead Men from this very thing that we are buried in Baptism we are assimulated to Christ buried and when he was buried Tilenus a great Protestant writer in his dispute on this Text Page 88 89. speaks fully to this case Baptism saith he is the first Sacrament of the New Testament instituted by Christ in which there is an exact Analogy between the Sign and the thing signified The outward Rite in Baptism is threefold 1. Immersion into the Water 2. Abiding under the Water 3. A Resurrection out of the Water The form of Baptism viz. External and Essential is no other than the Analogical proportion which the signs keep with the things signified thereby for the properties of the Water washing away the defilements of the Body does in a most suitable similitude set forth the Efficacy of Christ's Blood in blotting out of sin so dipping into the Water in a most lively similitude sets forth the Mortification of the old Man and rising out of the Water the vivification of the new Man The same plunging into the Water saith he holds forth to us that horrible Gulph of Divine Justice in which Christ for our sakes for a while was in a manner swallowed up abiding under the Water how little a time so ever denotes his descent into Hell even the very deepest of Lifelesness which lying in the sealed or guarded Sepulchre he was accounted as one dead Rising out of the Water holds forth to us a lively similitude of the conquest which this dead Man got over death in like manner we being Baptized into his death and buried with him should rise also with him and go on in a new Life Thus far the learned Tilenus Sir 't is time for you to lay to Heart what you have done in trampling upon dipping or Baptising that is such a glorious significant ordinance as these Authors tell you and no doubt speak the mind of God And in the room of it exalt an humane and an insignificant invention Doth Rantism or sprinkling bear any proportion to those great mysteries here mentioned doth that figure oâ— hold forth the burial of Christ or that of the old Man can a few drops on the Face represent that or what representation is there in that of a Resurrection Alass you know not what you do â—ut to proceed Ambrose saith Water is that wherein the Body is plunged to wash away all sin 1 suppose 〈◊〉 means 't is a sign of this i. e. that all sin is buried Chrysostom saith that the old Man is buried and drowned in the Immersion under Water and when the Baptized person is afterwards raised up out of the Water it represents the Resurrection of the new Man to newness of Life 〈◊〉 us Epist. ad Tradit Philadelph saith that â—â—lâ—â—ving in his death we may be made partakers of his Resurrection by Baptism Baptism was given in memory of the death of our Lord. We perform the Symbols of his death Mark it Reader not of the pouring forth of or sprinkling of his Blood nor of the Spirit no no but as these Authors say 't is a Symbol of his Death Burial and Resurrection which sprinkling in no manner of way can represent Justin Martyr saith we know but one saving Baptism inregard there is but one Resurrection from the Dead of which Baptism is an Image And from hence we know nothing of your Infants sprinkling See more in Sir Norton Knatchbul's Notes Printed at Oxford 1677. who to the same purpose quotes Basil the Great Lactantius Bernard c. Mr. Perkins 2. Vol. Cap. 3. on Gal. saith the Dipping of the Body signifies Mortification or fellowship with Christ in his death the staying under the Water signifies the burial of Sin and coming out of the Water the Resurrection from Sin to newness of life And in another place saith the ancient custom of Baptizing was to Dip all the Body of the Baptized in Water To these Ancient Writers let are once again add here for your further conviction what some of the chefest Prelates of the Church of England have very lately said on Rom. 6. 3 4. The Reverend Dr. Sharp the present Lord Arch-Bishop of York in a Sermon preached before the Queens Majesty on Easter Day March 27 1692. saith he and this in antient times was taught every Christian in and by his Baptism when ever a person was Baptized he was not only to profess his Faith in Christs Death and Resurrection but he was to look upon himself as obliged in correspondence therewith to mortifie his former carnal affections and to enter upon a new State of Life And the very form of Baptism saith he did lively represent this obligation to them For what did their plunging under water signifie but their undertaking in imitation of Christs Death and Burial to forsake all their former evil courses As their ascending out of the Water did their engagement to lead a Holy and Spiritual Life This our Apostle saith he doth more than once declare to us thus Rom. 6. 3. 4. We are buried with Christ by Baptism unto Death that like as Christ was raised up by the glory of the Father so we should walk in newness of Life Thus Dr. Sharp Dr. Fowler Now Lord Bishop of Glâ—cester in his Book of design of Christianity Page 90. on Rom. 6. 3 4. saith Christians being plunged into the Water signifies their undertaking and obliging themselves in a Spiritual sense to die and to be buried with Jesus Christ in an utter renouncing and forsaking all their Sins that so answering to his resurrection they may live a Holy godly life Also Dr. Sherlock Dean of St. Pauls in his Sermon Charity without usury on Rom. 6. 3 4. saith Our conformity to the Death and
Resurrection of our Saviour consists in dying to Sin and walking in newness of Life Which saith he St. Paul tells us is represented by the External ceremony of Baptism and rising out of his watry Grave a new creature Moreover unto these let me add what Dr. Tillotson the present Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury hath wrote see his Book stiled Sermons on several occasions 5th Edit Page 188 189. Speaking also of the same Text Rom. 6. 3 4. Antiently saith he those who were Baptised put off their garments which signified the putting off the Body of Sin and were immers'd and buried in the Water to represent the Death of Sin and then did rise up again out of the Water to signifie their entrance upon a new Life And to these customs the Apostle alludes when he says How shall we that are dead to Sin live any longer therein Know ye not that so many of us that were Baptized into Jesus Christ were Baptized into his Death c. Dr Duveil on Act. 8. Page 292 293. cites a most learned Anonimous French Protestant Writer in his answer to the famous Bishop of Meaux speaking thus viz. 't is most certain saith he that Baptism hath not hitherto been Administred otherwise than by sprinkling by the most of Protestants But truly this sprinkling is an abuse thus custom which without any accurate examination saith he they retained from the Romish Church in like manner as many other things makes their Baptism very defective it corrupteth its institution and ancient use and that nearness of similitude which is needful should be betwixt it and Faith repentance and resurrection This reflection of Mr. Bâ—ssuet deserveth to be seriously considered to wit saith he that this use of plunging hath continued for the space of a whole thousand and three hundred years hence we may understand that we did not carefully as it was meet examine things which we have received from the Romish Church Calvin also saith l. 4. c. 16. that Baptism is a form or way of burial and none but such as are already dead to sin or have repented from dead works are to be buried But now say we sprinkling and pouring is not the form of Baptism because not the form of a Burial nor can Infants be the subjects of it because as the learned observe Baptism is a Symbol of present not of future regeneration 't is an outward sign of that Death unto sin which the party Baptised passed under then or ought to have had before Baptis'd they then professed themselves to be Dead to sin i. e. when they were Buried with Christ in their Baptism for the argument of the Apostle lies in that respect How shall we that are Dead to sin live any longer therein know you not that so many of us who were Baptized into Christ were Baptized into his Death both in sign and signification And therefore as Dr. Sherlock says they rise out of that watry Grave as new born Creatures it denotes not only what they should be hereafter but what they were actually at that time So that as this Text and arguments drawn there from utterly condemn sprinkling and pouring as that which is not Christs true Baptism so it excludes Infants from being the true subjects thereof because in them appears no such Death to Sin nor can they be said to come out of that Watry Grave as new born Creatures I will only quote one Author more and proceed and that is learned Zanchy on Col. 2. 12. There are saith he two parts in regeneration i. e. Mortification and Vivification that is called a burial with Christ this a Resurrection with Christ the Sacrament of both these is Baptism in which we are overwhelmed or buried and after that do come forth and rise again It may not be said truly but sacramentally of all that are Baptised that they are buried wich Christ and raised with him but only of such who have true faith Thus Zanchy Now Sir see what a stir and pudder as you call it these Pedo-Paptists make on this Text Rom. 6. 3 4. Col. 2. 12. to prove Baptism is Dipping or a figure of a burial Would you not have us give the true sense of the Word wherein we concur with all learned Men I hope by this time Reader thou art fully satisfied that this Man hath said nothing to weaken our Arguments or Grounds for Dipping tho' ' twice as much we have said on this Account in that Treatise called The Rector Rectified but this shall suffice here as to the Mode of Baptizing CHAP. II. Wherein Mr. Shutes Reply to Mr. Hercules Collins Answer about habitual Faith is considered detected and clearly refuted proving that Infants are not required to believe nor are they without a miracle capable so to do nor are they intended in those places of Scripture that Enjoyns Faith on the Adult BEfore I proceed to take notice of what this Man hath said about Infants having habitual Faith I shall note two or three things by the Way 1. 'T is very remarkable and worthy the Readers observation to see how the asserters of Infant Baptism differ among themselves about that Faith they suppose to be in Infants for as I noted in by Answer to Mr. Smythies Cold resined Page 144 some of them as Thomas Aquinas asserts They have the Faith of the Church that being intailed upon all who are within the Pale thereof others say they have the Faith of the Gossips or Sureties thus the Church of England c. Musculus seems to assert they have an Imputed Faith Mr. Blake intimates They have a Dogmatical Faith only Mr. Baxter would have it be a saving Faith but does not tell us how it agrees or differs from the Faith of the Adult some as Mr. Danvers observes say 'T is a Physical some a Metaphysical Faith some a hyperphysical Faith Some say They are born Believers which proceeds from their Patents being in the Covenant and being Believers but this is to intail Grace to Nature and Regeneration to Generation nay and to assert all are not Children of Wrath by nature or as they are born and come into the World others say They are made Believers by Baptism that Ordinance conveying grace as Mr. Rothwell This Man asserts they have habitual Faith the like do the Athenian Society seem to intimate But which of all these shall we give credit to The Truth is they all speak without Book having no ground from Gods word to say what they do 2. We desire it may be considered and carefully heeded lest we still are abused as Mr. Collins hath been that we stedfastly believe and readlly grant it as an Article of our Faith That all Infants are under the Guilt and stain of original Sin as they come into the World and that no Infant can be saved but through the Blood and Imputation of Christs righteousness And also we do believe That all those dying Infants who are â—aved God doth in some way or
Trespasses forgiven Col. 2. 11 12 13. And will any Man says he yeâ— will Paul ascribe all this to those that did not so much as profess the things signified Will Baptism in the Judgment of a wise Man do all this for an Infidel or say I for an Inâ—â—nt that cannot make a Profession that he is a Christian pag. 31 32. He proceeds Arg. 23. The Baptized are in 〈…〉 called Men washed sanctified justified they are called Saints and Churches of Saints 1 Cor. 1 2. all Christians-are sanctified oâ—â—eâ— pag. 33. Now let me add the Minor But Infants baptized are not in Scripture called Men washed sanctified justified they are not called Saints Churches of Saints Christians nor sanctified ones Ergo Infanâ—s ought not to be baptized If any should say why did you not cite these Assertions of Mr. Bâ—â—tn's whilst he was living I answer More then twelve Years ago I did recite and print these Assertions and many other Arguments of his to the same Purpose â—o which he gave no Answer Arg. 24. If there is but â—ne way for all both Parents and Children to be adâ—iâ—â—â—d into the Gospel-Church to the End of the World and that it is upon the Profession of Faith to be baptized then both Parâ—â—â—s and Children must upon the Profession of their Faith be baptized and so admitted c. But there is but one way for all boâ—â— Paâ—eâ—â—â— and Children to be admitted into the Gospel-Church to the End of the World and that is upon the Profession of their Faith to be baptized Ergo. Arg. 25. That cannot be Christ's true Baptism wherein there is not 〈…〉 â—e â— lively Representation of the Death Burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ together with our Death 〈◊〉 Sâ—â— and V 〈…〉 tion to a new Life But in the Baptizing or Sprinkling of an Infant there is not cannot be a lively Representation of Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection c. Ergo. Arg. 26. That pretended Baptism that tends to 〈…〉 the glorious 〈◊〉 and Design of Christ in his 〈…〉 of Gospel Baptism or cannot answer it is none of Christ's Baptism But the pretended Baptism of Infants â—enâ—â— to 〈…〉 the glorious end and design of Christ 〈…〉 of Gospel Baptism Ergo. The Mâ—â—â—â— will now 〈…〉 As to the M 〈…〉 all generally conâ—â—â—â— the End or Design of Christ i◠〈…〉 the Ordinance of Baptism was in a lively Figâ—â—e to represâ—â—â— his Death Burial and Resurrection with the Person 's Death unto Sin and his rising again to walk in newness of Life that is baptized as the Sacrament of the Supper was ordained to represent his Body was broke and his Blood was shed But that a liverly Figure of Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection appears in sprinkling a little Water on the Face I see not and as done to an Infant there can no Death to Sin and rising again to walk in newness of lâ—â—e be signified And therefore-Christ's Design and End therein is frustrated Arg. 27. If Baptism be Immersion as to the proper and genuine signification of the word Baptizo as also of those Typical and Metaphorical Baptisms and the spiritual Signification thereof then Sprinkling cannot be Christ's true Baptism But Immersion is the proper and genuine signification of the word Baptizo and also of those Typical and Metaphorical Baptisms spoken of and the spiritual Signification thereof Ergo Sprinkling is not Christ's true Baptism 1. That the proper and genuine Signification of the word Baptizo is Immersion or to â—ip c. we have proved which is also confessed by the Learned in that Language 2. The Figurative Baptism was 1st That of the Red Sea wherein the Fathers were buried as it were unto Moses in the Sea and under the Cloud Pools Annotations on 1 Cor. 10. 2. Others saith he more probably think that the Apostle useth this term in regard of the great Analogy betwixt Baptism as it was then used the Persons going down into the Waters and being dipped in them and the Israelites going down into the Sea the great Receptacle of Water though the Water at that time was gathered on Heaps on either side of them yet they seemed buried in the Water as Persons in that Age were when they were baptized c. The 2d was that of Noah's Ark. See Sir Norton Knatchbull The Ark of Noah and Baptism saith be were both a Type and Figure of the Resurrection not the Sign of the washing away of Sin though so taken metonymically but a particular Signal of the Resurrection of Christ of this Baptism is a lively and emphatical Figure as also was the Ark of Noah out of which he returned as from a Sepulchre to a new Life 3. Metaphorical Baptism is that of the Spirit and of Affliction the first signifies not a sprinkling of the Spirit but the great Effusion of the Spirit like that at Pentecost Acts 1. 4 5. Shall be baptized c. on which Words Casaubon speaks thus See Dr. Duveil on Acts 2. The Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to dip or plunge as it were to die Colours in which Sense saith he the Apostles might be truly said to have been baptized for the House in which this was done was filled with the Holy Ghost so that the Apostles might seem to have been plunged into it as in a large Fish-Pond Also Oecumenius on Acts 2. saith A Wind filled the whole House that it seemed like a Fish-Pond because it was promised to the Apostles that they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost And the Baptism of Affliction are those great depths or overwhelmings of Afflictions like that of our Saviour's suffering i. e. no part free Matth. 20. 22. where you have the same Greed Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and like that of David who saith God drew him out of great Waters 4. The spiritual Signification thereof is the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ and of our Death to Sin and Vivification to a new Life This being so it follows undeniably Sprinkling cannot be Christ's true Baptism it must be Immersion and nothing else And in the last Place Finally To confirm that Baptizo is to dip both from the literal and spiritual Signification thereof as also from those typical and metaphorical Baptisms mentioned in the Scripture I might add further that this evidently appears from the Practice of John Baptist and the Apostles of Christ who baptized in Riuers and where there was much Water and also because the Baptizer and Baptized are said to go down into the Water not down to the Water and came up out of the Water John Baptist is said to baptize them into Jordan as the Greek Word renders it which shews it dipping and not sprinkling Would it be proper to say He sprinkled them into Jordan The Lord open the Eyes of those who see not to consider these things FINIS
believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved and thy House and they spake unto him and to all that were in his House vers 32. And he took them the same hour of the Night and washed their Stripes and was Baptized â—e and all his straight way Now from these words Mr. Shute affirms that they were all Baptized in his House that is in the Jaylors House 2. That they were Baptized the same hour of the Night 3. That they did not go out of the House to a River If you can see these three Things in these Verses you have better Eyes than I have As to what was done the same hour of the Night 't is directly in plain words asserted viz. He washed their Stripes As to the time when Baptized it is said Straight way If you will have the same Hour and Straight way to intend both the washing their Stripes and their being Baptized it is more than can be gathered therefrom but if that be granted might they not in that hour go a little way out of the House and be Baptized 't is evident he abuses the Sacred Text. 4. What reason hath he also to affirm that none believed but the Jaylor himself for so he asserts These are his words Page 7. We do not read of any one Soul of them that did believe besides the Jaylor himself before they were Baptized nor of any one act of Faith they exerted 1. Answer We do read in vers 34. And when he had brought them into his House he set Meat before them and rejoyced believing in God with all his House 2. He will say may be this was after they were Baptized I answer we read not one word of the Jaylors believing himself tell then I mean tho' he believed before and all his House believed before either were Baptized yet 't is not expressed by the Holy Ghost until after they had been Baptized and were come into his House and he set Meat before them believing in God with all his House So that here is as much mention made of that act of Faith his whole House exerted as of the Jaylors own Faith and as soon also 3. And is it not evident likewise that they were before out of the Jaylors House else why is it said when he had brought them into his House c. that is after they were Baptised take heed how you write at another time lest you provoke God by adding and diminishing from his Sacred Word In Page 12 you say you believe that there were more modes in Baptism than one for some went down into the Water and others were Baptised in their Houses but say you I understand not that any were Ducked all under Water it is possible their Faces might be Dipped without Plunging the whole Body under Water or by pouring Water on their Faces 1. Answer That which you again assert I again affirm is not true viz. That some were Baptised in their Houses what you have said of the Jaylors being Baptised in his own House all may see is without Book and without the least shadow of proof nor do you nor can you prove it of any other 2. If there were more modes of Baptism than one then there were different significations of the same ordinance and all of them could not be held forth in the Baptism of each person for such that were Dipped tho' it was but the Head only were taught the proper Mysteries represented thereby and those that were sprinkled only with Water or had Water poured upon them were taught the proper Symbols or signification of that mode but how absur'd that would be I leave to all impartial wise Men to consider 3. And if this was so how then was the way and ordinance of God in their Holy administration one and the same in all the Churches of the Saints you may as well say the modes of the Administration of the Lords Supper were more than one and so allow of the Popish mode therein who deny the Laiâ—y the Cup. Is this to make the Holy God a God of order or of confusion 4. If Dipping was one mode and Sprinkling another then would Baptism and Rantism be both ordinances of Christ ask the learned what the word for Sprinkling is in the Greek Tongue and if they do not tell you if they speak the truth 't is Rantising I will confess I have in this done you wrong and mistook my self But we deny Sprinkling is Baptism for Dipping of the whole Body is an essential not an accident of Baptism Baptism is compared to a burial that 's clear from Rom. 6. 3 4. as it is confessed by a multitude of learned Men who were Pedo Baptists as you shall hear anon Now will you say if the Face or Head only of a Dead Corps was covered with Earth and not the whole Body that the Corps was buried if you should would you not be laught at Our Saviour was buried not his Head only but his whole Body also in the Heart of the Earth and he whose whole Body is not covered all over in the Earth is not buried no more is he whose whole Body is not covered all over in the Water-Baptised Baptism is a lively Figure of the Burial of our Blessed Lord and of our Death to Sin and being Buried with him both in Sign and signification In Page 12. say you produce one positive command or example to prove that ever any Woman went down into a River or Pond to be Dipped or Ducked all under Water in Baptism throughout the Book of God or else take your human invention to your self these are your words Answer If we prove that a Woman by name was Baptized then we prove a Woman was Dipped because Baptized in Greek is Dipped in English and the Dutch as I have elsewhere shewed have so Translated the Word viz. Dooped or Dipped in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Now in Act. 16. we read of Lydia who was Baptized that is Dipped and in Act. 8. 12. when they believing Philip preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ they were Baptized both Men and Women That is saith the Dutch Translation they were Dooped both Men and Women our Translators have left the Greek word untranslated into our Tongue What difference is there between Baptisma Greek and Baptism 2. But Sir I cannot but take notice how often you add Ducking to Dipping Is not this to reproach and cast contempt upon us and on the ordinance of Christ of Dipping believers in his name The Lord open your Eyes and give you repentance in mercy to your poor Soul In Page 13. because every Sinner God draws to Christ must come to him naked c So you say it must be in Baptism viz. that part of the Man Woman or Child that is Baptized must be naked and so plead only for the Baptizing of the Face 1. Answer
5. Mâ—n Spiritual and savingly quickened from their Death in Sin and by the Holy Ghost whereof they are made partakers made a meet habitation for God Eph. 2. 21 22. 1 Cor. 3. 16. c. Page 106. Also see Reverend Mr. Cotton of New England on the Covenant speaking of the Ax being laid to the Root of the Trees Mat. 3. 9. Page 177 178. The first is saith he the Root of Abrahams Convenant which this People much trusted upon and that is that which John Baptist speaks of is the Ax laid to the Root of the Trees think not to say with in your selves we have Abraham to our Father vers 8. So that all their confidence they had in Abrahams Covenant Temple and Tabernacle and such things is burnt up and so they have no Root left them to stand upon But 2ly The Lord he saith hath cut us off from the righteousness of our Parents and from boasting of his Ordinances Again he saith it is spoken of the Ministry of John Baptist which did burn as an Oven and left them neither the Root of Abrahams Covenant nor the Branches of their own good works he cutteth them off from the Covenant of Abraham and so by cutting them off from the root he leaveth them no ground to trust to Page 21 22. you say the new creature in the Womb or in the Cradle is as perfect and compleat in all its lineaments as in the oldest Saint on Earth Page 40. c. Answer Sir do not mistake your self if Infants are any of them regenerated in the Womb then Regeneration in them is the first birth but Regeneration is a being born again or a second Generation which is wrought by the Holy Spirit therefore it can't proceed from believing Parents in any wise they can by their Faith contribute nothing to the second Birth Now shew at what time 't is that regeneration is wrought in your Infants O take heed for tho' God doth regenerate the Souls of dying Infants that are saved Yet what is this to the Infants of Believers as such Besides if John Baptist or Jeremiah the Prophet were Regenerated in the Womb or any other Infants then it would follow they were not born Children of wrath as others Nor could their Regeneration be called a being born again as I hinted before but their first Birth must be so called You I see apply those Scriptures where our Lord Jesus Speaks of the Adult to Infants as that Mark 16. 16. John 3. 3. So that Infants by your notion are required to believe and to be born again nay you in Page 24 25 Châ—llenge Mr. Collins in the name of the Lord to produce â—at one Text of Scripture that dâ—â—h discover any other way or means wherein God hath ordained and appointed to save Elect. dying Infants in differing in any point or part of it from that wherein he saves Adult believers Again in Page 19. say you where will you find two ways for the saving Elect Persons c. Answer As to the way of Salvation 't is we gâ—ant but one viz. Christ is the way nor is there Salvation in any other But the mode or manner may differ about the Application or means of that one way in some points as may appear to all viz. 1. The Adult except Ideots are not saved without the Act and exercise of Faith dying Infants are 2ly The Adult are not saved without actual repentance but dying Infants are 3ly The Adult are not saved without Mortification of Sin taking up the Cross and following of Christ. But Infants are saved without any of these or any other Sacred Acts of obedience whatsoever and yet will you say the way as to the Mode or manner of the Salvation of dying Infants differs in no one point from Adult persons How will you prove that 't is the habit of Faith and not the Act of Faith that applies Christs merits and Righteousness to the Soul in adult persons is it not from the habit the Soul is enabled to believe and say hold on Christ and is it not thus that Christ saves the Adult and doth he just so and in the same mode or manner save dying Infants As to the producing one Text in the Case I say the Holy Ghost is wholly silent as touching the way or manner of the application of Christs merits to dying Infants or how their sinful natures are sanctified yet that the modes differ in many respects as I have shewed is evident As to what you say in Page 4â— I ask how do you knâ—â— but that some of the dying Infants of â—fiâ—â—ls may be elected as well as some Infants of believers and so in as good a condition â—â—y â—â—w 〈◊〉 on know but that all Infants dying in Infancy may be elected sure I am naturally all are born in â—in and I know no difference in that respect nor is there any when grown up till grace is infused ' 〈…〉 e and not the natural Birth that makes any difference between the Children of Believers and the Children of unbelievers and I do affirm till Children have actual Faith or do believe and repent they have no right to the Ordinance of Baptism nor have you proved the contrary nor ever will The Church of England acknowledg the same viz. that Infants are not able to perform Faith and Repentance the two great prerequisits of Baptism by reason of their tender age therefore they have found out sureties to ingage for them In Page 57. you greatly abuse Mr. Collins in saying that he allows not Elect dying Infants to be in the Covenant of Grace Doth it follow because he denies the Infants of believers as such to be in the Covenant of grace therefore he denies elect Infants to be in the Covenant of Grace Sir you ought not to bear false witness against your neighbour as you have done he will tell you and hath told you that all that are saved are in the Covenant of Grace Reader Pray note how disengenuous this Man seems to be and how he hath strangely encumbred the present controversie in talk of habitual grace in dying Infants for what is that to the purpose since he refers not to such Infants of believers that live he himself acknowledges that all their Infants who live have not the habit of Faith Nor can he prove any of them have it or such that die either therefore unless no other but dying Infants were baptized by the Pedo Baptists this can no ways concern the controversie 2. Consider that since those supposed habits in Infants of believers do not appear to us nor do we know which they are what ground it there to Baptise any of them For what appears not is not as to us Shouâ—d we Baptise any Adult persons in whom no Fruit Sign or demonstration of Faith appears than what appears in Infants certainly we should be worthy of the greatest blame imaginable For 't is evident that in all whosoever that are the true subjects of
typical Covenant was taken away This being so it follows clearly that the Covenant Gen. 17. was only a peculiar external and Typical Covenant made with Abraham and his carnal Seed in which Justification pardon of sin Adoption and Eternal Life was not contained but in the free Promise only God made to him that Covenant had in it it is true temporal Blessings apolitical Church state and typical worship and visible legal Church Membership given to Israel in subserviency to the Gospel Covenant And further to prove that the promise of the Covenant of Grace did not belong to Abraham's natural Seed as such Paul shews in Gal. 3. 16. Now to Abraham and to his Seed was the promise made he saith not to seeds as of many but to thy Seed which is Christ. And therefore saith he vers 29. and if ye be Christs then are you Abrahams Seed and heirs according to the promise Ye must say I reckon from Christ not from Abraham but Mr. Shute misrepresents me here also as if I set Abraham before Christ when 't is evident I intimated no other thing than this i. e. you must see your selves first in Christ before you can reckon your selves to be Abrahams Seed Again I cited Page 17. part 1. that in Rom. 9. 7 8. Neither because they are the Seed of Abraham are they all Children but in Isaac shall thy Seed be called 7. That is they which are the Children of the Flesh these are not the Children of God But the Children of the promise are counted for the Seed What can be more clear than this viz. that the natural Seed of Abraham as such called here the Children of the Flesh are not his Spiritual Seed to whom the Covenant of Grace doth belong unto that is saith the Apostle They which are the Children of the Flesh these are not he Children of God that is as such or as simply so considered For some of the natural Seed of Abraham tho' not all were the Children of the promise for saith he they are not all Israel that are of Israel vers 6. This Man meddles not with my arguments and what he catches up he generally wrongs and abuses me in rendring me to speak that which I speak not nor intended But to proceed he says Page 132. Both the Seeds of Abraham had a right to all the external benefits and priviledges of the everlasting Covenant God made with Abraham very few excepted Answer What few he means that are excepted I know not but if all the Spiritual Seed of Abraham had right to all the external benefits and priviledges of the external Covenant God made with him then all believing Gentiles and their Elect Infants have or had a right to circumcision the giving of the Law the possession of the Land of Canaan and all other rites of the Mosaical Law 2. If by the everlasting Covenant he means the Covenant of Grace then all Abrahams natural Seed as such a few excepted have or had a right to Baptism the Lords Supper and all Gospel Churche-priviledges and if so why were the Sadduâ—ees and Pharisees and Multitudes more of Abrahams natural Seed refused and not admitted to the external benefits and priviledges of the Gospel or Covenant of Grace Think not to say saith John Baptist within your selves ye have Abraham to your Father when they came to be Baptized he proceeds to prove several things that none denys Aâ— that the Covenant of Works was made with Adam and all mankind in him and that there is but two Covenants that all the elect under the Law were in the Covenant of Grace c. Then in Page 134 Shews what a Straight he is in and knows not which to wonder at most 1. At our boldness and confidence and imposing our sallacious corrupt Doctrins upon the People 2. Or at the Peoples ignorance to suffer themselves to be so horribly deluded and imposed upon Answer I do not much wonder at such lines because I know who wrote them and in what Spirit but Sir you should first have proved any Doctrin we maintain to be corrupt and fallacious 2. That we impose those Doctrins upon the People Dare you falsly charge and condemn the innocent we are not yet convicted nor tryed at a lawful Bar But both you and we must appear at a righteous and just tribunal ere long You proceed to renew your charge against me for leaving out everlasting Covenant Friend I quoted those Verses that concerned the point I had in hand and have cited that Verse and answered it too where circumcision is called an everlasting Covenant see Ax laid to the Root and I will now recite what I there wrote 2. Part Page 1â— viz. the Covenant of circumcision was called an everlasting Covenant My Answer there to this is as followeth Answer 'T is not unknown to our Opponents that the word everlasting sometimes signifies no more than a long continuance of time and so extensive was the promise of Gods peculiar favours to the natural Seed of Abraham and the original of their claim therefrom that the severity of that â—aw afterwards given to them was so far restrained as that notwithstanding their manifold breach of Covenant with God and forfeture of all legal claims of their right and priviledges in the Land of Canaan thereby that they were never cut off from that good Land and ceased to be peculiar People unto God until the End or period of that time determined by the Almighty was fully come Which was at the Revelation of the Mâ—ssiah and the setting up his Spiritual Temple under the Dispensation of the Gospel and thus far the word everlasting doth extend 'T is said God promised to give the Land of Canaan to Abrahhm and to his Seed for ever and again Gen. 17. 8. for an everlasting inheritance whereas 't is evident they have for many ages been disposessed of it Nor may this seem strange if we consult other Texts where the same Terms are used with the like Restriction for the Priesthood of Levi is called an everlasting Priesthood Numb 25. 13. And so the Statutes to make an Atonement for the Holy Sanctuary and for the Tabernacle and for the Altar is called an everlasting Statute Levit. 16. 34. Yet we know they all ended as did the Covenant of circumcision in Christ See more in Page 14. Ax laid to the Root 1. Now let any person see what blame this Man doth in Justice deserve for saying I have not mentioned the word everlasting in all my Book viz. circumcision being called an everlasting Covenant you also see what little argument lies in that to prove the Covenant of circumcision is a Gospel Covenant or appertaining to the Covenant of Grace Reader in those Sermons I laid down eleven arguments proving that the Covenant of Circumcision was part of the old legal and external Covenant God made with the Jews or the natural Seed of Abraham so not belonging to the Gospel Covenant and because thou
some things in one peculiar to his Spiritual Seed that no ways related to his Carnal Seed as such which proved the Covenant contained in promise to be distinct page 15 16. and some things in the other that belonged to his Natural Seed that appertains not to his Spiritual Seed as such of which this Man takes no notice I begin there with those things that belonged to Abrahams Natural Seed as such as peculiar to them 1. The first that I Name is That of Gods multiplying his Seed by Isaac 2. The Birth of Isaac by Sarah Abraham s Wife Gen. 17. 16 19. 3. The continuation of his Covenant with all that should proceed from Isaac according to the Flesh Gen. 17. 6. 4. The coming of Christ out of Isaac according to the Flesh. 5. The bringing the Natural Seed of Abraham by Isaac out of Egypt 6. The promise of giving his Natural Seed the Land of Canaan for their Possession Now can any of these things concern or belong to Abrahamâ— Spiritual Seed as such that is do they concern us Gentiles who do believe Observe also that as these things peculiarly appertained to his Natural Seed as such so Circumcision is expresly called Gods Covenant Gen. 17. Thou shalt keep my Covenant every Man Child among you shall be Circumcised verse 10. And ye shall Circumcise the Flesh of your Fore Skins and it shall be a token of the Covenant betwixt me and you verse 8. And I will give unto thee and to thy Seed after thee the Land wherein thou art a Stranger all the Land of Canaan c. so Gen. 15. 8. Now this Covenant and these promises I affirmed cannot belong to the Spiritual Seed of Abraham as such page 16. therefore a Covenant of peculiarity to which he hath given no answer Secondly I have shewed also what those things are that are Peculiar to the Covenant of Grace and so to Abrahams Spiritual Seed as such which Covenant only was by promise not a formal Covenant like the other viz. that of Circumcision Gen. 17. 7. 1. See Gen. 15. 5. Look towards Heaven tell the Stars if thou art able to Number them and he said unto him so shall thy Seed be and he believed in the Lord and it was counted to him for Righteousness This was not in the Covenant of Circumcision and referrs to Abrahamâ— numerous Spiritual Seed 2. So again I have made thee a Father of many Nations meaning Gentile Believers as divers Expositors shew 3. In thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed Gen. 12. 3. Gen. 18. 18. Gen. 22. 18. I cited the Apostles words Gal. 3. 8. The Scripture foreseeing that God would Justifie the Heathen through Faith Preached the Gospel to Abraham saying in thy Seed shall all the Nations of the Earth be Blessed 'T is remarkable the Holy Ghost does not here refer to the Covenant of Circumcision Gen 17. 7 8 9 10. But to the free promise of the Covenant of Grace which Paul says positively Abraham received not in Circumcision Rom. 4. 9 10. Faith was reckoned to Abraham for Righteousness how was it then reckoned when he was in Circumcision or in Uncircumcision not in Circumcision but in Uncircumcision Now I desire it may be well considered by all Christians that the Covenant of Grace was only by promise and no Formal Covenant with any of the Saints under the Old Testament thus the Covenant of Grace run to Adam to Abraham to David c. 11 12. only by promise not a Covenant where there was a mutual restipulation between God and his Elect ones As in the Covenant of Circumcision there was between God and Abraham in respect of his Carnal Seed this Dr. Owen asserts also on Heb. 8. 6. page 227. When God renewed saith he the promise of it to Abraham he is said to make a Covenant with him and he did so but it was with respect unto other things especially the proceeding of the promised Seed from his Loyns but absolutely under the Old Testament it consisted only in a promise 1. It wanted its solemn confirmation and establishment by the Blood of the only Sacrifice which belonged to it 2. This was wanting saith he the Spring Rule and Measure of all the Worship of the Church this does belong to every Covenant properly so called that God makes with his Church that it be the entire Rule of all the Worship that God requires of it which is that which they are to restipulate in their entrance into Covenant with God but so the Covenant of Grace was not under the Old Testament thus Dr. Owen This is further confirmed by those expressions Jer. 31. 31. I will make a new Covenant with the House of Israel c. clearly intimating he had not so made it before with any except it was with Christ as our Head Representive and Mediator with whom it was made for us and in him with us before the Foundation of the World Tit. 1. 2. 2 Tim. 1. 9. Object Does not David say God had made with him an everlasting Covenant c. Answer I answer David was a Type of Christ Psalm 89 28 34 35. with whom the Covenant of Grace was made before the World began this therefore refers to the true David who was only able to answer the Condition agreed upon between the Father and himself as Mediator For the Covenant of Peace was between them both Zech. 6. 13. For unto us the Covenant of Grace is not a Conditional but an Absolute Covenant I will be their God and they shall be my People c. To Adam the promise runs The Seed of the Woman shall Bruise the Sepents Head c. To Abraham In thy Seed shall all the Families of the Earth be blessed In both places it contained only a gracious promise To Abraham and to his Seed the promise was made it is not said Covenant therefore when I say God made a Twofold Covenant with Abraham I mean that there were two Covenants contained in those Covenant Transactings of God with him one a Formal Covenant with him and his Carnal Seed which contained a Covenant upon mutual restipulation which was the Covenant of Circumcision which Abraham and his Carnal Seed subscribed to the other a free promise or Covenant of Grace to him and all is true Spiritual Seed which is confirmed by Christs Blood and which believers consent to and enter into when Baptized upon the profession of their Faith in Gospel days tho' I deny not but that they have actual interest in it as soon as they have Union with Christ or do believe in him Moreover it was through Faith only in the free promise of Christ and in the Covenant of Grace that all the faithful were justified and saved who lived under the old Testament tho' the Covenant it self was not then formerly a Covenant with them it being not Ratified nor confirmed by the Blood of Christ or Death of the Testator nor could it so be till the