warrant have you to wrest this similitude to what you please in those similes which are most apt there may be many disconveniences found Or what commission can you dream of that gives you authority to draw this alledged Scripture beyond the Apostles scope and purpose rather to that which seems to favour your fancy and practise of immersion then to another sense 2. Those expressions Rom. 6. 4. are meerly figurative and therefore do not at all bind us to any external or literal sense or observance in the maner of baptizing if the similitude must fully hold some might possibly reason thus as Christ was first dead and buried and rose again the third day so we must first be dead and buried and then be baptized and rise with Christ a third time Marcion that old pernicious heretick held that one might be three times baptized or they might infer that we must not rise up out of the water into which we are dipt until the third day but how absurd such inferences are none can be ignorant 3. The alledged scripture concludes not the manner of our baptism but the effects thereof not how the water should be applied or in what maner we should be baptized whether by sprinkling washing or dipping but how we ought to live who are baptized that sin should henceforth have no more power over us then if we were dead that we should so live to righteousness and bringing forth fruits thereof as being implanted into Christ and so no more living our own life but the holy life of Christ. 4. He saith not We are buried with Christ in water or juâ—â— as Christ was buried in his baptism but into the likeness of his death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead so we should not be raised oâ—t of the water but walk in newness of life Here is the main substance of the similitude 't is not in any circumstance Now I would fain know whether a man may not walk in newness of life being baptized with sprinkling as well as if he had been doused 5. The argument here drawn to prove necessity of immersion is a fallicia accidentis a reasoning from the the substance to the accident Suppose thus We must be baptized into the similitude of Christs death But he was covered and rose again ergo We must be covered with water that we may be raised again c. Non sequitur his being covered in the rocky vault was but a circumstance as was his lying covered to the third day therefore it can be no more here concluded that we must be like Christ in being covered with water in baptism then that we must lie under water three days and nights in our baptism because he lay so long in his grave for why should one circumstance or accident be concluded rather then another 6. If the similitude must be so strictly urged it will be rather for us Christ was not thrown down prone with his face downward as they use to dive their disciples but honorably embalmed and decently laid in a new Sepulchre and we use solemnly to bury our dead with their faces upward sprinkle dust and earth upon them and in such decent posture we baptize Infants by putting our sprinkling water on them or by dipping them 7. Christs natural body was truly dead buried we must therefore understand that which must be done in us by analogy and proportion and not wrest the Apostles words to a litteral sense The body of sin is then buried when the power thereof is enervated and weakned and as it were a dead carcase is so over-whelmed and buried that it can no more move and force a man whither it would and was wont and this is said to be done in Baptism in a twofold respect 1. In respect of Christ into whom when we are implanted by baptism all the benefiâ—â— of his death are freely given and sealed to us so that our sins are buried in his grave who bare our 〈◊〉 in his own body 1 Pet. â— 24. so in his burial our sins were covered no more to appear in judgment against us or to be imputed to us 2. In respect of our mortification sacramentally accomplished in our baptism and by the Spirit of God by certain degrees in al our life long though bodily death being a privation of life hath no degrees he that is dead dyeth no more yet in our spiritual death to sin there are degrees we dye daily as the power of sin is more and more broken in us That baptism which is not agreeable to Christs or Iohns baptism is not instituted by Christ therefore mans invention and will-worship But washing or sprinkling with water agreeth not with the baptism of Christ or John for they baptized and were baptized in Jordan and the Eunuch was baptized in the brook Acts 8. 38. therefore baptizing with sprinkling or only washing is not instituted by Christ. We answer 1. This is a fallacious arguing the termâ— agreeable being homonymical 't is doubtful in the assumption whether he mean agreeable in substance or in circumstance that which is not agreeable in substance with the baptism of Christ and Iohn Baptist is not instituted by Christ but this holds not in point of circumstance for then there could be no lawful baptism but in Iordan or some other water of Palestine 2. It follows not that Iohn B. dived Christ or any other into water or Philip the Eunuch because Iohn baptized in Iordan where were some sandy places because we read they went down into the water for so they may do who only wet their feet or go up to their knees or anckles we must consider that in the infancy of the Gospel they had not publike Oratories and Fonts to accommodate them baptizing as in a setled state of the Church we have seen and therefore they baptized where they could have convenience of water which in that dry region was not every where to be had as appeareth in that reason of Iohns baptizing in Aenon near Salim given by the Evangelist because there was much water there 3. It is not probable that Christ was dipt cloathes and all in Iordan and so went immediately wringing-wet into the wilderness see Mark 1. 1 2 10. nor that he was stripped naked with such a confused multitude of men and women as 〈◊〉 to Iohns baptism see Luke 3. 21. Matth. 21. 31 32. Matth. 3. 5 6. 4. It is but a weak Fallacy to dispute à particulari ad generale thus some went iâ—to the river to be baptized therefore all that are to be baptized ought so to do for in things circumstantial and without some binding Precept to impose them as duties a particular example can beget no general rule for our due and necessary imitation 5. If it could be proved which all our Antagonists can never do that Christ and those whom Iohn baptized were duckt into the water when they were baptized yet
admitted to the Lords Supper But in this agument there is a Sophisma â—lenchi for first it wants the condition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if we follow your sense concerning spirituall infants taking infants for spirituall or reâ—enerate persons in the major and for those who are literally infants in the minor and it wanteth also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is no question but that baptized infants have right to the holy CoÌ„munion as they have to strong meat but not a capacity as such or while they are infants and God hath in express terms restrained the Lords supper to those who can actually apprehend remember declare forth Christs death 1 Cor. 11. 26. which because infants cannot do we give them not the Communion Secondly God hath denounced a grievous curse or punishment against any that shall preâ—ume without due examination of himself to eat of that bread drink of that cup but not so concerning Baptism it being the seal of our new-birth and reception into the visible Church and Covenant which hatâ— no such condition annexed as may justly exclude Infants in respect of any present non-performance thereof But the Lords Supper is the Seal of our growth in grace and spirituall strength instituted for the confirmation of our admittance into and our continuance in the Church of Christ whose death and passion for our redemption we thereby shew forth and commemorate for our spirituall perfection nourishment and strengthening in faith and other graces of his Spirit for our assurance that God having once received us into his favour will continue his mercy to us in Christ By these disparities the invalidity of the Pleaders Argument may appear And if it were true which he further saith that the wit of man is not able to shew a disparity in the sanction c. yet the wisdom of God is able and hath declared this difference in holy Scripture and the same can shew more then the wit of man can discern and hath shewed more then the learned Pleader doth or will understand who I conceive doth not yet know all that the wit of man or all the world can inform him of but is it not better even for those who have been in the Mount with God to cast the veil of modest humility over those excellencies which they have received and with which they shine to others admiration then to ostent them to the contempt of others The Apostle of Christ was rap't up into the third Heaven and yet professed we know in part and we prophesie in part 1 Cor. 13. 9. But you further say Since the ancient Church did with an equall opinion of necessity give them the Communion c. That which you said a little before They are as honest and as reasonable that doe neither to wit baptize infants or give them the Comunion as those that understood the Obligation to be Parallel we may very well believe and wish that either of them may prove honest hereafter But to that which you say That the ancient Church did with an equall opinion of necessity give them the Communion I answer 1. with Tertullian That is of the Lord and true which was first delivered but that is extraneous and false which is afterward received in And with Cyprian We ought not to heed what some before us have thought was to be donâ— but what Christ did who was before all for we ought not to follow the custom of men but the truth of God 2 Your own rule must binde you though it cannot others wâ—o consent not thereto they who reject tradition when 't is against them must not pretend it at all for them pag. 237. Numb 25. 3 It is considerable in that custome of the church as some other incoveniences which Augustine saith It is saith he one thing which we teach and another which we endure one thing which we are enjoyned to command and another thing which we are commanded to amend and untill we amend we are compelled to endure it And again who is eaten with the zeal of Gods house why he that endeavoureth and desireth to amend all that â—e sees amisse he resteth not if he cannot amend it he endureth it he sigh's the grain is not tossed out of the floor it endures the chaff that it may enter into the granary when the chaff is winnowed out 4 We adhere not so to tradition that we universally receive all that which was done or said of old things delivered by some but not generally received by the Church we esteem but superstructions of particular men or superseminations which possibly may spread farre as many pernicious opinions have done yet no sober man ever took them for Apostolicall or so much as Ecclesiasticall traditions we neither reject any tradition which appeareth to be Apostolicall if not peculiar to their times or suited peculiarly to certain times places or persons nor do we rashly receive any tradition for such except we are certain that the Scripture determineth nothing against it or where strong consequence from thence justifieth it 5 We conceive Augustines rule herein to be good In those things saith he concerning which divine Scripture determineth nothing certainly the custome of Gods people or institution of our ancestors are to be held for a law otherwise endlesse contention will arise also we must beware that the calm of charity be not clouded by the storm of contention 6 We will not rashly dissent from reverend antiquity wherein it dissenteth not from the truth we love peace with all who hold that in fundamentalls at least and therefore will follow Augustin's advice in that he piously saith concerning his reader where saith he he knows his errour let him return to me where mine let him recall me our rule being that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 11 1. be yee fâ—llowers of me even as I also am of Christ more no good man will require nor render lesse to Ancestors 7 Lastly we say that the Scripture which you cite Ioh. 6. 53. except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood you have no life in you is not spoken concerning a Sacramentall but a spirituall feeding and although some of the Iesuites and other Papists contend against us herein yet some of the most sober of them acknowledge that those words are not to be understood concerning eating or receiving the Lords super which ours generally maintain you might do your self right to joyn with us and not with the most eager Iesuites concerning the spirituall feeding of infants to eternall life by the merit of Christ applyed to them for their Union with him and salvation in and by him we willingly accord the manner of effecting by the secret power of the holy Ghost we enquire not after because it is not revealed but for the reasons alleaged we give them not the communion Next you say If Anabaptist shall be a name of disgrace why shall not some
as can appear in Scripture how much water must be used herein noâ— how deep it must be as there is no quantum of the elements prescribed in the Eucharist neither is there in all the new Testament either one precept for or example of plunging or dousing the party to be baptized over head and ears under water 3. In Circumcision the whole body was not cut but onely the foreskin of the flesh whereby the whole person body and soul was sealed and admitted into Gods Covenant and so is it proportionably in baptism the seal of Gods prâ—sent Covenant In common use we know the seal of a writing obligatory is not set all over the deed but to some one part by which the whole is confirmed and as in Livery and Seisin a little turf of grass with a twig or smal bough delivered to the Purchaser investeth him in the whole state of the demeasn So here 't is the seal and subscription of a just Deed which passeth the estate not the quantity of the wax or largeness of the parchment nor greatness of the Character whether Text-hand Chancery Court-hand Secretary all these things are circumstantial and no more and so is it in the matter of much or little water in baptism the essence whereof is applying water to the body of the baptized in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost There is therefore no simple necessity of dipping the whole body under water it is sufficient if the face which is as it were the representative or epitome of man in which are united all the senses be dipped washt or sprinckleâ— 4 In baptism lawfully administred by washing sprinkling or dipping the elect have the same interest in the death burial and resurrection of Christ as if they were baptized in the deepest channel of Iordan or any other water Faith which instrumentally gives them interest in Christ being no effect of deep waters but of those Rivers of living waters whereof Christ spake Iohn 7. 38 39. to wit the Holy Ghost 5 Sprinkling doth also aptly signifie our sprinkling with the blood of Christ in baptism cleansing us from our sins â—nd sealing our election 1 Iohn 1. 7. 1 Pet. 1. 2. and pouring water signifieth the effusion of the Spirit upon us Tit. â— 5. and those sprinklings of the blood of sacrifices signified the very same Christ being baptized is said to have come up out of the water Matth. 3. 16. therefore he was in it And the Eunuch went down into the water with Philip in neither appears any sprinkling or washing but rather dipâ—ing We answer 1. It appearsâ— that Christ and the Eunuch were baptized it appears not that either they or any other whom Iohn B or any of Christs Disciples baptized were dipped all under water as hath been said any more then that they were washed or sprinkled with water The word Baptizing in the original signifying sprinkling washing or dipping therefore we take it to be indifferent which of the three ways baptism be administred respect being had to convenience of times places and persons 2. The Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the cited places rendred Out of signifieth properly From as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From not from under the ships and so Christ might come from the water though he were never dived under it or though he had gone only to the depth of the first or second measure of the Sanctuary waters to the anckles or to the knees 3. Philip and the Eunuch are said to have gone down into the water Act. â— 38. for it was a descent to them the waters though shallow or possibly not within very low or hollow banks as Iordan and all great waters of Rivers usually run yet always running lower then the Superficies of the earth near the sources and channels thereof 4 The words Acts 8. 38. are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And both of them descended c. so the word also signifieth to descend or to alight as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to alight from not to come from under an horse or to descend or lâ—t down ones self or to come down from some higher place as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Budaeus after Suidasâ— or to go down to some even place as to invest an enemy to wrestle fight or encountre also to go from one place to another as Acts. 17. 15. it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iacob descended or went into Egypt Acts 10. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Get thee down and go with them So Acts 14. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they went down unto Attalia for so they usuually expressed going from one place to another as the Hebrews by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So far is that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 8. 38. they went down both to or into the water from inforcing the conclusion aimed at therefore the Eunuch baptized was dived under water that it makes nothing for it more then that Iacob going down into Egypt was therefore duckt in Nilus or Peter in the waters of Cesarea â—r Paul and Barnabas in some Attalian waters because these were said in the very same word to go down to these places all which being frivolous and vain your assertion must be left unconcluded for any thing to the contrary in these cited Texts appearing Add hereto that here is nothing said of the Eunuch as going down into the water more then of Philip for they both went down c. now I suppose you will not affirm that Philip as and then when he baptized the Eunuch in that administration stood all under water with the Eunuch or that Iohn B. in the like action in Iordan was ever doused over head and ears for company And how then can it hence appear that the baptized were more dived then the baptizers Behold upon what unsound grounds our Antagonists build their pretended necessity of ducking their disciples in Rivers or deep waters CHAP. V. Protestants arguments against the supposed necessity of dipping rather then sprinkling or washing with water in Baptism THat which the word used by Christ enjoyning the duty of Baptism doth indifferently signifie and commonly import there being neither express example nor precept to restrain it precisely to either that is lawfully and warrantably to be done in baptizing But the word used by Christ enjoyning the duty of Baptism or Baptizing doth indifferently and commonly signifie dipping washing or sprinkling and there is no express example or precept in Scripture to restrain it precisely to either Therefore in Baptizing we may lawfully and warrantably pro more loci temporis statu personarum eitheir dip wash or sprinkle in water In the name of the â—ather and the Son and of the Holy Ghost The major is out of controversie The minor thus confirmed The Word used by Christ Matthew 28. 19 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth indifferently to wash