the first and purest times of that administration If then the right subject matter to be baptized and the due external form of Baptism be both wanting in that Baptism which is and hath been administred to infants then certainly such a Baptism hath that wanting in it which is essential to the true being of Baptism For what is more intrinsecally essential to the being of a thing then matter and form Or how is it possible to define Baptism or any thing else without the matter and form which do intrinsecally constitute the very essence and being thereof And certainly that which is absolutely necessary to the true definition of Baptism as of all other things is absolutely and essentially necessary to the being of it And therefore where either the true matter or the right form of a thing is wanting much more where both are wanting which is the case in Infant-Baptism there doubtless is a total deficiency or non-entity of the thing it self which clearly is the case of Infant-Baptism in reference to the question in hand And therefore he that thinks to build any such thing upon that Baptism he hath received in his Infancy which is competent or proper to true Baptism indeed hath but air and vanity for his foundation THe second thing to be enquired into is Whether baptism by water ought necessarily to be received by such persons who have for some considerable space of time made profession of the faith though it be granted that they were never duly baptized before since such a long continued course of profession preceding baptism renders such an Administration of that Ordinance unparallel and without example in Scripture and since also the ends of Baptism hereby seem to be anticipated or prevented Which question I must needs resolve in the affirmative and do say That notwithstanding all that is pretended to the contrary it is a thing necessary and a duty incumbent on every such man and woman as hath not been baptized before with a baptism duly so called to submit to and take up the Ordinance of water-baptism though it be not till long after the time in which they first began a conscientious profession of the Gospel otherwise Here I take for granted upon account of what I have before delivered that Infant-baptism and no baptism are of the same consideration this difference only excepted viz. That Infant-baptism is a sin of Commission in those that occasion it and Non-baptism is a sin of Omission in those that neglect it when otherwise they are duly qualified for it In the managing of this resolution of the question I shall endeavour 1 To lay down some reasons and grounds thereof And 2. To answer those exceptions and objections which take place in the minds of some against the practise of Baptism upon such terms The grounds on which I do assert Baptism necessary though but on the terms before specified are such as these 1. Because it is a duty enjoyned every one that imbraceth the Doctrine of Christ or of the Gospel to be baptized one time or other This appears by that Commission which was given by Christ to his Servants and Messengers to teach all Nations or every creature as Mark hath it Mark 16.15 and baptize them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Matth. 28.19 In which Commission there are these two things enjoyned amongst others 1. That they should teach all Nations or every creature capable of this teaching i.e. should instruct them in the Doctrine of the Gospel or make them Disciples as the word is rendred Now if we would know what they were to teach and in what to instruct them we may take information here about from the practise of the Apostles when first at Jerusalem they began to put this Commission in execution the brief Sum whereof was to this effect That Jesus of Nazareth approved of God by miracles wonders and signes being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledg of God was by wicked hands crucified and slain and that God raised him up from the dead the third day and hath made him the same Jesus both Lord and Christ They also further taught the people that in order to their being saved by him they should repent and be baptized in his Name for the remission of sins Acts 2.32.28 2. The other part of Christs Commission was that having thus taught the people and made them willing to imbrace the Gospel they should then also baptize them in pursuance of which Commission the Apostles did accordingly in the place and time and to the people before specified Acts 2. For saith the Text ver 41. They that gladly or willingly received his word were baptized According to which beginning we shall find that they constantly proceeded afterwards Acts 8.12.35.37 and 10.36.48 and 16 14 14.31.33 and 18.8 Now then if it were the duty of these Servants of Christ to teach all Nations to repent believe in Christ Jesus and to be baptized in his Name for the remission of sins then certainly it was the duty of all these Nations being thus taught to obey this voice of the Gospel as well in being baptized as in repenting and believing And by the way lest any should think the Date of this Commission lasted but during the Apostles dayes the Lord Jesus in annexing the promise of his presence and assistance to those that should put this Commission of his in execuon causeth the Date hereof to run along to the end of the world Matth. 28.20 which plainly shews that he would have this Commission of his observed and kept on foot even unto the worlds end A second Ground is this Because Baptism being one of the Doctrines of Christ which is practicable ought therefore to be imbraced and practised by all that profess themselves Disciples of Christ and followers of his Doctrine That Baptism is one of the Doctrines of Christ appears by Heb. 6.1 2. Those things which in general are called the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ ver 1. being afterwards particularized the Doctrine of Baptisms is set down for one of those Principles It 's a Doctrine of Christ both because it is a Doctrine concerning Christ in and by which Christ is set forth professed owned acknowledged as also because it is a Doctrine which Christ hath enjoyned to be taught and practised And whereas the word is used in the plural number Doctrine of Baptisms it doth not weaken but strengthen the authority of Water-baptism as being comprehensive of that and any other Baptism taught by Christ Now that the Doctrine of Christ ought to be obeyed and practised by all that profess themselves his Disciples will not be gain-say'd in as much as at what time they give up themselves to him and in particular make a solemn Dedication of themselves to him and his service by Baptism they are said to be delivered into the form of his Doctrine as the Marginal reading imports Rom. 6.17 And
concession Answ 1 and do grant that the time of mens new-birth or babeship in Christ is the fittest time and best season and the New-born babes in Christ the properest subject of baptismal Administration and that it was the usual custom in the Apostles times to baptize new Converts and so ought to be practised in these dayes all this is that which I have already asserted over and over But then secondly I answer further by way of Exception 1. That it no wayes follows that because a man both ignorantly negligently however sinfully omitted the fittest and properest season of doing that which was his duty in that season to have done that therefore he is by that omission of his discharged from and disobliged to that duty it self It is the duty of all men to remember their Creator in the dayes of their youth i. e. begin conscientiously to serve God betimes Eccles 12.1 but shall we say that because youths have let slip this season and opportunity of grace that therefore they are ever a whit the less obliged to remember their Creator afterwards when they come to be old men Nay rather on the contrary does not the greater obligation lie upon them then if possible to double their zeal and diligence therein Though the fourteenth day of the first month was the proper time and season for the celebration of the Passover by Gods own appointment as being the precise time in which that was done of which the Passover was a memoril and from which it tock its rise Exod. 12.17.42 yet if any had omitted it in that appointed season upon occasion of their being in a journy or of their being unclean they were notwithstanding that omission to keep it afterwards on the fourteenth day of the second month Numb 9.10 11. Nay circumcision it self which was but once to be received though the eighth day after the childs birth was the proper time of that Ordinance also by Gods own injunction yet when this had been omitted about forty years by the Israelites after the appointed and proper time yet it was not uncomely for them to do that then which should have been done long before Josh 5.2.7 2. Whereas it is suggested as an uncomely thing for old Disciples to be baptized and that which tends to take away much of the beauty and lustre of the Ordinance I demand wherein the uncomeliness lies Is it any disparagement to the Ordinance it self that a tall and well grown man in the things of God otherwise should stoop down to it to take it up or is it any disparagement for him so to do Indeed it is a disparagement to him that he hath neglected his duty so long as all sin is a disparagement to him that defiles himself with it but it is his honour that he remembers himself at last and obeys his God acts of conformity to the will of God adorn the creature Yea a subjection to the will of God in this Ordinance is a comely thing even in persons of the greatest attainments in the things of God Christ Jesus himself though he was anointed with this oyl of grace above his fellows yet he counted it no disparagement to him or uncomely thing in it self for him to be baptized Suffer it saith he to be so now for thus it BECOMETH us to fulfil all righteousness Matth. 3.15 As long then as it is an act of righteousness or conformity to a Law or Institution of God to be baptized it can be no uncomely thing no not in one of the growth of Christ Jesus himself but without doubt it is a fowl disparagement and a thing very unseemly and incongruous to the profession of a Disciple of Jesus Christ out of a conceit or vain opinion of high attainments in Christianity to refuse to follow his Lord and Master through the water whose attainments I am sure were then greater when he submitted to this Ordinance then thine are at the highest pitch who ever thou art that thus vainly disputest with and foolishly rejectest the Counsel of God against thy self And because it is said by way of illustration that for a strong Christian to be baptized is a thing as incongruous and uncomely as it is for a lusty man to do an action proper to a child I demand whether a man having omitted to do that in his minority which had been most proper for him then to have done and supposing the doing of which would have had an influence upon him as unto his accommodation and benefit all the dayes of his life whether is it an uncomely thing for such a man now seeing his former folly in his former neglect to do that now at last in order to his future good through the former neglect whereof he hath sustained too much loss already As for example we know the time of childhood is the fittest time and season for the drinking in the first rudiments of learning yet this having been neglected by one in his childhood and youth it is so far from being an uncomely thing in him to learn to read when he comes to be sensible of his want of skill that way that indeed it is his praise and commendations that he endeavours then to fill up that defect in order to his future benefit Even so Baptism having a spiritual influence upon a Christian throughout his whole life and not only at the time of his first taking it up it therefore follows that if a man was so weak and injudicious in this particular at the time of his new-birth as not to judge this Baptism we speak of necessary yet for him to see his former errour and to repent of this ignorance weakness and sin of his when he comes to better understanding and resolve to be no longer without the benefit blessing which God hath put in this Ordinance for the continuall good and benefit of a Christian all his dayes is none of his uncomely things but that which renders him truly wise both in the eyes of God and good men It was the duty of the Church of Ephesus to repent and do her first works having through backsliding and decay fallen beneath them Revel 3.5 And shall we then think it an uncomely thing for a man to repent of his former neglect and now at last to do that which should have been his first work 3. Whereas it is objected that there is no example in the New Testament as to administer Baptism to grown Saints I answer that if this be true then it is because there are no examples in the New Testament of grown Christians their being unbaptized and so no grown Christians that wanted Baptism For that corruption of such a sinful omission of Baptism was not then crept into the Church and so there was no occasion or place for such an example And yet this example we have viz. of Cornelius his being baptized long after the time in which he began to fear and serve the Lord for his
himself thereby as is most clear in the case of the Supper of the Lord he that in eating and drinking does not discern the Lords body eats and drinks Judgment to himself 1 Cor. 11.29 And because this qualification of discerning is not found in Children therefore they are not admitted to this Ordinance And how they should be uncapable of this Ordinance in this respect and yet capable of Baptism I understand not especially considering that they both represent the death of Christ Rom. 6.3 1 Cor. 11.26 both relate to the great benefit of remission of sins by him and tend to serve the important interest of men thereabout Mark 1.4 Matt. 26.28 Since they both then travel with the same blessing in the main how comes it to pass that the blessing of the one accrues not to the receiver but by his discerning the mind of God in it and yet the benefit of the other does without any such discerning if that were true which some imagine Certainly if plain Scriptures will satisfie hereabout they do inform us that it is by means of Faith and the answer of a good Conscience that Baptism becomes beneficial as to its ends as well as the Supper by a spiritual discerning as to its Colos 2.12 1 Pet. 3.21 But I shall not insist again upon that which I have already dispatched In a word the whole Ministration is denominated by Faith Galat. 3.23 25. because Faith from first to last from one end of it to the other is to steer all affairs under it on mans part to act every service to accompany every Ordinance to receive every blessing to render all actions acceptable and to make all parts of it beneficial Where this qualification therefore is known to be wanting as it is in Infants certainly there Baptism cannot be applyed without an apparent breach of the Laws and Rules of this spiritual Ministration And thus also have I made good the premisses of this third Argument the Conclusion will follow of it self without help c. AROUM IIII. MY next Argument shall be this If none ought to be baptized but such who appear voluntarily willing to be baptized in obedience to God then Infants ought not be baptized The reason hereof is because Infants Baptism cannot reasonably be supposed to proceed from any willingness in them to obey God therein they being no wise voluntary or active but altogether passive therein But none ought to be baptized Assumption but such who appear voluntarily willing to be baptized in obedience to God The reason hereof is this because without this obediential willingness Baptism will be unprofitable and fruitless to them and where we know the good of Baptism is not to be attained there it is not to be administred for in case we should it would be a profanation of the Ordinance a taking of Gods Name in vain Though the sowing of seed be never so necessary yet it would be no mans wisdom but folly to sow in such a ground or at such a season which he knows will render his seed fruitless That there is no reason to expect otherwise but that Baptism should be unprofitable to all such who do not take it up voluntarily willingly and in obedience to God appears upon this account 1. Because now under the Gospel this is the standing Rule or Law between Duties and Rewards between the using of holy Ordinances and the benefit that comes by them viz. That Duties be done and Ordinances performed willingly and in obedience to God 1 Cor. 9.17 where the Apostle speaking of his preaching the Gospel saith If I do this thing willingly I have a reward This saying of the Apostle though it were uttered upon one particular occasion yet doubtless it reaches all persons and all duties If any man do any duty willingly as unto God he shall have his reward But as Affirmatives use to include their Negatives by way of implication so it is here If I do it not willingly I have no reward For so the particle IF imports the condition upon which the reward is to be received or not received and you will spoyl the sence of the place if you suppose that if the Apostle did the thing he there speaks of he should receive a reward whether he did it willingly or no. Again 2 Cor. 8.12 If there be first a willing mind it is accepted according to that which a man hath and not according to that he hath not This also though it were spoken upon a particular occasion as many the great Doctrines of the Scriptures were yet it is a general proposition which reaches even all duties If there be first a willing mind that is an obedientious disposition God ward and this willingness of mind and obediential disposition is that both which puts a man upon doing his duty according to that ability he hath and which also renders the same acceptable and rewardable with God Here again this conditional particle IF If there be first a willing mind must needs imply that if this willing mind be wanting the man is not accepted his action not rewarded though he do the thing For so Paul speaking of the same duty of giving 1 Cor. 13.3 saith Though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor and though I give my body to be burned and have not Charity it profiteth me nothing Still teaching us that if there be an inward principle of a willing compliance with the Will of God wanting in any action which in it self is good and commanded of God yet for that very cause it becomes unprofitable to him that does it in which respect we affirm Baptism of Infants unprofitable to them 2. Promises made unto duty or upon condition of duty are rewards of that obedience which is yielded to God in discharge of duty when they are fulfilled thereupon Now it is no wise proper to say or rational to suppose that God rewards his creature man for that wherein he is only passive they being such actions which we call moral and which proceed from the motion of the Will governed by a divine Law that are rewardable by God And therefore unless Baptism be submitted unto willingly and in obedience to God which cannot be supposed in Infants the good things annexed thereto by way of promisory recompence of such obedience cannot upon any good ground be expected 3. I have proved before in another Argument That now under the Gospel-Ministration there is no benefit comes either by Baptism or any other Ordinance but by means of his Faith who partakes thereof Without Faith it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 i. e. in any service to approve ones self acceptable to him For whatsoever is not of faith is sin Rom. 14.23 It then the benefit we speak of comes not without Faith then neither does it accrue without that willingness of mind and obedientious disposition God-ward we speak of because it 's impossible this should be separate from Faith I mean a
religion and devotion this way was of that continuance and standing before his Baptism that it grew famous as it seems throughout all the Nation of the Jews though he himself was a Gentile Acts 10.1 2.22 And if those who had been long professors of Christianity as it appears they had been of whom the Apostle speaks Heb. 5.12 in that he saith For the time they ought to have been teachers had yet need because of their dulness to be taught again which were the first Principles of the Oracles of God then surely such as yet never learned all these first prinples but are un-instructed in the due use of the Ordinance of Baptism which is one of them and that upon occasion of their dulness this way have likewise need now to learn it practically though it be not till long after their first enterance upon the Christian profession 4. If because we have no examples in Scripture of old Disciples their being baptized I say if this be a reason against ancient professors their taking up the Ordinance of Baptism when thitherunto omitted by them then the like plea would be as good an argument against their being Members of Churches and their partaking of the Supper of the Lord who are un-baptized for where is there any example in the New Testament of any ones being joyned in Church-fellowship thereupon partaking of the Supper who had not been first baptized So that if this Argument be good for any thing it is to beat down both Churches and Ordinances a thing which would doubtless much gratifie those that already sit too loose that way which I believe some that have used this way of reasoning did not so well consider whil'st they build up with one hand what they endeavour to throw down with the other But about a work of reformation after a great Apostacy and general defection from the purity of Gospel-worship and Administration it is no good way of reasoning to say that because we have no examples in Scripture of such and such endeavours of reformation of abuses crept into the worship of God therefore we may not thus and thus endeavour it In such cases it is sufficient that we have the Original rule to direct us what it is that God did require of his people when he first delivered them those laws and rules to walk by and that we endeavour practically to answer these as near as the possibility of our present condition will admit and not totally neglect them upon a pretence of an impossibility in us by reason of disadvantage contracted to answer the first accustomed manner and usage in such or such Ordinances and Administrations in all particular circumstances If the Jews upon their coming out of their Babylonish captivity had gone this way to work they had never set upon the work of reformation and restitution of Temple and Worship as indeed they did For they had no example before them of that which they were now to do viz. to re-build the Temple and restore the Decays of worship in those particular cases and circumstances peculiar to them no not any particular direction from the law in several of their immergencies but only general rules of original Order and Institution And yet upon the authority of those Laws by which God at the first enjoyned the erection of a Temple and the use of such and such Ordinances they proceed to re-edifie the one and restore the other from under their decays and discontinuance Ezra 3. though in the doing thereof they had no more Prophets or other extraordinary means to direct them then we have now in our work of reformation and restitution of Gospel-worship and order And yet that in thus doing they did nothing but what was their duty appears by this in that when they desisted from the work and God raised up two Prophets Haggai and Zechariah they down-rightly reprove them from the Lord for letting their hand slack from the work and not proceeding as they had begun Hag. 1.2.4 c. Which clearly argues that it was their duty to have gone on as well as to have begun though God had raised them up no extraordinary Prophets to assist them and that their first endeavours herein were approved of God as their after dealings were reproved by him And therefore these things well considered I should rather think that such persons who having begun and made some good progress in the work of reformation otherwise but in this of Baptism slack their hands from the work should much rather expect to be sharply reproved from God with these Jews for being partial and remiss in this work of the Lord then to be indulged in the neglect of this duty upon a pretence that the season thereof is over with them This people say saith the Prophet the time is not yet come the time in which the Lords house should be built Hag. 1.2 But our present Opposers err on the other hand saying the time is now past in which the Lords Baptism should be administred to them A second Objection against the baptizing of Persons of a long standing in the Christian Profession ANother pretence against their receiving Baptism who have anciently professed themselves servants to Jesus Christ otherwise is this viz. because by such a long continued course of profession the ends for which Baptism was wont to be received are prevented For Baptism being a Christians visible transition or passing from under his former profession manner of worship and conversation into a new condition in these respects and that whereby he does engage to renounce forsake and disclaim the former but to continue constant in the worshipping serving and obeying him into whose Name he is baptized hence it comes to pass that when any men or women have by a continued constant and publick profession of repentance from dead works and faith towards God and love towards men given up their names to God and to Jesus Christ and declared themselves his servants hence it comes to pass say they that the foresaid ends and uses of Baptism are sufficiently provided for by such a profession and consequently Baptism to such is needless and unnecessary because Baptism as all other things is necessary only in respect of the ends whereto it serves and therefore where the ends of it are attained it self being the means ceases to be any further useful The Answer To this I answer 1. By demanding Answer 1 that if the ends of Baptism or the same things for the sake of which Baptism was ordained could be attained by a Christian profession without Baptism how came it to pass then that God did ever institute and ordain Baptism at all For such a Christian profession as is spoken of will be granted I suppose to be every mans duty whether he be baptized or no. And surely where the same end is sufficiently provided for by one means God is not wont to super-adde another for he makes nothing in vain It is upon this
the Church universal and when not there would be a great deal of uncertainty by what how and when to esteem them members thereof Should we make any thing else the rule of this Judgement we should find our selves at a strange loss to give right judgement herein For example Should we make a mans profession of the Christian Religion in general this rule then the question will be whether every profession of the Christian Religion does render a man reputably a member of the universal Church If not as I suppose it will not be asserted that it doth then the question will be to what degree a man must profess before he be worthy that denomination And who is able here to give the rule unto his brother yea or unto himself either but that he will be in danger of making it too high or too low too narrow or too wide But now if we take the rule which God hath fitted to our hands Baptism I mean we shall then find our selves delivered from those uncertainties difficulties and dis-satisfactions yea from that un-evangelical arbitrariness in the things of God which otherwise will of necessity and unavoidably befall us herein For according to Scripture rule all they and only they are to be esteemed visibly of the universal Church who so far profess repentance from dead works faith towards God and the rest of the foundation principles as thereupon to submit to the Ordinance of Baptism as engaging themselves thereby to be no longer the servants of sin but thenceforth the servants of Jesus Christ and of righteousness I shall not here repeat the proof of this you have it already If then none are to be esteemed as visible members of the universal Church but only such as are baptized then none but such as are baptized may be admitted as members of a particular Church For it is altogether irregular indeed absurd to admit any into particular Church-Fellowship who are not first visibly members of the Universal because particular Churches and so particular Church-members receive their right of being such of and from the Universal Church and from that precedent standing they had there as branches and members of it As the special must and doth agree with the general kind in the general nature of it or else it is no special of that general as Logicians speak So must a particular Church agree with the universal in the universal nature of it otherwise it is no particular of the Universal but is something of another kind But now Baptism is so essentially formally and universally necessary to the visible being I say visible being of the universal Church and of every member of it as that it is the distinguishing mark between those that are and those that are not visibly of it For it is that mean or only visible door by which visibly men pass out of the world into the Church from under the dominion of sin and Satan into the Rule and Government of Jesus Christ That the Scriptures do assigne this office unto Baptism I have formerly proved as I suppose and is the vote and concession of all men generally a few only excepted of those that profess Christianity If the Scriptures do in any other quarters of them repeal this mean and ordain another in its stead or do assigne any other besides this to the same service I desire to be directed therein that I may know what it is and where I may find it for I must profess my total ignorance of any such thing though I have made diligent search for it Nor is it indeed Gods way and method to leavy more means for the same end when one is every way sufficient as I have formerly shewed Baptism then being so much of the general nature of the Churches visible being as that no man can according to Scripture-rule esteem any one duly and regularly a member thereof without it those particular Churches or Church-members then that partake not hereof cannot in due form of Evangelical Law nor according to the principles of reason be esteemed particucular Churches or Church-members of the universal but either of some other kind or at the best of an un-evangelical form and constitution 4. This being Gods method order and way of bringing men into the enjoyment of Church-communion and Church priviledges viz. through the door of Baptism as hath been already observed this very method and order of his ought to be very sacred unto us and inviolably observed by us For as God is the God of order and not of confusion so he hath commanded us to do all things viz. which he hath commanded in Church-Affairs decently and in order 1 Cor. 14.40 Now what is it to do all things in order but to do every thing in its due place that first which in order of institution is first and that afterwards which hath a relative dependance upon that which goes before There is indeed a beautiful harmony and comely agreement between the wayes of Jesus Christ Ordinance and Ordinance when each of them is observed in that order that is proper to them in which respect I suppose the Tabernacle or House of God of old was called the Beauty of holiness or the Ordinannances thereof the comely honours of the Sanctuary as Master Ainsworth tenders it which yet were but a pattern of heavenly i. e. Spiritual or Gospel things Heb. 9.23 and 8.5 The which spiritual beauty being beheld by the Apostle in the Church at Colosse he was much taken there with Joying and beholding your order c. Coloss 2.5 i.e. Joying to behold your order which argues that this order of theirs was a lovely object And doubtless it is a duty incumbent upon every one of them who have devoted themselves to Jesus Christ and the Affairs of his Gospel to endeavour as much as in them lies the honour of their Master and of the Affairs of his house and therefore if there be any piece of comeliness or beauty more in one way then there is in another as doubless there is more in God's order and method then there is in that which is but of man it will well become the servants of the Lord Jesus to be zealous of that The best way and method of doing the best things is to be coveted as well as the best things themselves And as it is a thing very well pleasing unto God to have his own things done in his own way and order so it is a provocation to him to have his way and order neglected and another introduced instead of it yea though such a disorder proceed from no wicked intent out from inadvertancie only The Lord our God saith David made a breach upon us for that we sought him not after the due order 1 Chron. 15.13 meaning in that stroke upon Vzzah who did but touch the Ark out of an intent doubtless to uphold it upon the stumbling of the Oxen otherwise then Gods order was And shall we think that the
of Church-Fellowship And where there is any flaw in the evidence or ground upon which a man acts in matters of Religion there will be a proportionable deduction of comfort and spiritual joy in the doing of the work because all the joy and comfort of any mans actions in Church-Affairs or indeed in any other does arise and spring partly from the knowledge he hath that it is a work of Gods approving and partly from his confidence of his being accepted with God in the doing of it the later of which takes not place without the former But it may be some will here object and say Object 1 That though it do not lie so fair and clear in the Scriptures with that degree of evidence that unbaptized persons were admitted into Church-Fellowship with those that were baptized as it does appear that baptized ones held communion together yet it does appear at least upon probable grounds that unbaptized persons were Church-members with those that were baptized in the Churches of Galatia and Rome For when the Apostle saith Gal. 3.27 As many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ And again Rom. 6.3 Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death Do not these Particles of Speech so many of us and as many of you as have been baptized imply that there were some in and of those Churches that were not baptized into Christ For the form of Speech and manner of Phrase here used by the Apostle is partitive or distributive and supposes the persons of whom he speaks to be part of them baptized and part of them unbaptized To this I answer Answ 1 That upon due consideration had of the manner of speaking Scope of the Apostle and the Collation of other Scriptures here with it will appear that no such thing can be duly collected from the Scriptures mentioned as is pretended in the Objection 1. That though this form of speaking As many of you and so many of us c. is sometime used in a partitive or distributive sence and does denote a manifest difference between the persons of whom the predication is made yet it is not alwayes so used nor does it alwayes import such a thing 1 Tim. 6.1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own Masters worthy of all honour that the Name of God and his Doctrine be not blaspemed Here we see is the same form of speaking with that mentioned in the Objection But if we should understand it in a partitive or distributive sence then we must suppose that some servants only were under the yoke of servitude and that others were not and also that the Apostle would only have some servants viz. such as were under the yoke to count their Masters worthy of all honour but that he laid no such injunction upon other servants both which were absurd to imagine But the Apostles meaning is that all servants for as much as they are under the yoke should exhibit all respects of honour to their Master becoming such a relation And therefore in as much as this manner of expression is used sometimes distributively and sometimes collectively of all particulars to which it is applyed that light by which we must know when it is used in the one sence and when in the other must be had from the Context and Scope of the Sentence where we find it 2. And therefore I answer further that the Scope of the Apostle being consulted in the places mentioned in the Objection it will evidently appear that the inference made thence in the Objection is altogether groundless and unreasonable For the Apostle having said Gal. 3.26 Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus those words in ver 27. viz. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ are alledged by him as the reason of what he had said before in that ver 26. as hath been opened more at large upon another occasion in the former part of this Treatise But now if their putting on of Christ in Baptism was a proof of their relation to God as children as the Apostle you see makes it to be then that which he gives in by way of reason and proof that they were all the children of God by faith would fall very short of this end if only a part of the members of these Churches had been baptized and not all For though they who are baptized into Christ and have thereby put on Christ are thereby evidenced to be the children of God yet how would it have followed that they had been all the children of God by faith upon that account when only but a part of them had been baptized So that indeed if you will understand this Scripture as supposing some part only of these Churches to be baptized and another part unbaptized you force and fasten upon the Apostle a Solecism in reason a gross absurdity and piece of ridiculosity in his way of reasoning as you will easily perceive if you do but put the matter of his words so understood into a Syllogism which then must run thus If some of you only have been baptized into Christ and have thereby put on Christ then you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus But some of you only have been baptized into Christ and have thereby put on Christ Ergo you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus To understand then the Apostle in such a distributive sence as that is for which the Objection pleads is to deale by the Apostles argument and reason as Hanun did by Davids Messengers when he cut off their garments to their buttocks and to render it altogether inadequate to his Scope and purpose Whereas to understand his as many of you c. in a collective sence for all the individual and particular members of those Churches is to render the Apostles argumentation comprehensive of its end correspondent to its Scope and as hitting the mark For if their being baptized into Christ was a proof of their Sonship to God in the sence formerly declared then he might well conclude them all and not some of them only to be the children of God by faith in Christ in as much they had been all baptized into Christ Jesus The Scope of that place likewise Rom. 6.3 will not admit of a distributive sence of those words Know you not that so many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death For the Apostles pressing the great duty of Mortification upon this whole Church at Rome he is to make his exhortation the more effectual remembers them how they engaged themselves to the practise thereof by their Baptism upon which account he does enforce it upon them as you may perceive if you carry your eye along from ver 2. to the 13. So that you must suppose the Apostles ground