newness of life c. into which in their infancy they were baptized that is then ratified which others promised and stipulated for them as concerning outward profession which is in your language a supervening act to make the former appear valid Thirdly the question is not concerning the final effect of baptism in particulars baptized which cannot fall under the Ministers cognizance it being kept in heaven in the archives and secret counsel of God but concerning their right to baptism who are born within the verge and precincts of the Church Whether such infants doe afterwards believe repent and amend their lives to salvation by Christ or not we cannot foresee nor have we any exception to supersede or limit our duty of administring the outward seal of baptism For as much as children born of Christian parents and within the Church are thereby partakers of the Covenant of grace even they who are not partakers of the grace of the Covenant Fourthly we answer That children in Gods account do vow confess and avouch the Lord in their parents vowing confession or avouching him as they did of old which the learned Mr. Cobbet observeth from Deut. 26. 17 18. where we read Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God and to walk in his waies c. and the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people as he hath promised thee and Deut 19. 10 11 c. Ye Stand this day all of you before the Lord your God Your Captains and your Tribes your Elders and your Officers with all the men of Israel your little ones your wives and strangers that thou shouldest enter into a Covenant with the Lord thy God and into his Oath which the Lord thy God maketh with thee this day that he may establish thee to day for a people unto himself and that he may be unto thee a God as he hath said unto thee and as he hath sworn unto thy fathers to Abraham to Isaak and to Jacob c. whereof see Gen. 17. 7. Though therefore some stipulations made in minority and nonage bind not the person under age except he confirm it when he cometh to age yet you will not say that the same is not valid if made by Parents Governors or Guardians for childreâ— and so in some publick Covenants and Acts of one City or State with another which concern the present and future ages the infants within that City or State as being in minority free Denisons are bound by the same Covenant and Act though as such they could neither transact speak nor consent to the same but all was agreed on and done by their Parents or Commissioners of years thereto designed in their own and childrens name which may apear in Israels Covenant with the Gibeonites which though the stipulators were beguiled yet Israels children were bound to and when Saul out of a perverse zeal about 380 years after would needs violate how binding that Covenant was God declared in a severe judgment on Sauls Family and all Israel But upon this invalid supposition you build another quere Why were it not as good they stayed to make it till that time before which time if they do make it it is to no purpose this would be considered It would or should be considered that it is very dangerous playing thus with the sacred Ordinances of God You confess that baptism is the only inlet into the Church of Christ and is it to no purpose to be let into his Church and Covenant out of which you say there is no salvation 'T is true that all are not saved that are within the Church and Covenant but no man is sâ—ved out of it God hath appointed baptism to be a seal and token of our receiving and entrance into the Church is it to no purpose to obey him in his Ordinances God would not only have all the Citizens of his Church thus enfranchised but those who are not baptized when they may he will not have reckoned in the number of his Church And say you 't is to no purpose to have children marked for members of Christs Church Baptism is Gods mark whereby he will have his people discerned from all other false Churches and Sects and think you 't is to no purpose to have Gods mark set on children that they may not with a perishing world be toucht by the destroyers Yet you say Our way is the surer way for not to baptize children till they can give an account of their faith is the most proportionable to an Act of Reason and humanity and it can have no danger in it How often hath Satan in tempting to sin misled the incaucious with this suggestion there can be no danger in it 't is the surer way 't is neither reasonable nor humane wilfully to act his part and as much as in us lieth to shut infants from the kingdom of heaven and so to doe that which much angred Christ in the daies of his flesh to wit to barr or forbid children to come to him this would be considered And why is it more proportionable to an act of reason and humanity to defer childrens baptism then in due time to baptize them Infants were circumcised long before they could give any account of their faith and yet that act was proportionable to reason and Moses was near a sad affliction for delaying it You say further For to say that infants may be damned for want of baptism c. I know no Protestant that ever said so but take heed you damn not your selves by teaching contempt of the Sacrament We are well satisfied that the privation thereof shall not condemn infants it not being their fault if they want it it may be and certainly is theirs who teach men to deny it them And then consider in the inviolable justice of God whose the damnation will be We cannot conceive that a meer privation of circumcision condemned those Hebrew babes who died before the eighth day because God is unchangeably just who confined their sealing to that day yet you will grant that it was a great sin except in case of evident and inevitable necessity as during Israels marches in the Wilderness a great sin I say of parents to neglect the administration thereof for God never threatned any punishment such as is mentioned Gen. 17. 14. but in respect of great sin much more was it obstinately to deny it them It is certainly true which hath been noted out of Augustine There may be conversion of the heart without baptism but it cannot be in the contempt of baptism for it can by no means be called the conversion of the heart to God when the Sacrament of God is contemned And so take your dirt back again into your own faces which you cast at ours Whosoever will pertinaciously persist in this opinion of Anabaptists and practice it accordingly they pollute the bloâ—d of the everâ— lasting
that are capable of the same grace are not alwaies capable of the signe thereof If so alta pax esto We say so too for infants being capable of the same grace which is exhibited and received in the Lords supper are not alwaies that is while they are children capable of the same signe because they cannot examin themselves nor shew forth the Lords death and women nâ—t only under the Law but now also have and ever will have for ought you can say thâ— same incapacity of circumcision what makes this to conclude childrens incapacity of baptism this is to argue à genere ad genus though women had not a capacity of that signe they have a capacity of baptism infants had then a right to that whereof they had a capacity let them have so still and the controversie is ended You further say The gift of the holy Ghost was ordinarily given by imposition of hands and that after baptism By this it appears that your foregoing argument was fallacious you intending the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost which we pretend not to and what is this dispute to us now or to the present question seeing they are long since ceased But beware your lying too near a wind and mentioning crisme or confirmation and sanctifying the holy Apostles displease not your clyents and you be taken for an aâ—bodexter But you say After all this lest these arguments should not ascertain their cause they fall on complaing against God c. Tell true and shame the devil where to whom when which of all the reformed Churches ever did so We clearly affirm that God is ever and alike to be believed whether by signes or by words which signifie his will we say not that Goâ—â—id more for the children of the Iews but that your peevishness denying children baptism would have it seem so Do we then complain against God when we complain of the Anabaptists abridging children of that which God hath allowed them How vain and malitious is this calumny of yours But you say He made a covenant of spiritual promises on his part and â—piritual and reall services on ours What are these real services and whose if of children what can they as such perform but you say this pertains 〈…〉 when they are capable but made with them assoon as they are alive that is in the mothers womb what this this covenant so the words seem to import nay but undeniably Gods covenan and spiritual promises on his part presently belong to them who shall be saved for many of them presently die or mean you by this spiritual and real services on our part belong to children when they are capable Surely then they cannot have this covenant made with them as soon as they are born otherwise then by baptism because for the present they can perform nothing real If you mean spiritual and real services of parents in relation to their covenanted infants as such they cannot yet teach them they can only present them to the Church that the publick seal of Gods covenant being set to them they may according to their true interest in her external communion be thereby marked and known for parts and members of the sameâ— and this indeed pertaineth to children when they are capable that is as soon as they are born That which you infer to shew a disparity between Christian infants and the Iews babes is frivolous for thoug there appear some shew of difference in circumstance as the particular promise of the inheritance of Canaan c. yet for substance there is none there being as real a promise of blessings to Christians and their children in every kind for godliness hath the promise of this life and that which is to come and the present seal of faith marketh them for Gods peculiar people the effect whereof being wrought and perfected by the spirit of Iesus in their regeneration the woâ—â— is done in them and no otherwise was it in the Iews children for he is not a Iew which is one outwardly neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh but circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit Rom. 2. 2â— 29. Col 2. 11. 12. and the Iewish children were no otherwise sealed then into the same faith of Iesus nor otherwise saved then by faith in him neither less saved then we and our childâ—en This say you is the greatest vanity in the world What vanity you say to affirm that unless this mercy be consigned by baptism as good not at all in respect of us because we want the comfort of it This is the vanity well let it be so and let them own it that will I known not whom you mean I am sure there appears vanity enough in your following assertion and reason offered for proof Shall not say you this promise this word of God be of sufficient truth certainty and efficacy to cause comfort unless we tempt God and require a signe of him Yes Gods promise is of sufficient truth and certaine efficacy thereto therefore we baptize our children and it had been sufficient on Gods part and it must have been on ours had he not seen good further to confirm us by a seal set to his promise or had he not required more of us as our duty and a condition and seal of his covenant with us our children for as Augustine saith how much available even without the visible Sacrament of baptisme is that which the Apostle saith Rom. 10. 10. with the heart man believeth unto righteousnesse and with the mouth Confession is made unto salvation was declared in the penitent thiefe but then it is invisibly fulfilled when not any contempt of religion but a point or moment of necessity excludeth or preventeth baptisme for it might have seem'd much more superfluous in Cornelius and his friends to be baptized who had already received the gift of the holy Ghost then in the thiefe yet they were baptized and in that act the Apostolicall authority is extant as also the necessity of obeying God in his ordinance now how childish and perverse is that cavill unlesse we tempt God and require a signe of him Do you account obedience to God and his holy ordinances to be a tempting of God is bringing children to Christ which he commandeth and that by baptisme which you confesse is the ordinary inlet into the kingdome of heaven to require a signe of him or is it to receive a signe of him by his own appointment and what certainity of comfort could we concieve if on the contrary we should wilfully disobey neglect and contemn Gods ordinance as your clients do were it not rather to tempt God if as much as in us lies we should shut up the doore and inlet into his kingdome against infants man can do no more to shut them out then by denying them baptisme 't is true that God can and often doth save them without our ministry as when death
reckons up severall sorts of those whose Baptism was deferred some for sloth or insatiable desire of sinning others are not in ability to receive it either for their infancy or some sudden and violent accident disabling them so that they cannot receive this grace if they would True infants have neither ability nor will to come to Baptism nor can those though of years who are accidentally disabled they have not power though they have a will to come What is this to our deferring Infants Baptism in the Rule which in some cases may reasonably and lawfully be done As for example Suppose an infant neer some Mahumetan border were found and the parents not known we may and ought to demur But what makes this against baptizing infants of parents known to be within the Church But you say To which if we add that the parents of S. Augustine S. Hierom and St. Ambrose although they were Christian yet did they not baptize their children before they were 30 years of age it will be very considerable in the Example and of great efficacy for the destroying the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles This may make a formidable noyse in some vulgar ear 't is true which Mr. Homes notes pag. 188. that the opinions or practices of some few conclude no more against the generall tenet and practice of the Church then the Hills and Vallies do against the roundness of the world But to what purpose do you propose any of these examples to your clients imitation If not why inferre you them Possibly the parents of some great and excellent men might erre in such omission of duty or there might be some invincible lets or obstructions to their desires however you would not have your childrens Baptism deferred 〈◊〉 years To the particulars I say Possidonius in the life of Augustine saith that he was born of honest and Christian parents and that he received of St Ambrose Bishop of Milan both the wholesome doctrine of the Catholick Church and the Divine Sacraments But Augustine saith he believed and desired baptism from his childhood the cause of the delay thereof he putteth on a sudden great sickness and his fathers unbelief but if the parents were then Chrâ—stian when he was born and either understood not or neglected his Baptism what is this to our cause I know nothing hence following but that if so they neglected they were culpable We read of his dangerous estate while he was a Maniche and his mothers constant and importunate tears and intercession for his conversion as her sorrow for the delay thereof which at last happily obtained according to that which the Prelate answered her It cannot be that the son of those tears should perish After his conversion he seriously learned and happily taught others not to defer infant baptism as may appear by that which hath been alledged out of him As for St. Hierom they also say that both his parents were Christian and that he was diligently taught and brought up of them at home and that with Bonosus presently even in his Parents embraces and Nurses gentle language he received in Christ and presently he was instructed in the rudiments of Christian pâ—ety which very probably importeth his infant-baptisme rather then that he had any Nurses at his being 0 years old That which Erasmus who gathered his story out of other Authors after saith on Hieroms Epistle to Damasus that he would follow the faith of that Citie in which he had received the garment of Christ as the same Erasmus gives the sense in the life of Hierom proves not that he was not baptized before he was 30 years old for Hieroms words are to this sense because the Eastern Churches have rent the seamless Coat of Christ by their schismes so that it is hard there to know where the Church is therefore I thought it meet that I should consult with Peters Chaire and the faith commended by the Apostles mouth Rom. 1. thence now requiring food for my soul where long since I tooke on me the garment of Christ. What was it which he called Peters Chair What the Citie of Rome Was that faith which the Apostle commended onely there or then when Hierom wrote in all the Western Church his words concerning the Eastern Churches divisions by reason of the Arian faction and the following concerning the great distance at which Hierom being then in Syria near Antioch was make it plain that he spake of the Western Church in which he was baptized probably in oppido Stridonis where he was born not in Rome As for Erasmus's opion of his being baptized in Rome 't is grounded but upon an opinor I think saith he he meaneth it not of his Priesthood or orders And what solidity is there on these conjectures to conclude that Hieroms parents though Christian defer'd his baptism until he was 30 years old or what wil it advantage you if it were true there may be such lets to sealing as to Israel in the Wilderness and God bare with them 40 years together yet they should have circumcised the male children at eight dayes old upon a severe penalty Gen. 17. 14. an inevitable necessity varieth not the rule Concerning the last instance in Ambrose I find that his Father was Deputy or Governor of France but whether Christian or not I find nothing in Paulinus who wrote his life and you avouch no Author for that you say We read that after he was chosen Bishop of Milan after Auxentius the Arian by the joynt suffrages of the discordant parties and being though much against his own will confirmed in that charge by Valentinian the Emperor he was baptized and with the Church held Infant-baptism against Pelagius and the Donatists upon this ground Because every age is subject to sin therefore every age is fit for the Sacrament let the reader mark how this also is very considerable in the example and of what great efficacy it is for the destroying the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles as the pleader saith But seeing he can raise no stronger batteries against it he might more easily and certainly conclude that it will stand whether he will or no. But however saith he it is against the perpetual analogie of Christian Doctrine to baptize infants This is gallantly spoken if he could tell how to prove it or any part thereof Besides that Christ never gave any precept to baptize them c. This is his Argument all that for which Christ never gave any precept for the doing it and which neither himself nor his Apostles that appears did is against the perpetual Analogie of Christs Doctrine but Christ never gave any precept to baptize them c ergo I answer This foundredâ—Argument lame on both feet doth poorly charge 1. 'T is not true that all is against the perpetual Analogie of Christs Doctrine for which no express precept of Christ or practice
they have to the external seal as being born within the Church and that as soon as they are born we understand not any other predisposing cause in the infant to be baptized as if he were able to contribute any thing to his receptibility more then the unborn Iacob was in relation to the love of God which indeed never found any cause but it self yet ere the children were born God loved Iacob and hated Esau. Further we say as we shall be saved secundum opera but not propter opera Good works are in the regenerate excellent signes of justification and salvation future they cannot be the causes of either they follow they cannot precede justification So we may say that baptism works according to the dispositions of the suscipient which are not in infants faith profession repentance c. which God gives not to infants but to persons of years but as to their right to baptism by his Couenant what other predispositions are in them are secret and known to God above And so your exploded fancy and dream of a notable advantage vanisheth Either baptism you say is a meer Ceremony or it implies a duty on our part If it be a ceremony only how doth it sanctifie us or make the comers thereunto perfect If it implys a duty on our part how then can children receive it who cannot do duty aâ— all How many impertinences are heâ—e twisted up together We answer plainly Ceremony and duty on mans part are not membra dividentia nor always contradistinct for they may coïncidere as in those ceremonies of the Law which being commanded of God were duties of men subject to the Law and to be performed though they could not make the comers thereunto perfect and so is baptism now a duty on our part to be administred though of it self it cannot make all the comers thereunto perfect But you demand if it implies a duty on our part how then can children receive it who cannot do duty at all Where is now the revelation reason common sense and all experience in the world in which you so lately triumphed as if you had driven us to take sanctuary If it be a duty on our part to administer it how can children receive it who cannot do any duty at all Nay but tell me if you can by all your reason how could infants receive baptism except we did administer it say you how can he be passive who cannot be active at all how could infants receive circumcision who could do as little duty as infants now can That homonymical on our part must be otherwise limited by some expression or else your Argument will appear fallacious It is a duty on our part to baptize infants on the childrens part no duty is required they can do none as such for God enjoyneth no impossibilities But you say This way of ministration makes baptism to be wholly an outward duty a work of the Law a carnal Ordinance it makes us adhere to the letter without any regard of the spirit c. This Rhetorick would somthing better becom him that careth not what but how much he saith All these vain and injurious expressions are meer aspersions and call you this an Argument considerable wherein appears either matter or form thereto pertinent For the rest which in some other man I should take for some aegri insomnium we say if you mean by Mystery the spiritual baptism mysteriously signified by the outward ministration to which you seem to drive 't is evident that it doth not alwaies accompany it except you will say that the Sacrament justifieth ex opere operato which a little before you would have pinned on our backs which appears in Iudas Simon Magus and all others who fall away And as certainly false is it that it never follows in order of time common experience shewing that the spiritual seed sowed in baptism many times and in many of the baptized lieth long before it actually appeareth either in any outward effects inward signes of calling or fruits of regeneration as in Abraham faith preceded and circumcision the seal of the righteousness of faith followed so in Cornelius a spiritual sanctification preceded and baptism followed but in Isaak circumcised the eight day the seal preceded and faith and sanctity followed So in Infant-baptism the seal and laver of regeneration goeth before and actual faith followeth it in season if they hold fast the faith of Christ. You say again Baptism is never propounded mentioned or enjoyned as a means of remission of sins or of eternal life but something of duty choice and sanctity is joyned with it in order to production of the end so mentioned Know you not that as many as are baptized into Christ Iesus are baptized into his death c. Good reason that such things should be propounded mentioned and enjoyned to those who converting to the faith in years capable of Doctrine require the seal of Gods Covenant and certainly so was it to Proselytes to be circumcised but you cannot reasonably think that they proposed or enjoyned Infants to be circumcised any such things and it were as vain to propose any of these to Infants now to be baptized Therefore we seal them now and propound these like things to them when they be capable Now the Scripture speaking to men or women of understanding propounds to them their present duty who are to be baptized or who are baptized as faith repentance walking in newness of life mortification and as hath been said the Apostles in the ecclesiâ constituendâ had mostly to do being to endeavour the calling and conversion of the Gentiles who before were aliens from the Covenant of God But in ecclesiâ constitutâ we rarely meet with any first to be taught and then to be sealed the children of Christian parents having Church-priviledg are now baptized first as in the setled Covenant under the Law they were first circumcised and when they come to â—it years instructed And what then do all your impertinences disadvantage our cause seeing elect infants in their baptism are implanted into Christ and in due time walk-in newness of life This is indeed truly to be baptized both in the Symbole and the Mâ—stery Whatsoever is less then this is but the Symbole only a meer ceremony â— The effects of elect childrens baptism being nothing less this Rhetoâ—ick might have been spared Plainer yet Whosoever are baptized into Christ have put on Christ have put on the new man But to put on this new man is to be formed in righteousness and holyness and truth c. All this plainly makes for infants baptism who being naturally flesh and blood such as cannot enter into the Kingdom of heaven conceived and born in sin children of wrath must indeed put on Christ Jesus that they may be saved These premâ—ses we willingly adhere to but your conclusion is liâ—ble to a non sequitur because it is either fallacious disputing ab
Testament and in the â—postles sense Heb. 4 5 6. They crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to open shame who being once baptized and thereby planted together in the likeness of his death Rom. 6. 4 5. Who having once died dyeth no more death hath no more dominion over him will yet be baptized again The Apostles saying It is impossible for those who were once enlightned that is baptized as the Syriac Interpreter rendreth it and as we shall make it appear more anon If they fall away to renew them again unto repentance seeing they crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to an open shame How do they crucifie him afresh to themselves that is as much as in them is Why 1. They are said so to do who iterate or again do or resume that which is a resemblance or similitude of Christs suffering who died but once for in a reiterating it we declare or intimate the first to be void and so if we will have a new baptism we must have a new Christ and he must in our Symbole suffer as if one Christ or his once suffering were not sufficient for our redemption And is not this to pollute the bloud of the everlasting Covenant and Testament and to crucifie again the Son of God Secondly this may be said in respect of reciduation or falling away from Christ as they do who renounce their baptism by which they were implanted into him by receiving another baptism because the merit of Christs Cross being abolished and made void by which they were once renewed it must needs be that Christ should be crucified again and put to shame that they might be renewed by a fresh or new merit of the Cross which seeing it cannot be the Apostle possibly would infer that it was impossible that they which are once sealed and regenerate should ever fall away and that therefore all Christians should do their uttermost endeavour that they may be like good ground near the blessing and that they may not want an iterated renovation which no man can possibly attain As for the rest of your reviâ—ings though we have no cause to be troubled at your dogged eloquence yet for their sakes who are weak I shall endeavour to shew the injurious falshood thereof You say that we in baptizing infants dishonour and make a Pageantry of the Sacrament c. We answer to this puted calumny 1. You may as well in this your Theomachy and fighting against Gods Ordinance object the same against Circumcision of Infants if incapacity of present giving account of their faith as you pretend can make the Sealers of infants lyable to your unjust censure for infants could then no more give an account of their faith then now they can 2. Infants have a capacity of the holy Ghost as hath been proved in the examples of Ieremy and Iohn Baptist c. yea such a measure of sanctification and so certain a regeneration working in them all such things as God knoweth to be necessary to their salvation or himself supplying all those things as that Christ both pronounceth their propriety in the Kingdom of heaven and proposed them as patterns to all those who should enter thereinto Therefore the Apostles Argument being good from the extraordinary and visible gifts of the holy Ghost gifts of miracles flourishing in the primitive Church and marking many receivers to a capacity of baptism which yet might then be had without any interest in the Kingdom of heaven who can forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the holy Ghost as well as we It must as certainly hold from the gift of regeneration and the spirit of sanctification which is in many infants because many infants dying such are saved And now in your judgment doth the baptism of such as are saved dishonour the Sacrament the outward seal which man can give and wicked men receive who have received the thing signified the inward seal of Gods holy spirit which none but himself can give and none but the elect receive Or do you dishonour your self who were so admitted into the Church the Church our holy Mother who maâ—gre the Devils malice and the powers of hell by Infant-baptism bringeth an holy seed to Christ Christ himself commanding us to baptize all without exception to any estate sex age or condition that either are within the Church as born of Christian parents or in their conversion profession of faith and repentance desire to be admitted into the same Adde hereto that Christ particularly cautioned for children left any should despise them openly declaring that of such is the kingdome of heaven And yet the doing of this duty is dishonour to the Sacrament and Pageantry with you But If of every idle word which men shall speak they shall give an account in the day of judgment it concerneth them speedily to repent of these blasphemous calumnies lest it prove a black and dismal day to them in respect of these things for which they can give no better account then their own fancies and others And whereas you say they that baptize infants ineffectually represent a Sepulture into the death of Christ and please themselves with a signe without an effect making baptism like the fig-tree in the Gospel full of leaves but no fruit To say this is an untruth is as much answer as we owe to so reasonless a calumny yet I shall be contented to lay it further open I say 1. Can you be assured that none of these who are baptized in infancy and no otherwise are regenerate and saved Whence have you either such knowledg or commission so to judg You say the Anabaptists say so so said the Pharisees concerning those that believed in Christ This people who knows not the Law are cursed But what warrant is this for you to blaspheme for company 2. God be blessed that we who believe one God one Mediator one Faith one Baptism which we received in our infancy have such a testimony of Gods holy spirit effectually working faith repentance mortification and a comfortable measure of sanctification in us as that we know you speak untruth in that you say that Poedobaptists ineffectually represent a Sepulturâ— into the death of Christ and please themselves in a signe without an effect c. God be blessed which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a lively hope wherein as we need not be beholding to you for testimony so neither are we to regard what you say against it With me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you or of mans judgment but he that judgeth me is the Lord therefore judg nothing before the time He that saith that baptism is a bare signe only fallaciously concludeth dividing things which God hath joyned together 3. Although baptism of infants be effectless to the reprobate whether infant or person