it since we read of very foule evills in some of the primitive Churches themselves but doe not finde the sound party exhorted to separate from the corrupt but to proceed against them in a Church-way for their cure by admonition conviction and excommunication in case of obstinacy XVIII Querie answered What is said to the next precedent Querie will be a full and pertinent answer to this and therefore shall say no more to it XIX Querie answered To this I say that whatever else a company of true Believers have done yet if they have not done that which is necessary upon Scripture-account to render themselves a true Church according to Gospel order then it is not unreasonable for a Christian to deny them to be such a Church But yet for all that it does not follow that such a denyall renders them but as a rabble rout of the world because unbaptised Believers are a third thing neither prpoerly of the rabble rout of the world nor yet formerly of the Church as a man that having served an apprenticeshâ—p and is not yet made free of the Company of which his Master is neither servant nor freeman in the interim but have so far left the world as that they want nothing but an orderly induction to be of the Church Nor can it be concluded that because such have diligently enquired after the minde of God and have sought direction from him hereabout that therefore the way they are in must needes be right any more then that those that practise contrary to them in this particular upon like diligent search and seeking of God must needs upon that account not be in the wrong for they cannot both be in the right and yet both search and seek for the rule remains the same and will not bow at any mans intreaty and that 's it by which the one and the other must be tryed XX. Querie answered To this I answer 1. I have already said and now say it againe that a man may not depart from much lesse bid defiance to a Church because that Church cannot say Amen to every notion or conceit of his Nay I will say more he may not though that Church does not agree with every sober and savory apprehension of his supposing them still to be a Church duly so called from their due constitution 2. Though there is no example in Scripture of any mans being baptised after the profession of his faith who had been baptised before in his infancy because when the Scriptures were written there was no such thing as the baptizing of Infants practised by which to give opportunity of such an example yet if Infant-Baptisme cannot be proved to be that Baptisme which Christ requires his Disciples to submit to and consequently is none of his Baptisme but the Baptisme of Man then Infant-Baptisme and no Baptisme are of one and the same consideration and if so then there is example and precept enough in Scripture for such Believers to be once baptised who never have been baptised before and therefore the case is not so plain as the Querist supposes that there is no precept or example which warranteth the practise of the Children of after-Baptisme as he calls them But the Querist hath given himself an Answer to this Querie by the matter of his 7. and 8. Queries to which I referre him for further resolution in this XXI Querie answered Answer 1. If by Christians the Querist meanes no more then true Believers in Christ Jesus then I know none that so magnifie the Ceremony or externall Rite of Baptisme as to judge none Christians without it nay the truth is it is because we judge the Querist and others true Believers that we do perswade them to be baptised But if by Christians he meanes such as according to the Word have put on Christ then we must say that those that by being baptised into Christ have not put on Christ are not yet such Christians as they ought to be Gal. 3.27 And yet it does not follow that they who so say do stumble at the same stone of danger and perill of soul at which the Jews stumbled if they were Jews when they urged and prâ—ctised circumcision as necessary for justification Gal. 5.2 because they urged and practised that for necessary which was now abolished we that which is commanded and remaines in force we urge Baptisme to be necessary as a precept of Christ and necessary as a means of salvation they perhaps judged Circumcâ—sion as other works of the Law meritorious according to the Querists owne declared judg-ment upon another occasion And therefore I doubt the Querist does not deale so kindely with the Ordinance of Baptisme nor the Baptists themselves as he should doe in that he puts the one but much what in the same capacity with Circumcision as it was at that time when Paul said of it If ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing and in that he yokes the Baptists who onely urge Baptisme as one of the precepts of Christ and a meanes of salvation as the Scriptures themselvâ—s doe with those that urged the abrogated Ceremony of Circumâ—â—sion as necessary unto Justification as the Querist himselfe supposes Truly I doubt the comparison in both respects is odious with God whatever it is with Men. XXII Querie answered That which will be very well worth our noting here in the first place is how the truth which we plead hath gained a faire and ample acknowledgement even from the Querist himselfe in this Querie though he oppose it in others For he does not only demand whether there be any precept or example in Scripture for the baptising of any person after many yeares profession of the Gospell but also whether there be any precept or example in Scripture for the baptising of any person at any other time SAVE AT OR ABOUT their first entrance upon a profession of Christ And not onely so neither but farther demands Whether there be any competent ground either in Reason or Religion why either such a thing should have beene practised by Christians in the Apostles dayes or why it ought to be practised by any in these dayes By which I am sure he sayes as much to the condemnation of Infant-Baptisme as lightly can be spoken in so few words and in substance as much as ever any man did say in opposition to that practise For if there be neither precept nor example in Scripture for the baptising of any person at any other time SAVE at or about the time of their first entrance upon the profession of Christ nor yet competent ground in Reason or Religion why it should otherwise be practised then certainly there is neither precept or example in Scripture for the baptising of Infants nor yet any competent ground why such a thing should be practised and the reason is because Infants in their infancy can make no profession of Christ nor doe they in their infancy make any entrance upon a
Such whose ground on which they stand is truth though they ought with all sweetness love and meekness to invite and perswade others to come over to them yet may by no means depart thence or remove their standing no though it were to gain others to them 1 Cor. 9.21 To them that are without Law as without Law being not without Law to God but under the Law to Christ that I might gain them that are without Law Ier. 15.19 Let them return to thee but return not thou unto them Phil. 3.15 16. If in any thing ye be otherwise minded God shal reveal even this unto you Nevertheless whereto we have already attained let us walk by the same rule let us minde the same thing 6. Though endless Genealogies and striving â—bout the Law and the eating of meats and hearbs are but such things and the truth concerning them but of that nature as that for the sake thereof peace must not be broken Tit. 3.9 1 Tim. 1.4 Rom. 14. yet first such points or questions as concern the fulfilling of any righteousness of which those that concern the essentials of Baptism are Mat. 3.15 are such as of which the Kingdom of God does consist and in the defence of which men serve Iesus Christ and are accepted with God and ought to be approved of men RoÌ„ 14.17 18. Secondly not onely Gospel Doctrines about matters of faith but also matters of Gospel order such as the Apostle cals Ordinances appointmenâ—s or traditions 1 Cor. 11.2 even these are truths to be contended for and not to be let go for peace sake And the Apostle thought this a sufficient answer to such as should contend against these viz. that they had no such custome neither the Churches of God ver 16. with ver 2 3 4 5. c. And if the Churches of God then had no such custom neiâ—her as to sprinkle or Baptise little children or to admit members to Church-communion without Baptism does not the Apostles saying here though produced upon another occasion evince their contention sinful and unreasonable likewise that shal plead for and practise such things as these contrary to the custom of the first Churches which in all laudable things were patterns to al succeeding Churches The Apostle having in 2 Thes 2. given notice of the Mystery of iniquity itâ— bâ—gining then to work ver 7. and the coming of the man of sin with all deceiveableness of unrighteousness ver 10. which we know in the Papal Apostacy hath fallen out as wel in matters of Gospel order as in points of faith he to prevent a defection in both exhorts them ver 15. to stand fast and to hold the Traditions which they had been taught yea and in chap. 3. v. 6. counts that a disorderly walking which was not after the Tradition which they had received from the Apostles And if it were the wisdom and duty of the Churches then to stand fast and to hold fast the Traditions which they had received from the Apostles as wel touching matters of Gospel Order as otherwise to prevent their falling into Anti-christian pollutions then doubtless the way for men now to recover themselves and others from under those pollutions is by returning back to these Apostolical traditions and standing fast in them which doubtless is their duty what disturbance soever may follow thereupon ERRATA PAge 9. l. 15. r. those particular cases p. 25. l. 21. r. neither p. 44. l. 13 r. a p. 49. l. 25. r. supposing p. 52. l. 1 r. formally ib. l. 4. r. is p. 55. l. 16. r. such as have p. 55 l. 24. r. the time of his Baptism p. 57. l. 25. r. and p. 58. l. 24. r. of 59. l. 4. r. describe p. 59. l. 32. r. those p. 60. l. 6 r. words p. 61. l. 16. r. line p. 61. l. 26. r. of p. 61. l. 28. r. when p. 63. l. 3. r. 2 p. 64. l. 14. r. unreasonable p. 66. l. 1. r. much ib. l. 2. r. bapti ib. l. 14. r. meet p. 69. l. 26. r. about p. 72. l. 12. r. charging p. 72. l. 19. r. those p. 72. l. 19. r. practiseth An Answer to Mr. I. G. his XL. Queries touching Church-Communion between such as have been Baptised after they have Beleeved and others who have not otherwise been Baptised then in their Jnfancie As likewise touching Infant and after Baptism THe thoughts of the Worthy Author of the Book Intituled Philadelphia touching the subject matter of that Book being propounded Queriâ—-wise there is I suppose liâ—tle Question to be made but that it was with an expectation on his part to receive a return from the hand of some friend or other in order to a further Discovery of Truth in that particular Case of Conscience about which the Queries are imployed And therefore rather then â—he desire of this worthy friend should in this behalf be kept too long fasting I have resolved having first waited a while for some more able hand to have undertaken it through the assistance of God to offer my mite towards this service to which I adress my self as follows Querie I. Whether is there any Precept or example in the Gospel of any Baptized Person his disclaiming of Communion in Church-fellowship with those whom he Judges true Beleevers upon account onely of their not having been Baptized Respondant As for matter of Example for such a practise there is I suppose none in Scripture no more then there is of disclaiming communion with the Church of Rome as now it is or with the the Parochial Churches in England or elsewhere and yet it wil not follow that the one is any more unlawful then the other For Scripture examples are matters of Fact and therefore there having been no such corrupt practise crept into the world till after all the books of the holy Scriptures were finished as is the constituting of Churches without Baptism or upon Infant sprinkling in stead of Baptism which in true construction is not onely no Baptism at all but even worse then none as much as to commit an evil action is worse then to omit a good one there being I say no such corruption as this then on foot no more then there was the now Romish the National or Parochial Church-constitution then in being there could be no occasion for any truely Baptized person to disclaim communion either with the one or with the other and consequently no such matter of Fact to be Recorded of which to make an example But then it no more follows that it is unlawful to refuse communion with the one Church then it is with the other if there be no more ground in Scripture to constitute Churches without Baptism then there is for the Romish National and Parochial constitution The Querist then having himself disclaimed communion with the Church of Rome and the Parochiall Churches in England though he have no example in scripture so to do and yet hath done it because there is no example
suppose that those 3000. stood neerest unto him that spake and with best advantage to hear there being many thousands more present which can hardly be the supposition of any considering man in the case in hand Respon Not to take much notice how far the probable opinion of some will be accepted for proof against us when nothing but demonstrations will be accepted on our behalf I shall first demand of the Querist that if the children and families of those that gladly received the word and were baptized were indeed part of that number of 3000. that were added to the church or to the Discsples as he sayes it is the probable opinion of some that they were then I demand I say whether these children and families were baptized or no If he shall say they were not then he puts to rebuke another of his opinions which is that when believers themselves were baptized their children were baptized also to the belief of which he would perswade us at least as probable in his 24. Quaere from Acts 16.15.33 1 Cor. 1.16 If he say they were baptized why then though it should be granted that these were some of the number yet how would this prove that others besides those that were baptized were added to the church which yet is the thing he was to prove But then 2. to put the matter quite out of doubt that none of the children of those that gladly received the word were part of the 3000. that were added to the church if by children he mean little children or infants for els if they were adult ones they might gladly receive the word and be baptized as well as their parents it sufficiently appeares in that it is said They i. e. they that were added as well as they to whom they were added continued stedfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread and in prayers and I presume the Querist will not say that little children infants did continue stedfastly in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and in breaking of bread and prayers and if not then they were none of the number of the 3000. that were added to the church and so I think by this time the probable opinion of some in this behalf is rendred more then probably to be a weak groundlesse and erroneous opinion 3. To remove that doubt touching the improbability that 3000. men should distinctly hear the voice of a man speaking unlesse we will suppose them to stand neerest to him that spake 1. Evident it is that they did hear and so hear as to receive the word gladly but whether they were neerest to him that spake or no is more then he or I can tell or need to know But 2. There is no necessity to suppose that all the whole 3000. did all of them heare and convert in the self-same hour or juncture of time for one while the Apostle might preach to one company of them and another while to another company and yet this would not hinder but that they might all be converted baptized and added to the church the self-same day 3. Neither do I see any necessity to hold that all these 3000. that were in one day converted baptized and added to the church were thus converted and baptized by Peter only but by him and the rest of the Apostles or by them and the other Disciples also For 1. it is said that Peter standing up with the eleven lift up his voece and said unto them c. and doth not this imploy that the eleven did take part with him and assist him in the work 2. These men of Israel being pricked at their hearts they do not cry out to Peter only but the text saith They said to Peter and the rest of the Apostles men and brethren what shall we do ver 37. and therefore it should seem the rest of the Apostles as well as Peter had ministered occasion to them of this demand Nay 3. which is yet more it s said ver 4. that they all to wit the whole number of Disciples that were present together being filled with the Holy Ghost began to speak with tongues as the spirit gave them utterance which certainly was to the understanding of the multitude and also about such things as did much affect them for it s said the multitude were confounded at it and marvelled saying we do hear them speak in our own tongues the wonderfull works of God ver 6.7.8.11 All which things considered I think it will not be irrationall to suppose that others besides Peter might be instrumentall in the conversion of those 3000. Querist Nor 2. is it said or so much as intimated or hinted in the least that any of the whole number of the 3000. who were added unto them were added by means or upon the account of their being baptized although this addition be not mention'd till after their baptizing It is ten degrees mere probable that their believing or Discipleship which were precedent to their baptizing and not their being baptized were the reason and ground of Lukes saying they were added to the Church considering first that the originall main and principal foundation of the holy brother hood amongst the Saints is not the ceremony of their baptism but their fellowship and communion in the divine nature and inward relation to the same Christ by one and the same precious faith Respon We do not affirm that they were added to that particular church by baptism immediately without any other act intervening but we say they were not added without baptisme and so much is in effect acknowledged by the Querist himself in that he sayes this addition is not mentioned till after their being baptized and therefore their baptism must needs go before their addition to the church unlesse we will suppose Luke to have begun at the wrong end of this part of his Narrative in mentioning that first which was last done and that last which was first done and if so then according to the order of things done they were first added to the church and then afterward did gladly receive the word to conversion and were baptized which I suppose no man is so void of common sense as to believe And if their baptisme did precede their addition to the church then why does the Querist strive so as he does to interesse their believing or Discipleship with exclusion of their baptism as the reason and ground of Lukes saying they were added to the church For if he does not exclude baptisme in recounting the reason of that addition then we are agreed for there is no question but that their gladly receiving the Word or believing the Word or becoming Disciples by the Word was one reason or grouâ—d of their addition to the church but not the only one fâ—r Luke mentions their being baptized as well as that and why should any man go about to seperate them The question is not whether faith or baptisme is the originall main and
before Christ was crucified though its true also on the other side that neither could he truly estimate them to be of that number without any baptism at all because the greatest part of those that were baptized by John into the expectation of Christ to come yet dâ—d not believe in him or own him as the Christ of God when he was come much lesse they and many who had beene baptized by the Disciples of Christ did believe in him his being crucified notwithstanding * Luke had no reason to number them with the Church though bapâ—ized who had fallen from the Faith into which they were baptized and câ—nsequently had denied their baptism it self so that all the account that Luke could truly give of the number of the Church or of Disciples was only of such baptized persons who after the death and Resurrection of Christ did believe in him which it seemes amounted to no more then about an hundred and twenty And as for those who had beene baptized by John into the expectation of Christ to come and yet did not own him when he was come or els if they did believe in him for a season yet did afterward renounce him either before or upon his being crucified these were so far from being reputed of the number of the Gospell-church upon account of their baptism received formerly either from Iohn or Christ as that they were directed and exhorted by the Apostle as well to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus as to repent for the remission of sin before they could be admitted into the Church or be counted of its number their former baptism notwithstanding Act. 2.38 41. For who can imagine but that if not all yet that many of the 3000. that were baptized upon the preaching of Peter and the rest had been baptized before by Iohn or who can conceive but that if not all yet that many at the least of that great multitude unto whom the Apostle preached at that time when the 3000. were converted had beene baptized by Iohn those Scriptures considered cited by the Querist Mat. 3.5.6 Mark 1.5 Luk. 3.7.21 where it is said that all the Land of Judea and they of Jerusalem were ALL baptized And again that ALL the people were baptized and yet the Apostles exhortation to these inhabitants of Jerusalem that were now gathered together to the number of many thousands was that they would repent and be baptized EVERY ONE of them and as many as did receive this word were baptized accordingly and so added to the church Since then the owning of Christ crucified together with a being baptized in his name was requisite to render men of the number of Disciples as a Church Hence it came to passe that Luke could not estimate their number to be more then 120. Acts 1.1.15 nor above about 5000. Acts 4.4 notwithstanding more had been baptized by Iohn unlesse more of them had adhered to Christ crucified as these did so then though baptism be one of the requisites not without which yet it is not the only requisite by which the number of the church is to be estimated By this time therefore I hope it doth appeare that this Acts 2.41 doth both colour and cotten to use the Querists own words with the supposal or conclusion viz. that churches or at least the first Gospell-church a Sampler to the rest was not constituted without baptism notwithstanding all that by the Querist hath been offered to the contrary And if the first church or churches might not be constituted without baptism then neither may those that succeed them because the same reasons that made baptism necessary hereunto with them makes it necessary also unto us for Gospell-order setled by Apostollicall authority and direction as this was hath not lost any of its native worth efficacy or obliging vertue by disuse and discontinuance upon occasion of the Papall defection but ought to be the same to us now who are studious of a thorough reformation as it was unto them in the first beginning of such order or rather according to Davids resolution upon a like occasion Psal 119.126.127.128 to be the more closely adhered to and the vindication and observation of such Gospell-rules to be managed with so much the more zeal after the example of Christ himself who as well as the Psalmist was even eaten up with the zeal of his fathers house John 2.16.17 when he found corruption crept into it IV. Quaere Whether did not the Church at Rome in the Apostles daies and so also the Church in Galatia hold Church-communion with some who were not baptized considering 1. That the Apostle to the former writeth thus Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death Rom. 6.3 and to the later after the same manner thus For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ Gal. 3.27 2. That this Particle as many as used in both places is in such constructions as these alwayes partitive distinguishing or dividing the entire number of persons spoken of some from others by the character or property specified or at least supposeth a possibility of such a distinction Respon 1. I cannot grant the Querist his assertion viz. that this particle as many as is in such constructions as these alwayes partitive though I grant that many times it is for when the Apostle saith 1 Tim. 6.1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own Masters worthy of all honor doth he thereby suppose or imply that there were some servants who were not under the yoke or that there were some servants who were not to count their owne Masters worthy of all honour both which must be supposed notwithstanding if this form or manner of speaking as many as be alwayes to be understood partitively or as dividing the entire number of persons spoken of which yet to suppose who sees not how absurd it would be Object If it be said this exhortation Let as many servants as c. doth intentionally respect so many believing servants as were under the yoke and that therefore in respect of other servants who were not believers it is partitive Answ If so then the answer is that so do those expressions used Rom. 6.3 Gal. 3.27 intentionally only respect those at Rome and in Galatia who did believe and were baptized and therefore is partitive in respect of others the Inhabitants of those places dividing those of these churches from others dwelling in the same places who were not of these churches so that if that objected should be granted yet we shall gaine as much or more by it one way then we shall lose by it in the other 2. The coherence consulted will evince the expressions so many of us as and as many as to comprehend all those persons of whom those churches did consist For consider unto whom does the Apostle speak Rom. 6.3 does he not speak to the whole church
and every individuall soul of them in the 1.2 ver when he sayes What shall we say then shall we continue in sin that grace may abound God forbid How shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein And if these words in the 1.2 ver respect the whole church as they must be supposed to do unlesse you will suppose that the Apostle did grant a liberty to some of the church to continue in sin and to live therein then those words â—n ver 3. Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death are interrogatively propounded not only to the same persons unto which the former words relate but also as an argument or reason why none of them should live any longer in sin which is the thing from which he was disswading not onely some of them but even all of them in the foregoing words and which he improves in an argumentative way throughout the greatest part of the chapter And it would not befit the wisdome of any ordinary man much lesse of a great Apostle to make choice of a reason or motive to inforce his exhortation or perswasion which is of lesse extent in the tendency and concernment of it then are the persons which he does exhort or dehort which yet is a piece of weaknesse of which you must suppose this Apostle to be here guilty unlesse you do conclude that all those of the church at Rome were disswaded from continuing any longer in sin upon this ground because that they had all been baptized into the death of Christ viz. a conformity to his death as well as a beliefe of it In a word if the whole church had not been under the motive the whole church could not be pressed by it as here you see they are And for that other place Gal. 3.27 the Apostle in ver 26. had asserted them viz. those to whom he now writes To be all the children of God by Faith in Christ Iesus i. e. were now looked upon as children of God by their confessing and owning of Christ Jesus of which he gives this account ver 27. because they had put on Christ in baptism ye are all the children of God by Faith in Christ Iesus for or because as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ as if he should say if the owning professing of Christ does denominate men to be the children of God now under the Gospell as indeed it does then ye are all the children of God because by being baptized into Christ ye have all of you put him on that is so as to appear with him where ever you become as you do appear with the cloaths you wear But now most certain it is that they could not all of them have been denominated the children of God by faith in Christ upon account of their being baptized into Christ which yet we see they are unlesse they had been all of them baptized into Christ indâ—â—â— Besides doth it not appear in the return that is made to the first and third Quaeries that in the Apostles daies none were inchurched without baptism and if so then these places cannot import the contrary V. Query Whether did not the Church at Corinth in the Apostles daies entertain members and hold communion with those who had not been baptized considering that he demandeth thus of this Church els what shall they do which are baptized for the dead if the dead rise not at all why are they then baptized for the dead 1 Cor. 15.29 Or doth not this imply that there was a corrupt and superstitious practise on foot in this Church to baptize one or other of the surviving kindred or friends in the name of such persons respectively who died unbaptized and if so is it not a plain case that there were some of these members who lived and died unbaptized Respon 1. Though it should be granted which may not that there was such a superstitious thing practised by some of that church in the behalf of some of their friends who died unbaptized yet it is not necessary at all to suppose those dead friends of theirs to have been of the church whilest they were alive but much more probable it would be if the practise it selfe were probable that the dead in behalf of whom such a thing was performed were of the Catechumeni or others who were not of the church but such who though they were under some Nurture and in a way of learning somewhat of the Gospell yet died before they were either baptized or admitted as Members of the Church But 2. It is but a meer conjecture and as will be found not only without ground but against reason that the Apostle in the forecited words should have respect unto such a superstitious practise as that specified For 1. It s no ways probable that Paul would argue this great Article of the Gospel the Resurrection from a superstitious custome or would draw such a clean thing out of that which was so unclean 2. Much lesse is it probable that he should do so without taxing thâ—â— by way of reproof for it for might not they have been very apt to have concluded the Apostles approbation of their practise should he have produced it as usefull to convince them of the doctrine of the Resurrection without declaring his dislike of it 3. Pauls interrogatory indefinitely propounded to the whole church supposes them all to have been baptized 1 Cor. 1.13 were ye baptized in the name of Paul and that saying of his does assert it 1 Cor. 12.13 we are all baptized into one body 3. Is it not far more probable and more agreeable to other Scriptures and with the coherence of the Text to suppose 1. That the Apostle should herein mind them of their baptism in water wherein the Resurrection is figuratively represented Rom. 6.4.5 Col. 2.12 and by which when they first received the Gospel they made profession of their Faith touching the Resurrection Or els 2. That hereby is intended the baptism of afflictions elswhere mentioned Mat. 20.22 Luk. 12.50 considering that the Apostle immediately subjoyns the mention of his own and others hazzards and sufferings saying And why stand we in jeopardy I protest by your rejoycing which I have in Christ Iesus I die daily if after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus what advantageth it me if the dead rise not let us eat and drink to morrow we shall die ver 30.31.32 as if he should say why have ye suffered trouble and persecution for the Gospell which is a kind of death for he here says of himself that he died daily meaning his sufferings if ye do not believe the Resurrection and why do we stand yet in further jeopardy nay then rather let us eat and drink for to morrow we shall die These interpretations surely carry a far greater probability to answer the drift of the Apostle
then that given by the Quaerist But surely there is little edification or satisfaction when only one doubtfull thing is brought to prove another or rather when one improbable thing must serve instead of a proof to make that seem probable which of it self is altogether improbable But is not that cause barren of proofes and destitute of friends that must be beholding to such strangers to stand by it and succour it VI. Query Whether when Paul soon after his conversion assayed to joyn to the Church and Disciples at Jerusalem Acts 9.26 did this Church make any enquiry after his baptism as whether he had been baptized or no in order to his reception among them or did they know he had been baptized or did Barnabas in giving satisfaction to the Apostles and Church concerning his meetnesse to be admitted into communion with them so much as mention his being baptized but only declared unto them how he had seene the Lord in the way and that he had spoken to him and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus Act. 9.17 Respon 1. We have no good reason to suppose much lesse conclude that Paul was admitted to communion with the church untill the church had knowledge either from himself Barnabas or some other of his having obeyed the Gospell in imbracing the first principles of it of which baptism is one for how should they know him to be a Disciple of Christ and so meet for communion with them but by knowing that he had at least done the first things of a Disciple of which we find all along this history of the Acts of the Apostles a being baptized to be one and doubtlesse lesse satisfaction would not serve them concerning him then would concerning another Disciple who had never appeared in that height of opposition against them as he had done 2. When Barnabas declared to them how he had seene the Lord in the way and had spoken to him did he not declare what it was that the Lord spake to him if so then how can it be thought but that the relation of his being baptized must come in at the one end of his report inasmuch as that direction which the Lord gave Saul about his going into straight street in order to his further information touching the will of the Lord concerning him led him to rehearse the carriage of Annanias towards Saul and consequently his baptizing of him unlesse you will suppose Barnabas to have made a broken and imperfect relation of the Lords dealing with him which you cannot lightly do without supposing Barnabas either weak or carelesse in the businesse But surely the Querist does not think tâ—at Barnabas used no more words in his relation then what are here recorded by Luke since we have frequently if not for the most part but the briefe heads of things recorded that were done and spoken by Christ the Apostles and other Disciples Iohn 21.25 Acts 2.40 3. Might not the Quaerist with as much reason have quaeried whether the church upon Pauls assaying to joyn with them did make any enquiry at all whether he were converted to the faith or no as whether he was baptized or no for indeed here is no expresse mention made of the churches enquiring after the one any more then the other only it s said They were afraid of him and believed not that he was a Disciple But what shall we therefore think that the church did not at all enquire of these things concerning him in order to their receiving of him into communion with them 4. We do not find here that Paul himself spake any one word to them when he assayed to joyn himself with them only it s said That when Saul was come to Jerusalem he assayed to joyn himself to the Disciples But what shall we therefore think that Paul made no relation to the Disciples of the Lords dealing with him in order to their receiving of him or if we will suppose he did as no one I think is so void of sense as to suppose otherwise can we suppose lesse then that he should declare to them what the Lord had done for him by the Ministery of Annanias and if so his being baptized especially considering that where we find Paul upon another occasion not greater then this making the relation of that great providence of the Lord towards him in his conversion he does particularly mention his baptism Acts 22.5 to 16. There being then so little in this Quaere as you see I confesse I have not a little marvelled to see some make so much of it as they have done The substance of the seventh Quaere being only this viz. Whether many things may not lawfully be done for which there is no example in Scripture of like action in all circumstances and whether therefore it is not lawfull for baptized to joyn with unbaptized persons in Church-communion though it should be granted that it cannot be proved that ever they did so in the Apostles dayes For answer to this I shall refer to what is giv◠〈◊〉 answer to the 1. Quaere this only I shal add that many things may lawfully be done for which there is no example in Scripture of like action in all circumstances yet it does not therefore follow that such an action may be lawfull which is contrary to such examples in Scripture which are Recorded for our direction and imitation which yet is the thing the Querist is to make good before he is like to satisfie me in this particular what ever he may doe to others QUERIE VIII Whether is an Action or Practice suppose in matters relating to the Service or Worship of God upon this account evicted to be unlawfull becaause it hath neither Precept I meane no particular or expresse Precept wherein the Action or Practice it selfe with all the Circumstances under which it becomes lawfull is named or Example to justifie it Respon An action relating to the worship of God is not to be concluded unlawfull though it have no particular nor expresse precept or example in so many words upon which to bottome it if there be any generall rule which will safely warrant it as there is for admitting women to the Table of the Lord or for a Ministers preaching though to young men only from Rev. 22.3 or 4. which are two of the Qâ—erists instances But if such an action be not only void of particular precept or example yea and of generall precept too but is also contrary to and a transgression of a generall rule and precept and a swerving from particular example stampt with Divine approbation then I hope it is not lawfull but unlawfull which yet cleeâ—ly is the case of Baptized persons holding communion with unbaptiztd in as much as it crosses that holy order of the Gospell commission of Christ and constant practice of primitive beleevers Recorded in Scripture for our learning and which is â—o be observed and kept inviolably by all those
the Apostollicall writings are written of baptism is apparent that Baptism was Administred to none by the Apostles but those of whom they concerning their regeneration made no doubt Page 21. Cassander in libello de infantium Baptismo It is certain that some believers in time past have withholden baptisme from their children untill they were grown and could understand and remember the misteries of their faith yea also counselled not to administer baptism as by Tertullian and Gregory Nazianzen appeareth In same Page Zwinglius in his Book of Articles Artic. 18. In the old time children were openly instructed who when they came to understand were called Catechumens i. e such as are instructed in the word of salvation and when they had imprinted the faith in their Hearts and made Confession thereof with their Mouthes they were admitted to Baptisme Page 25. Lodovicus vives in Augustinum de civetate dei Lib. 1. Cap. 26. No man in times past was brought to be baptâ—zed but those who were come to their full growth who having learned what it concerned of their own accord desired the same Page 31. Luther in his book of Annabaptisme acknowledgeth that it cannot be proved by sacred Scripturâ— that Childrens baptism was institutâ—d by Christ or begun by the first Christians after thâ— Apostles Page 20. Rupertus Tuitienfis lib 4 de divinus officiis cap. 18. In former times the custom in the Primitâ—ve Chuâ—ch was that they adminâ—stred not the Sacrament oâ— Regeneration but only at the feast of Easter and Penticost and all the children of the Church which throughout the whole yeare through the word were MOVED when Easter came gave up their names and were the following dayes till Penticost instructed in the rules of Faith rehearsed the same by their baptism and dying thus with Christ rose again with him Page 15. Justin Martyr in oratione ad Anthonium Pium I will declare unto you how we offer up our selves to God after that we are renewed through Christ Those amongst us that are instructed in the faith and believe that which we teach them is true being willing to live accordiâ—g to the same we do admonish to fast and pray for the forgivenesse of their sins and we also fast and pray with them And when they are brought by us unto the water and there as we were new born are they also by new biâ—th renewed And then in calling upon God the Father the Lord Iesus Christ and the holy Ghost they are washed in water Note that this Author is one of the first extant after the Apostles dayes Take also a few instances of such who though borne of Christian Parents yet were not baptized till instructed in the Faith Page 16. Erasmus and Wicleuius in vita Hieronomi ex ipsis Scriptis collecta Hieronimus borne in the City Sydon of Christian Parents and brought up in the Christian Religion was baptized at Rome in the 30 yeare of his age Also Paulinus de vita Ambrosij Nauclerus Chror Gener. 13. Ambrosius borne of Christian Parents his Fathers Name was Ambrosius and his Mothers Name Marcelina remained instructed in the faith unbaptized till he was chosen Bishop of Millain at which time he received Baptism of a Catholick Priest Likewise Nauclerus Generat 14. Anno Dom. 391. Augustinus the Son of the vertuous Monica being instructed in the Faith was baptized when hee was about 30 yeares of age at the Feast of Easter Moreover Idem Generat 14. Constantinus the Emperour born of Helena the Christian Queen was by Christian Priests converted to the Faith and was baptized by Pope Silvester Historia tripartita lib. 1. Bibliorum de Trinitate Theodosius the Emperour borne in Spain his Parents being both Christians was even from his youth instructed and educated in the Catholick Faith who faling sick at Thessalonia was by Achalio Bâ—shop of the City baptized and thereupon recovered of his sicknesse Page 21. Pontius the Son of Markus a Christian was Catechised and instructed in the Christian Religion and afterwards was baptized by Pontiano the Bishop Page 22. Nazarius the Son of a Christian woman called Perpetua imbraced and followed his Mothers Religion even from his tender age who being Catechised instructed by Lino the Pope received also Baptism Also Tecla and Erasma Daughters of Valentinian a Christâ—an of Aquilea were in the dayes of Nero the Emperour instâ—ucted in the Faith by their Father and brought up in the Feare of God who being Catechised by Harmagora were baptized in a running water And now let the Reader judge whether these Testimonies against the practise of baptizing Infants of old have not much more in them and are worthy of much more credit theâ— Mr. Philpots Testimony for it together with Austin and Ierom to help him XL. Querie answered 1. Whether faith or the profession of Faith be the only or best ground whereon to build a Baptismall administration we shall not need to dispute it is sufficient that accordiâ—g to Scripture it is such a ground as without which baptism was not administred to any that we can finde in the Apostles dayes and therefore we say neither ought it now so to be 2. If the Querist thinks that the Apostles did insist upon believing or a profession of believing in such men and women as were baptized by them onely for want of better grounds as supposing there were better to be had let him but prove it and I will think so too Or else for my part I think they had no reason to expect better then those which were every way sufficient or then such as God had appointed for that puâ—pose or if God did appoint any oâ—her why does not the Querist produce us a copy of that order or Appointmâ—nt of God 3. The Querist puts the Question whether Faith or a Profession of Faith in order to Baptisme were insisted on meerly as or because such in their absolute or possitive nature or whether not rather in respect of their relative natures and properties To which I answer that for my part I am of the Querists minde as unto this that it is altogether irrationall yea indeed I thinke a thing so irrationall as never entred into any mans head to thinke that Faith or a profession of Faith should be required of men in order to Baptisme simply for Faith sake or meerly for profession sake 4. But though we are not so absurd as to hold Faith necessary to Baptisme only for faiths sake yet it does not follow that then we must needs hold with the Querist that Faith is no otherwise or in no other respect to be insisted on as nâ—cessary to Baptisme but onely as it is Significative or Declarative unto the Baptizers and others of the happy estate of those in whom Faith is as being persons in the Grace and Favour of God For if persons being in a happy condition as touching Gods love to them be not the adeqâ—ate reason why he wouâ—d have them Bâ—ptizâ—d then the knowlâ—dge