prudently constituted are superstitious or impious such persons who are otherwise pious humble and religious are not to be destroyed for such matters which in themselves are not of concernment to salvation and neither are so accidentally to such men and in such cases where they are innocently abused and they erre without purpose and designe And therefore if there be a publike disposition in some persons to dislike Lawes of a certaine quality if it before-seene it is to be considered in lege dicendâ and whatever inconvenience or particular offence is fore-seene is either to be directly avoided in the Law or else a compensation in the excellency of the Law and certaine advantages made to out-weigh their pretensions But in lege jam dictâ because there may be a necessity some persons should have a liberty indulged them it is necessary that the Governours of the Church should be intrusted with a power to consider the particular case and indulge a liberty to the person and grant personall dispensations This I say is to be done at severall times upon particular instance upon singular consideration and new emergencies But that a whole kind of men such a kind to which all men without possibility of being confuted may pretend should at once in the very frame of the Law be permitted to disobey is to nullifie the Law to destroy Discipline and to hallow disobedience it takes away the obliging part of the Law and makes that the thing enacted shall not be enjoyn'd but tolerated onely it destroyes unity and uniformity which to preserve was the very end of such lawes of Discipline it bends the rule to the thing which is to be ruled so that the law obeyes the subject not the subject the law it is to make a law for particulars not upon generall reason and congruity against the prudence and designe of all Lawes in the world and absolutely without the example of any Church in Christendome it prevents no scandall for some will be scandalized at the authority it selfe some at the complying and remisnesse of Discipline and severall men at matters and upon ends contradictory All which cannot some ought not to be complyed withall 6. The summe is this The end of the Lawes of Discipline are in an immediate order to the conservation and ornament of the Numb 8. publique and therefore the Lawes must not so tolerate as by conserving persons to destroy themselves and the publike benefit but if there be cause for it they must be cassated or if there be no sufficient cause the complyings must be so as may best preserve the particulars in conjunction with the publike end which because it is primarily intended is of greatest consideration But the particulars whether of case or person are to be considered occasionally and emergently by the Judges but cannot antecedently and regularly be determined by a Law But this sort of men is of so generall pretence that all Lawes Numb 9. and all Judges may easily be abused by them Those sects which are signified by a Name which have a systeme of Articles a body of profession may be more cleerly determined in their question concerning the lawfulnesse of permitting their professions and assemblies I shall instance in two which are most troublesome and most dislik'd and by an account made of these we may make judgement what may be done towards others whose errors are not apprehended of so great malignity The men I meane are the Anabaptists and the Papists SECT 18. A particular consideration of the opinions of the Anabaptists IN the Anabaptists I consider onely their two capitall opinions the one against the baptisme of infants the other against Numb 1. Magistracy and because they produce different judgements and various effects all their other fancyes which vary as the Moon does may stand or fall in their proportion and likenesse to these And first I consider their denying baptisme to infants although it be a doctrine justly condemned by the most sorts of Numb 2. Christians upon great grounds of reason yet possibly their defence may be so great as to take off much and rebate the edge of their adversaries assault It will be neither unpleasant nor unprofitable to draw a short scheme of plea for each party the result of which possibly may be that though they be deceived yet they have so great excuse on their side that their errour is not impudent or vincible The baptisme of infants rests wholly upon this discourse When God made a covenant with Abraham for himselfe and his posterity into which the Gentiles were reckoned by sprituall Numb 3. adoption he did for the present consigne that covenant with the Sacrament of circumcision The extent of which rite was to all his family from the Major domo to the Proselytus domicilio and to infants of eight dayes old Now the very nature of this covenant being a covenant of faith for its formallity and with all faithfull people for the object and circumcision being a seale of this covenant if ever any rite doe supervene to consigne the same covenant that rite must acknowledge circumcision for its type and precedent And this the Apostle tels us in expresse doctrine Now the nature of types is to give some proportions to its successour the Antitype and they both being seales of the same righteousnesse of faith it will not easily be found where these two seales have any such distinction in their nature or purposes as to appertaine to persons of differing capacity and not equally concerne all and this argument was thought of so much force by some of those excellent men which were Bishops in the primitive church that a good Bishop writ an Epistle to S. Cyprian to know of him whether or no it were lawfull to baptize infants before the eighth day because the type of baptisme was ministred in that circumcision he in his discourse supposing that the first rite was a direction to the second which prevailed with him so farre as to believe it to limit every circumstance And not onely this type but the acts of Christ which were Numb 4. previous to the institution of baptisme did prepare our understanding by such impresses as were sufficient to produce such perswasion in us that Christ intended this ministery for the actuall advantage of infants as well as of persons of understanding For Christ commanded that children should be brought unto him he took them in his armes he imposed hands on them and blessed them and without question did by such acts of favour consigne his love to them and them to a capacity of an eternall participation of it And possibly the invitation which Christ made to all to come to him all them that are heavy laden did in its proportion concerne infants as much as others if they be guilty of Originall sinne and if that sinne be a burthen and presses them to any spirituall danger or inconvenience And it is all the reason of the world
to Infants is so secret and undeclar'd and unconsign'd that wee want much of that mercy and outward Testimony which gave them comfort and assurance And in proportion to these Precepts and Revelations was the practise Apostolicall For they to whom Christ gave in Numb 11. Precept to make Disciples all Nations baptizing them and knew that Nations without Children never were and that therefore they were passively concern'd in that commission baptized whole Families particularly that of Stephanus and divers others in which it is more then probable there were some Minors if not sucking Babes And this practise did descend upon the Church in after Ages by Tradition Apostolicall Of this we have sufficient Testimony from Origen Pro hoc Ecclesia In Rom. 6. tom 2. pag. 543. ab Apostolis traditionem accepit etiam parvulis baptismum dare And S. Austin Hoc Ecclesia à majorum fide percepit And Serm. 10. de verb. Apost c. 2. generally all Writers as Calvin sayes affirm the same thing For nullus est Scriptor tam vetustus qui non ejus originem ad Apostolorum saeculum pro certo referat From hence the Conclusion 4. Instir. cap. 16. §. 8. is that Infants ought to be baptiz'd that it is simply necessary that they who deny it are Hereticks and such are not to be endured because they deny to Infants hopes and take away the possibility of their salvation which is revealed to us on no other condition of which they are capable but Baptism For by the insinuation of the Type by the action of Christ by the title Infants have to Heaven by the precept of the Gospel by the Energy of the Promise by the reasonablenesse of the thing by the infinite necessity on the Infants part by the practise Apostolcall by their Tradition and the universall practise of the Church by all these God and good people proclaime the lawfulnesse the conveniency and the necessity of Infants Baptism To all this the Anabaptist gives a soft and gentle Answer that it is a goodly harangue which upon strict examination will Numb 12. come to nothing that it pretends fairely and signifies little That some of these Allegations are false some impertinent and all the rest insufficient For the Argument from Circumcision is invalid upon infinite Numb 13. considerations Figures and Types prove nothing unlesse a Commandement goe along with them or some expresse to signifie such to be their purpose For the Deluge of Waters and the Ark of Noah were a figure of Baptism said Peter and if therefore the circumstances of one should be drawn to the other we should make Baptism a prodigy rather then a Rite The Paschall Lamb was a Type of the Eucharist which succeeds the other as Baptism does to Circumcision but because there was in the manducation of the Paschall Lamb no prescription of Sacramentall drink shall we thence conclude that the Eucharist is to be ministred but in one kind And even in the very instance of this Argument supposing a correspondence of analogy between Circumcision and Baptism yet there is no correspondence of identity For although it were granted that both of them did consign the Covenant of Faith yet there is nothing in the circumstance of childrens being circumcised that so concernes that Mystery but that it might very well be given to Children and yet Baptism only to men of reason because Circumcision left a Character in the flesh which being imprinted upon Infants did its work to them when they came to age and such a Character was necessary because there was no word added to the sign but Baptism imprints nothing that remaines on the body and if it leaves a Character at all it is upon the soule to which also the word is added which is as much a part of the Sacrament as the signe it selfe is for both which reasons it is requisite that the persons baptized should be capable of reason that they may be capable both of the word of the Sacrament and the impresse made upon the Spirit Since therefore the reason of this parity does wholly faile there is no thing left to inferre a necessity of complying in this circumstance of age any more then in the other annexes of the Type And the case is cleare in the Bishop's Question to Cyprian for why shall not Infants be baptized just upon the L. 3. Epist. 8. ad Fidum eighth day as well as circumcised If the correspondence of the Rites be an Argument to inferre one circumstance which is impertinent and accidentall to the mysteriousnesse of the Rite why shall it not inferre all And then also Femals must not be baptiezd because they were not circumcised But it were more proper if we would understand it right to prosecute the analogy from the Type to the Anti-type by way of letter and spirit and signification and as Circumcision figures Baptism so also the adjuncts of the Circumcision shall signifie something spirituall in the adherencies of Baptism And therefore as Infants were circumcised so spirituall Infants shall be baptized which is spirituall Circumcision for therfore Babes had the ministry of the Type to signifie that we must when we give our names to Christ become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 children in malice for unlesse you become like one of these little ones you cannot enter into the Kingdome of heaven said our blessed Saviour and then the Type is made compleat And this seemes to have been the sense of the Primitive Church for in the Age next to the Apostles they gave to all baptized persons milk and honey to represent to them their duty that though in age and understanding they were men yet they were Babes in Christ and children in malice But to inferre the sense of the Paedo-baptists is so weak a manner of arguing that Austin whose device it was and men use to bee in love with their own fancies at the most pretended it but as probable and a meare conjecture And as ill successe will they have with the other Arguments as with this For from the action of Christs blessing Infants Numb 14. to inferre that they are to be baptized proves nothing so much as that there is great want of better Arguments The Conclusion would be with more probability derived thus Christ blessed children and so dismissed them but baptized them not therefore Insants are not to be baptized But let this be as weak as its enemy yet that Christ did not baptize them is an Argument sufficient that Christ hath other wayes of bringing them to heaven then by baptism he passed his act of grace upon them by benediction and imposition of hands And therefore although neither Infants nor any man in puris naturalibus can attain to a supernaturall end without the addition Numb 15. of some instrument or meanes of Gods appointing ordinarily and regularly yet where God hath not appointed a Rule nor an Order as in the case of Infants we
fancy and hath in it nothing of certainty or demonstration and not much probability For besides that the thing it selfe is unreasonable and the holy Ghost works by the heigthning and improving our naturall faculties and therefore is a promise that so concernes them as they are reasonable creatures and may have a title to it in proportion to their nature but no possession or reception of it till their faculties come into act besides this I say the words mentioned in S. Peter's Sermon which are the only record of the promise are interpreted upon a weak mistake The promise belongs to you and to your children therefore Infants are actually receptive of it in that capacity That 's the Argument but the reason of it is not yet discovered nor ever will for to you and your children is to you and your posterity to you your children when they are of the same capacity in which you are effectually receptive of the promise But he that when ever the word children is used in Scripture shall by children understand Infants must needs believe that in all Israel there were no men but all were Infants and if that had been true it had beene the greater wonder they should overcome the Anakims and beat the King of Moab and march so farre and discourse so well for they were all called the children of Israel And for the Allegation of S. Paul that Infants are holy if Numb 20. their Parents be faithfull it signifies nothing but that they are holy by designation just as Jeremy and John Baptist were sanctified in their Mothers womb that is they were appointed and design'd for holy Ministeries but had not received the Promise of the Father the gift of the holy Ghost for all that sanctification and just so the Children of Christian Parents are sanctified that is design'd to the service of Jesus Christ and the future participation of the Promises And as the Promise appertaines not for ought appears to Numb 21. Infants in that capacity and consistence but only by the title of their being reasonable creatures and when they come to that act of which by nature they have the faculty so if it did yet Baptism is not the meanes of conveying the holy Ghost For that which Peter sayes be baptized and ye shall receive the holy Ghost signifies no more then this First be baptized and then by imposition of the Apostles hands which was another mystery and rite ye shall receive the Promise of the Father And this is nothing but an insinuation of the rite of confirmation as is to this sense expounded by divers Ancient Authors and in ordinary ministry the effect of it is not bestowed upon any unbaptized persons for it is in order next after Baptism and upon this ground Peter's Argument in the case of Cornelius was concluding enough à majori ad minus Thus the holy Ghost was bestowed upon him and his Family which gift by ordinary ministery was consequent to Baptism not as the effect is to the cause or to the proper instrument but as a consequent is to an antecedent in a chaine of causes accidentally and by positive institution depending upon each other God by that miracle did give testimony that the persons of the men were in great dispositions towards Heaven and therefore were to be admitted to those Rites which are the ordinary inlets into the Kingdome of Heaven But then from hence to argue that wherever there is a capacity of receiving the same grace there also the same sign is to be ministred and from hence to inferre Paedo-baptism is an Argument very fallacious upon severall grounds First because Baptism is not the sign of the holy Ghost but by another mystery it was conveyed ordinarily and extraordinarily it was conveyed independently from any mystery and so the Argument goes upon a wrong supposition Secondly if the supposition were true the proposition built upon it is false for they that are capable of the same grace are not alwayes capable of the same sign for women under the Law of Moses although they were capable of the righteousnesse of Faith yet they were not capable of the sign of Circumcision For God does not alwayes convey his graces in the same manner but to some mediately to others immediatly and there is no better instance in the world of it then the gift of the holy Ghost which is the thing now instanc'd in this contestation for it is certain in Scripture that it was ordinarily given by imposition of hands and that after Baptism And when this came into an ordinary ministery it was called by the Ancient Church Chrism or Confirmation but yet it was given sometimes without imposition of hands as at Pentecost and to the Family of Cornelius sometimes before Baptism sometimes after sometimes in conjunction with it And after all this least these Arguments should not ascertaine Numb 22. their Cause they fall on complaining against God and will not be content with God unlesse they may baptize their Children but take exceptions that God did more for the Children of the Jewes But why so Because God made a Covenant with their Children actually as Infants and consign'd it by Circumcision Well so he did with our children too in their proportion He made a Covenant of spirituall Promises on his part and spirituall and reall services on ours and this pertains to Children when they are capable but made with them as soon as they are alive and yet not so as with the Jewes Babes for as their rite consign'd them actually so it was a Nationall and temporall blessing and Covenant as a separation of them from the portion of the Nations a marking them for a peculiar people and therefore while they were in the Wildernesse and separate from the commixture of all people they were not at all circumcised but as that rite did seale the righteousnesse of Faith so by vertue of its adherency and remanency in their flesh it did that work when the Children came to age But in Christian Infants the case is otherwise for the new Covenant being establish'd upon better Promises is not only to better purposes but also in distinct manner to be understood when their spirits are as receptive of a spirituall act or impresse as the bodies of Jewish Children were of the sign of Circumcision then it is to be consign'd But this businesse is quickly at an end by saying that God hath done no lesse for ours then for their Children for hee will doe the mercies of a Father and Creator to them and he did no more to the other but he hath done more to ours for he hath made a Covenant with them and built it upon Promises of the greatest concernment he did not so to them But then for the other part which is the maine of the Argument that unlesse this mercy be consign'd by Baptism as good not at all in respect of us because we want the comfort of it this is