is the condition of the promise of remission therefore it is that which gives right in foro Dei in the Court of God to the seal Who would think now but Master Blake had given some substantial answer to this and other Arguments when himself and some others are so confident of the sufficiency of them His answer is this To this I have answered faith is not sealed to but remission of sins or salvation upon condition of faith and when I come to speak of the sealing of Sacraments I shall God willing make this more evident that the Sacrament qua seal immediately respects our priviledges not duties Reply 1. Is here one word of answer to any real part of this Argument Is not this answer as little to the matter as if he had talked of another subject I think it my duty to say that Ministers of the Gospel do but proclaim to the Church the matter of our common lamentation and the enemies joy when some confidently publish such kind of Disputations and others are satisfied with them and I must say if all were such they should never be angred with one word of mine in opposition to their assertions though they would maintain that the Crow is white 2. To that useless touch that he hath on a word whose following explication might have spared him his labour I may say that our Divines have ordinarily maintained hitherto that there is a mutual covenanting between God and us and no man more then Master Blake and that there is in the Sacrament a mutual sealing the receiving being our seal as the act is Gods Pag. 88. Argum. 6. If baptism be instituted to be a seal of the righteousness of that faith which we have yet being unbaptized then must we baptize none that profess not a justifying faith But no Infants profess a justifying faith therefore we must baptize no Infants The minor is manifest by sense The reason of the consequence is evident in that we must use baptism onely according to its nature and to its instituted ends The antecedent is proved thus Circumcision was instituted to be a seal of the righteousness of that faith which we have yet unbaptized The consequence will not be denied by them whom we now deal with because they confesse that baptism succeedeth circumcision The antecedent is evident in Rom. 4. 11. it being expresly said of Abraham to whom circumcision was first given I cannot imagine what they will say unless it be by recourse to the Anabaptists shift to say that circumcision was instituted to this end indeed to Abraham himself and others that were sincere but not to all that had right to it but God here tells us the established use and end of his ordinance and in such relations the end is inseparable And as God hath not made many sorts of baptisms or circumcisions So neither many meer inconsistent ends or separable and we are likest to know the true end of the institution where the institution and first example are reported to us Calvin in loc. saith Duae denique ut baptismi hodie sunt ita olim circumcisionis erant partes nempe tam vitae novitatem quam peccatorum remissionem testari Lastly as there are two parts at this day of baptism so of old there were two of circumcision viz. to witness as newness of life so forgiveness of sins Saith Piscator in loc. upon the place Sicut olim circumcisio signum suit faeleris gratiae figillum quo credentibus obsignata fuit justitia fidei hoc est quo illi certiores sunt redditi sibi remssa esse peccata propter futuram satisfactionem Christi ac proinde se babere Deam propitium ac foventem ita caetera quoque sacramenta c. similiter finis seu scopus omnium sacramentorum unus idemque viz. obsignatio justitiae fidei quae vulgo dicitur fidei confirmatio Paraeus in loc. saith ita signum fuit dantis accipientis respectu c. Et Justitia fidei est remissio peccatorum fide accepta propter redemptionem Christi et sic Sacramenta non sunt instituta justificandis sed justificatis hoc est non infidelibus sed conversis non igiturnisi conversione fide sumi debent secus sigilla justitiae esse cessant quid enim non babentibus fidem justitiam obsignarent As circumcision was of old a sign of the covenant of grace and a seal whereby was sealed the righteousness of faith to believers that is to say whereby they were certified that their sins were forgiven them by receiving of the future satisfaction of Christ and therefore they had God propitious and favouring unto them so also the other Sacraments c. Also the end or scope of all the Sacraments is as one and the same viz. the signing of the righteousness of faith which is commonly called the confirmation of faith so it was a sign both in respect of the giver and receiver c. and the righteousness of faith is the forgiveness of sins by faith received because of Christs redemption and so the Sacraments are not instituted for those who are to be justified but for the justified that is not for unbelievers but for those which are converted therefore are they not to be taken without conversion and saith otherwise they were to be seals of righteousness for what would it seal to them who have not faith and repentance Doctor Willet in loc. saith circumcision then did not confer upon him that grace which he had not but did confirm and establish him in the grace and faith received the sacraments then non instituta sunt justificandis sed justificatis are not instituted for those which are to be justified but for them which are already justified Parae Peter Martyr is large and makes these words Rom. 4. 11. of Paul to be the definition of a Sacrament to be a seal of the righteousness of faith Pag. 91. Argum 7. We must baptize none but those that are first professed Disciples of Christ But none are professed Disciples of Christ that profess not saving saith in Christ therefore we may not baptize any that profess not saving faith in Christ But no Infant doth profess saving faith in Christ as is manifest by sense therefore no Infant is a professed Disciple of Christ nor must we baptize any The major is proved from Matth. 28. 19. Go Disciple me all nations baptizing them As for those that say they are discipled by baptizing and not before baptizing 1. They speak not the sense of that Text 2. Nor that which is true or rational if they mean it absolutely as so spoken else why should one be baptized more then another 3. But if they mean that by heart-covenant or Gods acceptance and promise they are Disciples before but not so compleatly till the covenant be sealed and solemnized as a Souldier is not so signally a Souldier till he be listed nor a King till he
the Son by which they cry Abba Father So Tit. 3. 5 6 7. According to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost which he shed on us c. that being Justified by his Grace we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life The heirs then are regenerate justified and have the hope of eternal life So Ephes. 3. 6. The Gentiles being made fellow-heirs and of the same body are partakers of the promise in Christ by the Gospel even the unsearchable riches of Christ Heb. 6. 17. The heirs of promise have their salvation confirmed by Gods oath And Heb. 1. 14. they are called the heirs of salvation And Heb. 11. 6. 9. It is true justified believers that have that title and James 2. 7. They are called heirs of the promised Kingdom and 1. Pet. 3. 7. they are called coheirs of the same grace of life So that to be heirs in the first and proper notion is to be Sons that have title to the inheritance of glory and therefore to be heirs in the second analogical notion is to be such as seem such by profession of that Faith which hath the promise of that glory The last title that I mentioned in the Argument was Justified Paul calleth all the baptized Church of Corinth Justified None that profess not a justified Faith are called Justified therefore none such should be baptized The major I proved to Master Blake out of 1 Cor. 6. 11. Ye are washed ye are sanctified ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God Master Blake doth not at all deny the major or the sense of the Text alledged to prove it but darkly in generals intimateth a denial of the minor silently passing over that particular title justified as if he durst not be seen to take notice of it I confess its sad that good men should be so unfaithful to the truth which is so precious and is not their own and which they should do nothing against as Master Baxter hath done but all they can for it Having gon thus far about titles let me add another the title Regenerate Christ hath instituted no baptism but what is to be a sign of present regeneration But to men that profess not a justifying faith it cannot be administred as a sign of present regeneration therefore he hath instituted no baptism to be administred to such The major I have proved already in the first Argument and its plain in John 3. 5. Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God And so in Tit. 3. 5. where it is called the laver of regeneration In both which though I am of their minde that think that the sign is put for the thing signified yet it may thence plainly appear what is the thing signified even regeneration or the new birth Yea so commonly was this acknowledged by all the Church of Christ that there is nothing more common in the writings of the Fathers then to take the terms regenerate illuminate c. and baptized as signifying the same thing or at least spoken of the same person which occasioned one of our late Antiquaries so stifly to plead that regeneration in Scripture signifyeth meer baptism and that all the baptized are regenerate I grant that it oft falls out that baptism being misapplied sealeth not regeneration at present and that the same person may afterward be regenerate and his remembred baptism may be of use to him for the confirmation of his faith But this is not the institutes commanded use of it to be so administred at first if the party profess not saving faith though this review of it is a duty where it was so abused at first The minor I shall take for granted while regeneration in Scripture stands so connexed to salvation I know no regenerate ones but the justified or those that profess to have a justifying faith nor hath he proved any more Pag. 118. Argum. 11. All that are meet subjects for baptism are after their baptism without any further inward qualification at least without any other species of saith meet subjects for the Lords Supper But no Infant is a meet subject for the Lords Supper as is acknowledged therefore no Infant is a meet subject for baptism Or thus Those whom we may baptize we may also admit to the Lords Supper But we may admit no Infants to the Lords Supper as is acknowledged by baptizers of Infants therefore we may baptize no Infants The major Master Blake will easily grant me and if any other deny it I prove it thus 1. It is the same covenant that both Sacrament seal one for initiation the other for confirmation and growth in grace therefore the same saith that qualifieth for the one doth sufficiently qualifie for the other for the same covenant hath the same condition 2. They are the same benefits that are conferred in baptism and the Lords Supper to the worthy receiver Therefore the same qualification is necessary for the reception The antecedents is commonly granted Baptism uniteth to Christ and giveth us himself first and with himself the pardon of all past sins c. The Lords Supper by confirmation giveth us the same things it is the giving of Christ himself who saith by his Minister Take Eat Drink offering himself to us under the signs and commanding us to take himself by faith as we take the signs by the outward parts He giveth us the pardon of sin sealed and procured by his body broken and his blood shed 3. A member of Christs Church against whom no accusation may be brought from some contradiction of his first profession must be admitted to the Lords Supper but the new baptized may be ordinarily such therefore if he can but say I am a baptized person he hath a sufficient principal title to the Lords Supper Coram Ecclesia before the Church I mean such as we must admit though some actual preparation be necessary unless he be proved to have disabled his claim on that account either by nulling and reverting that profession or by giving just cause of questioning it 4. The Church hath ever from the Apostles dayes till now without question admitted the new baptized at age to the Lords Supper without requiring any new species of faith to intitle them to it I take the major therefore as past denial I must confess as much as I am against separation I never intend to have communion with Master Blakes congregation if they profess not saving repentance and faith And if he exact not such a profession I say still he makes foul work in the Church and when such foul work shall be voluntarily maintained and the word of God abused for the defilement of the Church and ordinances of God it is a greater scandal to the weak and to the schismsticks and a greater reproach to the Church and sadder case to
the Holy Trinity that doth not first profess to believe in them therefore the Chuch over taught the Catechumeni the creed first in which they profess to believe in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost And before they actually baptized them they asked them whether they believed in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost To which they must answer affirmatively or not be baptized And all that are baptized must first profess to believe in his Name and so to receive him and not onely promise to do it hereafter I adde that the same faith that is mentioned in the ordinary Creed in the Church is meant in the baptismal profession and to be required before baptism this will be confessed 1. Because the creed it self hath been this 1300. years at least professed before baptism 2. because the creed it self is but the 3. fundamental baptismal articles mentioned Matth. 28. 19. enlarged and explained on subsequent occasions as Sandford and Parker de Descensu have learnedly and largley proved and Grotius in Matth. 28. 19. proves out of Tertullian c. that the creed was not then in the form of words as now though the same doctrine was used in other words to the same uses Pag. 68. Argum. 3. The foregoing Argument was taken from the prerequisite profession the next shall be taken from the very work it self viz. the presenting and offering our selves to be baptized and willingly receiving baptism thus If it be the very nature or appointed use of the exâ—eanal part of baptism it self yea essential to it to signifie and profess among other things the saving faith and repentance of the baptized then true baptism cannot go without such a profession But the baptism of Infants is without such a profession therefore the baptism of Infants is not true baptism The minor is manifest by sense The antecedent which onely requireth proof I prove thus It is of the instituted nature of baptism to be in general a professing sign as well as an engaging sign de futuro for the future This I premise as granted by all Christians that I know of that have written of baptism and then let us consider of the several parts of the sign or external Ordinance with the signification of each that it is essential to it to be significant and obligatory on our part as well as on Gods part is commonly confessed And 1. the Minister doth baptize him into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and the party doth consent thereto 1. voluntarily offering himself to be bapitzed and then 2. voluntarily receiving that baptism And his offer of himself hereto goeth before the Ministers baptizing him and his reception of that baptism is essential to it So that baptism essentially containeth on his part a signal profession of consent to that which is meant in the form used by the Minister I Baptize thee into the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost And that is that God the Father Son and Holy Ghost be mine and I be theirs in the relations in which they are offered in the Gospel to Mankind for all confess that it is a Covenant that is here sealed and so a mutual consent which the signs are instituted by Christ to signifie Christ offereth himself to be related to me as my Jesus Christ and by offering my self to baptism and by voluntary receiving it I do actually profess my acceptance of his offer that is of himself so offered God the Father offereth himself to be my God reconciled in Christ and so my chief good and by voluntary receiving baptism I do signally profess my acceptance of him so offered The Holy Ghost is offered to be my Sanctifyer and guide and by voluntary reception of baptism into his Name I do signally profess my acceptance of him so offered So that it is a most clear case that baptism as baptism according to it s instituted nature and use doth contain the persons actual signal profession of present assent to the truth of the Gospel and acceptance of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost as therein offered And it containeth as our Divines commonly maintain an actual signal profession that we there presently consecrate or devote or dedicate our selves to God the Father Son and Holy Ghost in the foresaid relations 2. Another part of baptism is the Ministers washing the person and the person first offering himself to be washed and after actually receiving it doth thereby signally profess his consent Now this washing doth essentially signifie our washing from our former filth of sin together with the guilt our putting off the old man which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts of the flesh He that signally professeth his present consent to be washed by the blood of Christ from his former filthiness and guilt and to lay by the filthiness of flesh and Spirit doth co nomine profess saving faith and repentance But all that are baptized with the baptism of Christs institution do by the very voluntary reception of baptism so profess therefore they do thereby profess saving Faith and Repenâ— 3. Quad modum as to the manner it s commonly confessed by us to the Anabaptists as our commentators declare that in the Apostles times the baptized were dipped over head in the water and that this signifieth their profession both of believing the buâ—ial and resurrection of Christ and of their own present renouncing the world and flesh or dying to sin and living to Christ or rising again to newness of life or being buried and risen again with Christ as the Apostle expoundeth in the forecited texts of Col. 2. and Rom. 6. And though we have thought it lawful to disuse the manner of dipping and to use less water yet we presume not to change the use and signification of it So then he that signally professeth to die and rise again in baptism with Christ doth signally profess saving faith and repentance But thus do all that are baptized according to the Apostles practice Therefore c. Pag. 74. Argum. 4. If we must baptize none that profess not their consent to enter themselves presently into the covenant of grace with God in Christ Then we must baptize no Infant but the former is true Therefore c. The consequence is manifest sith it is manifest even by sense that Infants profess not their consent to enter themselves into the covenant of Grace with God in Christ The antecedent I think will be granted by many of the Papists and it is the common Doctrine of the Protestants and therefore as to them I need not prove it I confess some of the Anbaptists and some few others do question whether baptism be a seal of the covenant of grace but the quarrel is mostly if not onely about the bare word Seal for they confess that in sense which we mean by sealing and particularly they confess that we do in baptism enter into the convenant of God and that it is a professing and engaging
haec quatuor recenset Lucas quum desseribâ—re vult nobis rite constitutam ecclesiae statum Et nos ad hunc ordinem eniti convenit si cupimus vere censeri ecclesia coram Deo Angelis non inane tantum ejus nomen apud homines jactare Therefore we seek out the true Church of Christ its image is here painted to the life and verily it begins from the doctrine which is as it were the soul of the Church neither doth he name any doctrine but of the Apostles that is to say which the Son of God had delivered by their hands therefore wheresoever the pure voice of the Gospel sounds where men remain in the profession of it where they exercise themselves to profit in the ordinary hearing of it there undoubtedly is the Church Wherefore Luke mentions these four things not without just ground when he would describe the duly constituted state of the Church and its convenient that we should endeavour to attain to this order if we desire to be a true Church in the sight of God and Angels and not onely to boast of the vain name thereof before men And vers. 47. it is said that the Lord added daily to the Church such as should be saved It describeth them that were added to the Church viz. that they were such as should be saved or as Beza yieldeth to another reading and so Grotius and many others such as saved themselves from that untoward Generation qui sese quotidie servandos recipiebant in ecclesiam Who daily added themselves to the Church that they might be saved The Church is the body of Christ Col. 1. 18. 24. and none are members of his body but such as either are united to him and live by him or at least seem to do so The Church is subject to Christ and beloved of Christ and cherished by him We are members of his body of his flesh and his bones Ephes 5. 24. 25 30. And those that are against the general redemption me thinks should be moved with the consideration that it is the Church that Christ gave himself for even the visible Church which he purchased with his own blood Acts 20. 28. Ephes. 5. 25. and he is the Saviour of his body vers. 23. But so he is not effectively the Saviour of the professors of a faith that doth not justifie {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} according to opinion he is the effective Savior of those that profess a justifying faith and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} of the sincere but of others neither way Hitherto Divines have gathered from the plain Texts of Scripture that there is but one Church one faith and one baptism and those that had this faith really were to be baptized and were real members of the Church and that those that professed this faith and so seemed to have it when they have it not are visible members of the Church and are so taken because their profession is sensible to us and by that they seem to have the thing profâ—ssed but Paeâ—obaptists and chiefly Master Baxter are fallen into new conceits in these 1. They feign a new Christian faith to themselves to wit a believing immediate by the faith of a Parent or Proparent so that before there was but one Christian faith and now they have made two 2. And so before there was but one sort of real serious or sincere Christians consisting of such as had that real Christian faith in their own persons and now they have found out another sort of them to wit believers by anothers faith 3. So they have feigned a new baptism for the old baptism was for remission of sin and burial and resurrection with Christ and to ingraffe men into the Church which is the body of Christ upon the profession of a saving faith But now they admit to baptism as they term it Infants without any profession of saving faith made by them to seal an imaginary covenant of grace made by God to believing Parents and their seed without any covenanting or sealing by the baptized person upon a pretended title of Parents and Proparents faith and instead of baptizing as of old they did by putting under Water and coming out again so as to resemble Christs burial and resurrection and their conformity thereto they call that baptism and say falsly they baptize when they onely sprinkle or pour water on an Infant without such dipping as of old Master Baxter pag. 70. confesseth was used and expressed by the Apostle Rom. 6. 4 5. 4. And they have feigned also a new kind of Church For the Church of Christs constitution is but one which is called visible from mens profession and invisible from the faith professed But they have made a Church which consisteth of a third sort of members that is of men that neither have saving faith nor profess it but onely are Infants whose Parents or Proparents have faith 5. To this end they have confounded the Church and the Porch the Vineyard the adjacâ—nt part of the wilderness those that heretofore were not so much as Catechumeni oâ— men in preparation for the Church but onely designed to holiness and hoped and expected to be in after time when they came to understand the Christian faith Church-members are now brought into it and are annumerated to true Christians before they once profess themselves to be such 6. And hereby by Infant baptism also one of the two sorts of teaching which Christ distinguisheth Matth. 28. 19 20. is taken away to wit that teaching which draweth men to Christ and maketh them Disciples and perswadeth them to receive Christ Jesus the Lord For they take him for a Disciple so Master Bâ—xter of baptism part 1. chap. 3. that is not learning to be a Disciple yea though he do not so much as submit to learn nor hath learned any preparatory truths though yet he be not made a Disciple indeed nor profess to be Master Baxter is deeply offended with Master T. for denying Infants to be Christians or members of the Church mediately c. But I shall say somewhat more concerning those Infants that are asserted by him to be Disciples who do not so much as profess a saving faith viz. that they are no members of the Church at all and are not so much as to be named Christians nor to be admitted into the visible Church No man can prove that ever one man was admitted a Church-member in all the New Testament without the profession of a saving faith Otherwise we should have two distinct Churches specially different or two sorts of Christianity and Christians differing tota specie in the whole kind because the profession by a Parent and Proparent which is made by him their qualification doth make a difference specifical between such Christians and Church-members and other Christians and Church members When the Jaylor Acts 16. 30 32 33 34. was admitted into the Church by baptism it was upon the
Felo de Se. OR Mr. RICHARD BAXTERS Self-destroying MANIFESTED In twenty Arguments against Infant-Baptism Gathered out of his own Writing in his Second Disputation of Right to SACRAMENTS BY John Tombes B. D. PSALM 64. 8 9. So they shall make their own Tongues to fall upon themselves all that see them shall flee away And all men shall fear and shall declare the work of God for they shall wisely consider of his doings LONDON Printed by Henry Hills next door to the Sign of the Peacock in Aldersgate-steeet 1659. To the Christian READER MAster Richard Baxter in his Second disputation of right to Sacraments begins thus It may seem strange that after 1625. years use of Christian Baptism the Ministers of the Gospel should be yet unresolved to whom it doth belong yet so it is And I observe that it is a question that they are now very sollicitous about and I cannot blame them it being not onely about a matter of Divine appointment but a practical of such concernment to the Church The true reason hereof seems to be that Ministers have for many Ages left the true Baptism of believers which Christ appointed and like Michal instead of it have substituted an Image or Idol of their own to wit Infant Baptism Which being quite besides the rule of Christ Matth. 28. 19. Mark 16. 15. and the Apostles practice throughout the Acts of the Apostles they have been at a loss about the ground of it and almost at Daggers drawing about the use of it As it happens to fellow-travellers when they are all out of the right way one conjectures this way they should go another that and sometimes they are at hot disputos and contentions about their way and many by-ways are attempted yet still the farther they go the more out of the way till they come into the Road again So it hath been with Baptizers of Infants they are fallen into many new devices to maintain Infant Baptism the ancients with the Papists imagining that by it Gods grace was given and that it was necessary to save the child from perishing the Lutherans that by Baptism a seed of faith and some relative grace was given to Infants to which Doctor Samuel Ward Bishop Davenant Doctor Cornelius Burges Master Thomas Bedford Master James Cranford and others have of late much inclined others opposing these have fallen into as bad conceits of the Covenant of Gospel grace as made to a believer and his seed Baptisms succession to Jewish Circumcision and fetching a rule from thence as others from the Jewish Baptism Master Baxter having found these unsafe to rest on sub they will bring the assertors to the avouching Jewish tenets hath devised another as he conceives more refined and subtile way making Infants Disciples of Christ mediately by the parents or proparents as his new term is faith which he never proves and an imagined ordinance or law of Infants visible Church-membership no where extant unrepealed and in following these by-ways they have been at variance among themselves Tertullian and Gregory Nazianzen onely allowing Infant Baptism in case of manifest danger of imminent death others to take away original sin Baptizing all weak or strong believers or unbelievers children which had almost quite thrust Baptism of believers out of the World and under colour of Christening as they fasly term their Infant Baptism and making Christian souls by throwing water on them they have so polluted the Churches of God with the dregs of the nations I mean innumerable ignorant scandalous prophane superstitious haters scorners and persecutors of Christianity that nothing but the mighty power of God is sufficient to purge the Churches of God of that loathsome and infectious filth which these have brought into it The Papists themselves do in a sort confess that Infant Baptism is an aberration from the first rule in that they count it not perfect till their Mimical and ludicrous Sacrament of Confirmation be added which was used with some reformation in respect of the right and disclaiming of some errours affixed to it and with the appointment of Catechizing by the late Bishops and from them termed Bishopping though without any remarkable emendation of the intrusion of ignorant ungodly unchristian persons into the society of Christians and the Lords supper Some of those who of late have sought reformation herein begin to devise how they may remedy this evil and yet keep the multitude in their Communion by refining that which is called Confirmation To this purpose lately is published by Master Jonathan Hanmer An exercitation or Confirmation to which Master George Hughes Master Richard Baxter and Master Ralph Venning have prefixed their Epistles concerning which how he is mistaken in the laying on of hands used by the Ancients and the application of Heb. 6. 2. to Confirmation after Infant Baptism is perceptible by Sect. 23. of the second part of my Review and sundry passages in his own book in which many things besides are vented without proof about difference between the Church of Infants and Adult members of the effect of Confirmation of compleat and incompleat visible Church-members c. the errors of which it is unnecessary to refute there being no proof of them offered but his own and other Divines mistakes and the main of the design being to set up another humane inventiâ—n which hath no precept or promise of God that he may uphold or colour over an old corruption It pleased God lately to begin to bring the truth concerning Baptism of believers to light in this Nation which stirred up many to contend for Infant Baptism and having as they imagined though the three parts of my Review now published do sufficiently shew they are deceived made that sure they have of late fallen to dispute whose Infants are to be Baptized Mr. Thomas Hooker Mr. Cobbet Mr. Firmin and others pleading against the Baptism of the Infants of the national and parochial Church-members and some of them restraining it to Infants of inchurched Church-members and those who are judged to be real visible Saints have been opposed by Master Rutherford Master Cawdery Master Blake and others Master Blake to maintain his tenet hath asserted that a Dogmatical faith intitles to baptism to oppose which Master Baxter however in his Letter to me he pretends the unpleasantness and non-necessity of meddling any more about the point of Infant Baptism the want of time and health for work of greater moment that he might decline â—â—â—â—ing where his law of Infants visible Church-membership unrepealed is and thinks a man cannot justifie it to lay out the hundreth part or perhaps the thousandth part of his time study talk or zeal upon this question yet here he blames not them that are sollicitous about it being of Divine appointment and practical of such concernment to the Church and hath himself besides his Apology before this last year published a large Book of disputations concerning right â—o Sacraments the second whereof is against Master
sign on our part as well as an exhibiting notifying confirming sign on Gods part It is confest it is the covenant of grace we are to enter and that there is but one covenant of grace This Master Blake acknowledgeth for all the mention of an outward covenant it is also a confessed thing on all hands that it is God that is the first author and offerer of the covenant that it is he that redeemed us who made the promise or covenant of grace upon the ground of redemption and that it is frequently called a covenant in Scripture as it is a Divine Law or constitution without respect to mans consent as Grotius hath proved in the preface to his annotations on the Evangelists much more out of doubt is it that it is called a covenant before man consenteth as it is a covenant offered and not yet mutually entred in the former sense the word is taken properly but in another sense and for another thing then in the later But in the later it is taken tropically viz. Synedochically it being but a covenant drawn up and consented to by God conditionally and offered to us for our conâ—ent It is the same covenant that is offered to us and not another that we are called to consent to or enter in and we cannot be truly said to enter into covenant with God if we make a new one of our own and lay by his for that 's none of the covenant of God he never offered it nor will he ever enter it We are I hope agreed what the covenant of grace is as offered on Gods part or else its great pity viz. that on the title of creâ—â—â—n first and redemption after we being absolutely his own it is offered to us that God will be our God our chief good and reconciled father in Christ that Christ will be our Saviour by propitiation teaching and ruling us even from the guilt filth or power of sin that the Holy Ghost will be our indwelling Sanctifier if we heartily or sincerely accept the gift and offer that God will consent to be our God Christ to be our Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost to be our in-dwelling Sanctifier if we will but consent This is no doubt the gift or covenant so offered These things being thus premised I come to prove not onely the inseparability but even the identity of heart covenanâ—ing and saving faith and of signal external covenanting and the profession of saving faith without which we must not baptize any Pag. 79. Argum. 5. We must not baptize any without the profession of that faith and repentance which are made the condition of remission of sins But Infants make no profession of that faith and repentance which are made the condition of remission of sins therefore no Infants are to be baptized The minor is manifest by sense and the major I prove thus If we must not baptize any but intentionally for present remission of sin then must not we baptize any without a profession of that faith and repentance which is the condition of remission But the former is true therefore so is the â—uer the consequence is past all doubt for else we should imagine that men may have present actual pardon without that faith and repentance which are the condition of it which subverteth much of the Gospel The antecedent I prove thus If God hath instituted no baptism but what is intentionally for the present remission of sin then we must not baptize any but intentionally for the present remission of sin But the former is true therefore so is the later I say intentionally in contradistinction from eventually or certainly and infallibly attaining that end where further note that I speak not of Gods absolute decrees as if his intention in that sense could be frustrate but of his ends as Legislator speaking of him after the manner of men but principally of the instituted end of his ordinances that is the ends which he requireth the Minister and People to use them for and so it is our intention principally that I mention As the Gospel it self is said to be intentionally to save men and though it condemn most that is besides the first intention and but by accident and though this be principally to be spoken of the prae-imposed intentions of their conversion and salvation yet Christ is pleased in the word to ascribe such intentions to himself as attain not their ends as professing that he came not into the world to condemn the world but that the world through him migh be saved That is to condemn them is not his direct principal intent but onely on supposition of their wilfull final rejecting of him and thus he speaks partly in the habit of a rector or promiser and partly as man or after the manner of men and of the intention imposed on us there is no doubt Now I shall prove the antecedent for the consequence is past doubt And first we are confirmed in this truth because the Opponent whom it concerneth hath not proved any other baptism instituted by God but what is for present reâ—ission of sins If they can shew us one Text of Scripture that speaketh of any other we shall give up all the cause but yet they have not done it that I know of In the mean time we shall prove the contrary God hath instituted but one baptism That one baptism is for the present remission of sins therefore God hath instituted no baptism but what is for present remission The major is proved from Ephes. 4. 5. There is one baptism In the minor we take the words for remission not to speak of somewhat accidental or to be intended onely by the administrator uncertainly or but sometime And I prove it from Scripture Acts 2. 38. Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost as remission is here made the end of baptism so it is present remission For 1. It is such as is the consequent of the repentance which Peter exhorteth them to but that was present remission 2. It was to precede the giving of the Holy Ghost in the sense there mentioned therefore it was present remission Beza in loc. upon the place saith in nomen Christi id est dans Christo nomen cujus mortis scpulturae ac resurrectionis simus in baptizo participes cum peccatorum remissione nec enim hoc declarat formulam baptismi sâ—d finem scopum In the name of Christ That is giving our name to Christ of whose death burial and resurrection we are made partakers in baptism with the forgiveness of sins for this doth not declare the form of baptism but the end and scope So Deodate in the name viz. not onely for a mark of our profession of the Gospel but also to participate of his spiritual virtue in the washing away of our sins with which he accompanieth and
ratifieth the external ceremony in those who are his Bullinger in loc. saith Baptizâ—ri in nomine Domini Jesu Christi est baptismatis signo testari se Christo credere ad remissionem peccatorum To be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ is by the sign of baptism to testifie that we believe in Christ for the remission of sins 1. Mark It is not onely an engagement to believe hereafter but the profession of a present faith 2. And that not a common faith but that which hath remission of sin 3. And this was not an accidental separable use of baptism but he makes this the very exposition of baptizari in nomine Jesu Christi to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ And thus he expoundeth the covenant est enim baptismus pactum seu foedus gratiae quod init inter baptizandum nobiscum Christus For baptism is an agreement or covenant of grace which Christ enters into with us when we are baptized And that it is a professing sign of our true repentance he shews before rectissime conjungitur paenitentia baptismus quia baptismus paenitentiae signum est and most rightly is repentance and baptism joyned together between baptism is the sign of repentance Calvin in loc. upon the place Per baptismum ut Paulus docet crucifigitur vetus homo noster ut in vitae novitatem resurgamus by baptism as Paul teacheth our old man is crucified that we may rise to newness of life Rom. 6. 4. 8. Item indutmus Christum ipsum Gâ—l 3. 27. 1 Cor. 12. passim docet Scriptura esse paenitentiae quoque Symbolum Also we put on Christ himself and the Scripture doth up and down teach it to be also a badge of repentance Calvin on Acts 22. 16. Non dubium est quin fideliter rudimentis Pietatis Paulum imbuerit Ananias neque enim verâ— fidei expertem baptizasset nor doubt but Ananias did faithfully instruct Paâ—l in the rudiments of Piety neither would he have baptizeâ— him if he had been void of true faith John 3. 5. Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he shall not enter into the Kingdome of God though we are agreed against the Papists that Christ intendeth not here to place the same necessity in baptism as there is in or of the new birth by the spirit yet it is by most acknowledged that Christ doth here speak of the new birth as signified by baptism and so hath respect to baptism as the ordinary confirming sign And so the Text fully sheweth us that baptism is instituted to be the sign of our present regeneration or else it could not be said that we must be born of water and the spirit Calvin saith most are of Chrysostomes mind who took it to be meant of baptism and so did the generality of ancient Expositors and though himself and some more think otherwise yet as long as they take it to be a metonymical expression the sign being put for the thing signified it doth as well acquaint us with the use of baptism as if it were a proper speech Bullinger in loc upon the place saith Hanc Christi sententiam omnes pene de baptismo interpretantur almost all interpret this Scripture of Christ to baptism Beza believeth that the Text speaketh of baptism either Christs or some other but rather Christs Justly doth Beza in Mark 1. 4. fall upon Erasmus sharply for saying {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in praepâ—sitio praeparationem significat non effectum the preposition in signifieth a preparation and not the effect Because repentance and remission saith Beza cannot be separated so that he took it not to be a common preparatory repentance or baptism Piscator on Mark 14. saith It s called the baptism of repentance for remission of sin because John preached remission of sin to the penitent and believers praecip iebatque ut inhujus rei testimontum atque professionem baptizarentur He concluded that they should be baptized in testimony and profession of this thing and that is called {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the baptism of repentance id est qui resipiscentiae testificandae atque profitenda adbibebatur Neque enim baptizabat nisi eos qui confessione peccatorum â—dita resipiscentiam suam testatam reddebant Caeterum nomine resipiscentiae per synecdochen membri simul intelligenda est fides in Christum that is to say was used to testifie and profess repentance neither did he baptize any but those who by confession of their sins testified their repentance but by a Synecdoche of a part for the whole is also to be understood Faith in Christ And on Matth. 3. 11. Observe he shews that Christs baptism and Johns are the same in that both have the same end and use viz. obsignatio remissionis peccatorum resipiscentiae The sealing of remission of sins and repentance that is as already extant as his judgement is oft delivered as in his Schol. on ver. 11. he expresly faith In resipiscentiam id est in testimonium resipiscentiae ut nimiâ—um susceptione baptismi testatum faciatis vor resipuisse indies magis ac magis resipiscere velle sed simul hic intelligendum Joannem baptizasse quoque in remissionem peccatorum hoc est ut nimirum nomine Dei testatum faceret resipiscentibus in Christum credentibus peccata ipsis remissa esse propter Christum agnum Dei Unto repentance that is in testimony of repentance viz. that by receiving of baptism you testifie that you have repented and that you will daily renew your repentance more and more but withal we must here understand that John did baptize also for the remission of sins that is that he might testifie in the name of God to the penitents and believers in Christ that their sins were forgiven them for the sake of Christ the Lamb of God And I pray mark his observation on Mat. 3. 6. 8. 10 concluding our present question Baptismus nulli adulto conferendus est nisi prius ediderit confessionem peccatorum fidei in Christum ac praterea promissionem sanctae vitae Baptism is not to be administred to any of age unless he first make confession of his sins and of his faith in Christ and besides a promise of a holy life which he proves Calvin on Matth. 3. 6. saith Ergo ut se rite ad baptismum offerant homines peccatorum confessio ab illis requiritur alioqui nihil quam inane esset ludicrum tota actio Therefore that men may rightly offer themselves to baptism confession of sins is required of men otherwise the whole action would be nothing else but sport If I had charged the guilty so of making the whole work of baptism Ludicrous they would have been highly offended and yet Paedobaptists do so Paraeus on Matth. 3. 5. shews that the order was that confession as a testimony of true repentance
A Disciple of Christ is one that will take him for the great prophet of the Church which whosoever heareth not shall be cut off from Gods people and will learn of him as of the Christ but so will not all that will learn of him for a man that taketh Christ but for a common wise man as Socrates or Plato may be willing to learn of him And so may be his Disciple in another sense but not in the Christian sense as a Christian Pag. 96. Argum. 8. We ought not to baptize those persons that do not so much as profess their forsaking of the childhood and Kingdom of the Devil But no Infant doth profess its forsaking of the childhood and kingdom of the Devil as is manifest by sense therefore we ought to baptize no Infant The maior is proved thus If we must baptize none but for present admission into the Kingdom of Christ then we must baptize none but those that promise a present departure from the Kingdom of the Devil but the former is true therefore so is the later The antecedent is granted by those that I have to do with the reason of the consequence is evident in that all the world is divided into these two kingdomes and they are so opposite that there is no passing into one but from the other The minor of the first argument I prove thus All they are visiby in the kingdom of the Devil or not so much as by profession removed out of it who profess not a removal from that condition in which the wrath of God abideth on them and they are excluded by the Gospel from everlasting life but such are all that profess not a justifying faith The major is proved in that it is the condition of the covenant of grace performed that differenceth the members of Christs Kingdom from Satans and so it is that condition profest to be performed that visibly differenceth them before men It is the promise of grace that bringeth them out of Satans Kingdome therefore it is onely done visibly to those that profess the performance of the condition moreover to be out of Satans Kingdom visibly is to be visibly from under his government but those that profess not saving faith are not visibly from under his government Lastly to be visibly out of Satans Kingdom is to be visibly freed from his power as the executioner of Gods eternal vengeance but so are none that profess not saving faith The minor is proved from John 3. 36. Where it is plain 1. That the unbelief spoken of is that which is opposed to saving faith even to that saith which hath here the promise of everlasting life 2. And that this leaves them visibly under the wrath of God So in Mark 16. 16. compared with Matth. 27. 19. In the later Christ bids them make him Disciples and in the former he describeth those that are such and those that remain still in the Kingdom of Satan He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned Here it is evident that the unbelief threatned is that which is contrary to and even the privation of the faith that salvation is expresly promised to and that all that profess not this saving faith are not so much as professedly escaped a state of damnation and that this is the differencing character of Christs Disciples to be baptized of which yet more afterwards Pag. 98. Argum. 9. If it be the appointed use of all Christian baptism to solemnize our mariage with Christ or to seal or confirm our union with him or ingraffing into him then must we baptize none that profess not justifying faith because this is necessarily prerequisite and no other can pretend to union mariage or ingraffing into Christ But no Infant doth profess justifying Faith as is manifest by sense therefore we must baptize no Infant Both the antecedent and consequent are evident in Gal. 3. 27 28 29. For as many of you as have been baptized in Christ have put on Christ Ye are all one in Christ Jesus and if ye be Christs then are ye Abrahams seed and heirs according to promise Here 1. we see that it is not an accidental or separable thing for baptism to be our visible entrance into Christ our putting him on our admittance by solemnization into the state of Gods children and heirs according to promise For this is affirmed of all the baptized with true Christian baptism If we be truely baptized we are baptized into Christ if we are baptized into Christ then we are Christs and have put on Christ and are all one in Christ and are Abrahams seed and heirs according to promise If any object that the Apostle speaks this but of some of them even of the regenerate because he saith as many of you I answer It is manifest that he speaks of all 1. because it was of all them that were baptized into Christ 2. he expresly saith as much in the next foregoing words ver 26. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus To which the words recited are annexed as the proof for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ the assumption is implied but you have all been baptized into Christ therefore ye have all put on Christ and so in him are all the children of God 2. Note that they are the special gifts of saving grace that are here ascribed to all the baptized 3. Note also that all this is said and proved to be by faith 4. Note also that it is expresly said to be a justifying faith before vers 24. that we might be justified by faith Indeed this text affordeth us divers Arguments 1. The Apostle supposeth all the baptized to profess a justifying faith among the Galatians therefore so must we suppose of others and expect that they do it The antecedent is proved from vers 24 25 and 27. compared 2. All the baptized are said to have put on Christ therefore they are supposed to profess that faith by which Christ is put on But that is onely justfying faith 3. All that are duely baptized are baptized into Christ therefore they are supposed to profess that faith by which men are united or ingraffed into Christ but that is onely justifying faith but the rest of the Arguments here will be further touched on anon Master Rutherford saith that Scripture no where calleth Christ the head of the visible Church as such as it is after cited I conclude then that Christ hath appâ—inted no baptism but what is for a visible mariage of the soul to himself as Protestants ordinarily confess Therefore he hath appointed no baptism but for those that profess to take Jesus Christ for their Husband and to give up themselves to him as his espouse but this is a profession of justifying faith for heartily to take Christ for our head and husband is true saving faith and proper to his own regenerate pecple if