perhaps incouraged you thus to write But to correct your Rashness and silence you and them to consider what I and the fore-mentioned Gentleman have said Is it not enough that Infant-Baptism should be built upon no better a Foundation than the Tradition of the Apostate Gentile Church and the Decrees of Popes and General Councils but that it must also be grounded on the erronious Customs of the Jewish Talmud But to proceed that Circumcision may answer or run Parallel with Baptism you bring in the Practice of some Heathen Nations who circumcised their Females we shall have it anon the truth is the Proof and Explanation of Infant-Baptism shall be sufficiently made out before you have done if fabulous and erroneous Traditions of Jews Heathens and Apostate Christians will do it but if no better Authority or Proof can be brought for it than what is contained in your Mercury 't is time for all good Christians with Shame enough to cast it off Should I tell my Reader why some Heathens circumcised their Females it might greatly expose you But to close with your first Question take what Dr. Jer. Taylor late Bishop of Down hath said upon this Conceit i.e. that Circumcision figured Baptism there are his words viz. The Argument saith he from Circumcision is invalid upon infinite Configurations Figures and Types prove nothing unless a Command go along with them or some Express to signify such to be their purpose for the Deluge of Waters and the Ark of Noah were Figures of Baptism saith Peter If therefore the Circumstances of the one should be drawn to the other we should make Baptism a Prodigy rather than a Rite The Paschal Lamb was a Figure of the Eucharist which succeds the other as Baptism doth to Circumcision but because there was in the Manducation of the Paschal Lamb no Prescription of Sacramental Drink shall we thence conclude that the Eucharist is to be administred in one kind And even in the very instance of this Argument suppose a Correspondency of the Analogy between Circumcision and Baptism yet their is no Correspondency of Identity for tho it be granted that both of them did consign the Covenant of Faith yet there is nothing in the Circumstances of Children being circumcised that so concerns that Mystery but that it might very well be given to Men of Reason because Circumcision lest a Character in the Flesh which being imprinted upon the Infant 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 remains on the Body and if it leaves a Character at all it is upon the Soul to which the word is added which is as much a part of the Sacrament as the Sign it self for both which Reasons it is requisite that the Party baptized should be capable of Reason that they may be capable both of the Word and of the Sacrament and the Impress-upon the Spirit Since therefore the Reason of the Parity does wholly fail there is nothing left to infer a necessity of complying in the Circumstance of Age any more than in the other Annexes of Types Then the Infant must also precisely be baptized upon the eighth day and Females must not be baptized at all because not circumcised but it were more proper if we would understand it a right to prosecute the Analogy from the Type to the Antitype by the way for Letter and Spirit and Signification and as Circumcision figures Baptism so also the Adjuncts of the circumcised shall signify some thing spiritual in the Adherence of Baptism and therefore as Infants were circumcised so spiritual Infants-should be baptized which is spiritual Circumcision for therefore Babes had the Ministry of the Type to signify that we must when we give our Names to Christ become Children in Malice and then the Type is made compleat Thus the worthy Doctor hath answered your Question and you too If Circumcision must be a Type of Baptism he hath shewed how and how not if it be so taken but the truth is all Types cease when the Antitype is come the one must give way to the other but Circumcision did continue in full force some Years after Baptism was in full force for Circumcision ended not till Christ nailed it to his Cross therefore it could not be the Type of Baptism but how a Shadow or Sign should be the proper Antitype of a Shadow I see not But enough hath been said to this and I should not have said so much to it but because you Notion seems new to some As touching the other two Scriptures you mention viz. that in 1 Cor. 10. 't is very impertinently cited for your business to prove Circumcision the Type of Gospeil-Baptism but this Text speaks nothing of that in the least nor no more doth that in Peter Suppose the Red-sea was a Figure of Baptism and so also the Water and Ark of Noah what of all this if you had urged the Fathers and Children were baptized to Moses in the Sea and in the Cloud and therefore Children may be Baptized I would have answered you that was but a figurative Baptism and proves nothing besides it would prove Unbelievers may be baptized also because there was a mixt Multitude as well so Baptized as were the Fathers and their Children besides much Cattel were with them in the Sea and under the Cloud Quest 2. What certain indubitable Grounds can we have for the Practice of Infant-Baptism You answer The certain Ground is from the Scripture and first from the Words of the Commission Matth. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disciple all Nations and then follows Baptizing them in the name c. From the order of which words you say Infants are not excluded from Baptism as is generally believed by Anabaptists a Person may be Baptized before he is taught for say you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mathetusate signifies to disciple all Nations personally and subjectively being a general word it contains the other two that follow viz. Baptizing and Teaching it being a word of the imperative Mode and the other two only Participles so that the Commission of it is that and the Mode of it these but in the Mode Baptizing them preceeds Teaching them to observe all things c. Reply Because there is a Teaching follows Baptism doth it therefore follow according to the Order of the sacred Commission there is no Teaching indispensibly to go before the Person is baptized You have cause to tremble for trifling and basely inverting the order of the Commission of our Blessed Saviour what though the Greek word Discipliz or make Disciples be a word of the imperative Mode O strange have you found it out will this do your business doth it therefore contain the other two I ask you whether a Man may not be made a Disciple and not be Baptized or be Baptized and yet not be discipled Matth. 13.52 't is 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Matth. 28. 't is disciple ye here 't is discipled instructed or that is taught and 't is from the same Verb with the other 'T is evident notwithstanding all your Flourish tha Teaching according to the Order of the Commission goes and must go before Baptizing though the Person baptized is to be taught afterwards also all things that Christ commanded his Disciples both as to Doctrine and Practice that so they may be faithful Followers of Christ unto the end This Teaching after Baptism indeed the Baptists cannot deny unless they should be so foolish as to say a Baptized Believer needs no further teaching c. but you know in your Consciences we deny and that too by the Authority of the Commission that any ought to be Baptized but such who are made Disciples by their first being taught Doth Baptism Sirs make either Children or others Disciples if you do not assert that what do you say and if all Nations or any in the Nations are to be Baptized before they are taught or made Disciples why may not a Minister by the Authority of the Commission baptize Turks Pagans and Infidels with their Children as well as the Infants of Christian People Moreover if so be Baptizing may go before Teaching or Persons being made Disciples why did Philip answer the Eunuch after that manner when he asked him why he might not be Baptized the Answer is If thou believest with all thy Heart thou mayest intimating unless he so believed he might not Also why did Christ make Disciples first and then baptize them Joh. 4.1 I must also tell you that your Exposition of the Commission in Matthew doth tend to invert the Order of the same Commission in Mark 16.15,16 where our Saviour commands his Disciples to go and preach the Gospel to every Creature and then saith He that believeth and is Baptized shall be saved 't is not he that is baptized and then believeth but to give divers godly and learned Pedo-Baptists their due they I find dare not attempt to invert the Order of the Holy Commission as you seem to do thought it shakes the Foundation of their own Practice See Reverend Mr. Perkirs on these Words Teach all Nations baptizing them saith he I explain the former thus First of all it is said Teach them that is make them my Disciples by teaching them to believe and repent Here we are to consider the Order which God observes in making with Men a Covenant in Baptism first-of all he calls them by his Word and Spirit to believe and repent Then in the second Place he makes a Promise of Mercy and Forgiveness And then thirdly he seals his Promise by Baptism They says he that know not nor consider this Order which God used in covenanting with them in Baptism deal preposterously over-slipping the Commandment of repenting and believing and is the cause of so much Prophaneness in the World Much to the same Purpose saith Mr. Baxter Right to Baptism p. 149 150. speaking of the Order of this Commission Christ gave to his Disciples their first Task says he is to make Disciples which are by Mark called Believers The second Work is to baptize them whereto is annexed the Promise of Salvation The third Work is to teach them all other things which are after to be learned in the School of Christ To contemn this Order saith he is to contemn the Rules of Order for where can we find it if not here I profess my Conscience is fully satisfied from this Text that there is one sort of Faith saving even Saving that must go before Baptism the Profession whereof the Minister must expect Your second scipture-Scipture-Ground is that of whole Families being baptized Reply You cannot be ignorant that this Proof hath been often invalid How many Families are there in this City in which there is not one Infant Besides 't is said Paul preached the Word to the Jailor and to all in his House also 't is expresly said He believed in God with all his House We have as much Ground to believe in these Families there were some Servants or Children who were Unbelievers as to believe there were little Babes and because whole Housholds were said to be baptized therefore unbelieving Servants Sons and Daughters as well as little Children Others may infer ungodly Servants and unbelieving Children that were grown up to be Men and Women were baptized also in those Families In Jailors Families now a-days 't is evident there are too many wicked and ungodly ones and this Jailor was none of the best before converted 't is plain Besides whole or all doth not comprehend always every individual Person as 1 Sam. 21.28 Moreover Dr. Hammond saith That to conclude Infants were baptized because Housholds are mentioned so to be is saith he unconvincing and without Demonstration it being so uncertain whether there were any Children in those Families His Letter p. 471. Sect. 21. Your third Scripture-Ground is that of the Promise you say Covenant made to you and your Children Reply How often have we shewed that this Text proves not that any Children quatenus as such should be baptized nor as such that they are in the Covenant of Grace or have the Promise made to them the Promise runs to the Jews and to their Offspring and not to them only but to Gentiles also who were said to be afar off But pray observe 't is to no more of the Jews and their Children or Offspring and such who were afar off than the Lord shall call or make Disciples by the Word and effectual Operations of the Holy Spirit My Sons and Daughters are as much my Children when they are twenty or thirty Years old as well as when Babes Dr. Hammond also grants Children in this Text doth not refer to Infants as such but to the Posterity of the Jews p. 490. Sect. 81. If ye be Christ's then you are Abraham 's Seed and Heirs according to the Promise The Children of the Flesh saith Paul these are not the Children of God but the Children of the Promise are accounted for the Seed Rom. 9.8 Not if you be the Offspring of Abraham according to the Flesh or Seed of Believers Your fourth Scripture-Proof is that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven Reply This proves no more Children ought to be baptized than they ought to receive the Lord's Supper Baptism being a mere positive Precept and only depends upon the Will and sovereign Pleasure of the great Law-giver Jesus Christ A thousand such Instances prove not they ought to be baptized except there was a Precept annexed or Precedent for it in God's Word Besides of such c. as one well observes may intend such and such that have like Qualities viz. harmless meek c. as Children Therefore the Anabaptists as you call them are not uncharitable who say Infants have no more Right to Baptism than unreasonable Creatures for what can give them Right thereto but the Authority
of those that die in Infancy unbaptized You answer Of such are the Kingdom of Heaven Reply So saith our blessed Saviour but they have say I no Right thereto or belong unto the Kingdom of Heaven because sprinkled with a little Water nor would they have any further Right should they be indeed baptized since there is no Command of God for it Quest 7. If Children be saved whether baptized or not what signifies Baptism You answer 't is a Badg of Christ an evident Note of Distinction from the Children of Infidels and as we come to the Knowledg of spiritual Things by Sense so 't is an Evidence of a greater assurance of the Favour of God to them being invisibly introduced into the Covenant of Grace Reply 'T is no Badg of Christ besure because he never gave it to them and if it be an evident Note of Distinction from the Children of Infidels 't is wholly of Man's making You know what wonderful things are ascribed to Chrism by the Papists who use Salt Oil and Spittle c. in Baptism and to other devised Rites and Ceremonies used by them and I have as much ground from God's Word to believe what they say as what you say who affirm and prove not why do you not say they are thereby made Members of Christ Children of God and Inheritors of the Kingdom of Heaven Pray what an assurance can that give them of the Favour of God unless he had appointed it and imparted some spiritual Grace thereby to them Nay and what Arguments do you bring to prove they thereby are introduced into the Covenant of Grace Can any outward Act bring or introduce People either young or old into the Covenant of Grace if they are brought thereby into the Covenant of Grace I hope they shall all be saved that are baptized as you call it I hope you are not for falling away or that any Soul who is in the Covenant of Grace shall perish eternally Moreover how can they come to the knowledg of spiritual Things by Sense indeed in the case of Circumcision which left a Mark in the Flesh they might more probably understand by the sight of the Eye those spiritual Things signified by it but Baptism leaves no such Mark Nothing appears to their Senses when they come to knowledg that can have any such Tendency I fear rather it is a great means when they are grown up to blind their Eyes and cause them to think as many ignorant People do that they are made thereby Christians and so in a saved State and never look after the Work of Regeneration Quest 8. Whether have Children Faith or no since Faith and Repentance are Pre-requisites to Baptism Your Answer is That you have shewed that according to the words of the Commission Baptizing goes before Teaching therefore there is not such a Pre-requisiteness as some dream of you have said so I must confess from the Commission but have not proved it but rather made work for Repentance by striving to invert the Order of the sacred Commission of our Saviour c. But say you admit Faith as pre-requisite to Baptism we could answer that Children have Faith potentia tho not in actu visibili As an Artist when he is indisposed or asleep is potentially an Artist tho not actually Reply Strange you should attempt to affirm Children have Faith potentia who told you so when was this imaginary Faith infused into them it must be either by Nature Art or Grace or else your Simily is lost You are look'd upon indeed to be Philosophers but this is above my Understanding or your own Demonstration but you suppose that Passage in Matth. 18. doth your business whereas 't is evident that our Saviour speaks there of such little ones who were indeed capable to believer it was not such a little one as you would have baptized We doubt not but God doth oftimes insuse Grace very early in the Souls of some very young and calls them to believe and to the knowledg of the Truth but what is this to all Infants in general But more fully to answer what you say about Children having Faith take what Dr. Taylor hath wrote upon this Conceit Whether Infants have Faith or no is a Question saith he to be disputed by Persons that care not how much they say and how little they prove 1. Personal and actual Faith they have none for they have no Acts of Understanding and besides how can any Man know that they have since he never saw any Sign of it neither was he told so by any that could tell 2. Some say they have imputative Faith but then so let the Sacrament be too that is if they have the Parents Faith or the Churches then so let Baptism be imputed also by derivation from them and as in their Mothers Womb and while they hung on their Mothers Breasts they live upon their Mothers Nourishment so they may upon the Baptism of their Parents or their Mother the Church for since Faith is necessary to the susception of Baptism and they themselves confess it by striving to find out new kinds of Faith to daub the matter up such as the Faith such must be the Sacrament for there is no Proportion between an actual Sacrament and an imputative Faith this being in immediate and necessary order to that And whatsoever can be said to take from the Necessity of actual Faith all that and much more may be said to excuse from the actual susception of Baptism The first of these Devices was that of Luther and his Scholars the second of Calvin and his and yet there is a third Device which the Church of Rome teaches and that is that Infants have habitual Faith but who told them so how can they prove it what Revelation or Reason teaches any such thing are they by this Habit so much as disposed to an actual Belief without a new Master Can an Infant sent into a Mahometan Province be more confident for Christianity when he comes to be a Man than if he had not been baptized are there any Acts precedent concomitant or consequent to this pretended Habit This strange Invention is absolutely without Art without Scripture Reason or Authority but the Men are to be excused unless there were a better And again to this purpose pag. 242. And if any Man runs for Succour to that exploded Cresphugeton that Infants have Faith or any other inspired Habit of I know not what or how we desire no more advantage in the World than that they are constrained to answer without Revelation against Reason common Sense and all the Experience in the World As to what you speak as to those young Children you mention it proves nothing and some of your Stories seem childless and do not look as if they came from Men of such pretended Ingenuity But to close all We have the worst of you at the last wherein you in a very scurrilous manner cast Reproach upon
the Ax laid to the Root of the Trees Fourthly Your citing Heb. 8. and Jer. 31. to shew what Baptism seals to Infants proves nothing We deny not but all who are actually in the New Covenant viz. by Faith ingrafted into Christ have right to Remission and Salvation and that that Covenant secures and preserves them to Eternal Life therefore the Children of Believers as such are not in it And if they are no otherwise in it than conditionally that is if they repent believe c. I ask you what Priviledg that is more than what the Children of Heathens and Infidels have for if they believe and repent shall they not have the same Blessings Priviledges of the Covenant also As to the Adult Professors we say if they fall finally away it shews they never indeed were in the Covenant of Grace As to Adult true Believers the Holy Spirit seals Remission and Salvation to them and they shall be saved a sign of what is actually in them is held forth in Baptism there being nothing signified by that Ordinance as to a Death unto Sin but what they experienced wrought on their Souls before Baptized tho 't is true they thereby for the time to come covenant to walk in newness of Life Fifthly As touching the great Commission Mat. 28. where you urge Baptizing goes before Teaching we have fully answered you in the precedent Reply we prove there is a Teaching goes before Baptism and yet also a Teaching after Why do you attempt to blind the Eyes of the unwary Reader Sixthly To what purpose do you mention Jairus's Daughter do we deny but that the Parents Faith and Prayer may procure outward Blessings nay and spiritual Ones too and as much perhaps for their poor carnal Neighbours and Friends My Servant Job shall pray for you The fervent Prayer of a Righteous Man availeth much but it doth not give Right to their Friends or Children to Baptism Seventhly As to your Syriac Translation that the Jaylor and all the Sons of his House were Baptized I argue All his Sons no doubt were grown up to Age because 't is said he believed with all his House If he had Sons grown up and yet did not believe then by your Argument Unbelievers may be Baptized but to this see our Answer Eighthly As to your proof from that Passage i. e. Suffer little Children to come unto me Take the words definitely or indefinitely it proves nothing for you for Christ Baptized no Child for with his own Hards he Baptized no Person at all Joh. 4.1,2 't was to lay his Hands upon them not to Baptize them Moreover I have before told you those little Ones Mark 9.42 were Adult Whosoever shall offend one of these little Ones that believe in me I affirm our Saviour speaks only of such little Ones as were grown up to such Age as in very deed did believe in him and not Babes of two or ten days old But you say you would have no Children proselyted but such as Timothy c. To which you answer That according to the Original those Children that did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word we have shewed signifies any common coming and may be such who come in their Parents Arms Let Babes come to Christ this way or that he baptized none of them I may infer as well because little Children come or were brought to Christ and of such are the Kingdom of Heaven therefore they may partake of the Lord's Supper as you infer they may be Baptized Ninthly Tho the Gospel did not spread into all Nations c. yet sure you conclude all were to be baptized in all Nations wheresoever the Gospel did come or was preached or else as we say none in those Nations but such who were made Disciples i. e. did believe and repent for if but some in those Nations where the Gospel comes were to be Baptized and not all and yet more ought so to be then such who are discipled first Pray who are they or how shall we know them to be included in the Commission For as Mr. Baxter saith If we have it not here where have we it this being the great Rule or Charter of the Church for this Rite unto which we ought to adhere in this Matter Tenthly What signifies what some of the Ancient Fathers believed i. e. That Federal Holiness of Parents made Children Candidates for Baptism They said other things too that you decry as well as we many Errors being early let into the Church Besides we have Tertullian against Tertullian or one Father against another which is ground enough to believe you abuse Tertullian or to doubt of the truth of your History Eleventhly You ask whether Children have not as much right to their Baptism as that of Adult Females for 't is no where said she that believeth and is baptized where have we one Instance of Female-Baptism Reply We ak you whether Male and Female is not intended in Mark 16.16 he or she and so John 3.3 Vnless a Man be born again the Woman is included or have Women no Souls Did you never read of the Figure Sylepfis or Conceptio that comprehends the less worthy under the more worthy indignioris sub-digniore as for Example Quid tu soror sacitis ego mater miseri perimus tu uxor qui adsuistis testes estote and it 's no less true in Divinity see that full and never to be baffled place 1 Cor. 6.16 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Gen. 5.2 And he called their Name Adam they two shall be one Flesh Moreover do we not read Women were made Disciples as well as Men and so had the same right to Baptism from the Commission But to detect your Ignorance of the Scripture pray see Acts 8.12 When they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God and the Name of Jesus Christ they were baptized both Men and Women Also Acts 16.15 't is said Lydia was baptized I thought she had been a Woman Gentlemen you shew you are but younger Brethren and will do the Pedo-baptists no Service shew such a Proof for the Baptism of Infants and your work is done But tho Children lose no spiritual Right by Christ's coming yet they may lose some Legal Rites As Ministers Sons now are not born to the Ministry as they were under the Law as well as their Fleshly Seed had right as such to their Jewish Church-Membership Furthermore because Believers are made holy by the Operations of the Spirit are all their Children made holy in like manner also Blush for Christ's sake The Blessing of Abraham Sirs only comes upon the Gentiles through Faith not by natural Generation as you imagine As the Blessing runs to the Parents viz. through Faith so to their Children they must believe also if they would be the Children of the Promise or Spiritual Seed of Abraham Gal. 3. ult Twelfthly As touching what you say further as to universal Consent of