Free-man a Church-member yet according to their respective Charters the Honor of the one the Freedom of the other and Church-priviledges of the third may descend on their children ANABAPT CAT. Q. What other Arguments have you to prove That Infants have not Faith and are not to be baptized A. If they had Faith they were presently to be admitted to the Supper and not excluded from communion therein as many are which are admitted to communion in Baptism whereas the communion in both is one and the same the same thing signified in both viz. our fellowship with Christ in his Death and Resurrection So that all that are baptized into one body are all made to drink into one Spirit 1 Cor. 12.13 and the same preparations of Faith and Repentance are required for both and he that is cast out of the one is cast one of the other seeing by excommunication he is like an Heathen or Publican IT is the Judgment both of Mr Rutherford Exam. Chap. 4. §. 1. and Mr Hooker and others of New-England That Infants of visible Churches born of wicked Parents members of the same Churches ought to be baptized The reason may be We when a Child is presented to Baptism are to take notice of the Parents Church-membership not of his scandalousness If the Church do not cast out the Parents why should the Minister cast out the Child Parents where suspended lose only their present fruition not their fundamental right to membership It is right to membership not the present fruition of it nor their worthiness of that right doth as they conceive transfer that priviledg to Infants Mr Cotton in his Way p. 115. conceives it is considerable if the Grandfather or Grandmother making profession be still living and willing to undertake for the Child yea that in some cases a Heathens child may be baptized in right of its houshold-governor Gen. 17. Yet it is very far from their Opinions That these children or the immediate Parents of them should be admitted to the Supper Amongst the Jews Infants were circumcised §. 2. yet were they not presently admitted to the Passover they could not come up nor do we read they were carryed from the remote parts of Judea to Jerusalem where only the Lamb was eaten nor could they eat it standing with staves in their hands and with sowr herbs as was required Exod. 12. nor keep it to the Lord vers 46. with spiritual respects to Gods glory to Gods ends and rules and to have their hearts prepared as well as to be ceremonially clean 2 Chron. 18.19 and the same males were as well to be at the feast of tabernacles as at the Passover and to carry boughs which was no Infants work to make booths or tabernacles to dwell in Deut. 16.16 17. with Levit. 23.34 35 38 39 40. The children yea those that could speak and ask questions did not partake of the Passover as is implyed in that they did not say what mean we but what mean you by this service It was not allowable to count them for the eating of the Passover that could not eat of it viz. Infants sick persons uncircumcised and unclean see Ainsw in Exod. 12.4 The uncleanness of a Proselyte was no bar to Circumcision but to the Passover it was Numb 9.6 10. An adult Proselyte might in some case be circumcised and baptized and not presently admitted to the Passover Ainsw in Exod. 12.44 The Rite of Baptism is after the common custom of washing new born Infants from the pollutions of the womb §. 3. Ezek. 16. 5 9. but the elements of bread and wine are the food of riper years Baptism is a Sacrament of Initiation as Bernard calls it the Supper is the highest Ordinance Christians as such are capable of It is one thing to be admitted a Scholar in a School or to be matriculated into the University another thing to be of such a form standing or degree It is one thing to be a subject a tenant or free of a Corporation which children may be another to do homage suit and service Our Regeneration or birth in Christ whereof Baptism is the laver Infants are capable of but not of that growth and augmentation signified in the Supper To be baptized is to be passive as in the first act of Regneration we are meerly passive the action is wholly the Baptizers I baptize thee c. but to eat and drink in remembrance of Christs death and to discern the Lords body is to be active and requires exercises of reason and grace And as Christ himself did not administer Baptism but his Disciples Joh. 4.1 2. Paul faith God sent him not to baptize the Apostles did not so usually baptize as ordinary Ministers 1 Cor. 1.14 15 17. but Christ did administer the Lords Supper as also the chief Minister present did usually afterward So multitudes were baptized by John Baptist and the Disciples of Christ which were not presently admitted to the Supper when Christ instituted it The Apostles were to teach all Nations baptizing them but the communicating of all Nations is not expressed of the Samaritans and several housholds baptized we read of their present admission to the Supper we read not So that though the communion in both the Sacraments be one and the preparations for them both in adult persons be the same for substance yet because of their different dispensations and degrees Infants may be admitted to the one and not to the other Yet I freely and confidently assert that to admit children to the Supper is far more excusable then to deny them Baptism for they have jus ad rem a right to it as a young heir hath to his lands as Saints decayed in mind and body have a right to hear the Word and the communicating of Infants is of more antiquity and credit in the Church then denying of their Baptism though I hold it not fit that Infants should communicate because they have not jus in re they have not aptitude and fitness for it a child is not fit to manage his own estate nor is it rational to preach the Gospel to an holy man what right soever he may have to it when he is destitute of capacity to hear or understand it and hence it is that the Church having some while admitted Infants to the Lords Supper did upon second considerations discern her mistake and lay it aside but yet still continued that other of baptizing Infants seeing no cause to leave it off but rather more strictly to observe it ANABAPT CAT. Q. But what if an Infant or any other in their childhood should dye unbaptized are they not damned A. We know nothing out of the Scripture of their Salvation or Damnation and therefore we must not be too inquisitive yet may such Infants so dying be saved through the presentment of the satisfaction of Christ to the Justice of God for original sin which Satisfaction though it be applyed through beleeving in those
with one hand work in the work with the other hand to hold the weapon Some wise Master-builders have been valiant for the Doctrine and practise of Paedobaptism whilest others have bent their tongues like a Bow against it Some of them I have seen and made use of some I have heard of not seen others possibly there are which I have neither seen nor heard of However I desire that if any wisdom or strength be discerned in this Examination it may be esteemed first Gods then theirs the weakness hereof is not theirs much less Gods or the Causes but mine own yet I humbly hope this poor pains will be acceptable to God the chiefest Master-builder and Captain of his Hoast and also thou helping together with thy prayers profitable to thee his servant and Soldier Satan our grand Enemy would prevail if he could for such a gross renunciation of Baptism received in Infancy as Witches Wizzards his devoted Vassals and open Apostates do make but having no hope at first to prevail so far he endevors to bring-us by a pretence of purity to such denyal and renunciation of Infant-Baptism as the Anabaptists do make which hath been very advantagious to his Kingdom as well in Germany as in other places the more sad it is to see that some reputed yea possibly real Saints do in the simplicity of their hearts act and argue for him in this business as Peter did in another Mat. 16.22 23. The various turnings crooked ways and windings of the Serpent in this Controversie as I could in so short a time and piece I have endevored to discover and to make the paths of the Lord straight and plain to his people Repetitions for brevity sake I have avoyded even where they might have been somewhat useful by reason of which some parts hereof taken by themselves may seem more dark and defective then I hope they will be found if thou compare one place with another and spare thy censure of any part till thou hast read the whole I have kept close to the main matter viz. Infant-Baptism not omitting any Objection of the Catechist against it but I have purposely slighted by-matters lest this Book should be voluminous or I seem to be contentious above what is meet I have desired to speak rationally to the cause and durst not bring any railing accusation against persons My comfort is this the testimony of my conscience that in simplicity and godly sincerity I have managed this matter not daring to talk deceitfully for God or willingly to wrong any The worst I wish to my Antagonists in this cause is that both they and I may be ready to receive every revealed Truth of God both in the light and love of it THE Catechist Catechized OR AN EXAMINATION OF AN Anabaptistical Catechism Pretended to be Published for the Satisfaction and Information of the People of God in Lancashire c. ANABAPT CAT. Q. Who are fit Subjects for Baptism A. Onely such as beleeve Acts 8.12.37 lso Acts 16.34 also 18.8 Mat. 28.19 And such as repent Acts 2.38 and Mat. 3.6 NOne of these Texts severally nor all of them joyntly Exam. Chap. 1. §. 1. do prove That only such as believe and such as repent are fit Subjects for Baptism nor do they so much as shew That any son or daughter of Christian Parents such as we baptize in Infancy did believe or repent or make profession of Faith and Repentance before they were or could be admitted to Baptism Acts 16.34 doth not evince that the Jaylors house or family rejoyced or believed as you seem to understand it for the Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being of the singular number may thus be read He believing rejoyced or expressed his joy having believed in all his house by feasting Paul and Silas in his house whither he had brought them vers 34. Or if by house be meant his Family he rejoyced in or amongst his Family because of the Promise made to him v. 31. That if he did believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as now he did he should be saved and his house And if any Infants of the Jaylor might be in the number of those that should be saved as you will confess they might why might they not be also in the number of those that were baptized Besides this believing of whomsoever it is spoken is not in the Text expressed to have been before they were baptized for it is said ver 33. That he and all his were baptized straightway or immediately after which he brought them into his house set meat before them believing in God So this very Chapter v. 14 15. saith of Lydia that Paul preached to her and she heard and attended to those things that were spoken of Paul but none of these things are spoken of her house yet they were baptized as well as she It it true it is said that Paul preached to the Jaylor and to all that were in his house v. 32. and that Crispus believed in the Lord with all his house Acts 18.8 Yet this you know doth not shew that there we none but actual Believers in the houshold Abraham Gen. 18.19 is said to command his children and servants to keep Gods way and sure his house might be called a believing house And now we call godly families praying families though there be children in them not capable of understanding or obeying the Word or of actual believing and praying Now seeing the Jaylor Lydia and their and other housholds are said to be baptized as Abraham and his house were circumcised Gen. 17. and seeing children are part of the houshold and often included if not chiefly intended under that name 1 Tim. 5.8 Gen. 34.36 45.18 46.5 with Exod. 1.1 1 Sam. 20.15 1 King 17.12 13 with 15. and that there are so few families without little ones Who dare affirm and can prove That there were none in these families or that they were excluded from Baptism seeing the Scripture doth not exclude them as elsewhere upon just cause it expresly doth Gen. 50.8 Nor do we read of whole housholds admitted to the Lords Supper as we do to Baptism though your principles are as much for the one as for the other So that some Texts by you brought to overthrow Infant-Baptism do afford at least a very probable Argument for it Mat. 3.6 names confessing of sin which is oft too far from repentance §. 2. probably to God not to John or if to John not a particular confession of each of them by himself which Papists from hence urge for it was not possible for John to hear the particular confessions of so many as for their multitude deserved to be called Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region round about Jordan in any convenient time But whatsoever confession it was it seems it was not before their Baptism as you would have it but after for it saith they were baptized not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having confessed but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confessing their sins and it is not said they were baptized because they had repented but rather on the contrary that John's Baptism was a Baptism unto Repentance v. 11. This you know is consistent enough with Infant-Baptism As for Acts 2.38 it is probable that repentance to which notwithstanding their being pricked in their hearts v. 37. the Apostle exhorts was in them only in fieri before their Baptism for immediately after this Exhortation they were baptized and there could not be time to question three thousand in one day after Sermon which consisting of many main points must needs be long and three of the twelve hours of the day being spent before it begun v. 15. so as to make strict enquiry into and to take distinct notice of the repentance of each of them Of Mat. 28.19 Acts 2.38 and Mat. 3.6 more hereafter Suppose your Texts do shew that the Samaritans §. 3. the Eunuch the Jaylor the Corinthians and others which were then adult and formerly either of the Jewish or Heathenish Religion did believe or profess faith and repentance and were baptized that is nothing to Paedobaptists who never held that a Jew or Heathen should be baptized without profession of faith But grant further That actual Believers or Professors are indeed the primary and immediate subject of Baptism and in their own right and their children are but the secundary subject and may not be baptized but by a capacity derived unto them and at that time Christian Churches were but in gathering not gathered The foundation was not to be layd in Infants not in Infants only And the sacred story relating the manner of founding Churches hath not so much occasion to speak of the Baptism of Infants the secundary subject as of actual believers the primary God created the first man and woman of a perfect age though all their posterity were born Infants At first men of age were circumcised Gen. 17.24 with 14.14 and again after some intermission of that Ordinance Josh 5.4 And if any Nation had been Proselyted their men of age must first have been taught or discipled and have made profession of faith before they should have been circumcised though in the setled condition of the Jewish Church Child-circumcision was most in use If Believers and Penitents ought to be baptized will it thence follow that none but they only are to be baptized The rule is A proprio primo modo ad proprium secundo modo non valet argumentum All Crows are black therefore none but only Crows are black is no good argument If it were granted that Infant-Baptism cannot be proved by those Texts yet it will not follow that it cannot be proved by any other Texts Womens admission to the Supper though it cannot be proved by Mat. 26. Mark 14. Luk. 22. Christ admitting only men may notwithstanding be proved by other Scriptures Your notion That none are to be baptized but such as they were whose Baptism is mentioned Acts 8.12 37. 16.34 c. is by some further improved saying All those were such Believers as had been in person Jews or Heathens and therefore such only are to be baptized and those that have Christian Parents and were educated in Christianity from their childhood are not at least not by virtue of any of those Texts to be baptized at all neither in Infancy nor when they make Profession As they in their case so also you in your case are to blame to insert into your Answer the word only which you find in none of your Texts Our Scripture-grounds for Infant-Baptism you shall hear anon Chap. 10. ANABAPT CAT. Q. hat grounds have you against Infant-Baptism A. Many but chiefly Christs Commission Mat. 28.19 where the subjects of Baptism are those that are made Disciples and this Commission is to last to the Worlds end v. 20. and reacheth to every creature that is to partake of Baptism Mark 16.15 16. MAtth. 28.19 is not the first Commission for baptizing Examinat Cap. 2. §. 1. no more then for preaching John Baptist Mat. 3. and Christs Disciples Joh. 4.1 2. did baptize before this and had commission for it Joh. 1.33 Mat. 21.25 26. which Christ confirmed by his being baptized by John Mat. 3.13 Yea we have express Examples in Jewish Records of a Baptism See Mr Selden Dr Hammond Dr Lightfoot Mr Ainsworth Mr Tombes which was a Rite of initiation into the Jewish Church a concomitant of Circumcision if not ancienter So Jacob admitting the preserved Sechemites into communion all of age being women bad them be washed or baptized or cleansed by washing Gen. 35.2 which is the reason why a Jewish Proselyte is in Arrianus called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a baptized person Hence the Jews did not question John's Baptism as a new and unusual Rite they were already well acquainted with it but his Authority to administer it Grotius on Mat. 3.6 conceives it was begun upon occasion and to preserve the memory of the purging of the World by the Deluge and that Peter 1 Pet. 3.21 signifies so much calling Baptism the Antitype and figure of it And the Infants of the Jews were thus admitted as well as the Proselyte for one Ordinance was for both Numb 15.15 And thus the Hebrew Doctors assert notwithstanding Mr T. to the contrary pretends that the Proselytes only were baptized because they were unclean That Israel as well as others entred into Covenant Males by three things viz. Circumcision Baptism and Offering Females only by the two last Now as Christ abolishing the Passover took the postcoenium or common custom used at the Passover of the Master of the Family his breaking a piece of bread and distributing it and a cup of wine amongst the company to be materials of the Lords Supper so he abolishing Circumcision and Offering advanced this ancient usual unquestionable concomitant of Circumcision and of initiation of Males Females Infants or others into the Church to be a Sacrament of the New Testament the use whereof and the persons to whom it should be administred being then ordinarily and commonly known the Scripture did not need to record the commission or warrant given to John or that the Jews had long before for their baptizing It was enough that there is not the least hint in the Word that Baptism when advanced to be a divine Sacrament of the New Testament should not be applyed to Infants as it was before Indeed when the Apostles Commission was to be enlarged to all Nations this being a new thing and rarely known or believed it was needful that it should be set down in terminis as it here is And yet this Gospel was not written till about eight years after the Ascension of Christ and other Gospels were writ some years after this the Jewish Church all this while being guided by the Old Testament and observing the Jewish lawful Rites and Customs and this of baptizing
intended under the name of every creature and that of them God doth require actual believing as of as great or greater necessity to Salvation then to Baptism The words are not He that believeth not shall not be baptized but shall be damned And are you as confident that all Infants are damned as you are that none of them should be baptized I wonder you dare urge this Text against Infant-Baptism which your own heart tells you is as much or more against their Salvation then against their Baptism For my part I conceive Infants are not to be scrued up to that proportion which God requireth of adult persons The Lord will take vengeance on them that know not God that obey not his Gospel 2 Thess 1.8 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down c. Mat. 3.10 Must therefore Infants either know God obey the Gospel and bring forth fruit or he damned May we not feed and clothe Infants because the Word saith He that will not labor must not eat 2 Thess 3.10 Might not the Jews admit Infants into the visible Church because the Psalmist describes the Citizen of Sion you say a Church-member Walking uprightly working righteousness speaking the truth in love contemning vile persons c. Psal 15.1 2 c. The application is easie ANABAPT CAT. Q. What atker grounds have you against Infant-Baptism A. Infants are not fit subjects for Baptism because they do not believe they have not reason to discern between good and evil Deut. 1.39 Faith is an act of the understanding which cometh by hearing as well as an act of the Will and it is unlawful to baptize persons without they believe Acts 8.37 if thou believest it is lawful Act. 10.47 8.12 18.8 ALL the Textt you now produce have been answered before in the first Chapter Examinat Cap. 3. §. 1. save Acts 10.47 from which you may collect That those that had the gift of the Holy Ghost as it is called v. 45. and could speak with tongues v. 46. were to be baptized but sure you will not infer thence That those that have not the said gifts are not to be baptized If you do you will deny all Baptism that is now adays and turn Seeker But as by your Principles you hold Confession of Faith and Repentance sufficient to Baptism without those gifts so you should shew that the foresaid gift and speaking with tongues was in stead of their believing and repenting or else confess that you impertinently alledg this Text. I must now ask you once for all §. 2. what you mean by Believers whether such only as have a true justifying Faith or all that make profession of Faith whether indeed and in truth they have a true justifying Faith or no The first is requisite in foro Dei conscientiae ex parte baptizati that our Baptism may be acceptable to God and comfortable to us 1 Pet. 3.21 So the Eunuch desiring Baptism with the saving benefit thereof and asking not What doth hinder thee from baptizing me but What doth hinder me was answered If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayst But in soro Ecclesiae ex parte baptizantis the latter sufficeth for admission your self being judg No Scripture-rule was transgressed when Judas Simon Magus Ananias and Sapphira were baptized The Eunuch's profession That he believed Jesus Christ to be the Son of God sufficed to present admission of him to Baptism And surely not the inward and spiritual qualifications but the outward and visible estate of persons to be baptized is to be looked at and we should descend to the lowest personal profession of Faith and Repentance being the highest degree of visibility Suppose a Minister had a spirit to discern the inward estate of men as certainly as Christ did of Judas and possibly the Apostles did of some which they baptized yet were he not to withhold from any for want of inward grace the priviledges which they have right and title to by virtue of their visible estate Saint Augustin and others think Judas was admitted to the Lords Supper though he but received panem Domini not panem Dominum and Mr Cartwright also so judgeth from that connection Luk. 22.19 20 21. Certainly he was admitted to the Passover by virtue of his visible estate Ishmael and Esau were regularly circumcised though Abraham knew that the one and Rebecca that the other was not the Elect seed of the Covenant Gen. 17.19 20. with 23. 25.23 Rom. 9 12. We can but charitably judg not infallible know who are Believers and though Infants do not actually believe yet by the judgment of charity if that he our rule we ought to judg that Infants born of Christian Parents are regenerate and have faith habitual or the principle or seed of it so much as is absolutely necessary to their participation of Christ and Salvation by him and that they dying in Infancy are saved see Chap. 5. For though they cannot actually believe or at least not make a profession of their Faith yet they are not to be doomed Infidels no more then they are to be judged irrational or dumb because they cannot actually reason or speak and therefore they unless you can reduce them to a third party which will much strengthen the Popish conceit of a third place for them when they dye Limbus Infantum are to be counted Believers and so methinks Christ accounteth of them Mat. 18.6 with 4. Ever since God gathered a distinct number our of the World to be his Church visible Kingdom City and Houshold §. 3. in opposition to the rest of the World which is the visible Kingdom City or Houshold of Satan God would have the Infants of all who are taken into Covenant to be accounted his and to belong to his Church and Family and not to the Devils If Adam had kept the Covenant of Works his Infant seed had been righteous Adam breaking that Covenant his Infant seed was guilty of that breach and became sinners against the Law though they knew not what the Law or sin against it was Adam being within the Covenant of Grace his Infant seed was so judged likewise For by seed of the woman Genes 3.15 is meant Christ in his minority as well as in his grown years who dyed for Infants as well as others neither are infants to be excluded from the benefit of that Promise The Infants of Noah Abraham and the Jews were members of the same Church with their Parents As Infants of Jews Turks and Pagans though uncapable of those Opinions or Practises are esteemed Jews Turks Pagans so the Infants of Christians though as the children of men they are born in sin Psal 51.5 dead in it Ephes 2.1 3. yet as children of the Church they are visibly Christians not Insidels Jews Turks or Pagans Though a Noble-man a Free-man of a Corporation a visible Church-member do beget children as men not as a person of Honor a
possibly you that published this Catechism may be of the strictest Sect of your Religion as the worst of these at their first separating from us seemed also to be and do abhor to have communion not only with these but with Drunkards Adulterers Swearers c. To you I say if there be not amongst you Drunkards Adulterers Swearers c. Satan himself is none of these but are there not seditious schiâ—matical persons that say all the Church is holy sacrilegious persons that devour that which is holy or dedicated to the service of God and his Church not by themselves which was Ananias his sin but by others Are there not Murderers Railers false Accusers Lyars proud boasters covetous traytors heady high minded lovers of themselves despisers of good men having a form of godliness c. Such an one is Satan As for the rotten members in Paedobaptists Congregations they are or should be duly proceeded against and much good is done that way in many Congregations where Government is set up and people help forward the work humane infirmities both in Rulers and ruled ever have been and will be And more good had been done had not the separation of some from us the exemption by the Civil Powers from Church-government of whosoever will not freely own it the unjust clamors of Presbyterian Rigidness and Tyranny together with the Tumults and Troubles of the Times hindred it As for Infant-Baptism §. 4. it is a consecrating of children to God and formally initiates them into the Church which is a great benefit as casting out or excommunicating out of the Church is a great censure it is an outward distinctive sign of Christians children from Pagans signifies their original sin and necessity of regeneration even before the commission of actual sin and the Salvation of Infants as well as grown men by Christ It makes Infants partakers of the Ordinances at least of the Prayers of the Church as members thereof it pre-engageth them to a Christian Course when they have the least prejudice and obstruction against it and as soon as they are capable to receive the nurture and admonition of the Lord to frequent Ordinances to own Jesus Christ by external profession it binds Parents to be more careful and conscientious of their Religions Education it comforts their hearts godly Parents may speak this experimentally to see their Children thus sealed in assurance that God is their God and the God of their seed Yea God doth sometimes yea always as we ought to judg till the contrary appear baptize them inwardly or inâ—use grace or the seed of it into the Soul of the baptized Infant These and the like were counted great benefits in the time of the Law and are they or can they be mischiefs in the time of the Gospel You assert indeed That delaying of Baptism would make men careful to get knowledg and holiness whereas now they viz. they that do not delay Baptism are careless of both But may they not be as conscientiously taught and as careful and apt to learn in Christs School in his visible Kingdom as out of it baptized as unbaptized Are not many grown persons as forgetful and careless of the Promises they make on their sick beds and other occasions as of those which were made in Infancy Are Anabaptists the only men that are careful to get knowledg and holiness Are not multitudes of persons which were baptized in their Infancy as careful to get knowledg and holiness and as good Proficients therein as any others Is it better not to put children into a lease or grant of a priviledg lest they should be secure and careless to pay rent and do homage then to put them in May not deferring of Baptism so long make them despise it when they come to age Satan may more easily keep children when grown up from receiving Christianity then work them to renounce it though he sometimes prevails with Witches and Wizzards to renounce their Baptism received in Infancy that they may be his vassals and more assured to him Keeping the children of Christians out of the Church is a strange way sure it is none of Gods ways nor is it likely to prevail to make them in love with Christianity If any good can be done by such mediums the warrantable deferring of the Lords Supper alone may do it as well as the unwarrantable delaying of Baptism As for darkening the Doctrine of Baptism experience teacheth us that the Doctrine thereof was clear enough in Scripture and competently understood as well as the Doctrine of the Lords Supper before such opposition hath been made to Infant-Baptism If it be now darkened the darkness is not from Infant-Baptism but from your opposite Opinion and Practice ANABAPT CAT. Q. But may not Infants be baptized if they be Abrahams seed A. Yes But we Gentiles are only Abrahams seed by believing Gal. 3.7 so Rom. 4.16 Gal. 3.29 They that would make the children of Believers to be the seed of Abraham are mistaken for the Scripture speaketh but of three seeds of Abraham viz. Christ Gal. 3.16.2 The carnal seed 3. The Believer Jew or Gentile Gal. 3.28 And they add a fourth seed of Abraham viz. the seed or children of Believers amongst the Gentiles about which the Scripture is silent EIther you do not sufficiently enumerate Exam. Chap. 7. or not rightly understand your enumeration of the Scripture-kinds of Abrahams seed or both For 1. Christ personal is not the whole of Abrahams seed to whom though he be the whole in whom 2 Cor. 1.20 the Promises were made but Christ mystical the whole Church of Christ 1 Cor. 12.12 13. all which whether Jews or Gentiles bond or free I may add young or old are but one in their Head Jesus Christ Gal. 3.28 All that are Christs are Abrahams seed vers 29. and Infants are his as well as grown persons for he became an Infant suffered much in his very Infancy was the Head of the Church while an Infant and therefore might well have Infant-members dyed for Infants as well as for grown men bad his Disciples to suffer little children to come to him if not that he might baptize them for he baptized none at all Infants or others Joh. 4.1 2. yet that he might bless them and said that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven 2. As for the carnal seed of Abraham their fleshly relation was not sufficient to entitle them to Church-priviledges except they had a spiritual relation also Rom 9 6 8. Open Apostates and Revolters though the carnal seed of Abraham were not counted of the Church but as strangers and Heathens as David calls them Psal 54.3 59.5 That Text Exod. 12.48 prohibiting strangers did by the rule of proportion prohibit from the Passover all such Jews as did forsake the Faith The Caldee Paraphrast saith No son of Israel that is an Apostate or fallen from the Faith shall eat of it Cain and his posterity were rejected Gen. 4.15
Parents be Christian partus sequitur meliorem partem the children are not Infidels but Christian But §. 3. say you there is no command for baptizing such and you call it Will-worship forbidden Lev. 10.1 A tradition and ground-work for more traditions others call it the mark of the beast one of the strongest holds of Antichrist and what not To all which I answer 1. If Nadah and Abihu's offering strange fire fire unsanctified or not taken off the Altar Was Will-worship though the Scripture doth not call it so yet Paedobaptism suppose it be not warranted by the Word cannot be will-worship because it is not an introduction of a new Worship or Ordinance but the misapplication of an old and unquestionable Ordinance of God or if you put on it the worst name you can with any shew of reason the Profanation of an Ordinance as your self call it some of your party which have in derision and contempt of Infant-Baptism baptized Horses Cats or Dogs have been unquestionably guilty of horrible Profanation but not of will-worship 2. Infant-Baptism is grounded on and warranted by the Word of God and therefore is far enough from being a Profanation or so much as the misapplication of an Ordinance That it is so grounded and warranted needs no other proof then what hath already been produced in this Examination upon occasion of the Scriptures and Reasons brought against it 1. They that are Disciples in Scripture-sence are expressed in Christs Commission about Baptism and are to be baptized But Infants of the Church are Disciples in Scripture-sence Therefore they are to be baptized See Chap. 2. Sect. 3. 2. They that are Abrahams seed are to be baptized as you confess But such Infants are the seed of Abraham Therefore they are to the baptized See Chap. 7. 3. They that are visibly Within the Covenant of Grace are to be baptized as you acknowledg But such Infants are visibly Within the Covenant of Grace Therefore they are to be baptized See Chap. 8. 4. They that are to be judged Church-members are to be baptized But such Infants of the Church or born of members of the Church are to be judged Church members Therefore c. 5. They of Whom the Kingdom of God is are to partake of the privileges of the Kingdom of God But of Infants is the Kingdom of God Therefore c. 6. They that are Saints and holy are to be baptized But such Infants are Saints and holy Therefore 7. Christ knew that Baptism was an ancient Ceremony of initiation into the Church and applyed to the Infants of the Church as well as to adult Proselytes yet he took up that Ceremony and advanced it as he did the Postcoenium of the Passover to be a Sacrament of the New Testament without prohibition of Infants from it and therefore he did at least approve it should be administred to Infants See Cap. 2. § 1. In these alone to omit others conscientious enquirers into the mind of the Lord Jesus may find satisfactory grounds of Infant-Baptism especially when they are compared with the grounds of the contrary Opinion and Practice You cannot shew any precept at all §. 4. or president or good warrant in the Word of God that children of believing Parents should be kept from Baptism as you require them to be till they do in their own persons actually believe or make profession of Faith or that any such were baptized in riper years as you would have them now to be Yea I further say that if you can shew me in Scripture any son or daughter of believing Parents baptized I shall shew you that he or she was baptized in Infancy Surely from the time that John Baptist begin his Ministry to the writing of the Apocalyps great multitudes of Infants of Christians grew up to maturity yet amongst them all we read not of one whose Baptism was so delayed nor have we any solid ground to conceive that God at the coming of Christ took away Infants Covenant interest Church membership and Sacramental initiation and made their condition as to this as bad as the Heathen and worse then the Jewish children seeing it cannot be said that God did take these priviledges away in judgment upon occasion of Christs coming from all Infants even Elect children of Elect Parents seeing Infants in the time of the Gospel are not any way more guilty or uncapable then in former times nor can it any way appear that God did it in mercy and sure if it was done it was done either in judgment or mercy for it was a mercy to the Jewish children to have these priviledges and nothing more was conferred upon Infants which lost them then upon adult Christians which did not lose them You cannot shew a precept ' or president for your gathering Churches out of other true Christian Churches for requiring persons before they can be admitted members to give account of the truth of their graces for the Congregations judging whether they have grace or no and consequently whether they were to be admitted or no for a solemn explicite Church-Covenant for the erection of a Church without Officers for the power of such a Church consisting only of unofficed Christians to elect ordain impose hands by one or more of them on their Officers to censure or excommunicate any member yea any or all their Officers when they have them for maintenance of Ministers by Lords Day-Collections formerly urged as an Ordinance of God though of late much waved for a sentence of non-communion with Sister-Churches for Synods only consultative and not decretive for publike ordinary preaching of gifted men not so much as intending the Ministry and their receiving maintenance for their pains and yet these are asserted by men of the Congregational way in which Antipaedobaptists are generally found to be duties priviledges of the Church or Ordinances of God nor can you shew any Church consisting of unbaptized ones such as you account your selves to be your Infant-Baptism being a nullity till you be baptized upon profession und such a Church admitting members commissionating some Disciples to preach and dip nor any precept or president for admission of such which are in your opinion unbaptized to the Lords Supper not for rebaptizing such as were baptized suppose in Infancy in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost or for renouncing such Baptism nor can you shew any one Text of Scripture in which Infant-Baptism either in express words or in the interpretation of any Apostolick or Primitive Church or Father in the purest Times nor can you shew one visible Church from the beginning of the World to the time when your Opinion was lately broached which was of any long continuance and did neither admit into it nor permit in it any Infant-member Finally §. 5. Should you or I be required a Command for admission of women to the Supper as you require a Command for Infant-Baptism though you can neither shew command
least it is the profanation of the Ordinance Who you are I know not but the general Opinion of your party is that any Disciple especially a teaching Disciple may baptize See Confession of the seven Churches Art 41. And doth Ordination by a Bishop and other Ministers make voyd such Discipleship and make him that he cannot be so much as a private Christian yea make his Baptism Antichristian We receive from God the Old Testament by the hands of the Jews and the whole Bible by the hands of Papists most Scriptures have some time or other been abused must we therefore disuse them If a Bishop should baptize one at full age making profession of faith and repentance yea suppose a Jesuite pretending to be a gifted Brother or a teaching Disciple as it is lawful for the Jesuites to say or do any thing that may tend to the weakening the true Reformed Religion and should dip many would his dipping be null and voyd and to be reiterated This I dare say Whatsoever is rational or religious cannot be made irrational or irreligious whosoever useth or hath used it And if multitudes of persons should cast away all that they have received by the Bishops and Ministers ordained by them they should with those things irrecoverably cast their Souls into Hell When Antichrist most reigned and raged and the woman fled into the Wilderness God did preserve some Fundamental Doctrines and the essence of Baptism and the essence of a true Ministry dispensing it and they that is her Pastors did feed her there Revel 12.6 14. 4. There are now more Antichrists then ever were before in our or in any other Reformed Church and worse Antichrists by how much Fundamental Errors in Doctrine are greater abominations then Errors only in Discipline All Heretiques in Scripture-language are Antichrist 1 Epist John The Errors Heresies Blasphemies Treacheries Hypocrisies Perjuries sacrilegious seditious Actions Divisions and Subdivisions bitter and bloody Contentions Rebaptizations Ordinations by the people and other meer humane inventions of these Times do justifie the Bishops and all Episcopal men that have kept themselves free from these and the like crimes from being so Antichristian as we do really dishonor the true Reformed Religion delight the truly Antichristian Faction and make way for our reducing not only to Prelacy but to that which all sober men count incomparably more dangerous to Popery yea to the worst edition of it Spanish Jesuited Inquisition-Popery ANABAPT CAT. Paedobaptism is done upon a wrong subject who is not in Christs commission Matt. 28.19 nor Mark 16.16 Believers and Repentants being the subjects therein EXAMINAT You here beg the question what you here alledg hath been answered Chap. 1. and Chap. 2. ANABAPT CAT. All the certainty I can have of such a Baptism is only conjectural not infallible whereas the outward sign of a Sacrament must be visible and infallible as the thing signified is this Infant-Baptism I take only in trust from others THe Infants blessed by Christ could in their riper age have no certainty of their being so blessed by him Examinat Chap. 14. nor had the Jewish Infants any certainty of their Circumcision for the foreskin of circumcised Infants might be and sometimes was so drawn up that when they came to age they could not discern their Circumcision To this Paul alludes 1 Cor. 7.18 If the flesh-mark was alway discernable yet it could not teach them whether a friend or foe had done it whether for sacred or civil ends whether duly or unduly without instruction and information by word or writing and such instruction may assure us of our right Baptism though it was administred in Infancy You may have such assurance of your Baptism as the Priests by the Registers had of their pedigree Ezra 2.62 as Paul had that he was circumcised the eighth day that he was of the stock of Israel an Hebrew of the Hebrews of the tribe of Benjamin Phil. 3.5 Yea you may have as much or more certainty that you were baptized as that such an one was your father such a woman your mother yet sure if you will call that only a conjectural and not infallible testimony you will test so much upon it as to call him your father and her your mother that are testified and reputed to be so and without scruple of conscience honor them as you are bound by the fifth Commandment and also keep that which is generally computed to be the first day of the week or the Lords-Day though you take it but on trust from others Possibly he that is baptized at full age may not infallibly know that he was baptized some have forgotten through sickness the greatest concernments yea their own names must they thereupon be rebaptized Possibly a man or woman as you are dipping them under the water may be so damped that they may not hear or not heed the words used by the Administrator whether he baptize or bless or curse must they be dipped again till they do hear and heed that they may infallibly know themselves to be baptized If a man should herein be deceived and think he was baptized in his Infancy when he was not the Error is not very dangerous Faith in Christ may supply the defect of Baptism and he not neglecting or contemning Baptism nor knowing that he wants it may reap benefit by his supposed Baptism as if it were reâ—l As for his resolution of the case grounded on the suppose unlawfulness of Paedobaptism whether a Christian may with good conscience be present at it I judg it unnecessary for me to discuss it having I hope cleared the lawfulness of Infant-Baptism yet I confess I cannot approve sundry things in it though Paedobaptism were confessed to be unlawful SOME OBSERVATIONS Both Old and New Concerning the pretended Visibility Universality Antiquity Infallibility Unity and Purity of the present Roman Church and Religion Sent to a Gentleman upon his Revolt to Popery and now Published with some few Additions for the Churches good SIR 1. YOu do all confess the affirmative and positive Doctrines of the Church of England and other Reformed Churches to be true and Catholique and to have had visible Professors in all Ages only you superadd certain other Doctrines which you say are necessary to be beleeved unto Salvation For evidence whereof observe 1. Our Churches Doctrine All the Books of the Old and New Testament mentioned in the 39 Articles and in the late Confession of Faith to be holy and Canonical are for such to be received 2. Your Churches Additions The Books of Tobit Judeth Wisdom Maccabees and the rest commonly called Apocrypha are also Canonical The Scripture is the Rule of Faith and Manners Traditions of the Church are of equal Authority with the Scriptures The Originals Hebrew and Greek are Authentical The Vulgar Edition is most pure and Authentical There are two Sacraments of the New Testament Baptism and the Lords Supper There are also five more viz. Confirmation