Salvation is annexed to Faith and Damnation is the Punishment of Unbelief Baptism therefore is not absolutely necessary to Salvation nor its want absolutely exposing Souls to Damnation 3. This would be to tye God to means and to make it in Mans Power to Save or Damn whom he pleased For if it be impossible any should be saved without Baptism then would it follow that it is Baptism more than Gods free Grace that saves Ephes 2.8 and that it is in the Power of the Minister by Baptism to save whom he please and by denying it to damn whom he will Yea then this Ordinance will be supposed to confer Grace Ex Opere Operate which Assertion detracts from Gods Glory disagrees with Truth and is injurious to Souls who may be hereby brought to rely rather on a Creatures Baptism than their Creaton Mercy for Salvation 4. Then all Children and those who dye unbaptized must be supposed not to appertain to Christ nor to be saved by him which to believe of all Infants is dreadful whom I cannot implead of sin in not being Baptized being not capable of desiring it And though I cannot but think the Parent highly to Offend in slighting the Ordinance where it is to be obtained yet cannot I suppose it to be by God imputed as a sin to the Child so dying for which he will damn it which is the Genuine though Dismal Consequence of that Position That Baptism is absolutely necessary to Salvation 5. The Baptism contended for is but an outward sign of that inward Grace which Entitles the Soul to Heaven John 3.5 and to which Glory is annexed the sign then cannot be so Essential as that they who have received the things signified and inward Grace without Baptism should still be excluded Heaven because they are not Baptized Acts 10.47 Which is as much as to assert that though a Soul should partake of all Christs Benefits to be bestowed on a Worthy Communicant yet unless he actually Eat the Bread and Drink the Wine which are the External Elements in the Lords Supper and Representatives of those inward Benefits yet he could not be saved A Thesis deservedly to be exploded Rubric 3. after Comm. 〈…〉 as nullifying Christs Merits to Idolize External things And our Church is clear against it 6. By this Assertion it would follow that many Thousands of Christians shall be Damned who duly and perhaps more circumspectly walk in Obedience to God than we in and amongst the Turks and Pagans who probably by Reason of their Persecuted Condition or the non-settlement of a Church and Ordinances amongst them are and so dye unbaptized But how sad this would be to a Christians Eat I leave every one to judge 7. When ever Baptism is taken as so necessary to Salvation in Scripture it hath respect to the Internal thing signified by it so St. John 3.9 John hath chiefly respect to the Baptism of the Spirit whereby the Soul is Regenerated and reduced to a state of Grace nor can the Baptism we contend about be there meant this being not Instituted till after our Saviours Resurrection which was some Years after these words were spoken by our Saviour And this Baptism of the Spirit is other where called A Baptism by Fire Mat. 3.11 denoting the cleansing and purifying Nature of the Graces of the Holy Ghost which purifies the Regenerated Soul from its Corruption and burns up its drossie Lusts In comparison of which Baptism St. John accounts his of Water the Subject of our present Controversie so mean as only to have a Relation to it as Precedaneous not as Competitour Again Ephes 1.26 27. St. Paul joyns the Word of God with this Baptism in order to the Purifying Christs Church that acting on the Soul and this terminating on the Body And St. Peter's Assertion is clear 1 Pet. 3.21 that it is not the Water Purifying the Flesh but the Answer of a good Conscience towards God that saveth us And indeed the Trope of using the sign for the thing signified is not unusual in Scripture 8. The All-wise God hath determined the Controversie in that He in divers places of his revealed Will Asserts Gal. 6.15 1 Cor. 7.19 that neither Circumcision nor Uncircumcision avail any thing but a New Creature It is not the being an unbaptized Person that will expose any one to Condemnation for there is not one Woe denounced against any as such Nor is there one Promise in all the Divine Writ Infallibly annexing Salvation to Baptism 2 Thes 1.8 9. John 3.16 All Threats of Misery are to those who believe not and Obey not the Gospel of Christ And all Promises of Eternal Mercies are to those who by Faith close with Christ and live the life of Christians So that I dare not say all who are Baptized shall be saved and all who are not Baptized shall be damned But I dare affirm that whosoever remain and dyeth in unbelief shall be damned though he be Baptized And whoever believes truly on Christ and lives answerably to that Faith though for some Persecution or other Causes he cannot be Baptized he shall be saved Whence will appear That Baptism is not absolutely Necessary to Salvation so as that one cannot be saved without it As I have hitherto endeavoured to remove the great Censure of the Anabaptists of our being in no visible salvable way because not Baptized after their Mode by giving my Reasons why Baptism is not so absolutely Necessary to Salvation So I proceed to prove That Baptism of Water is not absolutely Necessary to Church-membership Prop. 2. so as that they cannot be Members of Christs Church unless Baptized Which will appear thus 1. Wills against Danvers p. 49. There was ever a Church before Baptism or Circumcision were Administred They being both External signs to be acted on visible Professors and Church-members in the Church of Christ there is necessarily presupposed an existence of a Church containing Members to be Circumcised or Baptized and Persons to perform these Offices So that these signs are not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse of a Church or the Essential Constituents of its visibility Noah Seth and those Holy Patriarchs before the Flood who Lived some hundreds of Years before the Institution of Circumcision Gen. 17.24 were doubtless Members of Gods Church And Abraham also doubtless before he was Circumcised which was in the 99th Year of his Age and about the 2107 Year of the World was a True Believer and a Member of the True Church And if it be alledged they were Members of the Invisible Church we may grant them a Membership in the Visible from that known Axiom Omne majus in se continet minus Their being of the Invisible Church being greater than their being Members of the Visible Church Yea it is apparent the Promises were made to Abraham above Twenty Years before Circumcision was Instituted which Promise he believed Gen.
the Sacrament of Baptism nor doth Scripture afford any tittle against it Therefore surely it may be Lawfully Practised Enq. 2 If Children be received to Baptism why are they not also received to the Lords Supper I Answer Answ 1. The Children of the Jews were admitted to Circumcision but not to the Passeover 2. Children though capable of having Baptism Administred to them yet are not capable of Manducation or eating Bread 3. Baptism precedes the Lords Supper as Regeneration doth our growth in Grace and in a Natural state a Child is first Born before he can be Nourished externally in order to his Growth 4. Though Children are capable of Baptism and the Sealing the Blessings of the Covenant of Grace to them thereby yet are they not capable of performing the Duties requisite to be Acted by any Communicant as self-examination and discerning the Lords Body Enq. 3 If Infants are capable of being engaged in Covenant with God by Baptism what need have they of God-fathers and God-mothers Answ 1. I Answer The Jews had at the Circumcision of their Children several Persons by Godwin Antiq. lib. 6. Buxtorf Jud. Syn. c. 2. p. 82. Gen. 17. Isa 8.25 Luke 1.58 Platina in vita Hygini Isaackson Chr. An. 153. as Witnesses to Testifie the Childs Circumcision and thereby its Reception as a Member of Gods Church and to remind the Child Circumcised when it came at Age of what a Covenant it was concerned in between God and its Soul 2. We find this Practice Recorded in Scripture as Witnesses at the first Institution of Circumcision and afterwards continued even to the Circumcision of St. John 3. The rise of God-fathers and God-mothers in the Christian Church was taken from the Practice of the Jews before Christ and was of an early Institution Especially Eyginus Bishop of Rome about 153 Years after Christ who considering the frequent Persecutions attending the Church of Christ whereby the Christian Parents often were taken away and the Children brought up in Heathen Idolatry or Jewish Superstition did Prudently order in the Church Persons to be engaged at Baptism with the Parents to take care of the Childs Education that if the Natural Parents dyed or were taken away by Persecution or else if they Apostatized from the Faith or were Ignorant and could not or wicked and would not bring up the Child in the Principles and Practice of the true Religion these might endeavour their being so Educated that Christianity might be propagated and Children brought up in the fear of God 4. Nor is this contrary to Gods pleasure Ephes 6.1 Deut. 29.10 11. Deut. 6.6 Gen. 18.19 Josh 24.15 who Commands and Commends the Parents and Friends engaging their Children in Covenant with him yea their Saves and Servant were to be engaged by them to be God Servants And we find Godly Parents and Masters Practising this Duty in their Families in their several Ages 5. Children are in the Power of their Parents or Guardians to engage in Civil Contracts and to be Invested with any Priviledge or Estate Therefore our Churches Prudence is Commendable in taking care that with the Child Baptized there should be Persons who should stand in the behalf of the Child engaged to God and the Church of Christ 1. As Witnesses to take notice of the Childs Reception into the Church as a Member of it and to Witness to the Child the tenor of that Covenant it was engaged in when it grows up and that thereby it stands obliged to be a true Christian And also to satisfie the Child that it hath been Baptized and may proceed to other Ordinances 2. As Sureties to engage as much as in them lies to see the Child brought up Vertuously to lead a Godly and a Christian Life in Principle and Practice 3. As God-fathers and God-mothers to engage themselves as it were to God and for his sake and cause to endeavour his Religion may be promoted in the Pious Education of those Children that the succeeding Age as well as the present may serve him 6. Sureties God-fathers and God-mothers are now as necessary as ever for though through Gods goodness we are not under Persecution for the Cause of Christ yet the sad Schisms and Divisions amongst us in Principles and the lamentable Debauchery and Profanenets in Practice of Professing Christians plead it necessary to retain this Commendable Order of our Church and they call aloud on all who stand thus engaged to God and the Church for any Child or Persons Education that they speedily and diligently labour after a discharge of their Duties in a diligent endeavour that those they are engaged for may be reclaimed from Impiety to Holiness and reduced from Error and Heresie to the true Faith For the neglect of those who are thus engaged renders the Order though it be in it self so good to be accounted as a meer Ceremony and as a burdensome Circumstance rather to be laid aside than continued But were the Persons engaged for Children thus Conscientious in the discharge of that great Trust they have undertaken the great good that would thence flow to the Church of Christ would make even its Enemies to be in Love with this Order and Constitution Enq. 4 Are Infants Obliged to perform that Covenant wherein they were by Baptism engaged since it was not their act but the act of other Persons in their behalf to which they gave no Consent Answ I Answer Yes They are obliged to perform it and that for these Reasons 1. Nothing was then engaged but what is Christian and Reasonable to be done 1 Pet. 5.8 Tit. 2.11 1 Pet. 2.11 1 John 5 4. If we would be Happy we must be Holy which is the sum of that Covenant then entred for Holiness will engage our Mortifying the Flesh Crucifying the World and Renouncing the Devil and all his Works So that these Duties of our Baptismal Vow are Commanded by God in Scripture as well as their observance is engaged by us in Baptism 2. Every one hath care of his own Soul and therefore what was in our Childhood engaged for 〈…〉 and every of us when we come to Years of 〈…〉 standing and retain the Christian Religion 2 Tim. 2.19 Tit. 2.14 are obliged to perform and we oguht to endeavour it if we expect Salvation nothing being promised but what our Religion obligeth to A ceasing from sin and a living the Life of Godliness And here how may the desires of all Christians be for the Christian Practice of that Solemn Ordinance of Confirmation of Persons of Ripe Years That they being instructed in the Vow of Baptism engaged in their Childhood may Publickly in the Congregation own that Religion they were Baptized into and be Solemnly in their own Persons engaged to the performance of it This certainly would much dis-engage the engaged God-fathers and Mothers and much Oblige the Catecheumen to abstain from all sin and to perform all Duties when as every Person in the Congregation is a several Witness of his Solemn Engagement it will shame him out of Sin nor will he dare wilfully to act contrary to the Gospel-Rules But 3. A Child is frequently obliged in Civil Contracts to perform what the Parent or Guardian engaged for it as in a Bond Lease or the like or else he is lyable to the Law and debarred from receiving any Profit or Advantage by any such Contract made for him So in Spirituals The Child is doubtless engaged by the Covenant made in his Name and behalf in Baptism to be Holy or else he will be deprived of the Benefits of this Covenant which is Eternal Happiness and be exposed to the Law and Curse of God for as the Commands of God obliging the Parents to engage their Children in Covenant with God are not impertinent So since the Duties they were then engaged in are but what God by Precept to the Children when at Age expects from them Their non-performance of that Covenant incurs Gods Anger and Forfeits Heaven and Happiness 〈◊〉 If they Labour not to perform the Duties of 〈◊〉 Covenant which is their Reasonable Service their Parents and Friends Care for the engaging them in Covenant with God and their devoting of them to God and their Labour in Educating them in true Christianity will Witness against them aggravate their Sin and add to their Torment FINIS
performing it by sprinkling 1. The Act of dipping or sprinkling may indifferently be used in Baptism without nullifying the Ordinance As appears thus 1. It is as an indifferent thing left to the Prudence of the Church of Christ whether to dip or sprinkle neither of them being commanded nor either absolutely forbidden by the Precept Baptizing 2. It cannot nullifie Baptism being but an external Ceremonial part and mode of performing it the Form or Essence of Baptism remaining in the Baptizing of a fit Person in the Name of the Sacred Trinity Therefore our Dissenting Brethren are to blame to make our Baptism to be essentially corrupted and not to be accounted Baptism because not performed by dipping Nor is their Folly less deplorable in Separating from that Church where Baptism is perfectly and rightly administred as to the Essence of it on the account of a bare external mode of Administration 3. The word by which the manner of Administration of this Ordinance is expressed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equally admits of both significations dipping and sprinkling Walker's Doctrine of Baptizing p. 6. to 64. as is granted by the best Criticks and is obvious to the Observant Eye of any Intelligent Reader of Sacred Writ in too many places to be cited as the Marginal citation at large proves Either Act then may be intended by Christ in the Word and be Practised by Christs People in the Church 4. Num. 19.18 Exod. 12.7 Heb. 9.13 Heb. 10.22 Rom. 6.3 4. Col. 2.11 The Sacramental Washings under the Law were by both dipping and sprinkling which might Typifie the Indifferency of either in our Baptizing 5. Both answer what is signified by Baptism A Washing or Purifying from sins filth and an evil Conscience and a Burying with Christ in Baptism which place though Objected against us hath little or no force in it against our Practice For 1. Earth is poured on the dead Body in its Burial and it is not put under the Earth Therefore this rather Pleads for our Practise of puring Water on the Baptized Person than for its being dipped or plunged under Water 2. If it be urged that the Person Buried is under the Earth therefore the Baptized Person in conformity to his being Buried with Christ by Baptism should be under the Water I Answer that the Interred Corps is but under part of the Earth and the Baptized Person by our Adversaries can plead no more than being under part of the Water wherein he was Baptized and the Child or Person Baptized by us is under part of Water also being under that Water which is sprinkled or thrown upon it 3. The Allusion respects more the Spiritual Ends of Baptism than a Litteral sense and implies the Baptized ought to dye to Sin and live to Righteousness not must a literal sense be strictly understood for then in conformity to our Saviours Burial the Person might reasonably Quaery whether he ought not to be part of three days under Water Rom. 6. as Christ was in the Grave which would gain few Proselytes And as to the Spiritual ends of Baptism which St. Paul seems to tell us is the meaning of the place 6. Each Action of dipping or sprinkling is equally Obliging Nor is a Person more engaged to Observe them who is dipped than he who is sprinkled as in the Lords Supper a Morsel of Bread and a small quantity of Wine received is equally Obliging of the Communicant as an whole Loaf or a full draught unless we make the inward Grace or outward Obligation of the Sacraments depend upon the Mode of an outward Administration which is unreasonable and unchristian Therefore either dipping or sprinkling may be indifferently used To require Dipping as so absolutely necessary in Baptism Dipping not absolutely necessary that the Ordinance is null unless so performed as the Anabaptist pleads is an unreasonable Error Because 1. There is not one place of Scripture which in express words commands dipping And here they are much to blame who while they cry out against us for want of Scripture-proof for Infant Baptism whereof this Treatise hath endeavoured to manifest us not destitute Adhere to the Practice of this Mode of Baptizing by dipping without the least command in Scripture and yet with so great Zeal or Prejudice as to declare us unbaptized Persons because not dipt when as our Saviours Precept and the Apostles Practice was to Baptize which word admits of both significations nor is it mentioned by which they did it 2. This is to Idolize a Ceremony and make that the whole of Baptism which is but an outward circumstance of the Act not determined by Christ but left indifferently to his Church to be used nor were obliging to the Soul nor more representing the ends of Baptism to the Soul than sprinkling 3. This Act cannot be used in the performance of Baptism in all parts of the habitable World there being many places where so much Water cannot be gotten for many Miles together as will suffice for the dipping of Persons over Head and Ears as in hot Countrys and Mountainous Places Nor is it consistent with Christian prudence to suppose Christ would limit such an Ordinance to such an Administration as could not be in all places at all times performed Nor indeed doth he for by his Commanding only to Baptize he limits the act to neither Dipping nor Sprinkling but the word admitting of both he leaves it to the prudence of his people to use which was most convenient who might probably in all habitable Towns get so much water as might suffice to Sprinkle though perhaps not so much as might serve to dip Persons in Baptism 4. Dipping or plunging the body over Head and Ears Baxters Infant Church-member Walkers Doctrine of Bapt. cap. 10. p. 179. seems to be an indecent action while either it is performed naked or in transparent Garments too suequently an act through the pravity of our Hearts too apt to create such thoughts as become not the Sacredness of the Ordinance whence some had made it a Breach of the Seventh Commandment 5. Nor is it a little injurious to the body exposing it by reason of the cold temperature of the Climate to not a few distempers in our Nation But as one observes the Adversary is so Carnally Prudent Wills against Danvers as not to Practice their Baptizing till warm Weather But how consonant to Christs Rule let all judge who know it was the Practice of the Apostles usually to Baptize Converts immediately upon their Conversion Mr. Walker's Doctrine of Bapt. cap. 8. p. 61. and if that should happen in Winter in Frost and Snow amongst us in our Cold Region and the Convert be plunged over Head and Ears in cold Water who can suppose it consistent with the Persons Health Nay must we not reasonably think it may endanger his Health and Life too unless God work a Miracle in his Preservation Baxtess Infant Church-member whence some have
or leap or however not containing so much Water as might fit it to dip or plunge over Head and Ears so many as were in those days Baptized 4. The expression of much Water being thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying many Waters denoting the confluence of those two Springs or Waters Jordan and Jalor causing rather some Stream rather than so much as might suffice to dip or plunge Persons in for it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie there was much Water And had it been so expressed according as our Translation renders it yet a little Stream may be esteemed much Water in that hot and dry Countrey whose Famous River Jordan was not Navigable and therefore it self almost incapable of serving to the dipping of so many as were Baptized 5. Supposing it to be a place of much Water and that it was fit for Persons to be dipt or plunged in it yet there being no mention at all of such a dipping or plunging but only that St. John Baptized there it can give no colour to the Anabaptists for their dipping whom they Baptize Nor can it be deduced from thence the force of their Objection lying in there being there much Water only denotes the fitness of the place to Baptize the many Converts in and gives an equal Latitude for Baptizing them by pouring water on them at the River side as it doth for dipping them in the River for which Practice the Anabaptists are wholly destitute of Scripture Precept or President and are therefore blame-worthy to Separate from our Church without Cause Baptism being rightly Administred by us according to that due form on that fit Subject and after that Lawful manner Christ appointed Thus have I performed the design of the Text and discovered the Necessity Form Subject and Manner of Baptism It remains Lastly that I Answer those Enquiries made by the Anabaptists as Objections against things pertaining to our Practice As Enq. 1 If Infant Baptism was Lawful Christ or his Apostles would have Commanded and Practised it And if Lawful why is it not mentioned in Scripture To this I Answer Answ 1. Christ is expresly said to have Baptized none John 4.2 John 3.22 nor must that in John 3. oppose this so as to render it untrue for Christ did Baptize as he Ordered his Apostles to do it and did it by them but in his own Person himself Baptized none yet did Christ grant to Children what was greater than Baptism the Holy Ghost and Eternal Life and admits them to the Ordinance of Laying on of Hands which presupposeth their being Baptized as hath been largely proved 2. The Consequence is invalid a non dicto ad non factum John 21.25 for St. John acquaints us many things were done by Christ and his Apostles that are not written and so might this be Practised though not expressed 3. As great Essential matters to the Church of Christ are not expressed either by way of Precept or Practice in Scriptures The whole Scriptures afford not one Instance of a Womans Receiving the Lords Supper or of the Apostles themselves being Baptized or of any Children of Believers or Converts being at any Age Baptized but it solely relates the Baptism of Heathens when Converted to Christ or of Jews embracing Christ as their Messiah But yet we believe on good grounds that Women ought and may partake of the Lords Supper and that the Apostles of Christ were Baptized and that Baptism is as necessary to be Practised by and upon the Posterity Seed and Children of Believers and Professing Christians as it was upon the new Converted Jew or Gentile though these and other things as material be not mentioned in Scripture 4. The Anabaptists who put this Enquiry to us as if nothing ought to be done but what is the express Precept of or President in Scripture do themselves Practice Baptizing by Dipping without any Scripture Precept or Example 5. Gen. 17. It was largely Commanded in the Old Testament that the Children of Gods People should be and they were also admitted unto the Seal of the Covenant Circumcision and Christ abundantly manifests our Priviledges to be as great as theirs Ephes 2.13 19. Heb. 8.6 whence as we have proved at large directly follows our Childrens Right to Baptism 6. There needed no new Command for it Christ being a Saviour to Jew as well as Gentile and admitting both to equal Priviledges would not did not abrogate any of the Jews Priviledges they enjoyed before his coming nor did Christ speak one Syllable against their Childrens Baptism but only gave Precepts for the Collecting a Church of both Jew and Gentile by Believing in him and being Baptized into the Faith of him And the Covenant between God and the Jews through their Messiah to come being un-repealed by him when come still gives the Children of the Converted Jews and Gentiles they having equal Priviledges right to Baptism which is warrantably Practised nor can it be unlawful it being against no Law and so not an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 7. 1 Joh. 3.4 Mat. 19.13 14 15. All the Spiritual and Eternal Mercies the Covenant of Grace contains and Baptism Seals are expresly Promised and applyed in the Scriptures of the New Testament to Children 8. It is more than probable that Children were Baptized in that we Read of several whole Families Baptized by the Apostles and that only on the account of the Parents or Masters Professing the Faith Abraham Believed and he and all his Gen. 17. Acts 16.15 31 34. 1 Cor. 1.16 Ishmael and Isaac c. were Circumcised The Jaylor Lydia Stephanas c. Believed and presently they and their whole Families and Housholds are Baptized whence we have Infant Baptism tacitly implyed in Scripture 9. And Lastly Scripture is silent as to a Precept for Infant Baptism under the New Testament Dispensation because it was the Practice of Jews to Baptize their Proselytes both Parents and Children as we have proved though not Sacramentally till Christs Commission for it So there needed not a New Command to promote an Old Practice continued from Abraham's time to Christ and no ways by him or his Apostles spoken against only there needed a Precept and Commission from Christ to make those Baptismal washings to be a Sacrament of his Gospel Church Mat. 28.19 20. which was done by our Saviour in the words of the Subject of this Discourse as appears in that it was not a Precept to Administer Baptism save only as to the Gentiles because it was Practised upon Christ and by St. Mat. 3.17 John 1.25 26. John 4.1 2. John on several others before this Commission was given though by this Precept and Commission it became first a Sacrament to both Jew and Centile And these Reasons may suffice why Infant Baptism is not expresly Commanded in Scripture And this small Treatise will prove the great Reasons Scripture gives us to receive them to