made concerning the thing signified viz. powring his Spirit which promise belonged to them and their children therefore they should receive the signe which God had instituted to signifie it which may seeme the most genuine resolution of the Text. Or secondly This reason may be understood as brought both to the exhortation Repent and be baptized and the promise And you shall receive remission of sinnes and the gift of the holy Ghost for considering that baptisme and the gift of the holy Ghost are correlatives as the signe and thing signified the reason well may that I say not necessarily must be referred to both Or thirdly if we grant that it is immediately referred to the foregoing promise yet it must necessarily be taken as a reason of the exhortation at least mediately for seeing the promise of remission of sinnes and the holy Ghost is brought as a reason to perswade them to be baptized and these words For the promise is to you c. is brought as a confirmation of the promise Causa causae est causa causati and considering that the cause of the cause is the cause of the caused and the reason of the reason is the reason of the thing proved by that reason this For the promise c. must needs be brought as a reason why they should be baptized and so those who bring this as a reason that the Apostle gives why they should be baptized joyning the thing argued and the Argument together and omitting that which was interposed as not pertinent to the purpose are quit from your slander of false alledging Scripture and you convinced to be a false accuser of the brethren The next Objection that you frame I owne not Assenting that it is true that neither these Iewes nor the Gentiles were in Covenant untill they had entred into the same by repentance and faith seeing that the old Covenant was now abrogated and the Gentiles had beene hitherto foreiners so that you will acknowledge that whensoever Iewes or Gentiles should receive the promise by faith and repentance it did not onely belong unto them but also to their children For though it be expressed to the Iews That the promise was to them and their children it is to be understood to hold of the Gentiles also For now the partition wall was removed and the Iewes had no priviledge for their childrens having right unto the promise any more then the children of beleeving Gentiles Thus farre I have digressed in answer to some objections made against the Scripture which was brought for the proofe of my proposition though it might be handled as well in the assumption yet because I have more to say on the assumption I brought these objections under the proposition The summe of the proposition must be remembred to be this Where is right to the spirituall blessing promised in the word and sealed in baptisme there is right to baptisme which stands firme against whatsoever hath beene objected I come to the assumption The places of Scripture quoted to confirme the assumption have beene spoken of before Onely we may consider now First what things are promised in those Scriptures expresly Secondly what is implied Thirdly to whom these promises are made For the first God promiseth to be their teacher yea though they be uncapable of humane discipline They shall not teach one another but they shall all be taught of God Esa 54.13 Ier. 31.34 Againe that he will give yea powre his Spirit and that his Spirit shall be upon them Ioel 2.28 Es 59.21 Secondly under these two expressions yea each of them severally are comprehended all those things that are requisite for our being in Covenant with God and all those spirituall graces that give us right to the seale of entrance as first Regeneration which is the proper and certaine worke of the spirit of sanctification Ioh. 3.5 which spirit of regeneration to be signified by the water of baptisme may appeare by that Scripture Ioh. 3.5 Tit. 3.5 Againe this implies communion with Christ which must needs be by faith actuall or virtuall Ioh. 6.45 Heb. 11.6 For whosoever is taught of God and hath the Spirit of Christ must needs have Christ and so it follows that such have right unto remission of sinnes Thirdly these promises belong unto the children of the Church the sonnes and daughters of the faithfull all of them from the least to the greatest the seede of the faithfull and their seeds seed as may appeare in the Scriptures quoted and here must be comprehended infants as well as others who have right unto the promise by vertue of their parents entering into Covenant with God as Act. 2.39 The Apostle bids them repent and be baptized and so enter into Covenant for the promise saith he is unto you and your children so that there can no reason be given why infants should be excluded from these promises unlesse any one shall say that infants are uncapable of these gifts which this A. R. seemes to hold in many places of his booke which opinion is more worthy detestation then confutation Are not infants capable of sinne Psal 51.5 and therefore of sanctification shall the first Adams disobedience be available to bring guilt and defilement and not Christs obedience to procure remission and sanctification Or is there no remedie for the poore infants of beleeving parents but if they die before they come to the use of reason they must necessarily perish as being born the children of wrath and being uncapable of remedie Or doth this man hold that they are brutes without soule in that he compares baptizing of infants to circumcising of Camels or Asses 2 Part pag. 21. Are not these profane Atheisticall conceits contrary to the promises of God cleare testimonie of Scripture and example as of Iohn the Baptist who was sanctified and moved by the Spirit even in his mothers wombe Quest But what must we then beleeve that all the children of Christians are already indued with the holy Ghost taught of God and sanctified c. so soone as borne or in their infancie Answ It is enough to prove their right to baptisme that they are under the promise and interessed therein by vertue of their parents being at least externally in Covenant so that whether they have already received the Spirit or have a promise thereof it sufficeth to give them a right to the Sacrament As these are bid repent and so come under promise themselves with their children and then be baptized and afterward they shall receive the holy Ghost Quest But must we think that all children of Christian parents that are baptized either have or shall receive the Spirit and so be saved Answ Iohn the Baptist and the Apostles though they were not to beleeve that amongst those multitudes whom they baptized there were none but truely had or should receive the Spirit for it was after proved by the event that many were hypocrites yet they turned away none because by
their externall confession of sinne and profession of faith and repentance they shewed themselves to be externally in Covenant and so to have right to the outward seale which they therefore administred to one as well as to another So though we are not bound to think that all the children borne of parents in covenant are or shall be sanctified yet because they are outwardly in covenant and under the promise which promise God makes good as seemeth good in his eyes therefore the Minister that is not to judge of the inward worke of sanctification on the heart whether present or future but of the outward estate neither if he could discerne the inward estate might he withhold the outward priviledge from any though wanting inward grace that hath right thereunto by being under covenant outwardly may and ought to administer baptisme to the children of all Christian parents under his charge that requires it so long as by wilfull Apostasie from the faith or just excommunication wherein they obstinately continue they with their children are not discovenanted Obiect If any should object That those promises of the Spirit or Gods teaching c. made to the seed of the faithfull to all both small and great c and the promise made to the faithfull and their children belong onely to the spirituall seed of the Church viz. those that are borne againe in the wombe of the Church Answer I Answer 1. These promises made to the Christian Church are like to that promise made to the Iewish Church Deut. 30.6 And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart and the heart of thy seed to love the Lord thy God Now this they were to understand not onely or principally of Proselytes that should be converted to the Church nor onely of their posteritie when they came to the use of reason but even of Infants as may appeare in that God appointed them to circumcise their Infants For circumcision of the flesh was a sign of circumcision of the heart which if infants had not been capable of God would not have commanded the outward signe to have been administred unto them And so these promises made to the Christian Church to their seed to their seeds seed to their children from the least to the greatest appertain to infants in the Christian Church as well as others The universall note being understood De generibus singulorum not de singulis generum as they say of all sorts sexes ages and condition some though every individuall of all sorts be not comprehended therein And therefore Baptisme sealing such promises belongs to Infants in the Christian Church as well as circumcision did in the Iewish Secondly I answer It is absurd to understand these promises onely of the spirituall seed as if they belonged only to the regenerate For what is it to be taught of God and have the Spirit powred but to be converted or regenerated and drawn to Christ so that by this interpretation the meaning of these promises should be this much I will powre my Spirit on whom I have or shall powre my Spirit and they shall be taught of God that are or shall be taught of God It is true God may here well promise a greater measure of the Spirit and illumination where he hath given some measure But withall it is certaine here is promised the Spirit and illumination also to those that are quite destitute and so to such as are not yet the spirituall seed of the Church Thirdly I answer What matter of consolation can this be to beleeving parents if not withstanding their prayer for and religious education of their children none of these or the like promises belong to them but onely to the spirituall seed of the Church that is such as are already converted and declare their conversion by actuall faith What ground of prayer for or hope of the salvation of their children have they more then of the Heathens if this be admitted 2. Argument If Governours of families upon their beleeving and tendring up themselves and theirs to God and Christ were not onely themselves baptized but all the persons in their houshold and which were under their government of what age soever were baptized also so that where there is no mention of preaching to or the beliefe of any but the Governours themselves yet their whole housholds were dedicated unto God in Baptisme Then it is lawfull yea a dutie to Christian parents to tender their children being part of their family unto God in Baptisme and Ministers have good ground yea ingagement for baptizing such But Governours of Families upon their beleeving and tendering up themselves and theirs unto God and Christ were not onely themselves baptized but all the persons in their houshold or which were under their government so that where there is no mention of preaching to or the beliefe of any but the Governours themselves yet their whole housholds were dedicated unto God in Baptisme Act. 16.14 15 and 31 32 33. 1 Cor. 1.6 Therefore it is lawfull yea the dutie for Christian parents or governours of families to tender their infants which are part of their houshold unto God in Baptisme and Ministers ought to baptize such being tendred of their parents The Major needs no confirmation it being granted by all yea by the Adversaries themselves as I conceive taken for an undeniable principle that the Apostles example in baptizing is a sufficient warrant for us and that such are to be admitted to Baptisme now as were admitted by the Apostles For most of their reasoning is grounded hereupon and they hence condemne our baptizing of Infants because say they it is not agreeable to the practise of the Apostles so that that Baptisme which is agreeable to the Baptism of the Apostles is warantable by their own grants and so the sequele standeth firme and good If in the Apostles times whole families of beleeving governours were baptized they ought so now and so consequently the infants of those families which are parts thereof if there be any such For as Abraham and his Family was a pattern unto all such as should enter into the Covenant of grace during the time of circumcision that as he and his Family were circumcised so should all whether of his posteritie or proselytes circumcise all their Males even the babes So those primitive Converts that were the first fruits of the Gentiles and when they beleeved were baptized with their whole families are examples for the beleevers of all Ages to follow in consecrating themselves and theirs to God in Baptism As for the Minor those places of Scripture cited prove it Act. 16.31 32 33. To the Iaylour demanding what he should doe that he might be saved Paul and Sylas answer bidding him beleeve in the Lord Iesus Christ promising that he should be saved and his houshold Teaching that the beleefe of a father or governour of a family is sufficient to bring a whole family that is at his disposing and to be ruled by
be lost though some baptized perish then what we have received from Christ the Prophets and Apostles Might you not as well have taken up Nathan for preaching unto David 2 Sam. 12. to bring him unto repentance and conversion Why what needs this Nathan David received circumcision the seale of the righteousnesse of faith and of circumcision of his heart in his infancie Rom. 4.11 and had the spirituall grace bestowed on him effectually and must he now be regenerate and borne againe And why should David himselfe upon Nathans exhortation and reproofe Psal 51.10 pray that God would create in him a cleane heart and renew a right spirit within him which what else is it but the renewing of the worke of regeneration Ezek. 18.21 Jer. 4.4 Why should the Prophets exhort the Iews to make them new hearts and circumcise their hearts though they had received circumcision What would Nathan David and the Prophets have answered this subtill disputant if he had examined them thus Or if you had been living in Pauls time when he called upon the Romanes Rom. 12.2 2 Cor. 5.17 Ephes 4.23 24. Gal. 4.19 Rom. 6.3 Gal. 3.27 Corinthians Ephesians and others to repentance and renovation to put off the old man to put on the new man to become new creatures to be renewed in the spirit of their mind professing that he travelled to forme Christ in them againe Belike this learned Divine to use your phrase Paul would soone have beene dasht if you had but risen against him Why what 's the matter Paul Did not you teach that so many as have beene baptized into Christ have put on Christ are buried with him in baptisme What have they put off Christ risen againe to sinne Rom. 8.38 39. Phil. 1 6. Rom. 11.29 fallen away from grace c. This will not stand with your doctrine that nothing shall separate from Gods love that God will perfect the good work which he hath begun that the gifts and callings of God are without repentance Therefore you were deceived in saying that Christ is put on in baptisme or in teaching that men cannot fall away from grace Or if you had had Peter in hand when he called Simon Magus to repentance Act. 8 22. though he had been baptized you would belike have lessoned Peter better Why what needs this Peter Didst not thou teach that baptisme saveth and is he that was saved even now damned againe 1 Pet. 3.21 sure thou wast mistaken when thou saidst baptisme saveth or when thou saidst that the faithfull are preserved by the power of God through faith unto salvation 1 Pet. 1.5 sith Simon that awhile agoe beleeved and was baptized hath need now to repent as being in the gall of bitternesse and bond of iniquitie Thus if you had disputed learned Peter and Paul belike had beene in great straits what to have answered It was well for them that none of these acute Anabaptists as they are called were sprung up in those dayes One more instance I will bring Our blessed Saviour preacheth unto his Disciples necessitie of conversion and becoming as little children Matth. 18.3 as they would enter into the kingdome of heaven Yet elsewhere he saith Joh. 3.35 Except a a man be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost he shall in no wise enter into the kingdome of God Thereby as you gather assuring us that if a man be regenerate and borne againe he shall see the kingdome of God But I conceive you will not deny but the Discipcles had already beene borne againe by water and the holy Ghost Sure in this case had you beene in his time you would have more troubled him with your Dilemma then an hundred of the Scribes and Pharisees with all their Sophistrie What To teach that being borne againe by water and the holy Ghost Joh. 10.28 they shall certainly enter into the kingdome of God And that none shall pluck them out of his hands being given him of the Father And yet now threaten them with the losse of the kingdome of heaven unlesse they shall be converted become as little children which what else is it but to be regenerate Doe you thinke that this your arguing would have perswaded the world that Christ was a false witnesse of God When your reasoning thus against the Prophets Apostles and Christ himselfe shall be found unanswerable we shall be forced to yeeld unto you but untill then we who in this point have their doctrine for our warrant That though Baptisme save and regenerate yet baptized persons have need to be called upon to repentance and regeneration need not to regard your bold and confident asseverations I have the largelier set forth the manner of your reasoning only changing the persons if it may be to make you see your weaknesse if not to make others ashamed of their simplicitie which admire such disputers You would not have reasoned so if you had considered First that notwithstanding some abuse baptisme yet that hinders not but in regard of Gods institution baptisme may be said to regenerate or save And so secondly that they which have received baptisme according to Gods appointment as farre as we can discerne may be said to be regenerated and saved viz. sacramentally Thirdly that baptisme is administred to the members of the Church not onely as a pledge of remission of sinnes past upon supposition of repentance and faith but also of sinnes to come being both an obligation to us daily to renew our faith and repentance and an assurance unto us that upon the performance of that condition God will pardon in so much that our regeneration viz. sacramentall in baptisme is a main ground why Ministers should call upon us being baptized to manifest our regeneration in our lives seeing God hath given us the seale of regeneration to assure us of the grace it selfe if the fault be not in our selves and to bind us to repentance that we may be partakers of the remission of sinnes and hence the Apostle urgeth conversion or sanctification from baptisme before received Rom. 6. So that if in Christs and the Apostles time the baptized had need to be called to repentance or regeneration though baptisme saved and buried with Christ what absurditie is it if our Ministers call to repentance and regeneration those that were regenerated in baptisme in the forenamed sense For even in the best times some that had professed and beene baptized had done it unsoundly and hypocritically and so had need to be called unto sinceritie whereunto when they were brought their baptisme though received in time of hypocrisie should be a pledge of the remission of sinnes Act. 8. as in Simon Magus whom Peter bids to repent but not to be baptized againe Secondly others might have the truth of grace and regeneration and yet not give so cleare testimonie thereof to themselves and others as was to be desired Thirdly those that had truely repented
use of circumcision to Abraham and his posteritie for the substance to wit to be a signe of their being in covenant and seale of the righteousnesse of faith in your opinion why doe you not shew the difference of Abrahams circumcision and theirs If you say it was to Abraham a seale of his faith righteousnesse and regeneration that he had already to them of that which they were to have I answer this is but a circumstantiall difference and gives what we desire and maintaine If you say that many who were circumcised were never justified by faith or regenerated this was mans abuse and fault who being received into such a Covenant wherein God promised to be his God and was ready to performe his promise yet would not performe the conditions required in the covenant For if some that received circumcision were never internally in Covenant nor indued with the righteousnesse of faith that hinders not but that circumcision was a signe of their being outwardly received into that covenant wherein God was ready to bestow faith and regeneration if through their owne default they did not deprive themselves thereof Besides if there was not the same use of circumcision to Abraham and his children circumcised by Gods appointment How doe you say in your Preface to the Reader That baptisme is an undoubted pledge from God of the free pardon and remission of sinnes to the right subjects thereof sith it may with as good reason be said though it were so in our Saviours time yet it is not so now as you seeme to beare men in hand Though circumcision was a seale of the righteousnesse of faith and a signe of the covenant between God and him to Abraham yet it was not so to his posteritie though they were the right subjects thereof whom God had appointed to be circumcised But if you rightly gather that Baptisme is an undoubted pledge of the pardon of sinne to the right subjects thereof now because it was so to those which were first baptized we may as well gather that circumcision was a signe of the Covenant and seale of the righteousnesse of faith to those infants which by Gods appointment received it as it was to Abraham Hitherto of those Arguments of ours whereunto this Disputant answers As for the other Arguments and Objections which he brings and answers I shall leave them to defend them that owne them I will adde briefly one or two Arguments more 4. Arg. Arg. 6. If the baptizing of Infants born of Christian parents or parents within the new covenant be not according to the rule of Gods word then there is no rule or warrant in the Scripture for baptizing the posteritie of beleevers under the New covenant at all and so consequently the children of beleevers must not be baptized at all neither young nor old for we must do nothing without Scripture warrant But that the posteritie of Christian parents ought not to be baptized at all is most absurd and false as I think will be acknowledged of all that beare the names of Christians For how can it be supposed that the faith and Christianity of the parents should be so prejudiciall to the children as to deprive them of the pledge of the remission of sinnes though they repent and beleeve when yet the posteritie of Infidels may be baptized upon their faith and repentance Therefore the Antecedent must needs be false viz. that the baptizing of infants of Christian parents is not according to the rule of the word and consequently the contradictory thereto true viz. that the baptizing of infants borne of parents in covenant is according to the rule The Assumption I conceive needs no proofe seeing Christ hath appointed that the Sacraments of the New Testament should be perpetuall to the end of the world Matth. 28.19.20 1 Cor. 11.26 to those that should be in Covenant For the confirmation then of the proposition and making cleare its consequence Consider first there is no command example or other testimony in Scripture can be given to shew that the children of testimony in Scripture can be given to shew that the children of beleeving parents should be kept from baptisme untill they could in their owne persons actually repent beleeve and make confession of their faith But still when parents were converted to the faith and baptized their whole families were baptized with them Neither is there any word concerning the posteritie of Christian parents who were borne of them being in covenant to have been baptized in riper yeares Secondly those commands and examples of baptizing them that repented beleeved and professed the faith are all of such as had before been out of the New covenant and were come of parents that had never been under the covenant of the Gospel and therefore with lesse reason can be applied to the posteritie of Christian parents when they come to yeares of discretion then when they were infants For those examples and commands shew that so soone as one is in covenant with God in the time of the Gospel he hath right unto baptisme Neither can it without sinne to God and injurie to the person be denied to him but ought to be administred so soone as it may conveniently be had And therefore as they that had beene out of covenant before so soone as they had repented and beleeved at least professed so much which was necessary to their being taken into covenant ought to be baptized as soone as might be conveniently Act. 8.36 37 38. Act. 10.47 Act. 22.16 and might not without injurie be hindred by others or sinne in themselves neglect it So the children of Christian parents being in covenant as hath beene proved and cannot be denied with any shew of truth that I say not without blasphemy cannot without injurie be denied baptisme so soone as it may expediently be administred to them This Argument for more evidence and clearenesse may be propounded thus The posteritie of beleevers either must be baptized in their infancie or when they are able to make a profession of faith and do it really or they must not be baptized at all But to hold that they should not be baptized at all but that all the children of beleevers should be debarred baptisme though they prove never so godly is absurd and wicked that they should be baptized onely when they come to yeares of discretion and make profession of faith and repentance there is no warrant in Scripture neither by command practise or otherwise as hath been shewed Therefore they are to be baptized in infancie Arg. 7. If Christian women that are under the new covenant have right to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and may and ought to be admitted thereunto neither can without great injurie be detained therefrom notwithstanding their sexe though there be no cleare expresse direct and immediate command or example in the Scripture for the same then may and ought infants of Christian parents being in covenant to be admitted to
examples foregoing A. R. Whereas you say Vpon these considerations you could not without unfaithfulnesse to God and your owne conscience but suspect your own baptisme c. Answer I answer It is not alwaies an argument of faithfulnesse to God to pretend to follow the dictates of conscience such is the deceitfulnesse of the heart and erroneousnesse of conscience and so much self-conceitednesse and wilfulnesse is in men for which they will hypocritically pretend conscience A. R. Whereas you say You remaine unsatisfied by our strongest Arguments and are more confirmed thereby in your perswasion of the unwarrantableness of the baptizing of infants Answer Ans This doth no more make against a truth that you are exasperated to oppose by so much more by how much more it is confirmed with Arguments then the rebellion of our corrupt hearts by so much more resisting the Law of God Rom. 7.8 by how much more powerfully it is pressed upon us proveth the Law to be evill Whereas you talke so much of The invaliditie and insufficiencie of our Arguments your faithfulnesse to God and your conscience I hope it shall appeare what fidelitie and conscientiousnesse you shew in abusing the Scriptures and what sufficiencie and validity there is in your arguments and objections in the following examination As for your peremptory rash and arrogant censuring the baptisme of children to be a meere device of man introduced and maintained for politique ends by mans subtiltie It is not much to be regarded so long as we know that we must not stand to your sentence at the last Day So much for the Preface Now to the book it selfe AN ANSWER TO A TREATISE intituled The vanitie of Childish BAPTISME WE will come to your five considerations whereby you would prove that That which is administred in the Church of England under the name of Baptisme is not the Baptisme of the New Testament and those are First the End Secondly the Manner Thirdly the Power Fourthly the Ground Fifthly the Subject The first Consideration or Argument taken from the End of childrens Baptisme Answered FOr the End you lay down for granted First A. R. that the end of childrens baptisme in our Church is regeneration Secondly that this appeares by divers passages in the Liturgie Thirdly you adde the Doctrine or iudgement of divers Authours which iustifie the same as you say Fourthly you reason from this and some other principles against us This is the summe of your first Argument which at large to set downe were tedious and endlesse Answer Ans Though I will not go about to defend every expression in the Liturgie or the Authours brought by you yet I may well deny first your proposition as you expresse it secondly I deny also that the reasons brought by you from the Liturgie and Authours prove that in our Church the end of baptizing is regeneration so that the act of baptizing should regenerate the child But to come to your proposition If your meaning be that the end of our baptizing is properly to regenerate as if our Church used baptisme that they may ex opero operato as the Papists say conferre grace and regeneration it is a slander to say it If you meane that they use it for this end that it may be a pledge signe seale or confirmation of regeneration or to speake brieflier that we use it sacramentally to regenerate or mystically to wash away sinne we avouch it and this we beleeve is the right end of baptisme as you grant viz. A pledge of the pardon of sinne which implies regeneration so Rom. 6.3 4. Mar. 1.4 Act. 22. c. And in this sense those expressions in the Liturgie and Authours may be warranted if they intended any more let them answer for themselves as being agreeable unto the Scripture phrase in sacramentall matters Exod. 12.1.12.13 Gen. 17.11 12. Matt. 26.26.28 1 Pet. 3.21 As the Paschall Lambe was called the Passeover though but a signe pledge or memoriall of the Angels passing over and sparing the Israelites Circumcision is called the Covenant though but the signe or token of the Covenant Bread and Wine in the Supper the Body and Bloud of Christ though but signes and seales thereof Baptisme saveth us though it be but a pledge signe or seale of our salvation And why may not the same be said to regenerate us as well as to save us Is not regeneration the beginning and also part of our salvation Doth not the whole comprehend the part And therefore we may and ought to pray for the regeneration of infants to be baptized that if begun it may be continued increased sealed and perfected if not that it may be wrought in Gods due time so that baptisme may have its efficacie And give thanks that God hath given the seale of regeneration and solemnly admitted them into that Covenant wherein he hath promised the blessing it selfe Let us see now what use you will make of this that we hold infants baptized to be regenerated viz. sacramentally as we have interpreted our meaning whence you gather That all infants baptized must be necessarily saved A. R. which is acknowledged an absurditie even by our Ministers which call upon baptized persons to repent and preach regeneration unto them Or else say you we shall be forced to leave our other principle which we hold against the Pelagians Papists and Arminians Namely that True saving grace can never totally or finally be lost And that they which have beene regenerate can never utterly fall away This is the summe of your reasoning wherein you are very large as having gotten us at an advantage in your conceit Answer Ans Will any man say that all that were baptized by Peter or to whom baptisme was applied in his time of which he saith 1 Pet. 3.21 that it saveth were certainly saved Or that it was an absurd thing to preach regeneration or salvation after baptisme Or that this doctrine that baptisme saveth or burieth with Christ c. is inconsistent with that other doctrine concerning the perseverance of the Saints seeing some of those that were baptized in the Apostles time fell away and perished Or in your baptisme if you use any which you professe is a pledge of the remission of sinnes are all certainly pardoned Or need you never to preach repentance and regeneration to them If so belike you are happier masters to your disciples then Christ was to his And seeing now you thinke you have got our learned Divines as you scoffingly call them at an advantage and follow them so eagerly with your horned argument as if your blow were unavoidable comparing your selfe to Christ and them to the Scribes and Pharisees Matth. 21.23 Let us try whether you would not by this Argument baffle and nonplus the Prophets Apostles and Christ himselfe For this your Argument holds as strongly against them as against us who teach no other thing in saying that baptisme regenerateth and true grace can never
we grant your proposition is true viz. that Baptisme must be either by dipping or infusion and so that it be either way it is sufficient But you take it not in this sense as may appeare by the manner of your reasoning for by the affirmation of the one you inferre the deniall of the other and if you should take it in this sense it would make against your selfe and overthrow your own argument Therefore it appears you take it by way of opposition and so we utterly deny it as false Your reasoning is like this We come to the knowledge of Christ by reading the Scriptures or hearing the word preached Joh. 5.39 But Christ bids the Iewes to search the Scripture viz. by reading that they might come to the knowledge of him Therefore not by hearing the word preached Or like this The Minister must preach either sitting or standing But Christ preached sitting Matth. 5.1 c. Therefore Ministers may not preach standing Or this We must pray either standing or kneeling or sitting or lying c. But Christ saith when you stand praying Mark 11.25 Therefore it is not lawfull to pray with any other gesture but standing Who seeth not the weaknesse of this reasoning yours is no better But to come to your assumption But Iohn the Baptist or Dipper as you say according to the Dutch did use the water By putting the partie into the water not by insusing or sprinkling Mat. 3.11 Mar. 1.8 Ioh. 1.26 Act. 11.16 Answer Answ First None of these places prove that Iohn put the partie into the water much lesse that the whole man was dipped all over in the water which you undertooke to prove But here is not the least intimation of any such matter Secondly Whereas you gather from the Originall that Iohn baptized in the water and dipped the whole man all over in the water and put the party into the water you might as well say that Christ baptized in the holy Ghost and fire and that he dipped the whole man all over in the holy Ghost and in the fire Act. 11.6 Matth. 3.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or put the party into the holy Ghost and fire which were a strange interpretation for the particle is the same Thirdly Whereas you gather hence A Baptisme in water not a Baptisme with water I would have you tell me what were they baptized or washed with if not with water as if there were an irreconcileable repugnancy between baptizing in water and baptizing with water But that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not necessarily signifie in you grant in our objection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which you propound thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie with sometime as in Revel 19.21 And the rest were slain with the sword Whereunto I might adde that not onely in this place but frequently in the New Testament the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by an Hebraisme answering the prefixe ב signifies as well with as in Matth. 5.13 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with not in what shall it be salted Matth. 7.2 with not in what judgement Act. 26.18 with not in the sanctified You answer this objection thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is never taken for with after baptizo Reply I reply That is the thing in question And I would demand whether you thinke that our Translatours and most or all others who have Englished it with knew not how to render the Originall in its proper signification as well as your selfe Besides these forementioned places Mat. 3.11 Act. 11.19 speaking of Christs baptizing with the holy Ghost and with fire cannot be otherwise Englished with any sense Your peremptory deniall of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie with after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you would confirme thus Either the word Baptizo must signifie to sprinkle or the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must not signifie with But the word baptizo doth signifie to dip Ergo the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie In and not with as is proved very clearely and denyed of none who are not ignorant of the language Answ As for this your Syllogisme it shews your Clarklinesse wherewith you scoffingly taunt our Ministers It is notoriously fond it wants forme hath foure termes In the assumption you put to dip in stead of not to sprinkle as if one word might not signifie to dip and sprinkle both There is no necessitie in the proposition Your assumption wherein you say But baptizo signifies to dip if it be taken exclusively as to debarre all other significations which it must or else it is brought to no purpose is false Whereas in your conclusion you say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signifie in and not with which you say is denied by none who are not ignorant of the language Answer Answ What fond arrogancy this is I shall make appeare by and by But let us heare this criticall Linguist prove what he saith from the signification of the Greek word You say that Greeke Authors account Bapto and Baptizo to signifie that for which the Latines use Mergo Immergo Tingere immergendo that is to dip or plunge to douse over head or under water Answer Answ Bapto indeed signifies Mergo or Tingo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptizo is a derivative that cometh thence which sometimes may signifie the same with its primitive But if we look into the use of it in the New Testament we shall finde it rendred To wash where the Originall word to Baptize is not kept as Mark. 7.4 And when they come from the market they eate not except they wash The washing of cups and of pots and of brazen vessels and of beds or tables Again vers 8. The washing of pots and cups Here you have the verbe Baptizo to wash and the noune Baptismos washing And that this is the proper signification of the word may appeare a Bez Lotiones Arias Mon. lotiones vul Baptismata beside the consent of Translatours in that it is used as signifying the same thing with the other words that alwayes signifies a Bez Lotiones Arias Mon. lotiones vul Baptismata washing as vers 2. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 With unwashen hands and vers 3. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wash their hands By which it appeareth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie the same thing So Hebr. 9.10 And divers washings where the Apostle speaketh of the legall washings So Luk. 11.38 The Pharisee marvelled that Christ had not washed before dinner So that the word signifies properly to wash whether by infusion or immersion it matters not But should we grant Baptizo and Bapto to be altogether of the same signification though the contrary have been sufficiently proved what will you gain thereby 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies either mergo or tingo Mergo signifies properly to drown overwhelm swallow up c. If you will have your converts
families without mention of going out to the waters or fetching great store of waters It is like the waters they had within doores at midnight sufficed Act. 8.38 39. Your Collection from Philips going down to the water with the Eunuch that therefore they used dipping is as vain Must not they go to the water where it was if they would use it would the water have come up unto them in the chariot any sooner for sprinkling then for dipping Of the same stamp is your inference from Matth. 3.16 Mark 1.10 from Christs ascending from the water For as Christ was pleased to be baptized with water so he was pleased to go where the water was viz. in the channell to which there was a descent and from which there was an ascent so that he must go down to and come up from the water But here is not the least hint that Iohn doused Christ over head or under the water Nay rather that conceit of yours is here confuted for if our Blessed Saviour had been plunged of Iohn into the water then it would rather have been said That Iohn cast or plunged Christ into the water 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and took him out of the water But it is onely implyed that Christ went down unto the water and came up again from it From your other Scriptures Col. 2.12 Rom. 6.4.5 1 Cor. 15.29 what you goe about to gather I know not unlesse this that as Christ was buried abode in the grave three dayes and then rose again so the party baptized must be put under the water abide there some considerable time and then come up againe for if you presse a similitude of Christs buriall in going down into the water and of his resurrection in coming up out of the water why not also of his abode in the grave three dayes by abiding three dayes or some answerable time under the water which will make bad worke neither can any such thing be gathered from those Scriptures Now to use your owne words Let any man that is not quite fallen out with his reason judge whether in all these Scriptures be any syllable that speaks more for dipping then for sprinkling or washing with water Men may well be at agreement with their reason and yet perceive no such thing as you inferre hence Col. 2.12 Rom. 6.4 5. 1 Cor. 15.29 But I would demand here two Questions First How can you gather from these places a dipping of the whole man over head and under water and that a similitude of Christs death buriall and rising againe to be represented by dipping into the water is signified here These Scriptures shew indeed that the end of our baptisme is to seale our communion with Christ in his death and resurrection by which we are dead to sinne and raised againe to holinesse But if you will presse hence a necessitie of resemblance of Christs death buriall and resurrection by our descending into abiding in and coming up out of the water Pro. 30.6 Revel 22.18 take heed lest you be one of those which adde to Gods word lest he reprove you as a lyer and adde unto you the plagues written in his Booke For I know not any word of God wherein this representation is necessarily implied much lesse expressed Besides if you urge death and resurrection to be resembled by descension into and ascension out of the water you must urge also buriall which is principally there expressed by the biding of the whole man head and all under for a time answerable to Christs three dayes buriall which cannot be without danger yea certainty of drowning Secondly If it should be granted that a representation and resemblance of Christs death buriall and resurrection is set before us in baptisme and so of our death to sinne and rising again to holinesse Yet I would demand why may not this be represented as well by infusion of water as by dipping Can you give me an example of so many killed and buried by immersion or dipping into the water as I can give of them that have beene put to death and buried by the infusion of water I am sure a whole world of men and other earthly creatures those few that were in the Arke excepted were buried in the universall Deluge at once by infusion not by dipping So that infusion or sprinkling Gen. 6.27 7.11 12. may well as clearely signifie death and buriall as dipping And to the preservation of Noah and those that were with him by the Arke on which waters were poured from drowning the Apostle compares baptisme as its antitype Wherefore you might doe well to be henceforth a little more modest and not talke as if all men were fallen out with their reason which will not jumpe with you in your weake conceits Now we come to your inference or conclusion which being built on the crazie and rotten foundation of such vaine and fond premises falls to the ground of it selfe And whereas you say that The Greek wanted not words to expresse any other act as well as dipping I answer Neither did the Greek want words to expresse onely dipping of the whole man all over into the water or dowsing and plunging over head and under the water which you would have Baptizo to signifie but neither have nor can prove that it doth if the holy Ghost had meant any such act Neither doth the Spirit of God need your helpe to find out fit words It seemed fit to that wise Spirit to use Baptizo which signifies to wash whether by dipping or sprinkling washing onely being intended to be significant and not either dipping or sprinkling Whereas you say that It cannot be proved that baptisme was administred any other way then by dipping for at least a thousand years after Christ Ans I leave the proofe and trialls of that to Historians and Antiquaries as being unfurnished with the Records of Antiquitie though I conceive your Assertion is as bold and groundlesse as your others are proved to be Secondly Why do you not prove that dowsing over head and under water was used for at least a thousand years after Christ Thirdly How can you tell it cannot be proved that sprinkling was used of all that time Will you perswade people that you have read over all the writings of the Ancients or that you are so honest faithfull and unerring that your word must be taken for an Oracle without proofe As for your cleare resulting consequence as I said It is built on too weake grounds to stand and therefore may be safely denied as a plaine untruth And whereas you apply the words of Peter and Ananias unto us Act. 2.38 Act. 22.16 1 Sam. 15.23 as to unbaptized persons perswading us to arise and be baptized Intimating that for us to refuse this your Charge is rebellion and stubbornesse as witchcraft iniquitie and idolatrie I would advise you take heed of and repent for abusing Scripture as in these and a great part
of your quotations you doe most grosly God will not hold them guiltlesse that take his name in vaine When you come to us with the same spirit and authoritie as Peter Ananias and Samuel had we will hearken to you Now though what hath beene said in answer to this disputers Arguments against baptizing by sprinkling or infusion and for onely dipping or plunging might suffice yet I will adde something more to what hath been written endeavouring to make it appeare that washing whether it be by dipping or sprinkling is the externall act required in this Sacrament to be used and that sprinkling or infusion is as if not more agreeable to the nature and institution of this Sacrament as dipping or immersion Argument 1. As the word used signifieth washing as hath beene shewed so the thing represented signified and sealed in this Sacrament is set forth in the Scripture by the phrase of washing or cleansing as 1 Cor. 6.11 But ye are washed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but ye are sanctified but yea are iustified c. Now who questions but our justification and sanctification or remission of sinnes together with mortification and vivification are sealed and signified by baptisme c. But these are here called washing So T it 3.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 According to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the holy Ghost In the former of which expressions washing if here be not meant baptisme it selfe which to deny I see no reason yet certainely here is meant the thing signified by baptisme which is sufficient for our purpose which way so ever it is taken Heb. 10.22 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Having our bodies washed with cleane water 1 Ioh. 1.7 And the bloud of Iesus Christ his Sonne shall cleanse us from all our sinnes Heb. 9.14 The bloud of Christ shall purge your conscience Now we know washing purging or cleansing may be and commonly is as well by infusion or powring on the thing to be washed as by dipping Common experience testifies so much and Scripture is not silent herein Luk. 7.44 She hath washed my feet with tears viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by powring or distilling as the word signifies And though it were granted that in those hot Countries they commonly washed by going downe into the water and being dipped therein whether in ordinary or ceremoniall or sacramentall washing that will no more inforce on us a necessity of observing the same in baptisme now then the example of Christ and his Apostles * Matth. 26.2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mar. 14.18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 22.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. 14.19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gesture in the Sacrament of the Supper ties us to the same which was leaning and partly lying which was their usuall table gesture then Now the ordinary table gesture which is usuall among us is most fit so the usuall manner of washing amongst us is most fit to be observed in baptisme and that is by powring as well as by dipping But it may be objected That sprinkling a little water doth not so fitly represent the perfect washing away of all our sinnes as dipping or plunging sith here the whole body is washed there onely the face or head onely Answ First the Scripture no where requires the washing of the whole body in baptisme Secondly with as good reason one might plead thus It is most convenient that at the Lords Supper every communicant should receive his belly full of bread and wine and take as long as stomack and head will hold to signifie the full refreshment of the soule with the body and bloud of Christ But who would endure such reasoning These outward elements of Water Bread and Wine are for spirituall use and to signifie spirituall things so that if there be the truth of things the quantitie is not to be respected further then is sufficient for its end namely to represent the spirituall grace and that it be neither so little as not clearely to represent it 2. Pet. 3.21 nor so much as to take off the heart from the spirituall to the corporall thing Not the washing away of the filth of the body in baptisme nor the glutting or satisfying of the naturall appetite in the Lord Supper is to be looked after but the washing and refreshing of the soule which may well be represented by the sprinkling of a little water eating and drinking of a little bread and wine In Circumcision a little skin was cut off Arg. 2 The spirituall grace and invisible act of God upon the soule signified and represented by the outward act of baptisme is oft expressed in Scripture by the phrase of powring and besprinkling and that in great probabilitie if not certainly and unquestionably with allusion to the Sacrament of Baptisme either already administred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fudit Infudit affudit profudit perfudit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or to be administred I mean the bloud of Christ and the Spirit of God which are the invisible grace of Baptisme are said to be powred or sprinkled on Gods people Esa 44.3 For I will powre water on him that is thirstie and floods on the dry ground I will powre my Spirit on thy seed and my blessing upon thine off-spring Here the Spirit is said to be powred and this benefit is signified by the type of powring water Ioel 2.28 I will powre out my spirit on all flesh Which promise Peter citing calleth upon the people to repent and receive baptisme as being the signe and seale which God had appointed to represent and exhibite this promised blessing by Ezek. 36.26 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And I will sprinkle upon you cleane water and you shall be cleane This cleane water questionlesse is the blood and spirit of Iesus Christ represented by the water in baptisme Thus we see three severall phrases signifying to sprinkle besprinkle powre If we look into the New Testament we shall find the like phrases Act. 2.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will powre forth my Spirit upon all flesh Heb. 10.22 Having your hearts besprinkled from an evill conscience 1 Pet. 1.2 By the sanctification of the spirit and sprinkling of the bloud of Iesus Christ See Heb. 9. 13. and 14. verses compared together and Heb. 12.24 Now let any one without prejudice consider these Scriptures whether at least some of them speake not in allusion to baptisme and whether they all hold not forth the thing signified in baptisme and whether baptisme be not a lively resemblance and representation of the things here spoken off And then withall let him consider whether the thing exhibited in this Sacrament be ever so fully set forth by dipping and then I leave him to judge whether sprinkling be not as that I say not more agreeable to the nature of this Sacrament as dipping Arg. 3 Thirdly this dousing over
head and under water that A. R. pleads for as essentiall to baptisme seems directly against the sixth Commandement and exposeth the person baptized to the danger of death For first suppose the party be fit for baptisme as they account in the sharpe Winter as now beleeving professing c. He must immediately be taken to the river as his tenet seemes to hold and there plunged in over head and eares though he come forth covered with yce But if he escape perishing with cold how can he escape being choaked and stifled with the water if he must be plunged over head to signifie his death to sinne secondly be kept under water to signifie his buriall and thirdly be taken up as this Disputer seemes to reason But whatsoever be the danger of freezing or suffocation it seemes this he holds the onely baptisme and therefore must not be swerved from Arg. 4 Fourthly will not this their manner of dipping be found also against the seventh Commandement in the Decalogue For I would know with these new dippers whether the parties to be dowsed and dipped may be baptized in a garment or no If they may then happily the garment may keep the water from some part of the body and then they are not rightly baptized for the whole man say they must be dipped Againe I would aske what warrant they have for dipping or baptizing garments more then the Papists have for baptizing Bells Therefore belike the parties must be naked and multitudes present as at Iohns baptisme and the parties men and women of ripe yeares as being able to make confession of their faith and repentance yet though they both sinne against the sixth Commandement indangering life and against all common honestie and civilitie and Christian modestie required in the seventh Commandement they must have this way observed because they fancie it the onely baptisme Shall we thinke this was the baptisme of Iohn Christ and his Apostles But enough of this second Consideration we come to the third Consideration The third Argument or Consideration against our Baptisme taken from the Ministers by whom administred examined YOur third Consideration against baptizing of infants amongst us is taken from the Calling Office Power and Authoritie of the Ministers by whom they are baptized Which subject because it hath been largely handled by others shall be lightly passed over Yet we will try what you say to it with shew of truth or weight A. R. Whereas you say That our Ministers power and authoritie was received from Bishops who received their power from the Antichristian State of Rome as they confesse so that the baptisme is from Antichrist not from Christ Answer 1 I answer First our Ministers have their authoritie and office from Iesus Christ as many as being fitted for that function upon due triall and approbation of Ministers though a Bishop or Bishops have had an hand yea a chiefe stroke therein and the choyce or acceptation of Gods people have set upon the worke of the Ministery Answer 2 Secondly a thing is not therefore forthwith unwarrantable or Antichristian because it comes from a Bishop or from the Pope or authoritie derived from them Is the doctrine of the unitie of Gods Essence Trinitie of Persons Creation of the world c. therefore unlawfull or Antichristian because holden by them If the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament have been in the custodie of the Papists as the Old Testament in the custodie of the Iewes so that we have no Bibles now but what came successively from the Iewes and Papists Must we therefore reject the Scripture as Antichristian or Iewish and look for immediate revelations Or if the Bishops had a hand in the Translation of our Bibles must they therefore be cast away as Antichristian so that neither you nor your disciples may meddle with them because they have passed through the hands of the Bishops If any of you have heard any Sacred truths from Ministers which have beene ordained by Bishops which you seemed to beleeve for a time must you of necessitie cast them away as falshoods and Antichristian Tenents false doctrines or nullities as you will make their baptisme Antichristian baptisme the reason is the same Take heed lest in so doing you cast away your soules Answer 3 Thirdly many things that Antichrist and they that are held under Antichrists tyranny hold and professe are not Antichristian but truly Christian As that the Canonicall Scriptures are the word of God that God is one in Essence yet three in Persons that Christ is the Sonne of God c. And many things taught by them many acts done by them are not Antichristian but Christian For Antichrist was foretold to sit in the Temple of God 2 Thess 2.4 which he would never have beene suffered to do had he not professed and practised some things that for their substance were of God And as for the faithfull over whom he did tyrannize while he sate in the Temple of God though they were abused and cheated by him with many superstitions and errours that he imposed upon them yet there were some saving truths that they professed and holy and acceptable worship and practise which they did performe which in Christ God was pleased to accept so that it is fond to reason Baptisme Ordination and the Scriptures were received from Antichrist therefore Antichristian Answer 4 Fourthly the power and authoritie of the Ministers doth not depend on the qualitie or station especially in respect of the worst part of the person or persons chusing or ordaining them Else men could never be assured of their owne or others ministrie whether it be true or false for the qualitie of men is onely knowne unto God and in the station of the best there may be somewhat irregular and wanting exact perfection but principally on Christs inward call discerned by the gifts propensitie and sincerity of the parties undertaking that office al which are requisite if they will to their own comfort and with Gods approbation exercise their ministerie although the want of some of these hinder not but that he which by Gods providence is called to the ministerie may have power and authoritie sufficient from God to be an instrument of God for the good of others though he were weake and unfound himselfe Mat. 10.4 and 40. as we may see in Iudas who was one of those to whom Christ saith He that receiveth you receiveth me c. the Scribes and Pharisees concerning whom Christ gave a charge that they should be heard and obeyed in those things which they taught sitting in Moses chaire Matth. 23.2 3. Phil. 1.15 16.18 Act. 6.5 Rev. 2.6 vide Brightman in locum though their lives were not exemplary the envious contentious and unsincere Preachers of Christ in whose preaching yet Paul rejoyced in Demas and Nicolas the Deacon who as Interpreters hold proved afterward the ring-leader of the Nicolaitanes This I say Christs inward call either of approbation
true the Apostles were to teach those among the Gentiles of ripe yeares and make them disciples before they or their children were to be baptized because they and their children were out of covenant and so uncapable of the seales and might not be received into covenant themselves or their children untill they gave up themselves and theirs unto Christ by faith and repentance which they could not ordinarily have wrought in them but by hearing the Gospel preached Yet when parents had given up their names unto Christ their children being also given up to Christ by them were capable of Baptisme As by Abrahams giving up himself unto God in Covenant not onely he but also his children and those that were as his children were received into Covenant and had the seale thereof administred to them by vertue of the unchangeable tenour of the Covenant of grace I will be thy God and the God of thy seed Gen. 17.7 as hath been said and God willing shall more fully be shewed Therefore the Commission which was given to the Disciples makes nothing against baptizing the children of the faithfull which are already in covenant with God though they have not heard the word preached Answer 3 Thirdly Yea I conceive it is no absurditie but a sound truth to say that infants of beleeving parents are made disciples of God and Christ so that the Apostles in making parents disciples that gave up themselves and their children unto God in that act made their clildren also disciples in two respects First in that parents gave them up unto God promising and purposing to bring them up in the knowledge of God so soone as they should be capable of outward teaching This Abraham was bound unto by vertue of the Covenant that as God would be the God of his seed so he should command and teach his children and houshold after him that they should keep the way of the Lord c. Gen. 18.19 So all the Israelites Exod. 12.26.26 27. Deut. 6.6 7. And the like obligation lies upon Christian parents Ephes 6.4 so that now they are the disciples of Christ in respect of Gods obligation and the parents promise purpose and prayer Secondly they may be said to be Christs disciples in that they are now under the teaching of God and Christ who hath promised to teach all that are in covenant all the children of the Church or faithfull at least some of all sorts from the least to the greatest Esa 54.13 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Edoctia Iehova or Edocti Ievovae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord c. All is an universall note implying all sorts sexes ages and conditions of those which were children of the Church or posteritie of the faithfull Ier. 31.34 And they shall teach no more every man his brother saying Know the Lord. For they shall all know me from the least to the greatest of them And so that those which are so little that they are uncapable of the teaching of men are capable and under the promise of Gods teaching To which promises our Saviour having as it seems respect saith Ioh. 6.44 It is written in the Prophets And they shall be all taught of God Every one that hath heard of the Father and learneth cometh unto me So that as there may be outward teaching without inward so there may be inward teaching without the outward Christ saith Whosoever hath heard of the Father not whosoever hath heard of the Preacher for many may heare of the Preacher and yet not come to God and some may be taught of God that are uncapable of the Preachers instruction though the inward and outward both be ordinary to those who being of ripe yeares are effectually called So that sith God promiseth that in the time of the Gospel All even from the least unto the greatest shall become his disciples why should the infants of beleevers be excluded seeing they are capable of divine instruction and the operation of the holy Ghost even from their mothers wombe Luk. 1.15 I have stood the longer on the answering of this Scripture objected Because these answers may serve for all the other reasons and Scriptures you bring to confirme your last Argument against baptizing of children Where having heaped up many Scriptures needlesly you talk your pleasure and triumph as if the cause were your owne as if your grounds were unmoveable and your conclusion unquestionable But though you plead against Childrens Baptisme you should remember that you dispute not with children Neither have we need or will By wit and sophistrie to goe about to elude any truth and justifie any errour though never so grosse and absurd as you say Which imputation of yours it may seeme is you last shift to answer those that will not be carried about with every winde of your vaine doctrine and subscribe to your dictates Now for what followeth I will not proceed in maintaining those further objections which either you devise of your owne head or raise out of others words to whose principles we are not bound your answers whereunto either doe not concerne us or if any thing therein seeme to beare shew of truth and weight it may be sufficiently answered from what hath beene already laid downe Therefore I will not trouble my selfe with the repetition of the same things So forbearing any further to meddle with your confident conclusions Apology for your expressions or other impertinent digressions wherewith you fill up paper I come to give our reasons for the lawfulnesse and requisitenesse of baptizing the infants of Christian parents intending to consider all along your answers you have made to them Arg. 1 Our first Argument therefore shall be To whom the spirituall and invisible grace represented signified and sealed in baptisme belongeth by vertue of Gods promise to them baptisme it selfe belongeth Act. 2.38 39. But to the children or infants of parents beleeving or within Covenant belongeth by vertue of Gods promise the spirituall grace represented sealed and signified in baptisme to wit the teaching of God and the Spirit of God which doth include all the spirituall blessings signified by baptisme as sanctification or regeneration wherein is comprehended virtuall faith and therein being besprinkled with the bloud of Christ and pardon of sinnes Esa 54.13 Ier. 31.34 Ioel 2.28 Es 59.21 Act. 2.39 Therefore Baptisme belongeth to infants of Christian parents Both the premisses me thinkes should be undeniable with Christians as being built on the word and so the conclusion certaine But because I would cleare this Argument against the cavils of the captious and doubts of the ignorant or scrupulous I will adde some what by way of explanation and confirmation The proposition for ought I know it is not doubted of by any It is taken as an unquestionable principle by A. R. and many of his arguments against baptizing infants are built upon this ground because they have not regeneration faith remission of sinnes
to maintaine and yet you are not afraid nor ashamed to father this errour upon Christ himselfe and would force his words to the Iewes to sound this way Ioh. 8.31 And among other your toyes that you would fasten on him which are not worth the examining unlesse a man had more time then he knew how well to bestow you bring him in speaking thus in the conclusion of your paraphrase that you make on his words to the Iewes You see then how that Covenant of Circumcision made with Abraham and you his naturall seed was to be an everlasting Covenant in your flesh to wit in me that was to come of your flesh Gen. 17.13 Answ First is not this notorious presumption to father such a fancy as this on Christ to call the flesh of the Iews fore-skinne Christ himselfe for that by the flesh in which Gods covenant was is meant the fore-skin wherein God set the signe and seale of his covenant is apparent by comparing the 10 11 12. verses of Gen. 17. together Secondly If that were an everlasting Covenant which God made with Abraham and the Israelites and made with them in Christ though Christ was not that flesh in which circumcision was made both which you grant here and the Scripture plentifully proveth then certainly was the covenant made with the Iewes and with us all one for substance seeing they and we have one Mediatour and seeing the old dispensation of the covenant is abrogated how was that an everlasting covenant but as the same covenant is perpetuated now in the Evangelicall dispensation of it But you will have Christ give this reason that by the flesh wherein the covenant of circumcision was to be is meant Christ because Christ was to come of their flesh Answ Was he so Was Christ to come of the flesh of strangers and Proselytes or of all the posteritie of Abraham which had the covenant in the flesh Did Christ come of the flesh of all that were circumcised which must needs follow on this conceit What prodigious opinions doth this mans braine conceive and father on Christ After you come as you say to shut up all thus That it is apparent that infants of Christian parents cannot warrantably be baptized untill they manifest and declare their faith by profession as is apparent first from the doctrine and practise of Iohn Matth. 3.6.8 9. Mar. 1.4 Secondly of Christ and his Apostles Ioh. 3 22. compared with 4.1 2. Act. 2.38.41 and 8.12.36 37. Thirdly by the tenour of the commission Mat. 28.29 Mar. 16.15 16. Answ No su h thing is apparent from these Scriptures as is first sufficiently shewed by the foregoing reasons Secondly by the fore examination of those Scriptures and grounds you build upon Thirdly in none of those places doe you finde baptisme so restrained to those that professe the faith that it should be lawfull for none else to have it Fourthly I adde if abusing the Scriptures and inventing and avouching new and monstrous errours may make your opinion for which you plead to be apparent truth then indeed you have made appparent what you say otherwise not Fiftly though in mine answer to that Scripture Matth. 28.29 I hope sufficient hath been said to answer all other Scriptures of that kind yet because some put great confidence in that Mar. 16.15.16 for this opinion though it be the same for substance with the other Mar. 16.15 16. I will adde a little in this place though happily the same for substance that hath beene said The words of Christ are these Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel unto every creature He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved he that beleeveth not shall be damned To make it appeare that nothing can be gathered to confirme the adversaries opinion note these foure things First Here our Saviour doth not forbid his Disciples to baptize any that want actuall faith or confine baptisme to beleevers or expressely shew who should be baptized and who not onely he shews who should by saved viz. those that beleeve and were baptized and who should be damned viz. those that beleeved not so that it is strange that men should promise to themselves any patronage for Anabaptisme from this place Secondly If any should say that though here it be not expressed that beleevers onely are to be baptized yet it may be hence gathered and is implied from the order and connexion of the words He that beleeveth and is baptized so that men must beleeve before they be baptized I adde secondly That no such thing can be necessarily implied by the series of the words which I prove by this very Text. First it would by as good consequence follow that none ought or can preach the Gospel be meanes of working faith baptize or helpe toward salvation but those who have received Apostolicall authoritie and gifts to goe into all the world and preach unto every creature for the connexion and order is alike but no man will yeeld this consequence Secondly by as good and better consequence you might gather that none shall be saved but those that beleeve and are baptized which is false for whatsoever you hold I conceive that none but those that are given over to strong delusions will hold that all the children of Christian parents that die before they come to actuall faith must remedilesly perish and as for the absolute necessitie of baptisme to salvation if with the Papists you hold it will easily be confuted from this Scripture shewing that not want of baptisme where it cannot be had and is not wilfully contemned but unbeleefe condemneth Yet there is as good reason for these inferences from this place as for that you would imply hence Or thirdly that nothing but unbeliefe can be the ground of damnation might as well be concluded hence as that nothing but faith can be the ground of baptisme whereas not onely unbeleife but every sinne is damnable and without repentance will bring damnation Thirdly I answer to this Scripture that though it were granted that the Apostles who were to gather a Church out the unbeleeving world and take them into Covenant that were out of Covenant might not baptize any but those who by professing faith tooke hold of the covenant from which before they were aliens and their families who were now received into covenant with them yet it doth not follow that the children of parents in covenant and so in Covenant themselves should be denied baptisme though they want actuall faith for there is not the same reason of a Church gathered and to be gathered as that latter part He that beleeveth not shall be damned if it be understood of actuall faith must be restrained to the present time and matter for to those that were out of Covenant actuall faith was necessary to bring them and theirs within covenant So that the Gentiles to whom the Apostles were to preach must of necessity actually beleeve else they could not
so busie to rob them of this most comfortable doctrine and precious priviledge concerning childrens being in covenant by vertue of the covenant made with their parents and so to drive Christians to renounce their baptisme received in infancy and disswade them from tendering their children to God in baptisme and so to overthrow a maine ground of our comfort in Gods ancient love to us and a speciall motive to obedience Fifthly in a word If we doe not prize and profit by this ancient love of God to us which he hath shewed us from our birth in taking us into externall covenant wherein he is ready to bestow the internall blessings If we doe not take God for our God repent of sinne and beleeve in Christ according to the obligation of the covenant of grace that was sealed to us in baptisme If the baptized doe not give up themselves to God actually in their own persons when they come to yeers of discretion And if parents be not carefull to bring up their children whom they have presented to God in baptisme we must know that all these mercies of God offered unto us all the professions of faith and obedience we have made will rise up in judgement against us and increase our condemnation above the condemnation of those that never were in outward covenant Other men are not so fast tied unto God as we that are baptized who are now no more our owne but Gods tied unto him by covenant which if we breake it will be to our greatest perill If it be demanded wherein this dutie of highly prizing and holily improving this priviledge of baptisme in infancie consists I answer First we should labour to be well instructed and settled in the grounds of this action viz. baptizing infants which are Gods gracious covenant and promise c. as hath been shewed before that we may give a reason of our being baptized in infancie That seeing our priviledge bestowed by God we may not suffer our selves to be sophisticated out of it by any so as to be driven from our hold in the covenant of mercy which God hath made to us and ours To this end we should solidly study the doctrine of Grace and of Baptisme and those Arguments that have beene before handled The reason why we so easily be driven by temptations from faith and obedience duties and priviledges is because we doe not well meditate on and throughly digest the grounds thereof But when we are well and throughly perswaded on Scripture grounds that this is a dutie enjoyned and a priviledge bestowed by God we shall see there is cause to contend for the faith delivered to the Saints Iud. 3. Secondly let parents looke that they offer up their children to God in baptisme with faith prayer and unfeigned purpose of heart to consecrate them wholly unto God And that they may make it appeare that they doe so indeed let them look that they give up themselves unto God in holy obedience repentance and faith praying earnestly for their children and when they be capable of instruction let them give them good example bring them up in the feare and instruction of the Lord putting them in minde of the covenant whereinto God hath taken them and use all holy meanes to bring them to actuall faith and holinesse and let them know that this is a necessary dutie required at their hand whereunto at least implicitly they obliged themselves when they tendred their children to baptisme wherein they may not be negligent without grievous sinne of disobedience to and mocking of God and most heinous injurie and dangerous hazard to their owne and their childrens soules Deut. 6.7 Prov. 4.4 Ephes 6.4 Thirdly all those that have beene baptized remembring that now they are not their owne but given up to God in the covenant of grace and solemnly tendred to his Majesty in this sacred Ordinance of Baptisme in the presence of the Angels and the congregation of the faithfull which act of their parents was not arbitrary but necessary and that whereunto they were absolutely bound by Covenant viz. to take God for their God and the God of their children and give up themselves and their children to God All Christians I say considering this that they were given up unto God in baptisme and that God graciously tooke them into covenant and admitted them into his family before they knew the right hand from the left must so soone as they are able to doe a morall act give up themselves unto God in their owne persons voluntarily and gladly assenting unto and ratifying that covenant which their parents entred into in their behalfe seeing it is not now in their owne choyce to be of what Religion or conversation they will They are bound to be Christians and Saints and that not onely by vertue of the creation preservation and redemption which God hath wrought for men but also by solemne promise vow and covenant Insomuch as those who having beene baptized live in wilfull ignorance superstition unbeliefe profanenesse covetousnesse following the lusts of the flesh continue all that while in most treacherous breach of covenant and rebellion against God whose servants they have bound themselves to be and yet serve his sworne enemies namely the devill and their owne lusts So that they have not onely forfeited their bonds and deserved for ever to be deprived of all those glorious and incomprehensible benefits contained in the covenant of grace but also have deserved to be dealt with as perfidious Apostates and traiterous revolters from their Lord and King Which breach of Covenant though the Lord will not impute to those which seasonably heartily and sincerely repent when they come to see what they have done for they are in a covenant of grace which admitteth repentance yet when people come to consider how they have sinned against God in this kinde must be the more humbled by this consideration that so many yeares after they were consecrated unto God they dealt traiterously and rebelliously against him and for the future be the more carefull to redeeme the time and by so much more diligently and zealously to honour him for ever after by how much carelesse and loose they have beene before But they that doe not thus repent and take care to keepe touch with God shall know to their woe Gal. 6.7 that God will not be mocked and that it had been better many waies never to have beene baptized or heard of the covenant of grace Eccles 5.4 5. 2 Pet. 2.21 then to live wickedly and impenitently in a profession of Christianitie Let Christian parents whet these and such like considerations on their children yea let all Christians from the youngest that are capable to the oldest whet them on themselves and one on another that they may be stirred up to give up themselves wholly and really to God Fourthly whensoever Christians finde themselves tempted to sinne or drawne from holinesse inclined to loosenesse or backward to good duties