sign of Circumcision as a seal of faith if not of that faith of which he treats For wheras it might be objected that if Abraham were justified by beleeving before he was circumcised as is said v. 3. 9. 10 then what needed hee after to haue been circumcised The Apostle answers v. 11 that hee received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousnesse of faith vvhich he had yet being uncircumcised which faith v. 9 vvas reckoned to him for righteousnesse that by it the covenant of grace between God him might be confirmed as covenants among men formerly agreed upon are by the seals thereunto annexed Lastly who endued with common sense and modesty can deny that by the righteousnesse of faith wherof Circumcision was a seal is meant the righteousnes which is by faith as v. 3 Abraham beleeved God and it vvas imputed to him for righteousnesse and v. 9 faith vvas reckoned to Abraham for righteousnesse which righteousnesse of faith in this whole discourse he opposeth to the righteousnesse of works by the Law as is expresly to be seen v. 3. 14. 15. 16. But now what say our Adversaries to these things as men in a maze and not knowing how to finde the way out goe sometimes backward sometimes forward and sometimes leap unorderly from one place to another so doe they in expounding this Scripture In their out-leaps about Abrahams fleshly children I shall not need heere to follow them Where after they say that Circumcision was a seal of Abrahams faith in beleeving God that he should be the father of many Nations and that this was imputed to him for righteousnesse they say as much as we do or desire they should But where they say in the very same place that hee received not circumcision to seal up his faith in the Messiah they goe backward most dangerously to bring in a faith to justification imputed for righteousnesse which yet is not in the Messiah Was righteousnesse ever or is it imputed to any for justification but by faith in Christ then promised now exhibited The reason insinuated by them is a pleasant one namely for that Abraham had faith in the Messiah 24 years before he was circumcised Whereas on the contrary it could not haue been a seal of such faith except hee had had the faith before whether longer or lesser time it matters not but is as it pleaseth him who bestowâ—th both the one and other Signes and Seals are not to be set to blankes neither doe they make things that were not before to be but serv onely to confirm things that are These things thus cleared the Reader must be requested not to measure our arguments from Abraham and Isaaks circumcision to the Baptism of Infants by the crooked line which these men draw between them but by the right rule of sound reason applyed as followeth in three particulars First that the Covenant unto which Circumcision was annexed was the Covenant of the Gospell and not of the Law and old Testement as they take it For then it could not haue been to Abraham the seal of the righteousnesse of faith any way but of unrighteousnesse and condemnation every way for righteousnes is not by the Law which worketh wrath and by which sin revives and becomes exceeding sinfull And surely it is more then strange that any beleeving the Scriptures should beleev that the Lords Covenant made with Abraham and so with Israel in him by which he took them to be his peculiar people from among all other peoples because hee loved their father and them by which they were a blessed Nation having Iehovah for their God in remembring of which covenant with Abraham c. he so often shewed them mercy and did them good and in time gaue his Son Christ to saue them from their enemies and lastly by which Covenant they shall again be called when the fulnesse of the Gentiles is come in and so all Israel shall be saved as it is written There shall come out of Syon a Deliverer and shall turn away ungodlinesse from Iakob For this is my Covenant unto them when I shall take away their sins As concerning the Gospell they are enemies for the Gentiles sake but as concerning the election they are beloved for the fathers sake for the gifts and calling of God are without repentance that this covenant of loue and mercy making them blessed which are taken into it and procuring the giving of Christ and of salvation should be the covenant of the old Testament and Law Of the Law I say and old Testament which is the ministery of death the letter that killeth which worketh wrath was added for transgression by which sin reviveth and all die and are accursed What is this else but to bring the currant of gracious mercy into a channell of severe justice and to curse where God blesseth as Balaam purposed to haue done Secondly we conclude hence that the Church of the Iews and Church now is one in substance though diversly ordered one Uineyard in which there are both grown trees and yong plants one Kingdom which was taken from them and given to us the branches of one oliue tree holy in the same holy root Abraham from which most of them were broken off for unbelief and we by faith planted in their place one body and therefore having Infants in it now as then and the same therefore to be baptized there being also one Baptism as one body as they were circumcised of old Baptism as elsewhere I haue proved at large to their silencing in that point comming in the place of Circumcision Thirdly that all their disputes against Infants Baptism because they cannot manifest faith and repentance are but the same quarrels which might haue been picked of old against Infants Circumcision That there was something in Abrahams circumcision extraordinary is true for he first received it for his posterity and for the Proselytes with them which joyned themselvs to the Lord so was there also in his faith as he was the father by example to all that should beleev after him Their prophane assertion that faith was required of none to wit men of years for circumcision I haue formerly disproved How can it come into the hearts of reasonable men that the Lord in whose eies the prayers sacrifices and all other services of ungodly men were so abominable should like of their circumcision Lastly for Abrahams children of the flesh according to their misunderstanding of them they were by nature children of wrath as well as others and had thereby no more right to circumsion then the Infants of Sodom It was of grace and not of nature that they were within Gods Covenant Of Gal. 3. and Rom. 9. we haue spoken at large formerly and of their misconstructions of the Apostles meaning Lastly we neither run as they say nor goe to the old Testament Law or Moses for the baptizing of Infants but to
such Heathenish men of yeares as became Proselytes then of their Infants to be circumcised with them The ground of this errour in so many is that they understand not the true nature of the Gospell and Ordinances thereof The Gospell aymes not at the exacting upon man as made after Gods own image obedience due as a naturall debt from the creature to the Creator as the Law doth but considers him as a most miserable creature drowned in sin and altogether unable to help himselfe neither yet servs it and its Ordinances primarily to declare and manifest what man in right owes and performs to God but what God in mercy purposeth doth and will perform to man being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a joyfull message or glad tydings of salvation by Christ. So to apply this for the baptizing of Infants albeit they on their part can for the present make no manifestation or declaration of obedience or thankfulnesse or any other goodnesse yet sufficeth it for Evangelicall dispensation that God according to the Covenant of grace I will be thy God and the God of thy seed can and will make manifestation and declaration of his gracious minde of washing them with the bloud and spirit of his Son from the guilt and contagion of sin they also being bound in their times to reciprocall duties Let us not think scorn as proud free-willers doe of Gods taking both of us and our infants to be his people going before our or their taking of him to be our God But let us rather magnifie his mercie in this regard both towards us and them ADVERSARIES NExt they undertake to proue that Infants are not regenerate and so not to be baptized Their reason is because they haue not faith and repentance This Regeneration they define to be a turning from sin to God which they would proue from Rom. 6. 11. DEFENCE THE Apostle Rom. 6 speaks not of regeneration it self which is Gods work but of our living to God as an effect therof For as our naturall life is an effect of our first generation or begetting by our parents so is our spirituall life an effect of our regeneration by God and his Word and Spirit Turning from sin is mans work by Gods grace Regeneration is Gods work not mans So for Repentance they roav about it on all sides but scarse touch the true nature of it Repentance to wit Evangelicall required for Baptism in men of years is neither a sight and knowing of sin by the Law for that the wicked also doe nor a confessing of sin for that is outward and follows repentance in the heart nor a sorrow for sin for that goes before it nor a promise to forsake sin for that follows after it as an outward effect no nor yet properly an endevour to forsake it though that come nearest Repentance is properly a growing wise afterwards and changing of the minde from sin to God in the purpose of the heaâ—tâ— having an effectuall endevour to forsake sin accompanying it as the effect thereof Now their argumentation in this place that because Infants haue not faith and repentance to wit actuall and that in manifestation also which are the conditions required in men of years for their Baptism and the inseparable fruits of regeneration therefore they are not regenerate and so not capable of Baptism is as if some idiot would affirm that infants are not born nor to be reputed reasonable creatures nor endued with the faculties of understanding and reason because they make no manifestation thereof no more then bruits doe Their proofs against the Regeneration of Infants thus disproved I manifest the contrary as followeth Christ the Lord teacheth that except a man be born or as the word more properly imports begot again hee cannot enter into Gods Kingdom Either therfore regeneration is to be granted Infants or Gods Kingdom to be denyed them If any say this is meant of men of years onely the Text convinceth him which opposeth the first birth or generation which is of Infants to the second regeneration The first as v. 6 being of the flesh making them so born uncapable of Gods Kingdom without the second by the spirit Secondly they confesse else-where that all by Adams fall haue that weak flesh Rom. 8. 3 by which they cannot keep the Law c. Now I demand whether Infants to be glorified carry this weak flesh hindring thus effectually true holinesse into heaven with them or no If not as is certain then it must be purged out of their soules and hearts as the seat and subject therof But nothing can purge out that which is contrary to holinesse saue the holy Spirit of God the Spirit of regeneration which lusts against the flesh and is contrary unto it either therfore they must be regenerated or not glorified Thirdly the Scriptures teach that by the spirit of Christ which is the spirit of life for righteousnesse dwelling in us our bodies shall be quickned and raised up unto glory Children therefore by their grant being to be raised again and glorified by Christ must haue Christs spirit which is the spirit of sanctification and regeneration dwelling in them Lastly joyn with these things that all are by nature I say by nature with the Apostle not by act alone as say the Adversaries children of wrath having right to wrath as children to their fathers inheritance and therewith that baptism is the lavacher or washing of regeneration it will follow that children if to be freed from the wrath to come and glorified are to be regenerated and baptized also Christ saues and so glorifies his body onely which is the Church which he sanctisies with the washing of water and the word and there is one body and one baptism ADVERSARIES THeir Answers to the Scriptures brought for the baptizing of the Infants of beleevers follow To Act. 2. 38. 39. Repent and be baptized every one of you c. for the promise is unto you and to your children and to all that are a farre off even as many as the Lord shall call they answer that this is meant of such fathers of the Iews and their children and fathers of the Gentiles and their children as beleev viz. both fathers and children and that by children are oft meant men of yeares in the Scriptures specially Abrahams children DEFENCE THat such are sometimes meant wee grant but deny that meaning in this place And first by them a far off are not meant the Gentiles far off in state as Eph. 2 but the Iews far off in time as the originall carries it Besides neither was Peter himselfe as yet sufficiently perswaded of the calling of the Gentiles Act 10 neither if he had was it as yet seasonable to mention that matter to the Iews Secondly in saying the promise is made to you and your children hee speaks of some solemn promise made to them all and the same to haue its fruit and effect
circumcision to the Fathers by his being circumcised The inward Baptism is not common to all but peculiar to the elect the outward whether by Christ or Iohn is not peculiar to the elect onely but common to others with them witnesse Simon Magus The outward Baptism by Iohn and all other Ministers was and is onely with water opposed to Christs as the inward with the Holy Ghost Which Baptism with the Holy Ghost being understood of extraordinarie gifts sometimes went before the other as Act. 10. 47 but commonly followed upon it But understood of ordinarie graces did or should alwaies goe before it in right order of things Next follows 1 Cor. 10. 1. 2 c. The meaning of the H. Ghost herein they take upon them to explain to others not understanding it themselvs as is evident in that they will haue this baptizing unto Moses in the clovd and sea c. to haue been onely for bodily deliverance and the offer of Christ. But the Apostle looks upon those things with a more piercing and spirituall eye as appears first in that v. 1 he cals the Israelites indefinitely his and the Corinthians fathers Morever brethren I would not haue you ignorant that all our fathers c. As if hee should haue said Let not the children look for more priviledg from punishment if they sin then their fathers haue injoyed He therfore considers the Church of israel here as in the state of a spirituall fatherhood to the Corinthians Secondly hee expresly saith that they were all baptized to Moses and that the meat was spirituall which they eat and the rock or water which they drank spirituall even Christ himselfe to wit sacramentally and mystically Thirdly the Apostles argument that it may goe in full force must thus be framed They that are alike for substance in Gods benefits shall alike be punished if they sin alike But you Corinthians now and Israel of old were and are alike in those spirituall benefites mentioned Therefore if you sin as they did you shall surely be punished as they were If the Apostle had propounded unto the Corinthians the tokens of Gods loue and protection onely for bodily things as they carnally conceiv there had been no force in his reason against the security of the Corinthians especially occasioned by their enjoying the Lords Ordinances of Baptism and the Supper as signes and tokens of Gods loue for spirituall blessings in heavenly things Might they not easily haue answered Paul that the Israelites indeed might well perish and be destroyed for such things as they practised having onely Gods loue-tokens for bodily deliverance but for them they were better secured against danger as having the tokens of Gods loue for spirituall and eternall deliverance by the body and bloud-shed of Christ I conclude therefore that all Pauls and the Corinthians fathers being baptized with the Baptism signifying deliverance by Christ and many of them being Infants the Infants of Israel now are to be baptized also ADVERSARIES THey object that the meaning of the Holy Ghost is not that Moses did at all wash them with water in the cloud and sea DEPENCE NEither say we he did but with the Apostle that they were baptized to Moses in the cloud and sea God not onely preserving them bodily thereby from Pharaoh but also moystening them with the cloud arising out of the Sea and showering down waters upon them as the Lords peculiar people and for spirituall use the Apostle himselfe in this place bearing witnesse under the Ministerie of Moses their Pastor or Shepheard procuring with this the other blessings even of the meat which was spirituall from heaven and drink which was spirituall even Christ mistically out of the rock Besides our Adversaries hold back the better part of Gods loue in saying he offered them Christ in the drink out of the rock If the rock were Christ and they drank of the rock then God not onely offered but they also received and drank of Christs bloud as the Corinthians did in mysterie Secondly the Apostles argument as they put it had been too blunt to haue peirced the Corinthians consciences who might easily haue answered themselvs and him that the Israelites indeed had Christ in their time offered but for themselvs they received him also and so were better fenced against Gods plagues yea though they sinned then the other were Thirdly it is neither true which after they affirm that Noahs Ark is called the figure of Baptism but that the saving of eight soules by water to wit bearing up the Ark had Baptism that now saveth c. for a like figure or antitype much lesse is it said that Noah and his family were Baptized in the Ark or water as it is expresly said that the Israelites were baptized in the cloud and Sea Every type of Baptism is not Baptism but hath onely something necessarily which resembles it But the more agreement there is between Noahs Arke and the Baptism now the more firm Argument may be gathered for the baptizing of Infants It is evident that Noah through faith prepared the Ark for the saving of his houshold and not of himselfe alone To their objection that there is as much warrant to enjoyn Infants to suffer persecution because it is called by the name of baptism as to baptize them because the cloud and sea is called Baptism I answer passing by their incongruities of speech that Infants may be persecuted as well as men of yeares Witness Christ himself persecuted in his mothers lap by Herod Besides the Israelites and their Infants with them are heere said to haue been baptized by water in spirituall use and consideration ADVERSARIES THeir next answer to such Scriptures as shew that whole housholds haue been baptized and therefore Infants as a part of the houshold is that there are many housholds in which there are no infants and that therefore except we proue such housholds to haue had Infants it is nothing Secondly that it is most true that as the Apostles practised in one houshold so they practised in all and that therfore they baptizing in the laylors house such as beleeved did not baptize infants DEFENCE WEE grant that the Apostles practise was the same where there was the same reason but as some Families had in them infants and some not so all of years in some beleeved and in some not according to which diversity of persons they administred Baptism diversly and not alike in all housholds Secondly if these men would haue taken any sound course for the clearing of things they should here haue given answer to such Scriptures as else-where haue been brought against them to shew how the tenour of the Lords promise and blessing runnes upon godly Governours and their Families with them and more specially to that about Lydia Act. 16 of whom it is testified that she having her heart opened to attend and beleev the Gospell both she and her houshold were baptized But
the Covenant of the Gospell solemnly made with our father Abraham long before the Law was given the old Testament established or Moses born Their discourse about Rome is vain except they can proue that the outward baptism there administred though unlawfully is not to be reteyned by such as unto whom the Lord afterward vouchsafeth the inward baptism of his spirit and so answer our Reasons to the contrary which they haue and haue had so long time in their hands These things thus cleared it remaines we come in the next last place to examine their defence of that their own unhallowed baptism in use amongst them formerly proved by me a mere nullity by their grounds and practise set together Their ground is that baptism unlawfully ministred is no baptism their practise that he who ministring his gift poorely as their manner is doth convert in truth pervert another may also baptize him without any speciall calling For foundation of my proofs I laid down these two Rules 1. There is no lawfull baptism but by him that hath a lawfull calling to baptize 1. Thess. 4. 11. Heb. 5. 4. 5. And unto this they assent 2. Onely he hath a lawfull ordinary calling to baptize and extraordinary they challeng not who is called therto by the Church This their first rebaptizer Mr. Smith had not neyther haue they that now administer baptism amongst them neither doe they account that more is requisite for power and right to baptize then a personall gift of teaching and making thereby one of their Proselites and supposed converts Whereupon it follows that they themselvs being baptized by such as want a lawfull calling are not lawfully baptized and so by the verdict of their own quest unbaptized persons Their defence they begin with the perverting both of my words and meaning very unhonestly in setting down the state of the question which yet seems not strang unto me considering their licentious dealing in like sort with the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures They frame the question whether any but Pastors or Elders may baptize and my charge upon them that they are unbaptized because they want Pastors But where haue I so spoken or how gather they that to haue been my meaning had it so been why could I not as easily haue said that none but Pastors for of baptism by others Elders which labour not in the word and doctrine we approve not may lawfully baptize as that none but such as are lawfully called by the Church may baptize which are my words My meaning was not to deny that a Church wanting Pastors may appoint a member able to teach though out of office to baptize for which much may be said and hath been by some so minded Which though I doe not simply approve of yet neyther did neither had I occasion ro deal thereagainst but onely against the wilde course of these All-alikes of whom any that can wrest a few Scriptures intended of men of yeares onely against the baptizing of Infants to the corrupting of some simple man or woman thinks himself another Iohn Baptist as their practise and profession manifests Now whether they haue thus altered my words and perverted my meaning out of bold rashnes as being more hasty to answer then to understand their adversarie or out of cunning for their advantage the Lord and themselvs bee Iudges Onely this any may see and I shall make appeare that the most and most colourable of their Arguments are against their misconceaved and not mine intended sense which gives occasion to suspect that they haue rather been cunning then carelesse in the thing ADVERSARIES LET us come to the particulars and first to their first and main ground and foundation of their course which is that members and Churches of Christ are made both by faith and baptism and not by the one onely DEFENCE THIS their foundation in respect of baptism is sandy seeing it servs but to signifie and confirm what was before but makes nothing to be that was not The Scriptures being many cited by them are partly impertinent and partly against them some of them expresly and the rest truely Some of them indeed speak of being baptized into Christ and into his death and into one body with him and make baptism a foundation but mean not 〈◊〉 to shew that men are made Christian soules by baptism as ignorant persons think and speak but onely that they are confirmed and furthered thereby in that which they were before Some of the places joyn with baptism the Lords Supper others the laying on of hands which yet rather is meant of the doctrine then ministration of those things Now doe they conceaue that such as were no true Christians before are in part made Christians by the Lords Supper and laying on of hands When the Scriptures affirm any thing of an ordinance they must be interpreted according to the nature of the ordimance As where Christ saith of the bread This is my body or of the rock And the rock was Christ or the Apostle here that we are baptized into Christ and draw neer unto Christ by baptism and the like we must understand the speaches as sacramentall so far as they are applied to ordinances that is as intending those things for signes and seales and means of confirmation and not otherwise Others of the Scriptures brought by them are so plainly against them as it is marvail that in setting them down they thought not of the Lords answer to the evill servant Luke 19. 22. For example Math. 28. 19. Go teach or as they well turn it make all nations disciples baptizing them c. The Apostles then were first to make to wit by their teaching disciples that is Christians and after to baptize them Is it not the Scriptures constant voice and these mens plea true in it self but to a wrong end that men must first beleeue and repent and upon manifestation thereof be baptized Are not they that beleev and repent Christians with them Otherwise How doe they baptize them But thus it is with men in all sects that are lead by passion and appetite more then reason they doatupon some one thing truly or apparantly good and labor aboue measure to magnifie it esteeming all things without it as nothing Thus these men esteem of baptism others of Church government others of seperation others of imposition of hands by Bishops And so according as men haue advantage by particulars or suffer for them or are otherwise prejudiced towards them they set high valuation upon them But as grace teacheth us to acknowledg better things in Christians then any outward ordinances so must wisdom warn us not to ascribe too much to any one as fond folks use to doe to the person or thing which they affect Math. 18. 20 is against them To be gathered together in Christs name there presupposes a Church state So is Io◠4. 1. Christ made and baptized disciples they were made disciples by preaching