being uncapable of teaching therefore there is nothing in that Commission of Infant-Baptism If they have any other word of Institution or Commission let them produce it we profess we know of none Object Christ commanded his Disciples to baptize all Nations Children are part of the Nations therefore may be baptized Thus you see we have Authority to baptize Children from the great Commission Answ Let me have the same liberty to argue and see what will follow viz. Christ commanded his Disciples to baptize all Nations but Turks Pagans and Infidels with their Children are part of the Nations Ergo Turks Pagans and Infidels and their Children may be baptized also Sir I will appeal to you is not this Inference as good and as justifiable as yours Come put it to your Consciences Can you suppose any should be baptized by virtue of the words of Christ in the Commission but Disciples only Object Well what though that be so yet we affirm that Infants are Disciples and therefore may be baptized Answ What if we shall grant you that Infants are Disciples which we can never do it being utterly false yet they are not such Disciples that Christ in the Commission requires to be baptized because they were to be made Disciples by being taught and that Infants cannot be said to be we are sure The Lord Jesus hath plainly excluded Infants in his Commission from this Administration according to ordinary Rule for in that he commands the them to Baptize Disciples upon preaching first to them it follows that none but such who are so taught and so by teaching made Disciples are by virtue of the Commission to be baptized Infants after an ordinary rate are uncapble of understanding the Gospel when preach'd and therefore are uncapable of being made Disciples thereby and there is no other way according to ordinary Rule of being made Disciples but by that means And this the Apostles could easily understand as knowing that under the term Disciple in common speech and in the whole New Testament those only are meant who being taught professed the Doctrine preached by such a one as John's Disciples Christ's Disciples and the Disciples of the Pharisees c. and accordingly the Apostles administred Baptism And in that Christ appoints these to be Baptized we say he excludes all others for the Institution Commission and Commandment of Jesus Christ is most certainly the only Rule according to which we are to administer the Sacrament of Baptism and all other Holy Things and they that do otherwise open a Door to all Innovations and follow their own Inventions and are guilty of Will-worship If you should say Infants are Disciples seminally in and by their Paâ—ents as if Believers could beget Believers â—or Disciples of Christ by natural Generation is absurd and ridiculous the Christian Church being not made up of Persons by meer Humane Birth but Spiritual Regeneration And to say that Infants are born Disciples by the relation to the Covenant and so have the Seal set on them without any precedent Teaching is but an unapproved Dictate as if a Title to Baptism were in its Nature a Seal of the Covenant which the Scripture no where affirms nor is there any Rule for baptizing of Persons because of Relation to the Covenant sith Baptism wholly depends upon a positive Institution Object But you further argue that Infants are called Disciples Act. 15. 10. Because the Yoak laid upon the Necks of the Disciples was Circumcision and Circumcision belonged to Infants ergo Infants are Disciples Answ To this we Answer That there is no colour of Ground or Reason of giving the Name of Disciples from that Text to Infants for tho true they are called Disciples upon whose Necks the false Brethren would have put that Yoak of Circumcision yet what 's this sith Adult Believers of the Gentiles also were required by the Jews to be circumcised as Timothy Act. 16. 3. And tho it be granted that they would have had Infants as well as the converted Gentiles to be circumcised yet the putting the Yoak of Circumcision is not actual Circumcision in the Flesh for that the Jews as well as their Children were able to bear for many Ages But the Yoak of Circumcision is the necessity of it upon Mens Consciences and therewith to oblige them to keep the whole Law of Moses or they could not be saved and this was not that which they would have put upon Children but upon the Disciples i. e. the faithful Brethren in Christ Jesus If Faith and Repentance be required as prerequisite of all them that are to be baptized then none but Believers ought to be baptized but Faith and Repentance is required of all such Ergo c. The Major Proposition cannot be denied without a palpable violation of Christ's Precept and by the same Rule that Infants may be baptized notwithstanding this absolute prerequisite Unbelievers may invalidate the Rule of Christ or render it defective and you give all away to the Enemy The Minor has been sufficiently proved If thou believest thou may'st else he might not that it seems was absolutely necessary Repent and be baptized every one of you Act. 2. 36 37. and those of the Church of England say the same thing In the Rubrick What is required of Persons that are to be baptized that 's the Question Answer Repentance whereby they forsake Sin and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the Promise of God made to them in that Sacrament If there be no Precedent in the Scripture as there is no Precept that any besides such who professed Faith and Repentance were baptized then none but such ought to be baptized but there is no Precedent that any besides such who professed Faith and Repentance were baptized Ergo none but such ought Had Infant-Baptism been any Appointment or Institution of Christ we should certainly either have had Precept or Example in the Scripture to warrant the same but in as much as the Holy Scripture is wholly silent therein there being not one Example or the least Syllable to be found for any such Practice we may be sure it is none of Christ's Ordinance If our Brethren have any Precedent or Example for it let them shew it for we declare and testify there is none as we know of And that there is neither Precept nor Example for Infants Baptism we have it confessed by many of them who were for it Erasmus saith It is no where expressed in the Apostolical Writings that they baptized Children And again upon Rom. 6. Baptizing of young Infants was not saith he in use in St. Paul's Time. Calvin also confesseth it is no where expresly mentioned by the Evangelists that any one Child was baptized by the Hands of the Apostles Ludovicus Vives saith None of old were wont to be baptized but in a grown Age and who desired it and understood what it was The Magdeburgenses as I find them quoted by Mr. Danvers do
they shall all know me from the least of them to the greatest of them that is all those who are in the New Covenant which you say all Believers Children are even in the same Covenant of Grace made with Abraham Eighthly And then it follows also that the Covenant of Grace and Spiritual Blessings made with Abraham is tied up to Believers and their Seed only and if so what will become of all poor Unbelievers and their perishing Off-spring Object But does not Baptism come in the room of Circumcision the one being a Figure of the other Answ There is no ground so to believe since the Scripture gives not the least hint of any such thing 1. For first if it had then when Baptism came in and was in force Circumcision must have ceased immediately but after Baptism was commanded and administred we find Circumcision in being and was not disannull'd till the Death and Resurrection of our Saviour Now it would have vanquish'd as Shadows do as soon as Baptism the Antitype came in force had it been a Type or Figure of Baptism or come in the room of it 2. If Baptism had come in the room of Circumcision then the Church of God under the Gospel would have been just like the National Church of the Jews viz. made up of the Fleshly Seed but the Apostle shews thè contrary it consists of lively Stones that is a spiritual and not a carnal Seed 3. Then Males only and no Females would have been baptized because none but Male Children were to be circumcised as God commanded 4. Circumcision was administred on Abraham's natural Seed without any Profession of Faith but none are to be admitted to Baptism but by a Profession of Faith Repentance and Regeneration The first Birth or being born in a fleshly way by Carnal Generation gave Abraham's natural Seed a Right to Circumcision whereas the Spiritual Birth or Regeneration gives a Right only to Baptism according to Christ's Commission as we have proved 5. 'T is evident Circumcision figured forth another thing viz. the Destruction of the Body of Sin by Jesus Christ and the Circumcision of the Heart and therefore not Baptism c. Very full and most excellently you have to this Point Dr. Taylor who saith That the Argument from Circumcision is invalid upon infinite Considerations Figures and Types prove nothing unless a Command go along with them or some Express to signify such to be their purpose for the Deluge of Waters and the Ark of Noah were a Figure of Baptism said Peter and if therefore the Circumstances of the one should be drawn to the other we should make Baptism a Prodigy rather than a Rite The Paschal Lamb was a Type of the Eucharist which succeeds the other as Baptism doth to Circumcision but because there was in the Manducation of the Paschal Lamb no Prescription of Sacramental Drink shall we thence conclude that the Eucharist is to be administred but in one kind And even in the very instance of this Argument supposing a Correspondency of the Analogy between Circumcision and Baptism yet there is no Correspondency of Identity for although it were granted that both of them did consign the Covenant of Faith yet there is nothing in the Circumstance of Childrens being circumcised that so concerns that Mystery but that it might very well be given to Children and yet Baptism only to Men of Reason because Circumcision lest a Character in the Flesh which being imprinted upon Infants did its work to them when they came to Age and such a Character was necessary because there was no word added to the Sign but Baptism imprints nothing that remains on the Body and if it leaves a Character at all it is upon the Soul to which also the Word is added which is as much a part of the Sacrament as the Sign it self for both which Reasons it is requisite that the Parties baptized should be capable of Reason that they may be capable both of the word of the Sacrament and the impress made upon the Spirit since therefore the Reason of this Parity does wholly fail there is nothing left to infer a necessity of complying in this Circumstance of Age any more than in the other Annxes of the Type then the Infant must also precisely be baptized upon the eighth day and Females must not be baptized because not circumcised but it were more proper if we would understand it right to prosecute the Analogy form the Type to the Antitype by way of Letter and Spirit and Signification And as Circumcision figures Baptism so also the Adjuncts of the Circumcision shall signifie something spiritual in the Adherences of Baptism and therefore as Infants were circumcised so spiritual Infants shall be baptized which is spiritual Circumcision for therefore Babes had the Ministry of the Type to signify that we must when we give our Names to Christ become Children in Malice and then the Type is made compleat c. Thus far the Doctor Quest But why may â—ot Infants be baptized now as well as Children were circumcised heretofore Answ You may as well ask why Nadab and Abihu might not have offered strange Fire or why might not the Priest carry the Ark in a Cart. The Reason why they ought to do neither of those things were because God commanded them not so to do In like manner say we Children must not be baptized because God hath given no Command to do it Circumcision was expresly commanded both as to the Subject Time Age and Sex which was as you have heard the Male Children at eight days old with a severe Penalty of the Parents Disobedience But there is not one hint or the least colour of ground for the baptizing of Infants in all the New Testament as hath been proved and yet the Gospel is as one observes as express in the matter of Baptism as first touching the Subject Men and Woman Secondly As to the Time viz. when they believe Thirdly As to the Qualifications of Baptism i. e. Faith and Repentance Fourthly As to the end and use of it to signifie the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ with our Death unto Sin and rising again to newness of Life Can any think the Servant should be so careful to give Directions from God in every case about the circumcising of Children under the Law and the Son of God not to be as express in all parts of instituted Worship and our Duties under the Gospel This can't be thought see what the Apostle saith which we before hinted Heb. 3. 5 6. Quest But Children were Members of the Jewish Church as well as Adult Persons sith Mr. Smythies and so say other Pedo-Bapâ—isto as 〈◊〉 Baâ—ter and many more and since they were comprehended with their Parents in that Church-state 〈◊〉 are so still under the Gospel and therefore to 〈…〉 Answ That Children were then admitted Members of the Jewish Church is granted and 't is as evident that God hath
have no other sence but this that the unbelieving Yoke-fellow is sanctified or made meet in respect of conjugal use to his or her Yoke-fellow And so though the one be an Unbeliever yet they might comfortably enough live together in lawful Wedlock See our late Annotators I rather think say they it signifies brought into a State that the Believer without Offence to the Law of God may continue in a married Estate with such a Yoke-fellow for else saith the Apostle your Children were unclean that is would be accounted illegitimate But now this being determined that the Husband is thus sanctified to the Wife and the Wife to the Husband though the one be an Unbeliever hence it follows that your Children are holy that is lawfully begotten which is the only sense opposite to the Determination ver 12 13. It was 't is plain about this matter those Saints at Corinth wrote to the Apostle and therefore according to the scope of the place it cannot intend any thing else And as for the use of the word Holy for Legitimate that it is in this sense used else-where in the Scripture is evident from Mal. 2. 15. where a Seed of God or a Godly Seed can be understood in no other sense than that of a lawful Seed in opposition to those born by Polygamy Neither ought any Man to infer Federal Holiness to be intended here unless he can prove from some other Text in the New Testament any such Holiness to be in Children i. e. because Parents are Believers and in the Covenant of Grace their natural Seed must therefore be so esteemed and have the like Right to Gospel-Baptism as the Children under the Law had to Circumcision which is no where to be found in all the New-Testament but the quite contrary as has been proved and therefore this Interpretation ought not to be admitted but utterly to be rejected in regard of what the Apostle Peter asseres How false and ridiculous therefore is that which Mr. Smythies hath lately affirmed Whensoever saith he God enters into Covenant with the Parent he enters into Covenant with the Children of that Parent that is the Children were included in the Covenant and the Blessings of that Covenant belonged to the Children as well as to the Parent They that will build their Faith upon such kind of Men deserve to be deceived who speak what they please and prove nothing as if this was so because Mr. Smythies says it I must charge it upon him as false Doctrine 1. As being quite contrary to the Nature of the Gospel-Dispensation and Constitution of the New Testament-Church wherein the Fleshly Seed are rejected and cast out in respect of Church-Priviledges and Ordinances 2. What is this but to intail Grace to Nature and Regeneration to Generation in opposition to what our Saviour saith John 3. 3. and Paul Ephes 2. 1 2. 3. It also contradicts all Mens Experience How palpable is it that Godly Men have wicked Children now adays as well as in former times What wicked Children and yet in the Covenant of Grace Or were they in it and are they now fallen out of it What a Covenant then do you make that sure and everlasting Covenant of Grace to be Besides we have many learned Men and Commentators of our Mind upon this Text as Mr. Danvers observes and â—uotes them Austin saith it is to hold without doubting whatsoever that Sanctification was it was not of Power to make Christians and remit Sins Ambrose upon this place saith the Children are holy because they are born of lawful Marriage Melancthon in his Commentary upon this same Text saith thus Therefore Paul answers that their Marriages are not to be pulled asunder for their unlike Opinions of God if the impious Person do not cast away the other and for comfort he adds as a Reason The unbelieving Husband is sanctified by the believing Wife Meat is sanctified for that which is holy in use that is it is granted to Believers from God so here he speaks of the use of Marriage to be holy and to be granted of God. Things prohibited under the Law as Swines Flesh and a Woman in her Pollution were called unclean The Connexion of this if the use of Marriage should not please God your Children would be Bastards and so unclean But your Children are not Bastards therefore the use of the Marriage pleaseth God And how Bastards were unclean in a peculiar manner the Law shews Deut. 23. Camtrarius in his Commentary upon this place also saith for the unbelieving Husband hath been sanctified an unusual change of the Tense that is sanctified in the lawful use of Marriage for without this saith he it would be that their Children should be unclean that is infamous and not legitimate who so are holy that is during the Marriage are without all blot of Ignominy Erasmus saith likewise Infants born of such Parents as one being a Christian the other not are holy legitimately for the Conversion of either Wife or Husband doth not dissolve the Marriage which was made when both were Unbelievers What Reason now had Dr. Featly and others to contemn this Exposition of the Text considering what we and so many Learned Men have declared as touching this matter for a more fuller Answer read Mr. Danvers p. 166 167 168 169. But after all should it be allowed that the Holiness in this Text is indeed to be taken for a Faederal or Covenant-Holiness yet we cannot therefore grant that this is a sufficient Proof for Infant-Baptism for let the Holiness be what it will whether Moral Faederal or Matrimonial neither of these is any where assigned to be a ground of baptizing Infants the Institution Commission and Practice of the Apostolical Church being that alone that can warrant the same 'T is God's Word only not Mens Reason conceited Grounds and Inferences that can justify a Practice or make a Gospel-Ordinance if all therefore was granted which you affirm of the Covenant made with Abraham of Circumcision and Faederal-Holiness yet infant-Infant-Baptism is gone unless you can prove God hath from this ground commanded you to baptize your Children or that they were for this Reason admitted to Baptism in the Apostles Time for all your Arguments from thence prove as strongly that your Infants may partake of the Lord's-Supper c. But that any thing less than a Profession of Faith and Repentance is or can be a sufficient ground for baptizing any Person young or old we do deny sith the New Testament is the only Rule or perfect Copy by the Authority of which we ought to act and perform all Duties of instituted Worship and administer Sacraments c. which are mâ—re positive Precepts and depend only upon the Will and Pleasure of the Law-maker So much to this pretended Proof of Infant-Baptism A sixth Proof of Infant-Baptism is grounded upon Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be
where it is said in the Law of bathing the Flesh and washing the Cloaths of the Unclean it is not meant but of baptizing the whole Body c. but if the Greek word would bear sprinkling or pouring yet that will not justify Men thus to baptize because not according to the Vsage of the Primitive Church nor doth it answer or reach the Signification of this Ordinance which is the Death Burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ together with our Death to Sin and rising with him to walk in newness of Life to represent which great Mystery it was ordained as you will find if you read this Treatise I have been the larger upon this because if Baptism is nothing less nor more nor any other Act than Immersion or total dipping the whole Body c. than abundance of godly Christians must seek after true Baptism neither can Infants it appears from hence be the Subjects of it sith their tender Bodies can't bear it in these cold Climates without palpable danger of their Lives as our Opposites confess and formerly by woful Experience found to be so Jesus Christ never appointed an â—â—â—â—nance to destroy the Lives of any of his Creatures â—ut why will not our Brethren keep to the great Instiâ—ution and exact Rule of the Primitive Church Must we content our selves with that Light which the Church had in respect of this and other Gospel-Truths at the beginning of the Reformation since God hath brought forth greater to the praise of his own rich Grace in our Days And why should a Tradition of the Antichristian State be so zealously defended The Church will never certainly appear in its Primitive Glory till this Rubbish be remov'd which is nothing less than to take a Stone of Babylon and lay it in Sion for a Foundation Besides it doth not a little reflect upon the Honour of the Lord Jesus thus to derogate from his holy Law who is appointed Heir of both Worlds who hath settled in his Church that Religion and every Ordinance thereof which must remain unalterable to the end of Time or Consummation of all things He as our Annotators well say is the Builder of God's House propagating a holy not a fleshly Seed for himself and hath appointed and fixed on the Matter and Form thereof as seemed good in his own sight who is the brightness of the Father's Glory and express Image of his Person c. And what an account our Brethren or others will be able to give to him for presuming to do any thing contrary to the Apostolical Constitution when he comes to judg the Quick and the Dead I know not As touching that great Argument for Infant-Baptism taken from the Covenant made with Abraham tho something is here said in Answer and enough hath been said by others formerly yet I must acquaint the Reader there is a most excellent Treatise prepared written by a very worthy and judicious Person and ready for a timely Birth wherein that grand Objection and all â—thers are answered beyond what any I think have â—itherto doâ—â— But if we should grant all they say of Abraham's Fleshly Seed and Foeâ—â— Holiness yet that will not prove Children to have a Right to Baptism because Baptism as well as Circumcision was is a meer positive Law and wholly depends on the Will and Pleasure of the Law-giver which is in this Treatise opened and asserted again and again and not without good Reason But lest I should keep the Reader too loong at the Door I shall conclude this Epistle with my hearty Prayers that God would be pleased in Mercy to open our Brethrens Eyes or ours wherein either they or we lie short as touching any part of God's Will and let us strive to live in Love and Concord together wherein we do or can agree 'T is Truth I contend for and that Truth which was once delivered to the Saints and shall I hope whilst I am in the Body who now as well as formerly subscribe my self thy Servant for Jesus sake Aug. 6. 1688. Benj. Keach Advertisement IF any desire to be furnished that excellent Book written some times since by Mr. William Kiffin proving no unbaptized Person ought to be admitted to the Lord's Table may have them at Mr. Nath. Crouch's at the sign of the Bell in the Poultry or at the Authors House in Southwark Gold Refin'd or Baptism in its Primitive Purity CHAP. I. Wherein the Baptism of Water is proved to be that intended in the Commission and so a standing Ordinance till the End of the World. I Having for many Years last past observed with what strength of Argument some worthy Christians have laboured to defend the Sacred Ordinance of Baptism and how they have endeavoured to refine it from all Human Mixtures to the great Satisfaction and Establishment of many Persons in the Land yet notwithstanding finding how that still a Multitude of gracious People remaing very ignorant about it and otherâ— very obstinately and reproachfully do slight and contemn it casting very scandalous and scurrilous Reflections upon those who practise it according to the Primitive Institution both from the Pulpit and the Press I have been put upon writing something further in the Defence of our selves and Practice herein And that I may the more regularly proceed in this Work I shall endeavour to prove Baptism in Water to be that Baptism which is intended in the Commission and therefore to abide as an undoubted and standing Ordinance of the Lord Jesus Christ until his second Coming or the End of the World. First of all it may be necessary to shew you that this Ordinance was instituted and ordained by our Lord Jesus and given forth by him soon after he rose from the Dead and a little before he ascended into Heaven see Mat. 28. 18 19 20. Mark 16. 16. And Jesus came and spake unto them saying All Power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you and lo I am with you alway even to the end of the World. The Lord Jesus first of all asserteth his Power and Authority Secondly he delegates a Power to his Disciples Thirdly he subjoyns a gracious Promise to them 1. The Power and Authority which he asserteth to himself is all Power in Heaven and Earth Power to institute and appoint Laws and Ordinances how and after what manner God ought in Gospel-Times to be worshipped Power to give Repentance and Remission of Sins Power to congregate to teach and govern his Church as the supream Lord Head and Ruler thereof yea and Power to give Eternal Life to whomsoever he pleaseth This was inherent in him as God blessed for ever given to him as our Mediator given to him when he came into the World but more especially confirmed to him and manifested to be
given him at his Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven And having declared himself Supream Lord and Law-giver He 2. Delegates a Power to his Disciples Go ye therefore and teach all Nations baptizing them the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make Disciples that must be by preaching the Gospel to them instructing them in the Principles of the Christian Faith teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and lo I am with you alway to the end of the World that 's the Promise These are the words of the great Commission which contains part of the last Will and Testament of the ever blessed Jesus the glorious Testator of the New Covenant wherein Baptism is found and expresly given forth and with as great Authority and in as solemn a manner as ever was any Precept or Ordinance that we read of in all the Book of God. Object But 't is not said baptize them in Water it may therefore intend the Baptism of the Holy Spirit Answ To which we answer As 't is not said baptize them with Water so 't is not said baptize them with the Holy Spirit They were commanded to baptize that 's evident and that it was Water our Saviour did require them to baptize with and not the Spirit we prove First Because the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was never by our Saviour or his Apostles commanded it was never injoyn'd as a Precept or Duty to be done but was always mentioned as a Promise He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with Fire And again Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence It argues great Weakness or else Wilfulness that Men should see no better how to distinguish between a Baptism that was commanded as a Duty to be done and a Baptism promised which was never injoyned as a Duty Secondly It cannot mean the Baptism of the Holy Ghost because the Disciples of Christ nor no Man under Heaven had ever any such Power delegated or given to them as to baptize with the Holy Ghost 't is strange Persons should be so blind and bold to think much less to assert that meer Men can give the Holy Spirit or administer that Baptism as if the Holy Ghost was at the disposal of the Will of Man or that Men know whom to give it to which indeed only lies hid in the Breast of God himself who bestows it to whom and in what manner he pleaseth And therefore Thirdly We do affirm from the Authority of God's Word that to baptize with the Holy Spirit is the peculiar Prerogative Royal of Jesus Christ and that he did never impower any Disciple of his to give it He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit The Father by him and he immediately by himself in his own Person distributes or gives forth of the Spirit according to the good Pleasure of his Will without imparting with this Sovereign Prerogative or peculiar Power to any other Now since Christ's Disciples could not baptize with the Spirit and yet are commanded to baptize it follows clearly it must be Water Object Doth not the Apostle shew that Men had Power to give the Spirit what else is the meaning of these words he therefore that ministreth to you the Spirit it appears that Persons who preached ministred the Spirit Answ By the Spirit is meant the Gospel or Word of Christ as the Law is called the Letter so is the New Testament called the Ministration of the Spirit 2 Cor. 3. 6. The words that I speak unto you saith Christ are Spirit c. Doth God as if the Apostle should say concur with our Ministry and give the Spirit to those who hear it and help us to work Miracles to confirm it And is this done by our preaching the Law or by the hearing of Faith that is the Word of Faith viz. the Gospel see vers 2. or by preaching the Word of Christ Fourthly The Baptism in the Commission cannot intend that of the Holy Ghost because the Spirit 's Baptism signifies the miraculous Effusion or extraordinary Gifts thereof and not the saving Influences Graces and Operations of it which but a few and those too in the Primitive Time did partake of but the Baptism in the Commission is injoyned on all that are made Disciples in all Nations and in every Age even to the end of the World. Fifthly It must be Water-Baptism because our Saviour joyneth it with Repentance and Believing Now all along in order of Practice these two went together both before this time and also afterwards You may be sure had it been any other Baptism it would never have been thus joyned together in order of words with that Baptism that was so united in order of Practice with Repentance and Faith without the least intimation of any thing by our Saviour to the contrary Sixthly Because 't is a Baptism that is to be administred in the Name of the Father of the Son and Holy Spirit how can any with the least shadow of Reason suppose it should be meant of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit sith it is to be administred in the Name of the Holy Spirit Were any ever baptized with the Holy Spirit in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost The Spirit was that with which they were baptized and therefore not baptized in the Name of the Spirit Seventhly The only way further to remove this Objection is to observe what the practice of the Disciples was after the Ascension of Christ in the execution of this great Commission What was it they baptized with See Acts 8. 36. And they came to a certain Water and the Eunuch said See here is Water Vers. 28. They went both down into the Water and Philip baptized him Acts 10. 47 48. Can any Man forbid Water that these should not be baptized And he commanded them to be baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus That Baptism which in the Commission the Lord Jesus commanded his Disciples to baptise with was the Baptism which they after his Ascension did baptize with and that it was Water the Scriptures we have now cited do evidently shew certainly the Apostles well understood what Baptism it was their blessed Master did command them to administer Eighthly Besides were it not the Baptism of Water which was given to them in the Commission Matth. 28. 19 20. They did that in his Name i. e. by his Authority which they had no Authority to do for other Commissions they had not this being the only place where Water-baptism is mentioned as being instituted and given in Commission to them to administer and to all other Disciples and Ministers of Christ to the end of the World. Now Secondly that this Holy Ordinance of Baptism doth continue to the end of the World is evident First Because whatsoever is given forth by Jesus Christ is given forth by him as he is King and Mediator of the New Covenant and as part of his
20. Jesus ge doopt zijnde is terstont opge-klommon uit het Water And when Jesus was dipp'd he came out of the Water hence they for John the Baptist read John the Dipper and for he baptized them he dipp'd them Why our Translators who have been so faithful and exact generally in all things as is acknowledged by all Learned Godly Men in the translating the holy Bible should leave the word Baptism it being a Greek Word and not translate it into our Language as the Dutch have done into theirs I know not unless it were to favour their own Practice of Bantising or Sprinkling which the word Baptize will in no wise bear as is confest by a whole cloud of Witnesses Mr. Ball in his Catechism renders it washing by Dipping See also Dr. Ames in his Marrow of Divinity Mr. Wilson in his Dictionary saith to baptize is to dip into the Water or to plunge one into the Water Also in the Common-Prayer-Book dipping into the Water is given as the proper and primary Signification of the word We will leave this to the Consideration of all thinking Men it being so i. e. that Baptism is Dipping or Plunging the Body all over in Water whether Infants can be the Subjects of it sith their tender Bodies cannot bear being plunged thus into the Water in cold Climates without palpable danger of their Lives CHAP. III. Proving that Baptism is dipping plunging and covering the Body all over in Water from the Practice of the Primitive Times CErtainly no better course or way in the next place we can take to find out what Baptism is than to examine the Scripture and see what the thing was which the Saints practised in the Primitive Time where we read they did baptize or were baptized for as the Jews in Circumcision all along were to practise that Rite as it was commanded and practised by Abraham and keep the Passeover as it was given to them from the Lord by Moses together with all other Ordinances and Services whatsoever it behoved them to observe the first or Primitive Institution and Practice of every particular Duty and were not to derogate from thence in any thing whatsoever and for their adulterating any of the Ordinances of God they brought themselves under the Wrath of God and many heavy Judgments from him as the Old Testament doth sufficiently witness so it behoveth us I say to see to the first or Primary Institution and Practice of Baptism in the Gospel-Time that being a Pattern or Rule to us and to all Christians to the end of the World in respect of every Gospel-Ordinance and if we derogate from that Rule we must expect to meet with sharp Rebuke from the Almighty first or last Now that that Ordinance which is called Baptism is Immersion Dipping or Plunging into Water will appear if we observe the Practice of John the Baptist who was the first that was sent by Christ to baptize read Mat. 3. 6. he 't is positively said baptized in a River viz. in the River Jordan Diodate on this place in his Annotations saith he plunged them in Water and our late Annotators say he dipp'd them in Jordan Moreover 't is said that John was baptizing in Aenon near Salim the Reason is given because there was much Water Now if it had not been dipping or covering the Body in Water this could be no reason for a little Water would have served to sprinkle thousands as Cornelius à Lapide notes Piscator on this Passage saith that Baptism was dipping the Body in Water Also our late Annotators upon the place say thus viz. It is from hence apparent that both Christ and John baptized by dipping the Body in the Water else they need not have sought places where had been a great plenty of Water They say well and less they could not speak unless they would stifle their Consciences or offer Violence to their Reason but if they had from hence said it is apparent that Christ and John Baptized and not Rantized Persons they had come off better and had undeceived the People Secondly 'T is said when our blessed Saviour was baptized by John in Jordan he went up straightway out of the Water c. and Philip and the Eunuch 't is said went both down into the Water and that they came up out of the Water The Assembly in their Annotations on this Text say they were wont to dip the whole Body and Piscator on the place as I find him quoted by a worthy Divine saith the ancient manner of Baptism was that the whole Body was dipp'd into the Water Certainly it had been a vain and weak thing for them to have gone down into the River to be sprinkled with a little Water There is no ground to think they would ever have done so if Sprinkling or Rantism had been the Ordinance required of them the manner was not to apply Water to the Subject as some do but the Subject to nay into the Water In Mark 1. 9. 'T is said Jesus was baptized of John in Jordan Now saith one on this place it had been non-sense for Mark to say that Jesus was baptized in Jordan if it had been sprinkling because the Greek reads it into Jordan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 could Jesus be said to be sprinkled into Jordan 't is proper to say he was baptiz'd that is dipp'd into Jordan and that was the Act and nothing else as all the Learned acknowledg Moreover Philip needed not to have put that noble Person who was a Man of great Authority under Candace Queen of the Ethiopians to the trouble to come out of his Chariot if Sprinkling had been Baptism and to go into the Water and dip him or if Sprinkling might have done as well as Dipping sure Philp would on this occasion have dispensed with Immersion and let Rantism have served considering he was a great Man and on a Journey he might have fetch'd a little Water in his hand and have sprinkled him in the Chariot But as Philip had preach'd Baptism to him so there is like ground to think that the Eunuch very well understood what it was and readily submitted to it but if Sprinkling would not excuse them I know not how any Christian can think it may excuse us in these days we have no Reason to think Christ Jesus or his Apostles did do or teach any thing in vain yet so we must conclude if he went into a River to receive no more than Sprinkling and so we must think of Philip and the Eunuch also But to proceed here I cannot well omit that which Mr. Daniel Rogers a most worthy English Writer hath said in a Treatise of his It ought saith he to be the Churches part to cleave to the Institution which is Dipping especially it being not left arbitrary by our Church to the Discretion of the Minister but required to dip or dive And further saith that he betrays
Resurrection Why are we baptized In vain does the Church use the Symbol of Baptism if there be no Resurrection The like Testimonies frequently occur among the Fathers that believing in his Death we may be made Partakers of his Resurrection by Baptism Baptism was given in Memory of the Death of our Lord we perform the Symbols of his Death and Resurrection in Baptism We know but one saving Baptism in regard there is but one Death for the World and one Resurrection from the Dead of which Baptism is an Image Here Paul exclaiming they pass'd through the Sea and were all baptized in the Cloud and in the Sea he calls Baptism the Passage of the Sea for it was a flight of Death caused by the Water To be baptized and so plunged and to return up and rise out of the Water is a Symbol of the descent into the Grave and return from thence Baptism is a Pledg and Representation of the Resurrection Baptism is an Earnest of the Resurrection Immersion is a Representation of Death and Burial Innumerable are the Testimonies which might be added But these I think sufficient to prove that Baptism is an Image of the Death and Resurrection of Christ from hence we acknowledg the Mystery of our Religion his Deity and Humanity and of all the Faithful who are baptized in his Faith from Death to Sin to newness of Life which if they lead in this World they have a most assured hope that being dead they shall hereafter rise to Glory with Christ Which things if so what Affinity is to be seen between a Burial and a Washing that Christian Baptism should be thought to draw its Original from Jewish Lotions for if it were true that the end of our Baptism were to signify a Washing or Ablution or if it were true that the Jews of old did admit their Children or Proselytes into their Church by the administration of any diving as it is asserted by many Learned Persons of late Days yet to prove that our Baptism is indeed an Image of Death and Resurrection not of washing enough hath been said Thus far Sir Norton Knatchbul And indeed what this great Man hath asserted and clearly demonstrated doth fully detect our Brethren who argue for their Childish Rantism affirming Though Dipping was the Baptism that was practised in the Primitive Time yet it doth not from thence follow that Dipping is essential to Baptism they are the words of our late Annotators on Mat. 3. 6. The Reason they give is Because the washing of the Soul with the Blood of Christ the thing say they signified by Baptism being expressed by Sprinkling or pouring Water as well as by Dipping or being buried in Water In Answer we say with St. Bernard viz. Immersion is a Representation of Death and Burial But saith the famous Dr. Du-Veil To substitute in the room of Immersion either Sprinkling or any other way of applying Water to the Body to signify the same thing is not in the Power of the Dispensers of God's Mysteries or of the Church for that saith he as Thomas Aquinas excellently well observes It belongs to the Signifier to determine what Sign is to be used for the signification but God it is who by things sensible signifies Spiritual things in the Sacrament To which let me add Shall frail and silly Man seek out or contrive new Rites or Signs having other significations than ever the great Lawgiver appointed or intended and call them by his Name viz. Ordinances or Sacraments of Christ Will God I say ever think you suffer any Man to invent out of his own Brains new Signs or Symbols of Divine Gospel-Mysteries and father them upon him What Ordinance hath he ordained to signify the sprinkling of the Blood of Christ this cannot cerâ—ainly stand with his Care Wisdom and Faithfulness you may as well no doubt and be as far justified to contrive some other proper and fit Signs or Figures of other Gospel-Mysteries and call them Sacraments of Christ as to change his Holy Institution of Immersion or Dipping designed and ordained by him chiefly as it most clearly appears to represent his Death Burial and Resurrection into Sprinkling or Pouring and make it represent washing in or sprinkling with the Blood of Christ and then say and not blush It may serve as well Object But do you not acknowledg Baptism to signify our being washed in the Blood of Christ Answ In Answer to this we do say in a more remote sense Baptism doth hold forth our being washed or bathed in Christ's Blood which we doubt not but is signified in that of Titus 3. 5. by the washing of Regeneration and in Heb. 10. 22. Yet certainly Sir Norton Knatchbul is in the right The proper end of Baptism saith he ought not to be understood as if it were a Sign of the washing away of Sin although it be often-times taken thus Metonymically in the New Testament This therefore we say Washing is not at all the main or principal thing or such as is immediately or primarily but only remotely and secondarily signified thereby But the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ which is the Rise and Root the Original and Meritorious Cause of all the Good we partake of is the principal Thing signified hereby But what advantage is it to you that are only for Rantism for us to own Washing is signified by Baptism sith Sprinkling can as you use it in no proper manner represent Washing But suppose it did answer in that yet it cannot be Baptism because it cannot nor does it in any respect represent the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ nor our death to Sin and rising again in a Figure to walk in newness of Life which Baptism we have shewed was appointed to do and therefore can be no other but Immersion Dipping and Plunging or covering the Body in Water which doth resemble and most lively hold forth the Things signified thereby to our sight Yea these Matters viz. Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection are the cardinal or great Things to be considered for as in the Lord's Supper remotely many Things may be signified to us yet all the Things cannot plainly be represented to our Eyes but such Things that are the more immediate Significations of it are the proper Cause of all the rest viz. Christ Crucified and our feeding on him by Faith or the breaking of his Body and the pouring forth of his Blood are most lively set forth and represented to our visible sight So in Baptism likewise the main and more immediate Significations which are the Death Burial and Resurrection of our Blessed Saviour with our death unto Sin and vivification to a new Life is clearly resembled though the Fruit of his Death and Remission of Sin and Purging c. are consequently gathered from it also Calvin saith Baptismum esse sepulturam in quum nulli msi jam mortui mortuo tradendi sunt i.
e. That Baptism is a form or way of Burial and none but such as are already dead to Sin or have repented from dead Works are to be buried Also Learned Zanchy I find writes thus on Col. 2. 12. Of Regeneration saith he there are two parts Mortification and Vivification that is called a Burial with Christ this a Resurrection with Christ the Sacrament of both these saith he is Baptism in which we are overwhelmed or buried and after that do come forth and rise again It may not be said truly but sacramentally of all that are Baptized that they are buried with Christ and raised with him but only of such as have true Faith. Now we may appeal to all the World whether Zanchy doth not clearly and evidently testify the same thing which we assert viz. that Baptism is and can be no other than Immersion or Dipping sith Sprinkling all must confess doth not represent in a lively Figure the Burial and Resurrection of Christ nor our dying or being dead to Sin and Vivification to Newness of Life saith he Sacramentally i. e. Analogically and in respect of the near Resemblance yet truly to be buried with and raised with Christ This we say cannot be said of them that are sprinkled only for if in respect of Mortification and Vivification they may be denominated buried and raised with Christ yet that outward Rite and Ceremony cannot of it self denominate them so much as Sacramentally buried and raised with Christ for there is not so much as any likeness of such Things in it But in true Baptism viz total dipping the Body in Water and raising it again it is in a lively Figure held forth to our sight Moreover Chrysostom saith that the old Man is buried and drowned in the Immersion under Water and when the Baptized Person is afterwards raised up from the Water it represents the Resurrection of the new Man to newness of Life and therefore concludes saith my Author that the contrary Custom being not only against Ecclesiastical Law but against the Analogy and Mystical Signification of the Sacrament it is not to be complied with It has been too long God grant Men Light to see their Error and do so no more Also Dr. Cave saith that the Party baptized was wholly immerged or put under the Water which was the almost constant and universal Custom of those Times whereby they did most notably and significantly express the great Ends and Effects of Baptism for as in immerging there are in a manner three several Acts the putting the Person into the Water his abiding under the Water and his rising up again thereby representing Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection and in our Conformity thereunto our dying to Sin the destruction of its Power and our Resurrection to a new course of Life By the Person 's being put into the Water was lively represented the putting off the Body of the Sins of the Flesh c. by his being under it which is a kind of Burial into Water his entring into a state of Death or Mortification like as Christ remained for some time under the State or Power of Death therefore it is said as many as are baptized into Christ are baptized into his Death c. And then by his Emersion or rising up out of the Water is signified his entring upon the new course of Life that like as Christ was raised by the Glory of the Father so we should walâ— in newness of Life We are said saith Paraeus to die and to be buried with Christ in Baptism and further shews that the external Act of being buried in Water in Baptism is a lively Emblem of the Internal Work of Regeneration This saith Augustin speaking of these things is by a Sacramental Metonimy and the meaning of it is not that one thing is changed really into another but because the Sign doth so lively resemble the thing signified Thus all Men may see how the Learned agree with us that these Scriptures do hold forth Baptism to be a lively Resemblance of Christ's Death Burial and Resurrection and not of the spiritual things signified only viz. our Mortification of Sin and rising to Holiness in a way of likeness to Christ's Death and Resurrection but also the outward Rite or Form of Administration of the Sign it self to be done in a way of likeness or lively Resemblance to them both so that either our Brethren and other Pedo-Baptists must deny the Apostle speaks here at all of the Ordinance of Baptism or else confess they have no Baptism I mean none of Christ's Sacrament of Baptism their 's not answering nor representing any such things that Baptism was appointed to do and still does among those Christians and Churches who have it according to the Primitive Institution restored to them and practised by them We are saith Mr. Leigh buried with him in Baptism unto Death Baptism saith he is an Instrument not only of thy Death with Christ which is the killing of Sin but also of thy Burial with him c. He alludes to the manner in which Baptism was then administred which was to plunge them in Water the plunging of them into Water which were baptized was a Sign of their Death and Burial with Christ Dr. Jer. Taylor late Bishop of Down in his Plea for the Baptists saith This indeed is truly to be baptized when it is both in the Symbol and in the Mystery whatsoever is less than this is but the Symbol only a meer Ceremony an opus operatum a dead Letter an empty Shadow an Instrument without an Agent to manage or force to actuate it CHAP. V. Proving Baptism to be Immerging or Dipping from those Typical and Metaphorical Baptisms spoken of in Scripture THat we might remove every stumbling-block out of the way if possible we shall shew you what those Metaphorical Baptisms spoken of in the Scripture do hold forth 1. We read of the Baptism of Afflictions or Sufferings Mat. 20. 22 23. Mark 10. 38. Luk. 12. 50. I have a Baptism to be baptized with and how am I straitned till it be accomplished From the literal Signification of the word Baptizo viz. drown immerge plunge under overwhelm great Afflictions come to be called Baptism and signifies as Voâ—lius shews not every light Affliction but that which is vehement and overwhelming as there are Waves of Persecution and Tribulation mention'd in Scripture so such as are drown'd and overwhelm'd by them may seem in a mystical way to be baptized the reason of the Metaphor is taken from many deep Waters to which Calamities are compared He drew me out of great Waters saith David Psal. 32. 6. I am come into deep Waters where the Floods overflow me Psal. 69. 1 2. and hence great Afflictions are called Waves or compared to the Waves of the Sea that overflow Tâ—y Waves and thy Billows are gone over me Psal. 42. 7. Christ spake of his Suffering who was as it
were drowned or drenched or overwhelmed in Misery no part free every Suffering is not the Baptism of Suffering but great and deep Afflictions suffering unto Blood and Death in opposition to a lesser degree or measure of them being dipp'd and plunged into Afflictions Mr. Wilson on the Baptism of Affliction renders it to plunge into Afflictions or Dangers as it were saith he into deep Waters so that it appears also from this Metaphorical Notion of Baptism to baptize is to dip or overwhelm or cover the Body in Water See what our last and best Annotators positively affirm on Matth. 20. 22. To be baptized is to be dipped in Water say they Metaphorically to be plunged in Aâ—flictions I am saith Christ to be baptized with Blood overwhelmed with Sufferings and Afflictions are you able so to be c. 2. We read of the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and Fire I indeed baptize you with Water saith John but he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with Fire Now the Question is What we are to understand to be meant by the Baptism of the Holy Ghost whether the sanctifying Gifts and Graces of the Spirit are intended hereby which all the Godly receive or those extraordinary Gifts or miraculous Effusions of the Holy Ghost only which many received in the Primitive Times I know some are ready to make use of the Baptism of the Spirit to justify their Rite of Sprinkling or Pouring because God is said to pour the Spirit upon his People and to sprinkle them with clean Water which we do grant does intend the Graces of the Holy Spirit But certainly if they did consider the ground and reason why Persons were said to be baptized with the Spirit they would soon perceive this Argument would utterly fail them likewise or stand them in no stead For we do affirm that every Believer who hath the Holy Spirit cannot be said to be baptized with the Spirit like as every one that is under Afflictions and Sufferings cannot be said to be baptized with Sufferings as we have shewed But in the first place it is necessary to understand the difference between the Baptism commanded and the Baptism promised the Baptism commanded is that of Water the Baptism promised was that of the Spirit Our Saviour after his Resurrection gave forth his Commission to his Disciples to teach and baptize and then being assembled together with them commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem but wait foâ— the Promise of the Father which said he ye haâ—â— heard of me Acts 1. 4. What was that why 't is exprest in the fifth Verse Ye shall be baptiz'd with the Holy Ghost not many days hence and this was made good to them on the day of Pentecost Acts 2. 1 2 3. which was no other than the Spirit in an extraordinary manner or the miraculous Gifts thereof these the Apostles and believing Jews received first and in the tenth Chapter of the Acts the same extraordinary Gifts or Baptism of the Spirit the believing Gentiles received I mean Cornelius and those with him for they spoke with Tongues and magnified God and Peter saith Chap. 11. And as I spake unto them the Holy Ghost fell on them as on us at the first then saith he I remembred the word c. Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost ver 15 16. Now no other Gifts of the Spirit than these great and extraordinary and miraculous Effusions of the Spirit we do conclude is or can be intended or meant by the Baptism of the Holy Ghost And that you may see we are not alone in this Opinion see what Dr. Du Veil saith on Acts 1. 4 5. shall be baptized the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says Casaubon is to dip or plunge as if it were to dye Colours in which sense saith he the Apostles might be truly said to have been baptized for the House in which this was done was filled with the Holy Ghost so that the Apostles might seem to have been plunged into it as in a large Fish-Pond Hence Oecumenius on Acts 2. saith a Wind fill'd the whole House that it seem'd like a Fish-pond because it was promised to the Apostles that they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost To the same effect saith another as is noted in our Book of Metaphors Baptism is put for the miraculous Effusion of the Holy Spirit upon the Apostles and other Believers in the Primitive Church because of the Analogical Immersion or Dipping for so Baptizo signifies for the House where the Holy Spirit came upon the Apostles was so filled that they were as it were drowned in it or the reason of the Metaphor saith he may be from the great plenty and abundance of those Gifts in which they were wholly immerg'd as the Baptized are dipp'd under Water And it appears by what Mr. Delâ—un hath written and translated out of Tropical Writers that Glassius and others assert the same things And so likewise Mr. Gosnold a worthy and learned Man understood it speaking of those Scriptures We have here cited saith he these places diligently compared together evidently shew that the Baptism of the Spirit is a distinct Baptism from that of Water and hath no Reference at all to the inward sanctifying Graces of the Spirit but notes out the most extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit that ever were given to the Sons of Men therefore called the Baptism of the Spirit Object But yet this Baptism however was by a pouring forth of the Spirit and why may not Baptism be administred so Answ 'T is evident 't was not by a sprinkling or dropping of the Spirit and therefore no ways for your turn and though it was by a pouring out or a pouring forth of the Spirit yet in such sort that the House in which they were is said to be filled and so they immerg'd or baptized with it But however all confess this was but a Metaphorical Baptism and therefore your Argument from hence at best is but far fetched and signifies nothing for 't is a strange way to go to the Metaphorical Notion of a word to prove a Practice that is contrary to the literal and proper Signification thereof Moreover if this be granted which we have hinted here it may serve to detect the Error of some Men who own no other Baptism than that of the Spirit and think that the ordinary Gifts and Graces of the Spirit is the Baptism of the Spirit which there is no ground as I can see to believe nor was there any other Baptism to continue to the end of the World but that of Water without doubt sith the Baptism of the Holy Spirit was given only to the Apostles and Saints in the Primitive Time for the Confirmation of the Gospâ—l as these Scriptures shew Mark 16. 16 17 18 20. Heb. 2. 3 4. Therefore let such take care who say they have the true Baptism
baptized at once in that first Church so that we may conclude there were many thousands of Believers who doubtless had many Children born unto them during the time of the Gospel 〈◊〉 in the History we have recorded in the New Testament and yet we read not of one of their Children upon the account of federal Holiness and their Parents covenanting with God baptized and can any be so blind as to think the holy God would have left this thing so in the dark without the least hint or intimation had it been any of his Mind or Counsel that Believers Seed should be baptized I am sure they cannot say it without reflecting upon the Faithfulness Care and Wisdom of God. CHAP. VIII Proving Believers the only true Subjects of Baptism from the special ends of this holy Sacrament WHat the special end and use of Baptism is comes next in order to be considered wherein it will more fully and clearly appear that no Infant in Non-Age ought by any means to be baptized First of all it was ordained to be a Sign 〈…〉 the Baptized of some inward 〈…〉 viz. of the Person 's Death unto 〈…〉 to a new Life buried with 〈…〉 i. e. Christ doth certainly 〈…〉 â—mmediately if not wholly in 〈…〉 Scripture to that outward Sign 〈…〉 that in which there is a plain Representation of the Mystery and inward Grace we are said to be buried and risen both in Signification and also in lively Representation of the inward and spiritual Burial and Resurrection with Christ Secondly Here is mention made of the Sign and of the Thing signified And as for that which is spoken of under this Expression Buried in Baptism 't is delivered as a Mâ—dium saith one whereby as a Motive whereunto and as a Reason wherefore as an Image and Representation wherein we are both to read and remember and also practise and perform that other for do but mark how shall we that are dead to Sin i. e. should be live any longer therein Know ye not that as many of you as were baptized into Christ i. e. into or in token of an Interest in him and of a Oneness and Fellowship with him by Faith are baptized into his Death i.e. in token of such a Communion with the Power of his Death as to kill Sin and crucifie the old Man so that henceforth we should not serve Sin therefore hence it is saith he that in Baptism i. e. the outward Sacrament we are buried with him i. e. outwardly visibly bodily in Water into his Death i. e. in token and resemblance of our dying unto Sin by virtue of his Death That we should be ever practically mindful of this That like as Christ rose again after he was dead so we should rise to a new Life for if we have been planted together in the likeness of his Death i. e. signally in outward Baptism spiritually and really in the inward Work of Death unto Sin c performed by the Spirit upon the Soul we shall be also in the likeness of his Resurrection Thirdly This Burial and Resurrection that is immediately expressed by these words Buried with him in Baptism wherein ye are also risen with him is made a Motive Argument and Incitement to the spiritual Death and Resurrection for therefore are we perswaded to die to Sin and live righteously because in Baptism we are buried in Water and raised again in token that we ought so to do and to this end are we baptized and buried and raised therein and so interested into all the other Benefits of Christ's Death Remission of Sins and Salvation viz. that we should die to Sin and live holily and to the end also that we may thereby be put in mind so to do Now if this Death and Burial in Baptism be to this end viz. to teach us and shew us how we must die to Sin Then I infer two things First That the burial in Baptism here spoken of is not the Death to Sin for the Motive and things we are moved to do are two and so are the Sign and the Thing signified Secondly That Infants are not capable Subjects of Baptism for this Sacrament calls for Understanding and Judgment and Senses to be exercised in all that partake thereof or else the whole work will be altogether insignificant Therefore saith one to carry a poor Babe to Baptism is as much as to carry it to hear a Sermon A Sign as Pareus observeth is some outward thing appearing to the Sense through which some inward thing is at the same time apprehended by the Understanding Therefore saith Mr. Perkins the preaching of the Word and the administration of Sacraments are all one in substance for in the one the Witness of God is seen and in the other heard Secondly Another end of Baptism is that it might be a signal Representation of a Believers Union with Christ hence called a being baptized into Christ and a putting on of Christ As many as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ and are all one in Christ Jesus saith Mr. Baxter and are Abraham's Seed and Heirs according to Promise Gal. 3. 27 28 29. This speaks the Apostle of the probability grounded on a credible Profession c. And further saith he our Baptism is the Solemnizing of our Marriage with Christ and 't is a new and strange kind of Marriage where there is no Profession of Consent Now if this be true which Mr. Baxter affirms and I see no cause to doubt of it most worthy Men as well as Scripture agreeing in this case with him how absurd and ridiculous a thing is the Invention of Infant-Baptism sith all Men know they are not capable to signify their Consent of Marriage with Christ if any thing in the World cuts in pieces the very Sinews of Infants Baptism 't is this for there is a Contract made between both Parties before the Solemnization of Marriage and how can a Babe of two or ten days old do that 't is a strange Marriage if it be not done though more strange indeed without the other But may be some will say 't is a Marriage by Proxy or Sureties as Princes sometimes are married Answ Sometimes there has been some such like Action done I must confess But does not the Prince actually consent so to be married But all this while who has required any thing of this at our Hands Are not Sureties in Baptism a meer human Invention and have not our Brethren cast it away as such The third end of Baptism as Mr. Perkins observes is this viz. 'T is a Sign to Believers of the Covenant on God's part of the washing away of our Sins in the Blood of Christ we see saith lie what is done in Baptism the Covenant of Grace is solemnized between God and the Party baptized and in this Covenant something belongs to God and something to the Party baptized Are Infants capable thus to covenant with God though
he she were a Widow yet she might have no Children or if any they might be grown up and to such Children we deny not Baptism upon profession of Faith. Besides she was at this time from her own Dwelling and that many miles distant for she was of the City of Thyatira but now was at the City of Philippi where she was a merchandizing being a seller of Purple Grant she had Children how unlikely a matter is it saith he that she should carry them about with her trading so many miles distant But finally to resolve the Doubt the last Verse of this Chapter calls them of the House of Lydia Brethren They entred into the House of Lydia and when they had 〈◊〉 the Brethren they comforted them and departed Who now can conclude rationally that any Children were in any of these Housholds 'T is a haâ—d case Men are forc'd to fly to such weak and unlikely grounds to prove their practice but as the Proverb goes A poor Shift is better than none at all The next Proof they bring to prove Infant-Baptism is from Acts 2. 39. The Promise is to you and to your Children c. The Pedo baptists would sain have this Promise to be a Promise of External Priviledg and such as gives Children of Believers a right to Baptism but that there is no such thing in the least to be proved from this place we shall make appear by opening the Text. First 'T is evident that Peter preach'd this Sermon to the Jews and to many of them who had a hand in murâ—hering the Lord of Life and Glory And this he laid home and prest upon their Consciences very close and they being prick'd in their Hearts cried out Men and Brethren what shall we do If it be thus we are lost Men and undone No as if Peter should say Do not dispair upon your Repentance there is Mercy for you Then said Peter unto them Repent and be baptized every one of you for the Remission of Sins and ye shall receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit For the Promise is unto you Ay this is good News indeed they might say But what will become of our Children our Off-spring for we have wish'd that his Blood might not only be upon our selves but also upon our Children Well what tho let not this terrify you neither as to drive you into despair for the Promise is not only to you who repent c. but to your Children or Off-spring also your Posterity shall not be lost for the Promise is unto them as it is to you viz. if they repent and not only to them of your Race or Posterity but also to all that are afar off meaning the Gentiles who were said to be sometimes afar off But now if they would know who of their Children and those who were afar off the Promise was made unto In the close of the Verse he resolves them in these words Even to as many as the Lord our God shall call The Promise therefore here evident is that of the Spirit and all the Divine Graces and Blessings of it which was promised and first tendered unto the Jews and their Off-spring upon unfeigned Repentance and turning to God or being effectually called and brought over to close in with the Tenders of Mercy and then to the Gentiles who in like manner should be wrought upon or effectually called This Promise was not made to their Children as Believers Seed nor to them or any other uncalled by the Lord but with this express Proviso Even so many as the Lord our God shall call Which Calling or effectual Work of Grace upon their Souls made them capable Subjects of Baptism Nor are the words to you and your Children mentioned as an acknowledgment of a Priviledg to them above others being Abraham's Seed according to the Flesh but by reason doubtless of their Wish Mat. 27. 25. His Blood he on us and on our Children Nor is there the least intimation given of a right to Baptism to them or their Children as the Children of Believers but as an Exhortation to them and theirs to repent and be baptized as their Duty for their Benefit and Soul-advantage the Promise being not mentioned as though of it self it gave a title to Baptism either to them or their Off-spring without Repentance But as a Motive why both they and their Children should actually repent and be baptized i. e. because in so doing they would be in the way of obtaining Remission of Sin and receive the Holy Spirit the two grand Branches of the Promise here mentioned Which Duty of Repentance little Children being not capable of performing are not therefore according to this direction of the Apostle the proper Subjects of such an Ordinance By Children here saith a Learned Man is not meant their Infants but the Posterity of the Jews And so Dr. Hammond grants it and therefore confesseth this place a very unconcluding Argument for Infant-Baptism And says he though by Children be here meant the Posterity of the Jews yet not the natural or carnal Seed neither but the Spiritual as appears by the last words in the verse viz. Even to as many as the Lord our God shall call So that it is very evident that this Text is grosly abused by such as infer from hence a title to Baptism for Children of Believers by virtue of a Promise to them as such whereas it is manifest from the whole scope of the Context that it is only an incouragement to the Jews against Dispair by reason of their crucifying the Son of God letting them know that yet there was hope of Mercy and Pardon for them and their Children upon the respective Repentance of both or either of them And to the same purpose our late Annotators I find give it speaking of this Text. A Fifth pretended Scripture-proof for Infant-Baptism is taken from 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your Children Vnclean but now are they Holy. Object From hence 't is asserted That the Children of Believers are holy with a Federal or Covenant-Holiness and therefore to be baptized Answ To this we answer That the same sort of Holiness which is ascribed to the Children is to be understood in reference to the unbelieving Husband or the unbelieving Wife who are both said to be sanctified by their respective Yoke-fellows which cannot be meant of a federal or a Covenant-holiness but that which is matrimonial For if we must understand it of a Covenant-holiness then it will follow that the unbelieving Wife or unbelieving Husband may upon the same ground lay claim to Baptism as well as their Children which yet your selves will not grant Besides it is evident from the words themselves in which the Term Husband and Wife are twice used which shews that the Holiness is from the conjugal Relation and cannot be meant of any other than Legitimation And the term Vnbeliever is also twice used and said to be Sanctified which can
saved but he that believeth not shall be damned Now they affirm that Infants are Believers and therefore are to be baptized Mr. Smythies says Infants are Believers in a sense or else they could not be saved nor have right to the Promises of Christ in the Gospel and if they are in any sense such Believers as are intitled to Salvation they are such Believers as have a right to Baptism if the Estate belongs to a Child in the Cradle the Indentures and Seals of that Estate belong to him likewise the Child of a Believer may as well be called a Believer as the Child of a Proselyte was called a proselyte if God gives Children but the denomination of Believers it is sufficient to entitle them to Baptism Thus Mr. Smythies But how does it appear that Infants are Believers in any sense is there any Argument or Scripture brought by this Man to prove them so to be if he can prove they have Faith and do believe in Christ he will do more than all the Men that ever lived on Earth could do I mean Children as such in common and in an ordinary way to be Believers True nothing is too hard for God to do he that can make an Ass to speak can as well cause a Babe to believe But how does it appear God has given them either the Habit of Faith or the Act of Faith or Faith in any sense to render them to be Believers But 't is intimated they are Believers by their Parents Faith why may not their Parents Baptism serve as well as their Parents Faith and they receive the Lord's Supper for them in their Names also and that be imputed to the Children by virtue of their Parents Faith And what though the Estate belongs to the Child in the Cradle together with the Indenture and Seals of that Estate Is it required the Child in the Cradle should therefore set his Seal to the Indenture is that requisite or would it make the Estate the more firm or sure to him But when you can prove Grace and Salvation to be Hereditary and that the Father's being a Believer and a godly Person all his Children must needs be such too you do your business Secondly But why do you say Children must be Believers or else they can't be saved who told you so Because Faith in Adult Persons is required as necessary in them if they are saved Can't God save poor Infants without they also do believe has God told you he cannot or will not save them except they believe I must confess I wonder at your Ignorance and daring Boldness God as Dr. Taylor observes may have many ways to magnify his Grace through Jesus Christ to them which we know not of and what have you to do with the Secrets of God who made you one of his Privy-Council you may as well say unless they repent they cannot be saved from Christ's words Luk 13. 3 5. and that they must be obedient and take up the Cross for these things are required of Adult Persons that would be saved as well as believing Thirdly Prove that God has given Children the Denomination of Believers or if it was granted he hath would it therefore â—ollow they may be baptized certainly no for we read of many who were said to believe they had some kind of Faith and so in some sense had the denomination of 〈◊〉 and yet had no right to Baptism for such ought to have 〈◊〉 Faith or to believe with all their Hearts 〈◊〉 Philip said to the Eunuch Act. 8. who are fit Subjects of that Ordinance or have a sufficient Title to it and would not that believing in any sense you speak of that entitles them to Salvation give them as good a right to the Lord's-Supper as to Baptism Come Sir you can't infer a right to an Ordinance from what grounds you please Baptism depends wholly I say again upon the Authority of a positive Law and express words of Institution and none but such who are made Disciples by preaching or who do actually believe ought from thence to be baptized I wonder what Faith 't is you suppose to be in Infants is it the Faith of the Church as Tho. Aquinas asserts which is intailed upon all within the pale thereof Or is it an Imputitive Faith from the Parents in Covenant as Musculus and others maintain Or is it the Faith of the Gossip or Surety as many of your Church say i. e. others believe for them Have they a justifying Faith as Mr. Baxter intimates or a dogmatical Faith only as in Mr. Blake's Sense Some as Mr. Danvers observes say 't is a Physical some a Metaphysical and some a Hyperphysical Faith. Some say they are born Believers others say they are made Believers by Baptism Now when you tell us what Faith they have we shall the better understand you and give you an Answer A Personal and actual Faith saith Dr. Taylor they have not for they have no Acts of Understanding besides how can any Man know they have Faith since he never saw any sign 〈◊〉 neither was he told so by any that could tell Secondly saith he Some say they have Imputative Faith But then so let the Sacraments be too that is if they have the Parents Faith or the Churches then so let Baptism be imputed also by derivation from them And as in their Mothers Womb and while they hang upon their Mothers Breasts they live upon their Mothers Nourishment so they may upon the Baptism of their Parents or their Mother the Church for since Faith is necessary to the susception of Baptism and they themselves confess it by striving to find out new kinds of Faith to daub the matter such as the Faith such must be the Sacrament for there is no proportion between an actual Sacrament and an Imputative Faith this being in immediate and necessary order to that This saith the Bishop We know there are some argue stifly for Infants having habitual Faith but as the said Doctor saith Are there any Acts precedent concomitant or consequent to this pretended Habit this strange Invention saith he is absolutely without Art without Scripture Reason or Authority But the Men are to be excused unless they had any better Arguments to defend their Practice they are forc'd to confess the Truth in the main viz. That Faith is required of Persons to be baptized and therefore they do what they can to prove Infants do believe But I will conclude this with what the said Doctor further saith And if any Man runs for Succour to that exploded Cresphugeton that Infants have Faith or any other inspired Habit of I know not what or how we desire no more advantage than that they are constrained to answer without Revelation against Reason common Sense and all the Experience in the World. CHAP. XII Containing an Answer to several other Arguments brought for Infant-Baptism Object 1. THough there is
did baptize and all Ministers ought to administer the same Ordinance to the end of the World. The nature and order of the Commission cuts this Objection to pieces For if the person be a Disciple a Believer he is to be baptized let his Parents be Jews Heathens or Christians 't is all one If you had the like grounds to baptize Infants we should contend no longer with you 3. When you can prove the Faith of the Parents or their subjection to the external Rite of Baptism adds any spiritual advantage to their Children or such as gives them a right to Baptism we will give up the Controversie Object But whereas you say Baptism was always done by dipping the Body all over in Water how can that be since some were baptized in Houses Answ I answer That is a fancy a thing asserted without the least shadow of ground tho no less Men than our late worthy Annotators seem to affirm this very thing for notwithstanding the Jaylor and those of his were baptized the same hour of the Night c. Yet can any suppose they could not go out of the House so late might there not be a Pond or some River near whithersoever they went or wheresoever it was done it is no matter they were baptized which has been sufficiently proved to be Immersion or dipping the Body in Water Object But say what you will the Baptism of Infants is of God for there was a multitude of Children of old baptized to Moses in the Cloud and in the Sea. Answ We have shewed you that was but tropically called Baptism and also that Baptism is a pure New-Testament Ordinance tho 't is like that as some Learned Men have said might be a Type of this Ordinance they being as it were buried or overwhelmed in the Sea and under the Cloud But if that may justifie Infant Baptism it will allow you to baptize Unbelievers also for there was a multitude of mixt People who went through the Sea with Israel besides much Cattel And a mixt multitude went up also with them and Flocks and Herds even very much Cattel Exod. 12. 38. All these were doubtless baptized metaphorically and typically as well us Children under the Cloud and in the Sea therefore this can be no proof for Infant-Baptism CHAP. XIII Shewing the evil Consequences Absurdities and Contradictions that attend Infant-Baptism as 't is Asserted and Practised Object BVT what harm is there in Baptizing of Children is it not an innocent thing can it do the Child any hurt Answ The harm will be to the Parents and Ministers who do that in Christ's Name which they have no Authority from him to do If it do any harm to Infants 't is not till they are grown up and then it may be a means to blind their Eyes and cause some of them to conclude they in Baptism became the Children of God were regenerated made Christians Members of Christ and Heirs of the Kingdom of Heaven and cause others to think they were then rightly baptized and so to look after no other Baptism Whereas poor Souls they are all unbaptized Persons having never had any Baptism at all but Rantism Pray see what Mr. Danvers hath said upon this Respect 1. But is it no harm to alter Christ's Order in the Commission who requires Faith and Repentance to precede or go before Baptism or first to make them Disciples by Teaching and then to Baptize them And for Men to invert this Order as to baptize them then teach them Repentance and Faith sure it must be an evil and hurtful thing so to do 2. Is it not an evil thing to change the true subjects of Baptism who are Believing and Understanding Men to ignorant Babes who neither know good nor evil 3. Is it not an evil thing to frustrate the sacred and spiritual ends of Baptism which are many as you have heard and by administring it to poor Babes render it wholly an Insignificant thing 4. Is it not an evil and a shameful thing to change Baptism into Rantism from Dipping the whole Body to Sprinkling or pouring a little Water upon the Face and to pronounce an Untruth in the Name of the Lord saying I baptize thee in the Name of the Father of the Son and holy Spirit you not doing the thing nor have any Authority so to do nor to baptize Children at all much less to sprinkle them 5. Is it not an evil and harmful thing and a great error to say Baptism takes away Original Sin whereas nothing can do that nor Actual Sin neither but the Blood of Christ 6. Is it not a foolish thing and a Lye to say Children have Faith and are Disciples who are not capable of Understanding to assert a thing that no Man has any ground to believe nor can't without offering violence to his Reason 7. Is it not a weak thing to open a Door into the Church which Christ hath shut up 8. Is it not weak and an absurd thing to say that Infants can't be Saved except they be Baptized partly because Christ saith Except a Man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God Baptism as some of you say taking away Original Sin As if it were in the power and at the will of the Parents to save or damn their Children For this is intimated by this Notion of yours If the Parents or Friends baptize the Child it shall if it die in its Infancy be saved but if they nor no other indeavour to get it Baptized the Child is lost and must perish How can outward Water saith Mr. Charnock convey inward-Life How can Water a material thing work upon the Soul in a Physical manner Neither can it be proved That ever the Spirit of God is tied by any Promise to apply himself to the Soul in its Gracious Operations when the Body is applied to the Water He says Water applied to the Body Because the adult Person who sat under the preaching of the Word cannot be saved without Regeneration Can't God save poor dying Infants unless the same change by the Spirits Operations pass upon them Is not God a free Agent may he not do what he pleases and magnifie his Grace to poor dying Infants through the Blood of his Son in other ways than we know of Do not secret things belong to him what Vanity is there in the minds of some Men 8. Has God ordained Baptism to be an Ordinance to save the Souls of any Persons either the Adult or Infants is the Opus operatum of Baptism think you a likely way or means to beget or bring forth Children to Christ or make Disciples of them Baptism signifies no thing it being but a Sign where the inward Grace signified by it is wanting 9. Is it not strange that you should say That none but the Children of Believers ought to be Baptized And that Baptism is absolutely necessary to Church-Communion or an initiating Ordinance And yet
Persons or otherwise why were you Baptized afterwards Who can justifie you in this Practice I am persuaded our Brethren cannot will not do it if they rightly consider the light or dictates of your Consciences in this Matter 't is not what they are in their own Sense but what they are in your Judgment Speak are they Baptized Or is not that they call Baptism in your Consciences a Nullity Nay worse a Tradition of Men nay a prophanation of the Sacrament of Baptism How then can you justify your selves in such a Practice I have as much charity for our Brethren I hope as most of you have and love and honour them yet dare not transgress or invert Christ's holy Laws and Gospel-Order and therefore take heed what you do If there were no Baptized Churches with whom you might have Communion somewhat might be said in your Justification For upon a case of necessity that may be lawful or be permitted to be done which otherwise is utterly unlawful Besides I hear some of you daily confess they believe they are not such Orderly Churches as the Baptized Congregations are and that is the sum of what I say and believe concerning them why then do you chuse to have Fellowship with them Ought you not to follow the best and highest Reformation and clearest Discovery of God and to be in the most perfect and compleat Order of the Gospel you are able to arrive to the knowledg of Yet are not you contented to lie short in doing this according to the Sentiments of your Minds and Understandings Is this the way to that longed-for Reformation Is not Truth and Righteousness to be joyned with Peace and Love Nay and doth not my Love run out to our Brethren in a cleaner Channel than yours who resolve my Affections shall never pilot my Judgment or Understanding I have as great reason to love and honour some of the Congregational Way as any one Man this day in England it pleasing God to work upon my Soul I hope effectually when very young under the Ministry of one that is of that Persuasion who is yet living and none of the meanest Ministers now Preaching near this City whose Name is dear to me and one I do honour and ever shall as long as I live in the World. Yet nevertheless my blessed Lord and Saviour and his Truth lies nearer my Heart I speak the more upon this account not only to deliver your Souls from Temptations and disorderly Walking but also because I know it grieves many very gracious Persons and weakens the hands of those who carry on the Work of God amongst us and seems to me to obstruct the further Glory and Reformation of the Church Yet I am for such Communion with our Brethren as we may warrantably promote as to Pray and Preach together and to love and encourage Grace and Holiness in one another I 'll say no more I have done only remember that excellent saying of the Apostle Now I pray you Brethren that ye remember me in all things and keep the Ordinances as I delivered them to you Would to God I could say so of you 'T is not enough to keep the Ordinances of Christ but so to keep them as at first delivered to the Saints Let us go forward and not decline or seem to draw back in our Zeal and Testimony for the Truth Let us walk as we have attained God may bring our Brethren to see wherein they come short as well as wherein they know they are got before others I hope what I have written will be received in good part and none will be offended for I can appeal to God the searcher of all Hearts I have done all that I have done or writ in this Treatise in the integrity and uprighness of my Heart and in sincere love to Christ and his dispised Ordinances and to discharge my Conscience hoping a Blessing will attend it and that it will redownd to his Glory and the profit of his Church and if so I matter not what Censures I lie under For my Record is on high and my Witness is in Heaven I am contented to be any thing or nothing if I know my own deceitful Heart that God may be All in all to whom be Praise and Glory by Jesus Christ now and for evermore Amen FINIS The Table of the Contents Chap. I. BAptism of Water only intended in the Commission proved by Eight Reasons from Page 1 to p. 6. Water-Baptism to continue to the end of the World from p. 7 8 9. Baptized in the Name of Christ proved to be according to the Commission p. 11 12. The Objection that the Baptism in Water was John's Baptism Answered p. 12 13 14 15 16. Object That Paul was not sent to baptize Answered p. 20 22 Chap. II. Opening the true genuine literal proper signification of the word Baptizo p. 24 25 26 Chap. III. Baptism is Dipping c. proved from the practice of the Primitive Church p. 32 33 c. Chap. IV. Baptism Dipping or Plunging proved from the Spiritual signification of the Ordinance p. 42 43 c. Chap. V. Baptism proved Immerging or Dipping from the Typical and Metaphorical Baptisms spoken of in Scripture p. 56 57 c. Chap. VI. Believers the only subjects of Baptism from the Commission p. 63 64 c. Chap. VII Baptism of Believers proved the only Subjects of it from the practice of the Primitive Church p. 76 77 c. Chap. VIII Believers the only Subjects from the ends of Baptism p. 78. Seven ends of Baptism p. 80 Chap. IX Containing Eight Arguments proving Believers the only Subjects p. 86 to p. 99 Chap. X. The Arguments for Infant-Baptism Answered p. 100 to 124 Chap. XI Other Objections and pretended Proofs for Pedo-Baptism Answered p. 125 126 c. Chap. XII Answer to several Arguments p. 146 Chap. XIII Shewing the evil Consequents of Infants-Baptism p. 165 166 c. Chap. XIV Baptism a great Ordinance and Initiating p. 171 172 c. Water Baptism an Institution of Christ Water Baptism an Ordinance of Christ to the end of the World. * Gal. 3. 15. †Joh. 12. 49. | Heb. 3. 5. Continuation of Pool's Aâ—not on â—at 28 1â— 20. * Acts 2. 1 〈◊〉 3. Jewel B. of Sal. Sect. 9. in Confâ—t Harding Cyprian Epist 73. ad Jubaian Augustin lib. 3. against Maxim Bp. of the Arrians c. 17. Eulogius of Alexandria l. 2. contra Novatian apud Photium in Bibliotheca See Mr. S. F's Baptism before or after Faith. Mat. 3. 1. * Act. 2. 39. 8. 16. 10. 47. * Mat. 3. 16 17. Acts 10. 36 37 38 39 40 41. Rom. 15. 18. Joh. 10. 41. Neh. 8. 14 15. * Mr. Delaune * S. Fisher Circumcision â— cutting the fore-Skin round about quite off Danvers Treatise of Baptism 2d Edit p. 182. Grotius Pasor Vossius Mincaeus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Casaubon Dr. Du-Veil Liegh De prim papae p. 193. Beza De Jure Nat.