Opinion be of little signification yet I cannot forbear to say that as to the substance and main of the design I judg it of so considerable importance that I see not how it can be neglected without very great prejudice to Church-Communion to say no more Haply some may be so nice as to be offended with the Name and dislike Confirmation for fear of Bishoping as if that old-fashioned Garment had but a piece of new-nam'd Cloth put to it and drest up in another Mode if it were so can no good come out of Nazareth Bonus odor veritatis ex re qualibet but if any are under such a fear I think I may assure them they are more afraid than hurt yea afraid where no fear is as they will quickly find if they please to come and see I could wish our dissenting Brethren would weigh the matter more seriously and moderately and since there has been by many of different Perswasions so diligent a scrutiny made ad veritatem investâ—gandam and such holy longings after the mind of God herein the result was hop'd to have been a singular Agreement in the thing it self But it may seem strange I confess to all discerning Christians that such should not be able to discover or find out the Antichristian pollutions and mutations in Baptism in respect of the Subject and Manner of Baptizing which is so apparently contrary to the Gospel-rule and pattern also O that the God of Israel would open the eyes of some eminent ones amongst them to see the pure chrystal Stream of this Institution of Christ or help them to use Mr. Vennings's phrase to find the Vein of this Golden Ore since they will not receive it as refin'd and ready-stampt for them by such whose Skill or Faithfulness they seem to suspect But 1. How can they be perfect in Church-constitution and Order whilst they miss the mark in so considerable an Ordinance as Baptism taking a Stone of Babylon for a Foundation and that for Baptism which is none For it has been so grosly abused as a learned Writer noted in another case that there is nothing remaining of it amongst them save the meer Name And 2. May it not be admired to see Men of such Light and Conscience be only pleased with the Theory and notional part of an Ordinance of Christ They see it to be a Gospel-Institution but I could never yet understand they are in the practice thereof If ye know these things happy are ye if ye do them 3. But how contrary to the Rule and glorious Doctrine of the Lord Jesus would they act should they get into the practice thereof whilst they so grievously err in the administration of Baptism since that also wholly belongs to adult persons as must be own'd if the Scriptures be a perfect and sufficient Rule for us to walk by and express whatever is necessary to know concerning this as well as things of the like nature But probably some may object Since most of the Authors mentioned in this Discourse for the further evincing the Truth contended for are corrupt either in Baptism or laying on of hands or both to what purpose are they produced In answer to which I must say that what 's offered on the account of Authors and Antiquity has been occasionally done Mr. Danvers having led us in that path Nay I might say we are necessitated thereto by his means unless we should leave one chief part of his Book unanswered in regard he utterly denies the thing it self viz. Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers as such affirming there is no mention made of any such thing or practice in the Scripture and secondly in saying the Antient Fathers and asserters of it flew mainly to Tradition and the usage of the Church in the case Should an Adversary utterly deny Water-baptism however administred and say it was never commanded by Christ but is a meer human Invention or Innovation of Man yea and affirm that all the Fathers and Confessors that heretofore pleaded for it wholly made use of Tradition and usage of the Church in vindication thereof Would not any that is for Baptism judg it necessary not only to prove it instituted by the Lord Jesus and practised by the Apostles and primitive Christians but also in opposition to his Opponent that those Writers both of former and later times who contended for it did fly to the Scripture for its proof and confirmation tho some of them could not do so as touching the Subject and Manner of Administration Hence it is we have took the same method in the defence of an Ordinance of the same Nature and Authority And now my dear Brethren I cannot but acquaint you that my Spirit has been much refreshed to hear how the work of the Lord has been carried on of late amongst some of you and the readiness of many to receive this despised Truth I am perswaded the more a Truth is opposed the more it gets ground and the Saints with others inquire after it for since Mr. Danvers's Book came forth at one Meeting in London on one day upon my own knowledg near 30 persons came under the practice hereof Vincet veritas let Truth go on conquering and to conquer the Lord will arise and scatter all the clouds of Darkness and Opposition and take away the reproach cast upon his Servants for their Witness to his Truth and Zeal for his Name Let them be ashamed who transgress without cause if we are reproached let us take it patiently since it is for our precious Redeemer's sake who hath said You are my friends if you do whatsoever I command you and in another Place Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least Commandments and teach Men so he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of God Mat. 5.11 Brethren remember the Spirit of God pronounces them worthy of commendation who stand fast and keep the Ordinances as delivered to them 1 Cor. 11.2 and the more we see evil Men and Seducers as those called Quakers and others labouring on every side of us to tread under feet and contemptuously despise all of them let us stir up our selves with one heart in defence of them all and as they are appointed as Conduit-pipes for conveyance of the Spirit and blessings of the Gospel to our Souls so let us walk as such that experience the inward Life and Virtue of them that thereby we may beautify the Gospel and Doctrine of God and our Saviour in all things having Lamps and Oil also in our Vessels viz. the form of sound Words and power of Godliness in our Hearts and Lives And now finally Brethren that I may not be further tedious unto you my breathings and desires are that the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ the Father of Lights the God of all Comfort and Consolation would fill you with the knowledg of his Will in all Wisdom and spiritual Understanding grant you more clear and heavenly
this Truth 't is no marvel considering the Day they lived in Object If it be objected they with other Churches and People he mentions were much enlightned into the Truths of the Gospel Answ That is no good Argument since glorious Reformers and eminent enlightned Souls may notwithstanding lie short of some Institution of the Almighty as appears both in the Old and New Testament What glorious Light had David Solomon Hezekiah Josiah and many others of the Godly Kings and Prophets in Juda And yet one thing plainly laid down in the Book of the Law they were short in nay as some judg they did not see it viz. sitting in Booths in the Feast of the 7th Month of which we read in Nehem. 8. 13 14. They found written saith the Text in the Law which God commanded by Moses that the Children of Israel should dwell in Booths in the Feast of the seventh Month. Vers 15. And all the Congregation of them that were come again out of Captivity made Booths and sate under the Booths For since the days of Joshua the Son of Nun unto that day had not the Children of Israel done so and there was very great gladness verse 47. CHAP. IV. Shewing upon what ground some of the Independent and Presbyterian Perswasion have asserted Laying on of hands on baptised Persons IN Pag. 36. Mr. Danvers having done with Tradition and Fathers he tells us he will consider the Scripture-grounds urged in proof hereof by the Independents and those of the Presbyterian Perswasion In the first place which is the principal Heb. 6.1 2. which he saith Mr. Hanmer modestly expresses to be but a probable ground To which I shall give this answer that tho Mr. Hanmer uses such a Phrase viz. calling Heb. 6.1 2. a probable ground he doth not say 't is but a probable ground and those that read his Book shall find that by the Testimony of divers famous Men he abundantly endeavours to prove it to be absolutely the Laying on of hands intended in that Scripture See Page 25 26. And since I find many eminent Men speaking so plainly on this account of Heb. 6. 1 2. and to satisfy some Persons herein and prevent mistakes take a few instances out of Mr. Hanmer as the Judgment of several Divines upon that Text. The first I shall cite is Didoclavius who of three Interpretations of this Text mentioned by him admits of this Cap. 2. viz. Laying on of hands after Baptism and before admitted to the Lord's Table And gives a reason why it may be called Confirmatory Nempe ratione Ecclesiae approbantis confirmantis sua approbatione examinatum ad verum illud ac genuinum Confirmationis Sacramentum admittentis viz. Because of the Churches approving and by their approbation confirming of the Person examined and admitting him unto that true and genuine Rite of Confirmation The next is Major on Heb. 6.2 On this place saith he all that I have seen mark understand it of Imposition of hands on such as have been baptized only Bullinger Mr. Hooker Lib. 5. Sect. 6. in his Appendix Pag. 3. alledging T.C. thus speaking Tell me why there should be any such Confirmation seeing no one Tittle thereof can be found in Scripture Thus answers ironically except the Epistle to the Hebrews chap. 6. 2. be Scripture plainly intimating saith Mr. Hanmer he thought that place to be a sufficient ground for it and that to be the meaning of the Apostle there Mr. Parker de Polit. Eccles lib. 3. c. 15 16. refuting the Arguments of such as plead for Episcopal Confirmation at large assents saith our Author to what is by me delivered First He shews the general nature and end of it viz. admission of Members into the Communion of the Church which accordingly was used towards such as were converted This Imposition of hands saith he Heb. 6.2 is that very Ecclesiastical Union by a solemn professing of Faith and admission into the Church Secondly He shews the necessity of it from this Text Heb. 6.2 saith Mr. Hanmer Thirdly That it ought to be done publickly and before the Church Et hic ordo inter gravia negotia agitur enim de membro recipiendo publicum hoc est publici juris ideo non nisi Ecclesiae consensu ejusdem cui adjungendus est competens perficiendus This course is to be reckoned among the weighty affairs it is a publick thing and of publick right for the matter in agitation is concerning the receiving of a Member and therefore not to be performed without the consent of that same Church to which the Competent is to be joined Fourthly He shews the Antiquity thereof and that 't is an Apostolical Institution and the practice of the Antient Church He further affirms pag. 28. that Piscator so understood Heb. 6. 1 2. viz. to mean Laying on of hands upon the Baptized Also Beza Paraeus and Rivet whose words take as follows â—â—â—mpositio manuum cujus mentio fit Heb. 6.2 referenda est ad solennem Baptizatorum Benedictionem quae à Pastoribus solebat fieri eos in Christianismi vocationis confirmantibus Imposition of hands whereof mention is made Heb. 6.2 is to be referred to the solemn Benediction of the Baptized which was used to be performed by the Pastors confirming them in the calling of Christianity He mentions the Doctors of Leyden shewing this to be their sense upon this Text also Calvin who gives this only as the chief thing intended by the Apostle in this place from hence draws this remarkable Inference wherein saith Mr. Hanmer he plainly declares his apprehensions concerning the Original and Antiquity of this practice in the Church of Christ Hic unus locus c. This one place saith he abundantly testifies that the-original of this Ceremony viz. Confirmation or Laying on of hands flow'd from the Apostles which yet afterwards was turned into a Superstition as the World almost always degenerates from the best Institutions into Corruption Wherefore to this day this pure Institution mark ought to be retained but the Superstition to be corrected Why should Mr. Danvers presume to say these Men confess the Scripture is but a probable ground and that Tradition and Antiquity is the more certain And again that there is nothing but a faint insinuation from the Scripture to ground Laying on of hands upon What Men can speak more fully to a Text But to proceed he adds Hyperus who saith Imposition of hands Heb. 6.2 was in the confirmation of those that had been baptized and rightly instructed that they might receive the Holy Spirit He urgeth several other Persons of the same mind as Illyricus Mr. Deering c. To which I might add what Mr. Hughes late of Plymouth in his Ep. to Mr. Hanmer's Book mentions on this account speaking of Heb. 6.2 It is by some glorious Lights in the Church saith he understood of Confirmation in that Phrase of Imposition of hands annexed to Baptism Heb. 6. Whence it is said
and have need of it as well as others besides this sort concerns not all no only sick Persons and may be practised again and again as oft as Persons may be sick or under bodily infirmities but that Principle that is one of the beginning words of Christ's Doctrine is only to be laid or practised once Heb. 6.1 Not Laying again c. 2ly Unbelievers had hands laid upon them for healing and therefore I might also argue it appertains not unto Babes as such Moreover anointing with Oil is left as the Ordinance for healing in the Church 3. Mr. Danvers should make a difference between what Christ taught as a Promise or Gift to some particular Persons and what he taught as a general Practice that which is minded in Mark 16. is laid down promissory-wise to such as should have the gift of Faith or the Faith of Miracles and is therefore nothing to the purpose 4. They distinguish not between the Word or Doctrine of Christ and Miracles which were for the confirmation thereof which in Mark 16.20 the Spirit doth which causeth their mistake But do they not confute themselves by thus arguing they own the Doctrine of Laying on of hands to be a Foundation-principle of Christ but this they speak of here must needs be granted to be temporary being for the confirmation of the Word as he himself confesseth and every Word or Ordinance of Christ as I have shewed was more or less confirmed with Signs and Wonders according to this Promise of Christ I shall say no more to this but proceed to his next Objection 2. Object Page 44. If every one of these Principles in Heb. 6.2 are so absolutely to be taken in by Babes and without which we are not to esteem them communicable what do you say to the Doctrine of Baptisms in the Text one of the Principles must all be baptized with the Baptism of the Spirit and of Sufferings c. Answ We answer by distinguishing between that Baptism that is a practical Duty and that which is taught or laid down by our Lord Jesus to be believed that that is commanded ought absolutely to be obeyed by every Babe and 't is as necessary for every Babe to believe the Doctrine of Sufferings which Jesus Christ preached to all that would follow him and be his Disciples this was that which he taught Mat. 20.22 23. to the two Sons of Zebedee that they and consequently all God's Children should more or less be baptized with In the World saith Christ you shall have tribulation John 16.33 'T is necessary every Saint should be instructed into this and believe this that through much Tribulation we must enter into the Kingdom of God Acts 14.22 and all those who will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution 2 Tim. 3.12 We say not that every one must actually forsake House and Lands and Life for Christ's sake and the Gospel or else be none of his Disciples but be ready in holy disposition so to do when call'd to it And as to the Baptism of the Spirit that the Spirit is promised to every true Believer see Joel 2.28 29. which Peter Acts 2.17 compared with vers 38 39. applies indefinitely to all penitent baptized Persons whether Jews or Gentiles as their Right by promise of the Father to receive and not to them of that Generation only but also to such as should repent and be baptized in all succeeding Ages this Promise is one and the same with that in John 7.38 called Rivers of Water implying fillings with the Spirit In Acts 2.38 't is said to be the Gift of the Holy Spirit In Acts 11.17 like Gifts In Acts 8.15 the Holy Spirit which the Apostles in the belief of the promise Joel 2. and Joh. 14.16 Acts 2.38 prayed for From which Scriptures it appears that all Believers are under the like Promises of the Holy Ghost on like terms of Repentance Faith c. And according to the measure of Faith given us by Christ may our fillings with the Holy Spirit be And thus it is the duty of every Disciple to believe he shall receive or be baptized with the Spirit according as the Will of the same Spirit is that divides to every Man the particular measures thereof having the Promise of a faithful and never-failing God to rely upon provided he go on in his Obedience as directed in the blessed Word for the attaining of it Object But if it be objected none are baptized with the Holy Spirit but such as receive it visibly and in its extraordinary Gifts Answ 1. Suppose none are so baptized now yet all the Saints are to believe the Promise of the Spirit and do receive it too and doth not God perform his Promise because none so receive the Spirit viz. to be baptiz'd therewith 1 Cor. 12.13 2. All are to believe the Baptism of the Spirit was given in the Apostles days to confirm the Gospel or Word of Christ And 't is to be observed that Paul to the Ephesians on whom he had imposed hands Acts 19.6 and the spake with Tongues and prophesied takes no notice of those visible Gifts but saith In whom also after ye believed ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of Promise Eph. 1.13 plainly shewing 'tis the great Benefit received and enjoyed by Believers to be sealed by the Spirit 't is not matter of rejoicing to work Miracles as 't is to know our Names are written in Heaven And thus we have explained the Doctrine of Baptisms Now to what he says in the 3d place p. 45 That the Laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 may respect the Laying on of hands upon the Ministry for their solemn Investiture into their Office whether Deacons Elders or Messengers which he says is necessary to be taught known and understood by all tho all are not commanded into the personal practice of it for all are not Prophets Apostles Teachers and 't is most remarkable that the Doctrine or teaching of Laying on of hands is all that is mentioned in this Scripture all baptized Believers must be taught it that 's plain but that they are obliged therefore to practise it is not here or elsewhere to be found Answ Before I give a further Answer to this grand Objection I can't but observe how he mistakes the Text i. e. than the Doctrine or teaching of Laying on of hands only is mentioned in this Scripture why does he speak thus of Imposition of hands only may he not as well speak so concerning Repentance Faith and Baptism as of this Principle i. e. they also are necessary only to be taught and known by all and none concern'd in the personal practice of them Would any judg this Good Divinity What reason can he give seeing all the four are practical Ordinances that the three first should be taught so as to be personally practis'd by all and the other only to be believ'd Tho what he says here has already been fully answer'd yet I shall
was not admitted to the Eucharist Doubtless if the Church of Judea first planted in the order of the Gospel is to be followed or if that which was the practice of some of the Churches was also of every Church then both these Ordinances as well as the other beginning Principles must precede or are prerequisite to Church-Communion and Fellowship Object But doth not this straiten and narrow the Interest of Jesus Christ Answ Mr. Danvers's Reply to Mr. Wills about Baptism is a very good answer viz. This saith he is no other than Reformation in all Ages since the Antichristian defection hath been charged with and particularly that Reformation that has been endeavoured in that other Ordinance of the Lord's Supper therefore the Presbyterians cry out against the Independents for sinful Schism Fomentèrs of Faction and narrowing of Christ's Interest in their respective Separations and Church-Communions The same do the Prelats say to the Presbyterians and the very same do the Papists say to the Episcoparians If Mr. D. in the work of Reformation excels or has more light than such he speaks of in respect of Church-Constitution and Communion and resolves to pursue his work tho he is reproach'd on this account why should he blame us who according to our light labour after a pure and perfect Reformation or doth he judg he has got to such a degree of knowledg that he is perfect and needs no more light nor instruction and that the last Stone of Reformation and Restoration here is laid because Baptism shines forth in its primitive purity Remember him who said such was his Humility What I know not teach thou me and Apollos tho mighty in the Scriptures could stoop to the Counsel and Instruction of Aquila and Priscilla tho much inferior to him who taught him the way of God more perfectly Act. 18.26 6. Ought not we to stand fast and hold the Traditions we have been taught and is not this worthy of Commendation what saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 11.2 Now I praise you Brethren that you remember me in all things and keep the Ordinances as they were delivered unto you And are we not commanded to withdraw from every Brother that walks disorderly and not after the Traditions we have received Besides can we comfortably have Communion with such as oppose a Command of God nay that make it but a Tradition of Men and an Antichristian Innovation And as in all Fundamentals of Salvation so in those of Church-Constitution we ought to be agreed before we can orderly sit down together 7. But to say no more I would caution all our Brethren to take heed what they affirm on this account I mean concerning us and this sacred Institution since they seem so cloudy in their understanding about those Scriptures urged as the great Warranty for our Practice If God has hid for reasons best known to himself this Truth of Imposition of hands from their eyes as he hath the holy Ordinance of Baptism from the Independents c. it will be their wisdom to forbear Reflections let them not be angry lest it be found to be a Truth of God and they consequently prove offended at Christ himself who left this as well as Baptism amongst the beginning-principles of his Doctrine Why should they be offended at us for having an equal love to all the Commandments of Christ I would hope they have reason to judg 't is from hence we so earnestly contend with them on this account 8. I cannot but marvel that our Brethren should call Laying on of hands a Doctrine or Tradition of Men and render those who plead for it guilty of adding to the Word of God and yet receive such into Communion at the Lord's Table as are in the practice of it What uncharitable thoughts do they retain of their Brethren and what guilt on this Consideration do they bring on their own Souls But let me close with one Caution more since they know 't is as sinful every way to diminish from God's Word as to alter or add to it let them take heed lest they be found guilty therein We have now traced Mr. D. quite through and have little more to do In page 53. he labours to remove an Objection brought against him from Antiquity and since he has fairly stated it take it in his own words As to the point of Antiquity tho 't is granted the Antients and their Followers ever since have erred not only in the Subject but in divers Circumstances about this Rite of Imposition of hands yet in-as-much as there has been all along such a witness born to the thing it self it makes for its Apostolicalness and confirms our Practice therein Now take his Answer to it It doth not appear saith he that such a Witness hath been born all along thereto for Mr. Baxter ingenuously acknowledges that Justin Martyr Ireneus and others in those times are silent about it c. And those Authorities that are pretended to assert the same in the first Centuries have been proved to be spurious and supposititious 2ly That pretence of antient Prescription without the Word of God to warrant it can never justify the Divine Authority of any Practice Answ 1. We fully agree with him viz. whatever is found in antient Prescriptions concerning this or any Practice signifies nothing if God's Word doth not witness to it But having such evident proof from God's Word to warrant this Precept we never judged it worth while to search into Authors concerning it neither should we have cited any now had we not been forc'd by our Opposers And as to what he says concerning Mr. Baxter's ingenuous Confession that Justin Martyr and Ireneus are both silent about it it signifies very little for first we have nothing but Mr. Baxter's say-so for it who may be has overlook'd some places of these Authors or probably not met with all their Works But 2. Since their Silence only is pretended it carries no great force with it must we of necessity produce all the Antients expresly witnessing thereto or else is all nothing that is brought from Antiquity in the Case We have mentioned several antient Witnesses and some of the 2d and 3d Centuries which are neither spurious supposititious suborn'd Witnesses nor Knights of the Post tho Mr. D. is pleased so to call them And now to conclude we must say again against what is mention'd p. 54. that there is a clearer Precept for Imposition of hands on baptized Believers as such than can be urged for that on Church-Officers or the observation of the first Day of the Week c. I have ground to conclude Mr. D. thinks it his duty to keep holy the first Day of the Week as the Christian Sabbath We gave Mr. D. no ground to say that which he did of us viz. Reproach the Wisdom of Christ and slight the Authority of the Holy Scriptures as tho we had not a sufficient Direction therein in all parts of God's Worship
as much corrupted changed and polluted as this Nay what Ordinance has not Our work is to discover and remove all Popish Additions and Pollutions which in the days of darkness crept in that so we may see every Institution shining forth in its primitive purity and splendor and not reject any Ordinance of Christ because polluted by Antichrist What tho as he said those Popes Councils and Fathers that enjoined and imposed Infants Baptism for an Ordinance of Christ enjoined that of Confirming Infants Reply If it was as early corrupted altered and changed as Baptism ought we not since God has given us the Light of his Word and Spirit to recover it from those Corruptions as well as Baptism Infants Baptism we all say is a Popish Tradition or humane Innovation yet is Baptism Christ's Ordinance so in like manner we say is laying on of hands upon Infants or such as have only been baptized in Infancy a meer Popish Rite and Innovation yet Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers as such is an Ordinance of Christ as divers worthy Men have clearly proved from God's Word And tho the Antient Fathers and Councils he speaks of together with those of the Church of Rome and England do wholly fly unto Tradition to prove their practice of Laying on of hands upon Children this will no more weaken our practice of Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers than their flying to Tradition and Usage of the Church to prove their Infants Baptism weakens our practice of baptizing Believers Moreover those of the false Church who wholly make use of Tradition to prove their Pedobaptism might without doubt had God been pleased to open their eyes seen that Baptism was a Divine Institution practised by the Apostles even so might they also have easily seen that that Laying on of hands practised by the Apostles next after Baptism was Christ's holy Appointment tho they could not find their ridiculous Rite and Popish Ceremony of Confirming Children so to be there being not the least Word of God for it But from what our Opponents say of Authors I observe that in the Antichristian Church ever since the Apostacy from the good old way of the Gospel there has been somewhat practised and kept up in the room and imitation of that Laying on of hands instituted by Christ and practised by the Apostles upon baptized Believers as such and as necessary to Church-Communion as well as they have kept up something they call Baptism in imitation of the true Baptism And 't is evident that as the Romish Church has abominably corrupted the Ordinance of Baptism as to the Subject and Manner of Administration and added many ridiculous and superstitious Fopperies to it even so they have done by Laying on of hands The Silver is become dross and the Wine mixed with Water Isa 1.22 He shall saith Daniel think to change Times and Laws speaking of the little Horn and they shall be given into his hand c. Chap. 7.25 But to proceed do our Brethren utterly detect all those impious Forgeries and Ceremonies used in Baptism and contended for by those Fathers Councils and corrupt Churches they speak of and so clearly witness against them for changing the Subject and Manner of Baptizing and yet all the while hold for Baptism it self and faithfully contend for it yea and conclude too notwithstanding those Abuses and Corruptions by the Antients and in the false Church Baptism all along was maintained this I say rather confirms and proves the thing it self to be an Ordinance of Jesus Christ than otherwise tho not as they perform and practise it why cannot they do the like concerning that Rite of Popish Confirmation We do detect and abominate all those superstitious Ceremonies used by them and witness against them for changing of the Subject viz. from baptized Believers to sprinkled Infants or such as were rantised in their Infancy and yet contend for the thing it self as practised in the Apostles time and little reason they have to blame us herein since the work of Reformation or to labour to reduce Ordinances to their primitive Purity and Lustre is by all accounted a glorious Work yea and it is a full and compleat Reformation we all long for not only for one Ordinance to be restored and refined from the dross and abominable filth of Popish Traditions but every Appointment and Ordinance of Christ Mr. Danvers p. 30. having given us an account how Laying on of hands or Confirmation has been asserted and practised By the Antients By Councils By the Church of Rome By the Church of England By some of the Independent and Presbyterian Perswasion And Lastly By some of the Baptized Churches He comes to examine upon what ground such a great Ordinance has been and is enjoined Reply Doubtless it concerns us all to see what ground or Scripture-warrant we have for whatever we do or is done in the Worship and Service of God and as to Confirmation or Laying on of hands as asserted and practised by some he speaks of I marvel not that they leave the Scripture and fly to Tradition For first as to that which the Popish Church calls an Ordinance of Jesus Christ 't is so blasphemous and ridiculous as he well observes that the very naming of the particulars thereof may fully detect the folly and impiety of it whether respecting the Name which is called Chrysm Vnction Perfection c. or the Nature which is done by putting the sign of the Cross with the Bishop's finger in the forehead of the Confirmed with these words I sign thee with the sign of the Cross and with the Chrysm of Salvation in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit the Party being in a white Garment his Head bound with Linen his Hair cut and attended with Gossips or Sureties this is saith Mr. Danvers what several Popes and Councils have by their Canons and Decrees determined and enjoined as the great Sacrament of Confirmation pag. 3. Reply Well might Hommius tell us that it is not only contrary to the Scriptures but Blasphemous and Idolatrous and the vain Invention of superstitious Men. And well might Tilenus call it an Excrement of Antichrist And Amesius say the reasons given for the same by the Papists are both empty and vain and Mr. Calvin cry out against it as is minded by Mr. Danvers To which I might add a passage out of a Treatise of Mr. Hanmer a Presbyterian who tho very clear as touching Laying on of hands upon Adult Persons Baptized before they are admitted to the Lord's Table yet cries down the Papists practice herein in respect of manner and form they use saith he anointing with Chrysm a compound of Oil and Balsam consecrated by the Bishop which as it was never instituted by Christ nor his Apostles so saith he as some affirm it had its original from Calixtus Bishop of Rome Anno 218 who ordained Confirmation to be performed with Chrysm which before was done with
that this abundantly testifies that the Original of this Ceremony flowed from the Apostles Before I proceed I might cite a passage full to the same purpose as the Judgment of the Learned Assembly of Divines which take as follows out of their Annotations on Heb. 6.2 Laying on of hands say they is usually called Confirmation which stood first in examining those that had been baptized what progress they had made in Christianity Secondly In praying for them that God would continue them in the Faith and give them more Grace strengthning them by his Holy Spirit they laid their hands upon them whence the Apostolical Constitution was called Laying on of Hands Moreover What Mr. Baxter speaks upon this account I can't well omit Confirmat p. 124 125. If the Vniversal Church of Christ saith he have used Prayer and Laying on of hands as a practice received from the Apostles and no other beginning of it can be found then we have no reason to think this Ceremony ceased or to interpret the foresaid Scripture contrary to this practice of the Vniversal Church But the Antecedent is true ergo And if any say Anointing and Crossing were antient I answer saith he First That they were as antient in the Popish use as the matter of a Sacrament or necessary Signs is not true nor proved but frequently disproved by our Writers against Popish Confirmation Secondly Nor can it be proved that they were as antient as indifferent things Thirdly We prove the contrary because they were not in Scripture-times there being no mention of them Fourthly So that we bring Antiquity but to prove the continuance of a Scripture-practice and so to clear the practice of it But the Papists plead Fathers for that which the Scripture is a stranger unto I shall close this with Reverend Mr. Hooker The antient Custom of the Church saith he Eccles Polit. p. 351. was after they had baptized to add thereto Imposition of hands with effectual Prayer for the illumination of God's most Holy Spirit to confirm and perfect that which the Grace of the said Spirit had already begun in Baptism for the means to obtain the Graces which God doth bestow are our Prayers and our Prayers to that intent are available as well for others as for our selves But to pass by this I intreat the Reader to consider that tho we have urged the Testimony of several Authors who are one with us in the main concerning our Practice herein yet we build not upon Men or Tradition but on the Word of God neither do we suppose any necessity for us to take up new weapons to defend so plain a Truth since our Adversaries have been so sufficiently worsted and put to flight by the Sword of the Spirit as used by several eminent Saints in times past What we have mentioned of Authors we have been in part forced to by what Mr. Danvers and others have said of them And that leads me to what he speaks pag. 40. of the Scripture-grounds on which the Baptists have asserted this Rite as he calls it and founded this Practice of Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers as necessary to Church-Communion as before especially held forth Heb. 6.1 2. tho not affirmed with that sobriety and modesty as the other from Probability but rather Infallibility denying fellowship to any that do not receive it c. CHAP. V. Shewing how and upon what ground the Baptized Churches do assert Laying on of hands HOW those learned Persons he speaks of have writ and asserted Laying on of hands from that Text I shall leave to the judicious Reader by considering the Instances forecited and that they hold it also as necessary to Church-Communion might I presume be made manifest but that is not our present work but rather to make the thing it self appear to be an Ordinance of Jesus Christ and in order to this those two Particulars or Principles Mr. Danvers lays down we will consider viz. First That to every Ordinance of Christ there must be some plain positive word of Institution to confirm it and not only human Tradition or far-fetcht Consequences and Inferences such as the many Volumes written of Circumcision and federal Holiness to assert Infants Baptism to be an Ordinance of Christ which no ordinary Capacity can reach and only Men of Parts and Abilities can trace and follow in their Meanders Secondly That to practise any thing in the Worship of God for an Ordinance of his without an Institution is Will-worship and Superstition c. Answ The great Text urged for this Institution he says is Heb. 6.1 2. Therefore leaving the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ let us go on to perfection not laying again the foundation of Repentance from dead Works and of Faith towards God of the Doctrine of Baptisms Laying on of hands c. This is the Text affirmed saith he to be the great Charter of the Church for this point of Faith and Practice but how to find the least warrant for the same there he says we see not If it was indeed said let all baptized Believers have hands laid upon them with as much plainness as let all Believers be baptized Mat. 28.29 Acts 10.43 or let all baptized Believers eat the Lord's Supper 1 Cor. 11.24 Acts 2.41 it was something to the purpose Answ First we grant that to every Ordinance of Christ there must be some word of Institution and that such far-fetch Consequence as he minds will not do or be sufficient but that every Institution must be laid down in such plain positive Words as he seems to affirm viz. Let all baptized Believers have Hands laid upon them I deny it being none of our Principle I judg nor theirs neither since they practise such things as Institutions of Christ which are no where in so many plain positive words commanded as may hereafter be shewed But as to the other thing he minds we do agree with him in that matter and say Whatsoever is done in the Worship and Service of God without an Institution is Will-worship and you shall see that our Principles agree and comport with all those honest Protestant Principles concerning what we have to say further about Laying on of hands c. But to reply to what he says concerning Heb. 6. it matters not whether it be Heb. 5.12 or Heb. 6.1 2. or Acts 8.16 17. or Acts 19.6 or any other Scripture that is the chief Text urged to prove Laying on of hands an Ordinance and Institution of Jesus Christ provided that the Scripture urged on this account will prove it so to be But whereas he says he finds not the least warrant for the same I somewhat marvel at it considering what has been formerly written and proved from that Text by several worthy and able Men whose Books he nor none else have ever yet answered But it seems he would have it said in so many plain words Let all baptized Believers have hands laid upon them or else all
examin this Text further and make it evident that the Laying on of hands in this Text cannot intend or be meant that upon Church-Officers but must mean that sort now contended for and I am more willing to speak further to this Objection because this being answered our work is done 1. Mind that the Apostle is speaking only here of the first Principles of the Doctrine of Christ are they not so called i. e. Doctrinae Christianae Initia seu Rudimenta the Beginnings or Rudiments of Christian Doctrine Or as Beza Prima Christianismi Principia the first Principles of Christianity Now Laying on of hands on Officers is not a beginning Principle nor of the Alphabet of the Christian Religion I think they will not affirm it so to be May not a Church or People profess and practise the first or beginning Principles of Religion and proceed very far in the way of Christianity and yet have no Officers orderly ordained amongst them But 2. These Principles appertain to the Foundation of God's House being such on which the House is built they are all equal in kind nature and quality and one not to be without the other God having joined them together as all of one rank for the bearing up this Spiritual Fabrick see vers 1. But laying on of hands on Officers is an Ordinance of another rank and nature a Church must be first gathered or constituted and Persons make a considerable progress in the Profession of Religion before they can orderly be chosen or ordained to the Office of Elders or Deacons In short Officers are not for the being but well-being of the Church and therefore such a Laying on of hands cannot be intended here We read of Churches who had no Officers amongst them Tit. 1.5 6. If a Minister were to preach unto a People what are the Fundamentals of a Gospel-Church viz. what Persons ought to do that so in an orderly way they may be congregated together in the fellowship of the Gospel or be made regular Members of the visible Church would he tell them Laying on of hands on Officers is one Principle Surely no he would not affirm this to be one of the Rudiments of Christian Practice that which first of all a Christian should be instructed in and come under that he may have a being in God's House nor a Foundation-principle of Church-Constitution but that the Laying on of hands spoken of Heb. 6. is so nothing is more evident for if it be a Principle of the Foundation either it must be a Fundamental of Salvation or of Church-Constitution but none will say of the former therefore it wust be of the latter 3. That it cannot intend Laying on of hands on Church-Officers might appear further because 't is joined to or coupled with Baptism why should Laying on of hands on Officers be by the Spirit of God laid down after this sort Repentance from dead Works and Faith towards God the Doctrine of Baptisms and Laying on of hands the Resurrection from the Dead and Eternal Judgment May we not safely argue that the Laying on of hands which follows here in order of words is what followed in order of practice See Acts 8.17 and 19.6 And is it not according to what they acknowledg sound reasoning in another case upon Mat. 28.20 and Mark 16. that Baptism mentioned in the Commission joined to and following Faith and Illumination in order of words is what the Apostles in order of practice viz. after Faith and Illumination did baptize with Acts 2.41 Acts 8. and 10. But that was the Baptism of Water which therefore is only intended in the Commission c. And thus by comparing Scripture with Scripture we may be satisfied in those things which at first seem'd doubtful 4. It cannot be meant here because all the Church of the Hebrews as well as that in Samaria Acts 8. and consequently all other Churches had laid or come under this Principle as they had laid Repentance Faith and Baptism when they were Babes Now who can reasonably imagine either that the whole Church of the Hebrews were Officers or that Officers are Babes in Christ That this is the Laying on of hands on baptized Believers is easy to understand 1. Because taught to Babes Heb. 5.12 2. Babes are capable or meet subjects thereof 3. Babes have need of it as Children of Milk 4. Babes we read were in the practice thereof Acts 8. and 19.5 Because it belongs to them as such and were at first taught it Heb. 5. and 6.1 2. this cannot be said of any other sort I shall say no more only add something out of Dr. Jer. Taylor of Confirm p. 45 48. full to our purpose which considering the learning and worthiness of the Author I judg may be useful what he minds take as followeth speaking of Laying on of hands called Confirmation We have seen saith he the Original from Christ the practice and exercise of it in the Apostles and the first Converts in Christianity what I shall now remark is That this is established and passed into a Christian Doctrine the Warranty for what I say is Heb. 6.1 where the holy Rite of Confirmation so called from the effects of this Administration and exprest by the ritual part of it Imposition of hands is reckoned a fundamental Point and here are six fundamental points of St. Paul ' s Catechism which he laid as the Foundation or beginning of the Institution of the Christian Church and therefore they who deny it dig up Foundations Now that this Imposition of hands is what the Apostle used in confirming the Baptized and invocating the Holy Spirit upon them remains to be proved which is done by shewing 1. It cannot intend Absolution nor 2. Ordination And this is evident 1. Because the Apostle would henceforth leave to speak of the Foundation and go on to perfection that is to higher Mysteries now in Rituals there is none higher than Ordination 2. The Apostle saying he would speak no more of Imposition of Hands presently discourses of the mysteriousness of the Evangelical Priesthood and the Honour of that Vocation by which 't is evident he speaks nothing of Ordination in the Catechism or Narratives of Fundamentals 3. This also appears from the Context not only because Laying on of hands is immediately set after Baptism but because in the very next words of his Discourse he enumerates and apportions to these Ordinances their proper proportioned Effects i. e. to Faith and Baptism Illumination to Laying on of hands the tasting the Heavenly Gift and being made Partakers of the Holy Spirit by the thing signified declaring the Sign and by hopes of the Resurrection tastes of the good things of the World to come He that falls from this state and turns Apostate from this whole Dispensation digging down and turning up these Foundations shall never be built again he can never be baptized again and never confirmed any more If he remains on these Foundations tho he sins
this Ordinance as well as those twelve The way of God touching the Administration of Gospel-Institutions being one and the same in all the Churches of the Saints notwithstanding what has already been offered may be a satisfactory Answer to Mr. D. concerning what he minds from those two Scriptures yet finding so many Learned Men both antient and of later times agreeing with us in their Expositions on these two Places and not knowing but their Words may with some take more place than what such a one as I may speak I 'll cite a Passage or two Cyprian speaking of Acts 8.17 saith It was not necessary they should be baptized again only what was wanting was performed by Peter and John that by Prayer and Imposition of Hands the Holy Spirit should be invocated Saith Hierom on the Acts of the Apostles We find another Instance of the Celebration of this ritual Mystery for it is signally exprest of the Baptized at Ephesus Paul first baptized them and then laid his Hands upon them and they received the Holy Spirit And these Testimonies are the great Warranty for this holy Ordinance Eucherites is cited by Dr. Taylor p. 43. speaking thus The same thing now done in Imposition of Hands on single Persons is no other than what was done upon all Believers in the descent of the H. Spirit He mentions Zanchius saying I wish the Examples of the Apostles and Primitive Churches were of more value amongst Christians It were well if they were so saith the Doctor but there is more than meer Examples these Examples of such Solemnities the Apostles are our Masters in them and have given Rules and Precedents for the Church to follow this is a Christian Law and written as all Scriptures are for our Instruction Estius on Heb. 6.2 affirms that the Laying on of Hands mentioned Acts 8.17 Acts 19.6 by St. Luke is that of Confirmation whereby the Spirit of God is given to Persons baptized wherewith with they being strengthned confess the Name of Christ undauntedly among the Enemies of the Faith And again saith he That Hands were wont to be laid upon Persons baptized after the example of the Apostles all Antiquity teacheth Dr. Hammond also in his Annot. on Acts 8.17 saith That it was Confirmation may appear probable because it so soon attended their Conversion and Baptism When the Apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the Word of God they sent Peter and John vers 14. Which agrees well saith he with that of Confirmation which is an Act reserved to the Rulers of the Church and not communicated or allowed to inferior Officers such as Philip the Deacon here And then paraphasing upon Acts 19.6 he saith After this Paul by Imposition of hands and benediction gave them Confirmation by which means the Holy Spirit came on them Mr. Ralph Venning in his Remains speaking of Acts 8.17 and 19.6 gives his understanding upon them That it was the practice of the Apostles after they had baptized Persons sooner or later to lay Hands upon them Thus from what has been said I hope it may appear to all inquiring Souls in opposition to what Mr. Danvers saith page 47. that these two Places are clear Precedents and Rules for this Practice as well as Heb. 6.1 2. and other Scriptures we have insisted upon for as much as there was a Laying on of Hands practised immediately after Baptism and with much certainty upon every Member or baptized Believer and to such an End as is attainable in these times CHAP. VII Further shewing that Prayer with Imposition of Hands upon baptized Believers remains for ever as a standing or perpetual Administration BUT lest any should still object this Ordinance doth not continue neither is the End attainable now I am willing to add two or three Arguments for the further evincing of these particulars Arg. 1. Because the Lord was pleased to bear witness to or ratify this blessed Ordinance or Principle of Christ's Doctrine with the like Signs Wonders and Gifts of the Holy Spirit as he did any other Word Command or Principle of the said Doctrine Now what was thus established must needs remain in full force to the end of the World as our duty and dangerous it is to labour to make it void for by the same Argument may an Enemy lay waste and take away another yea and consequently every one Arg. 2. Because it is a Foundation-principle of God's House or one of the great Pillars next to Christ on which it is built it must needs remain and very dangerous it is for any to take away a Foundation-stone 'T is very absurd saith Mr. Blackwood on Matth. p. 688. to think that one of the six Foundation-principles commended to us by the Apostle should cease and all the other remain to the end of the World Nay is not Imposition of Hands placed in the midst betwixt Faith and Repentance on the one side and Eternal Judgment on the other 't is fenced in on every side there is no coming to slight it 'T is absurd to think the Apostle would place one temporary Principle that was to last but a short time amongst five perpetual Principles and call them all by the same name of a Foundation c. Arg. 3. Because the Promise of the Spirit is very extensive 't is made to all believing and obedient Souls to the end of the World Matt. 28. ult Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and lo I am with you always to the end of the World John 14.15 16 17. If you love me keep my Commandments and I will pray the Father and he shall give you another Comforter that he may abide with you for ever even the Spirit of Truth which the World cannot receive c. Dr. Jer. Taylor p. 53. speaks excellently concerning the perpetuity of this Ordinance And from this very ground take his own words The perpetuity of this holy Rite appears 1. Because the great Gift of the Holy Ghost was promised to abide with the Church for ever Repent and be baptized every one of you and ye shall receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost not the meanest Person amongst you but shall receive this great thing for the Promise is to you and to your Children and to all that are afar off even so many as the Lord our God shall call this Promise is made to all and unto all for ever And presently speaking as to Laying on of Hands as God's way for the ministring of it I say such a Solemnity saith he 't is not easie to be supposed should be appointed that is it is not imaginable that a solemn Rite annex'd to a perpetual Promise should be transient and temporary for by the nature of Relatives they must be of equal abode the Promise is of a thing for ever the Ceremony or Rite was annexed to the Promise and therefore this also must abide for ever Arg. 4. Because the Spirit which is promised
in some other way yet we ought not to neglect our Duty Because I have obtained Faith in some other than God's usual way for the begetting it shall I not hear the Word preached for the further increasing it in my Heart Again because I have remission of Sins and other Blessings promised in Baptism before baptized shall I reject that Ordinance Sure Cornelius did not do so Acts 10. 45 47. And again I feed by Faith on Jesus Christ and receive his Flesh which is Meat indeed and his Blood which is Drink indeed shall I therefore refuse the Ordinance of the Lord's Supper which is appointed as the Ministry of his Body and Blood God forbid Even so let none neglect this Appointment nothwithstanding any Gift or Measure of the Holy Spirit they have received since it has pleased God to direct to it and left it in his House as a perpetual Ministration Destroy it not for a Blessing that is in it Isa 65.8 Motive 5. Consider the great need thou hast of the Holy Spirit yea and of a further increase thereof tho I should grant thou hast received it already for without it none can savingly believe nor call Jesus Lord. Yet there is a further Promise made to thee as thou art a Believer in Jesus Christ and what can a poor Saint do without the Spirit what Temptations dost thou meet with what Lusts and Corruptions still hast thou to mortify and what outward Tribulations art thou who professest the Gospel exposed to O therefore use all means and particularly this which God injoins thee that thou mayst obtain a further measure and increase of the Spirit of God Motive 6. Lastly Consider the excellent and unspeakable worth and usefulness of the Holy Spirit O what spiritual Profit and Advantage do the Saints of God receive hereby 1. 'T is the Holy Spirit that enlightens the eyes of our Vnderstandings 1 Cor. 2. 10 11 12 13. Eph. 1.17 we cannot see afar off without our Eyes are anointed with this Eye-salve And O what Beauty do we hereby behold in Jesus Christ how are our Souls taken with invisible Objects and what an empty and nothing-World is this when we look through the Prospect-glass of the Spirit of God upon it 2. 'T is the Holy Spirit that revives and quickens us and makes us lively in the Paths of Righteousness Joh. 6.63 Col. 2.13 3. 'T is the Spirit that leads us in the way we should walk Rom. 8.14 yea and makes them Paths of peace and pleasantness unto our Souls Prov. 3.17 't is he that guides us into all Truth and brings Christ's Words to our remembrance Joh. 14.26 4. 'T is the Holy Spirit that comforts us when cast down 't is from hence we receive all Heavenly Consolation Joh. 14. 16 26. 5. 'T is the Holy Spirit that makes us profit under the Word and means of Grace 't is that which maketh our Souls to grow and flourish in the Courts of the Lord's House Heb. 4.2 1 Cor. 3.6 6. 'T is the Spirit that helps us to pray helps our Infirmities and teacheth us what to pray for and gives us access at the Throne of Grace yea makes Intercession for us with groanings that cannot be uttered Rom. 8.26 7. 'T is by the Spirit we cry Abba Father 't is that which bears witness with our Spirits that we are the Children of God Rom. 8. 13 15 16. 8. 'T is by the Holy Spirit we mortify the Deeds of the body Gal. 5.22 't is by that we live and stand and are confirmed in Christ Jesus and sanctified throughout 9. 'T is from the Holy Spirit that all heavenly Grace and spiritual Gifts flow 't is he that divides to every man severally as he will 1 Cor. 12. 5 8 9. 10. 'T is the Holy Spirit which is the Earnest of our Inheritance and which gives an Assurance of the purchased Possession unto our Souls Eph. 1. 10 14. 11. 'T is the Holy Spirit by which we are sealed to the day of Redemption Eph. 1.13 12. 'T is by the Spirit we are made strong and enabled to overcome all Enemies and helped to triumph over Death 1 Cor. 15. 55 57. 't is by the Spirit we know that when our earthly House is dissolved we have a Building of God a House not made with hands eternal in the Heavens 2 Cor. 5.1 These things considered let none blame us that we so earnestly contend for the Holy Ordinance of Prayer with Imposition of Hands in which God has promised and so sweetly communicated as through a Conduit-Pipe such blessed Water of Life to our Souls Shall it not trouble our Spirits when Persons labour to take away the Childrens Bread or spill any of their sweet and heavenly Milk upon the ground CHAP. IX In answer to the Conclusion of Mr. Danvers's Book Mr. Danvers's Conclusion THus you have had a candid Account of the rise growth and progress of this Rite of Confirmation or Laying on of hands from the beginning to this day amongst all that have owned it with the Authorities on which it hath been found and imposed together with a genuine Examination of the Grounds and Reasons each Party have given to justify the same And may we not upon the whole fairly come to the following Conclusions viz. 1. That there doth not appear to be the least Scripture precept or Practice for any such Ordinance of Confirmation or an imposing of hands upon all the Baptized before they break bread or are admitted into Church-communion 2. That the Instances produced to prove it an Apostolical Tradition are impious Lies and Forgeries 3. That the Authorities by which it hath been heretofore enjoined were nothing but Antichristian Can. Decrees 4. That the most eminent Witnesses and Confessors that opposed the Antichristian Vsurpations and Innovations have all along witnessed against and impugned this of Confirmation viz. the Novations Donatists Waldenses Greek Churches Wicklissians All which are worthy the serious consideration of all sober and judicious Christians and especially recommended to them who having rejected Infants and imbraced Believers Baptism do yet cleave to this Practice with these following Observations viz. 1. It is most manifest that those Popes Councils and Fathers that have enjoined and imposed Infants sprinkling for a Sacrament or an Ordinance of Christ have enjoined this also as such 2. That the principal Arguments pretended for the one have been urged and pleaded for the other also viz. Apostolical Tradition and pretended Inferences and Consequences from Scripture 3. That the famous Churches and Confessors that have opposed Infants sprinkling as superstitious Popish and Antichristian have upon the same account opposed this also 4. That it doth not appear that any baptized Church or People did ever in any Age or Country own such a Principle or Practice to this day except some in this Nation in these late times CHAP. IX In answer to the Conclusion of Mr. Danvers's Book The Conclusion of this Treatise in opposition to his
REider Thou hast had a faithful and impartial Account of the rise growth and progress of this holy tho contemned Ordinance of Imposition of hands from the beginning of the Gospel-Ministration to this day and how asserted amongst many Perswasions with the Authorities on which it has been enjoined together with the grounds given by Antient and Modern Writers to justify it And from the whole we also may come to these following Conclusions viz. 1. That there appears full and ample Precept and Practice from Scripture for this Ordinance of Imposition of hands on all baptized Believers as such before admitted to the Lord's Table 2. That the Instances to prove it an Apostolical Tradition or Institution are the pious Sayings and written Verities of Christ's Disciples 3. That the Authorities by which it was at first enjoined were none else save Great Jehovah Father Son and Holy Spirit 4. That many eminent Writers both antient and modern have born witness for it All which is worthy to be minded and commended to the consideration of those who having rejected Infants and imbraced Believers Baptism do oppose a Principle of the same nature and annexed to it with these following Observations 1. It is most manifest that those Popes Councils and Fathers that have corrupted polluted and changed the holy Ordinance of Baptism and the Lord's Supper did also change alter and corrupt this of Imposition of Hands 2. That tho the principal Arguments the Church of Rome and others who have drunk of the Whore's Cup do bring to defend the Rite called Confirmation is humane Tradition and far-fetch'd Consequences from Scripture yet there is plain Scripture-proof for the holy Institution of Imposition of hands upon baptized Believers 3. That many godly Persons in several ages have opposed Popish laying on of hands on the same account that we reject Popish Baptism and not otherwise 4. It appears not that any baptized Church in any Country have denied Imposition of hands upon Believers baptized as such to be an Institution of Jesus Christ nor ever writ against it as some in this Nation have done no ways for their Credit nor Honour of the Gospel These things being so it may be enquired what ground and reason our Brethren in this Nation had at first or have now to oppose this Divine Institution of the Lord Jesus Christ A brief Reply to a Book called A Treatise concerning Laying on of Hands Written by a nameless Author and published in the Year 1691. THE first Reason he says why they cannot own Laying on of Hands on all Believers is because there must be a Command or at least some Example for it pag. 3. Answ We have proved in the preceding Treatise that we have both a Command and Example for it if a Command of God and an Oracle of God is all one See Heb. 5.12 That which is an Oracle of God is a Command of God but Laying on of Hands c. is an Oracle of God Ergo. And as to Examples we have them also see Acts 8. and Acts 19. 2 ly Because they say they believe neither our Lord nor his Disciples were under it pag. 4. Answ Our Lord we have shewed was under it the Father laid his Hands upon him when he came out of the Water and thereby sealed him the Holy Ghost in the likeness of a Dove rested upon him And no doubt but our Lord laid his Hands upon his Disciples since he taught this Precept as a Principle of his Doctrine Heb. 6. 1 2. True we read not of their Baptism nor of this neither therefore from thence they may as well say they were not baptized as that they had not Hands laid upon them 3 ly Because say they if the Apostles were under it they must have an Administrator and who say they should that be p. 4. But there is nothing said of it c. Answ 1. Our Lord Christ might be the Administrator who is the great Shepherd and Bishop of our Souls as I said afore 2. And it no more follows that they were not baptized than that they were not under Laying on of Hands i. e. because there is nothing said of either 4 ly Their fourth Reason is the same with their first 5 ly Their fifth Reason is because they say the Church at Jerusalem was not under it pag. 5. Answ Was not the Hebrew Church the Church at Jerusalem Now they 't is evident were under it or had laid it Not laying again presupposeth they had once laid it or were under it as well as Baptized 6 ly Their sixth Reason is because an Ordinance necessary to Church-Communion ought very plainly to be expressed p. 6. Answ So is this of Imposition of Hands Heb. 5.12 Heb. 6. 1 2. Acts 8. and Acts 19.6 7 ly Because they say our Lord did leave no Ordinance as absolutely necessary to Church-Communion but such as holds forth his Death and Resurrection p. 9. as Baptism and the Lord's Supper c. Answ Who told them so or doth it follow that because Baptism and the Supper are Figures of our Lord's Death c. therefore this must be a figure of the same or no Ordinance This is not argumentative nor demonstrative 8 ly Because Salvation is promised on the Terms of Faith Repentance and Baptism and from hence they argue there is no need of any such Ordinance as this of Laying on of Hands p. 7. Answ Salvation is promised particularly to Faith He that believeth hath the Son hath Life and shall be saved Mark 16.16 therefore need not I be baptized Moreover I deny that any Ordinance gives a right to Salvation any other ways than as it is an evidence of that Right or Title to our Consciences Our Right or Title is Christ's Righteousness or his active and passive Obedience only But should a Man be convinced that Laying on of Hands Church-Communion Order and Discipline or giving to the Poor c. were Duties which he omitted would his pretended Faith Repentance and Baptism render him a sincere Christian No he must do all things Christ commanded or taught to be done which he is convinced of as well as those three things 9 ly Their ninth Reason against Laying on of Hands is taken from those Effects that followed this Ordinance viz. the extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit Answ The same Effects followed all other Gospel-Ordinances this we have also answered in the precedent Treatise 10 ly Their tenth Reason is because the Holy Spirit was sometimes given without Laying on of Hands pag. 8. Answ The Holy Spirit is promised to them that are baptized but because some received the Spirit before baptized needed they not be baptized In Acts 10.44 Cornelius received the Spirit to confirm the Ministration of the Word to the Gentiles before baptized yet was commanded to be baptized nor had he so much of the Spirit as to need no more and therefore came under this Ordinance also Besides because God may step out of his usual way must we