Acts of the Apostles proveth Act. 18.8 If you could shew any saith Mr. Baxster that did delay Baptisme he meaneth to Disciples since Christs Command P. 24. Of plain Scripture proofs Math. 28.19 it would appear to have been sinfull as through ignorance or negligence Again That it is Christs rule that persons shall be baptised without delay when they are first made Disciples P. 126. Of Scripture proof I have fully proved already both from the Commission for baptising and from Scripture example explaining that Commission and from the end and use of Baptisme If any should be so impudent as to say it is not the meaning of Christ that baptizing should immediately follow discipling they are confuted by the constant example of Scripture So that I dare say this will be out of doubt with all rationall P. 127. considerate impartial Christians If this be so clear a truth as every one with half an eye cannot lightly but see it then is it not a plain case that they that shall attempt to sit down with Church-bodies before Baptisme or those Churches that shall admit unbaptised Disciples into full communion that they all depart from the rule of Christ and walk by a rule of their own devising and instead of Law-obeyers take the boldness to be Law-makers Mr. Goodwin objecteth p. 64. of his water-dipping that His proof meaning my Brother Allens is built upon a clear mistake of the word Teach in the Commission Math. 28.19 for to teach doth not signifie to teach men so as to make them wiling to obey which is my Brother Allens sense but to do that which is apt to make Disciples whether any he actually made Disciples or no. That this sense of the word Teach is a part of the truth I deny not but that it is all that is contained in the word Teach that I deny for these reasons following 1. Because then all persons whatsoever to whom the Gospel was at any time preached by the Apostles were upon their bare hearing of it whether they beleived or blasphemed to have been baptised by them For you say the word Teach doth not imply an actually discipled person to Christ but onely the having instructions proper to make men so If that were all the sense then the Apostles were bound by their Commission to baptise in the Name of the Father Son and Spirit all they preached the Gospel unto though they knew neither Father Son nor Spirit or beleived a word they said yea those that commanded them to teach no more in that Name and beat them for it and imprisoned them being filled with indignation Acts 5.18 Secondly To shew that this sense of yours hath not all the truth in it it appeareth by the 2. Acts 41 which saith not that all that heard the Word were baptised but they that gladly RECEIVED the Word which sheweth clearly enough what is meant by the word teach in the Commission namely such whereby persons became glad receivers of the Word why else did he not baptise every body that heard him Sir you say truly it is a loud untruth to say there is not one example of a person baptised barely upon his hearing of the Gospel preached unto him but I pray Sir whose cause do you plead by saying so your own or ours and here I heartily desire the Reader to consider whether you have not in a few words destroyed your own sense of the word Teach and established my Brother Allens for if there be not one example throught the Acts of a person baptised barely upon his hearing the Gospel but all examples speak of their being Beleivers or Disciples first Why then surely the Apostles understood by the word Teach the making them actual Disciples which is our sense and not onely the saying such things to them which were proper to make them so which is Mr. Goodwins or else they practised contrary to their own judgement But thirdly that by teaching is meant actual discipling is the judgement of our Adversaries Mr. Baxter giveth this for the sense of the word Teach in the Commission very frequently in his plain Scripture proof p. 15. Go ye teach is go make me Disciples in which exposition of the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mr. Baxter confesseth to agree with Mr Tombes I say as he saith Mr. Baxter that the verb signifieth make ye Disciples Vrsinus upon these words Go teach all Nations baptising them The word which Christ useth saith he properly signifieth make Disciples thus it is expounded saith he by John Note well John 4.2 The Pharisees heard that Jesus made and baptised more Disciples than John and what Vrsinus meaneth by Disciples appeareth plainly p. 414. of his Catechisme Teach all Nations baptising them that is all who by your doctrine come unto me and p. 420. That unto the use of baptisme faith is required and in p. 415. these discipled persons he calleth converted persons So that in this learned mans judgement by teaching in the Commission is meant discipling by Disciples Beleivers commers unto Christ converted persons and not as Mr. Goodwin that to teach signifieth not to make them actual Disciples but onely the saying such things to them which are apt to make them so But fourthly and lastly the reason Mr. Goodwin giveth why by the word teach must be meant as he saith and not according to the common consent of Interpreters I humbly apprehend to be invalid his reason is this because if we understand the word Teach of actual discipling these absurdities will follow First He must be conceived to commissionate them to do that which was not in their own power to do Secondly It would follow that though they preached never so faithfully yet they had falsified trust and acted short of their Commission if they had not at all times made those to whom they preached actuall Beleivers To which I answer This Argument standeth upon an unsound bottom which is this That it is an absurd thing to conceive that God should put more into a Commission given to Men then is in the Creatures own power to do What is more frequent in Scripture than to put that into the Commission both of Prophets and Apostles which was not in their own power to effect Isaiah 6.9 10. Ge make the heart of this people fat and make their eares heavy and shut their eyes least c. is not here more put into the Prophets Commission than was in his own power to do could he make their hearts fat or make their eares heavy or shut their eyes Nay are not these effects attributed to God though put in the Prophets Commission John 12.40 He hath blinded their eyes and hardened their heart that they should not see with their eyes yea these effects are attributed to themselves in Math. 13.15 Their eyes they have closed least they should c. So that though these effects are put in the Prophets Commission yet altogether out of his own power to
1 Cor. 1.10 and 15. so in the 4. of the Eph. 4 5. and to the Colossians also But we never read of working miracles or speaking with tongues made any Argument of union I hope then enough and more than enough is said to satisfie any indifferent man that the word baptised in the fore-mentioned place is to be understood properly even of water Baptisme and consequently the Argument from that Text to prove Baptisme the door of entrance into the visible Church of Christ unanswerable But besides this 1 Cor. 12.13 to prove Baptisme the door of the visible Church the 6 of the Romans 3. speaketh the same language Know ye not that so many of us as were BAPTISED INTO Jesus Christ were baptised into his death c. Now to prove that by Baptisme in the first clause he meaneth it not of mortification which some conceive the Baptisme of the Spirit it appeareth thus If the Baptism of the Text be used as an Argument to perswade to perfect mortification and a new life then is it not the thing it self But it is used as an Argument to perswade to perfect the work of mortification and a new life In the 2 verse How shall we â—â—â—t are dead to sin live any longer therein Now they were not already dead to sin in a proper sense they were not already actually mortified though the work was begun in them for then there would be little fear of longer continuing in sin to which they were dead from which he now dehorteth them But in the 3. verse he mentioneth their Baptisme and useth it argument wise to perswade not to live any longer in sin Know ye not that so many of us as wâ—â—e baptised into Jesus Christ were baptised into his death And at the 4. verse Therefore we are buried with him by baptisme into death that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father even so we aslo should walk in newness of life So that his doctrine in my apprehension is plainly this that though for the present they were not attained to the perfect state of actuall mortification yet by their baptisme they were under an effectual obligation to use all possible meanes to attain thereto and if this be not the true sense of the place I have lost my tast good Reader judge Now to come home to the point to prove Baptisme the entring Ordinance into the visible body of Christ The Text saith plainly of Baptisme that it was INTO JESUS CHRIST Now how into Christ but into the mystical body of Christ the Church which in the 1 Corin. 12.12 is caâ—led Christ for as the body is one and hath many members and all the members of that one body being many are one body SO ALSO IS CHRIST meaning in respect of the Church which is his mistical body where though there be many members yet all make but one body as 1 Cor 12.13 saith the gate and entrance whereinto is by the door of Baptisme But in this point having the judgement of almost all the learned on our side I need say the less I shall therefore conclude as to this with offering the words of Vrsinus and Mr. Baxsters Argument with a word from the non-repeating it as to the same person Vrsinus in his Catechisme Baptisme is a Sacrament of entrance into the Church P 421 whence it cometh that the Supper is presented to none except first baptised As a Souldier before listing and a King before crowning and taking his Oath Plain Scriture proof P. 24. so are we he putteth in infants too Church members before Baptisme But as every one that must be admitted solemnly into the Army must be admitted by listing as the solemn engaging sign SO EVERY ONE THAT HATH RIGHT TO BE SOLEMNLY ADMITTED INTO THE VISIBLE CHURCH must ordinarily be admitted by Baptisme I prove it thus If we have neither precept nor example in Scripture since Christ ordained Baptisme of any other way of admitting visible Members but onely by Baptism then all that must be admitted visible Members must ordinarily be baptised But since Baptisme was instituted we have no precept or example of admitting visible Members any other way but constant precept and example for admitting this way Therefore all that must be admitted visible Members MUST be baptised I know not what in any shew of reason can be said to this by those that RENOUNCE not Scripture Mark well Mr. Baxster thinks they that bold men may be visible members without Baptisme renounce the Word of God for their rule For what man dare go in a way that hath neither precept nor example to warrant it from a way that hath a full current of both Yet they that will admit Members into the Church without Baptisme do so And what can any man in reason imagine to be the ground why Baptisme is but once practised whereas prayer and hearing and breaking bread frequent but onely this that God in the Ordinance of Baptisme hath in some respect a different design though in many other respects the very same as I shall shew hereafter and wherein can any one conceive that difference to lie but here that it is the Rite of entrance into the body of Christ and consequently no need of reiterating it no more than there is of being twice made free of the City or twice listed into an Army Some I find make a question whether Baptisme should not be repeated in respect of the same person which is strange considering that though Christ in the Commission ordereth the Apostles to Teach the Disciples again there is not a word of baptising again Math. 18.20 neither did the Apostles ever baptise any into the Name of Christ twice that we find in Scripture and surely they both knew and practised the mind of Christ 1 Cor. 11.1 Phil. 3 17. and we are charged to follow their example and to mark those which walk contrary to avoid them From these premises it is clear enough that Baptisme is in the wisdom of Christ the Ordinance of entrance into the visible Church or Body of Christ and consequently there can be no regular enjoying the priviledges due to the body before it The truth is to admit unbaptised persons to all the priviledges of Church communion is as irregular and disorderly as to admit the Mayor to the grand priviledges of the chair before he hath been sworn to the faithful service of the City 3. To prove baptised persons sitting down in Church bodies with unbaptised disorderly I prove it thus That practise which bringeth down the esteem of Baptisme and maketh it slighted is against the Order of Christ But for Disciples that are baptised to walk together in a Church body with unbaptised bringeth down the esteem of Baptisme and maketh it sleighted That it is against the Order of Christ that any thing should be practised to prejudice the primitive esteem of Baptisme appeareth 1. By Christs joyning it
way of God whereby you seek to pervert the strait wayes of the Lord I shall say little but Lord lay not this sin to your charge Suppose they should do so ought the errors of men to be indulged or corrected onely let me mind you of your own words which as at many other times so at this rise up in judgement against you Sir in one of your Letters to Mr. Tho. Goodwin p. 11. you have these words If we judged it any advantage to the truth and cause we maintain against you we durst vye morrall imputations with you and are confident that we could assign and suggest against you both as many and as likely indirect and fleshly grounds for your departure from us as you can against us for keeping our first standing and profession BVT the truth will never be made GREAT by such demonstrations or arguments as these on either side If Mr. Goodwin thinkes the truth will never be made great by such demonstrations as these it is because he judgeth there is no reason why it should and if so as on the one hand it condemneth him for using them so on the other hand it justly begetteth suspition of error concerning that opinion that such Arguments are used to maintain But to proceed you say that as to another end of Baptisme namely the obliging persons to be the loyal Disciples of Christ you say your Infant-sprinkling or baptisme is as operative that way upon the Conscience as out Baptisme is upon ours or would be upon yours if you should come under it Here is two things affirmed but neither of them proved nor indeed is it possible to prove them one is that your Baptisme is as bearing upon your conscience to become Christs Disciples as our Baptisme is upon ours this is a thing which you affirm at randome not knowing how the baptisme of those that are indeed rightly baptised and that take up the wayes of God in uprightness I say how it heareth upon them nor ever are like to doe because your prejudice is grown so great that you know not how to interpret any action they doe charitably nor scarce word they say Another thing you affirm is that your Infant-baptisme is as bearing upon your conscience as ours would be if you came under it and how can you tell that without tryall Truly Sir I should hope that passing under that figure wherein in so fully represented Christs death buriall and resurrection and your death buriall and resurrection with him being approached unto in the Name and fear of God and in obedience to Jesus Christ that it might be a meanes of killing that spirit of cruelty that haunteth your pen in many of your controvert all writings to the dishonour of God and discredit of the opinion you maintain in them the strait wayes of truth as they have no need of the crooked wayes of sin to build them with so they are never like to be built by them But thirdly and lastly You say your Infant-baptisme is as edifying and comforting To which I answer You must first prove it to be of Christs appointing or else you impose upon us to beleive that the Spirit of God which is the Spirit of edification and comfort will take as much pleasure to concurre with mens inventions as his own Ordinances which is quite contrary to the Scripture Mark 7.7 In vain doe they worship me teaching for doctrines the traditions of men But 2. You say your soules have thriven under that Baptisme 'T is probable so but that doth not prove it was by the meanes of Infant-baptisme of which you are ignorant whether ever any such thing was done or no onely that you have heard so if this arguing be like Mr. Goodwin in other things I am much mistaken Christ telleth the Jewes John 649. That their Fathers did eat Mannah in the wilderness and are dead but can any body gather from hence that their death was caused by the eating of Mannah These are your own words p. 44. Of Water dipping And is not your reasoning in this place much after the same manner you were baptised in Infancy and thrive in godlinesse when grown up to yeares of discretion but it no more followeth that your thriving in godlinesse was by the meanes of your Infant-baptisme than that their death was caused by eating of Mannah And is it likely that ignorant worship of God should have any lively operation upon the soul much lesse that it should have as much as that which is done knowingly and voluntarily and belâ—ivingly the soul having communion with God in it And why may you not as well say that hearing Sermons in infancy is as edifying as at age I know not Infants would understand as much of the one as of the other and when grown up it might be told them what was said then as well as now they are told what was done then in Baptisme is the darkness of the darkest night more void of light than this proposition is of truth Reader judge Your seventeenth Consideration for substance this IT doth not appear from Scripture that any Church of Christ or embodied Society of Beleivers was commanded by Christ or the Apostles to be dipt nor yet threatned or reproved for the non-practise of dipping I answer It is very true because the Apostles did not use to spend their breath in vain they would not command that to be done twice which Christ had ordered to be done but once nor to reprove where there was no cause If you would have the Reader feel any weight in this Argument you are bound to find us a Society of embodied Beleivers undipt which is a task too hard for you but yet this light supposition is the very foundation of your Argument which being rotten and sandy the building falleth of it self I need say no more to it Your eighteenth Consideration for substance this THat it is more than any of us will be ever able to prove that there is any precept of Christ whereby it is made sinful for any person whatsoever not to be baptised in one form or other 1. Because it can be no sin to be undipt whilst there is no legal Adminstrator 2. Because the Commission to baptise is given to the Apostles onely 3. Because they were not enjoyned to baptise any person against their wils 4. It is hard to know what is the Antecedent to the Pronoune THEM in the Commission or whom or what persons they are whom our Saviour here authorizeth his Apostles to baptise 5. In the Commission is no Command laid upon any person to be baptised 6. Neither doth it appear from those words teaching them to observe whatsoever I have commanded you that the Apostles did teach Beleivers to require Baptisme of them 7. It appeareth not that the Apostles in the course of their Ministry did ever teach either Church or person to seek baptisme at their hand 8. Though that should be granted yet it followeth not
not him that eateth DESPISE him that eateth not But by despising them to understand the rejection of them from Church communion the Scripture saith no such thing and for you to say it it is to be guilty of that which you charge us with namely to take a half for a whole and to indulge a light appearance and to let it pass for an evident demonstration But 3. Suppose the word receive should respect the Communion of the Church and the Argument this That God having received the weak into communion with himself it is the Churches duty to receive â—hem into her communion Doth it follow from thence that it would be her duty to receive them disorderly into her communion To come a little closer Cornelius the person you instance in from Acts 10.25 being a fearer of God and worker of righteousness was ACCEPTED of God yet when God had a purpose to adde him to the visible Church of Christ he sendeth him to a Minister of Christ and inspireth him to command Cornelius to be baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus Acts 10.48 Neither doth Peter notwithstanding he was convinced of his being a person accepted of God hold any Church communion with him before it what ever he did after 4. If fellowship with God give immediate right to full communion with the Church simply upon that account then not onely the godly of the Presbyterians have such a right but the Episcopal party too nay 't is probable a many in the darkness of Popery for I suppose no body can be so uncharitable as to think there are no persons there upright nay to shew the unreasonableness of this opinion I could go further and say Pagans debt and Dowry p. 14. many amongst the Heathen which in your judgement may be in the state of grace These and all these have a present actual immediate right to Church communion In a word as this principle was contrary to your judgement heretofore so also hath your practise been ever since you took up the Church way I remember not one man that ever sat down with the Church in the constant fellowship thereof but was orderly joyn'd according to the Independant principles Nor one man that ever occasionally broak bread with the Church but it was matter of offence to some except they were members of some Church or other Who then may not see whose eyes are not too heavy to open what a strait your opposing us bringeth you too namely to turn head upon the principles of the way you walk in and your own constant practise and what man is he who doth not glory in men whose faith and practise standeth not in the wisdome of men but in the power of God 1 Cor. 3.21 1 Cor. 2.5 James 2.1 and that hath not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with respect of persons but must conceive with jealousies as strong as death that that cause which you now plead is not right which putteth so learned a man as your self to so desperate a losse Your fifth Consideration for substance this THat learned men are not agreed about the exact signification of the word BAPTIZO whether it be to dip or not therefore not fit for any much less such illiterate ones to determine it and build so great a matter upon it To which I answer 1. What considerable advantage would it be to us to know the original at this point it seemeth all the knowledge of the learned worketh not union in judgement about it you confess they are not agreed for all that But 2. Whether learned men can agree about the signification of the word BAPTIZO or no it is of little consideration to us in this case because the Spirit of God hath interpreted it to our hand in the holy Scripture elsewhere namely in the 6. of Romans 4. and Colos 2.12 Therefore we are BURIED with him by Baptisme Again being BURIED with him in Baptisme wherein also we are risen with him besides many other places So that if these Scriptures speak of water Baptisme which is but few mens question That one of them doth I have proved already and would the other if need required it there must be a buriall of the body in water where the Baptisme of the Gospel of Christ is rightly administred otherwise it is none of the Baptisme of Christ and the Apostles and Primitive Churches The late Annotators are much to be commended for their honest and upright dealing with the Scripture herein upon this 4 verse of the 6. Romans these words Buried with him by Baptisme in this phrase say they the Apostle seemeth to allude to the antient manner of Baptism which was to dip the parties baptised and as it were to bury them under the water for a while and then to draw them out of it and lift them up to represent the buriall of our old Man and our Resurrection to newness of life Again upon the 8. of Acts 38. these words They both went down into the water and he baptised him They were wont say they to goâ— down into the water and dip the whole body As in the 3. Math. 16. So that their judgement of the Text there also And Jesus when he was baptized went up straight way out of the water I say their judgement is that his body was dipt by John in Jordan and who can think otherwise with reason for to what purpose should he go to the River to be baptised but because there would be a want of much water And how clear is this apprehension to an unprejudiced mind since that the abundance of water is given for the reason of Johns baptising at Enon John 3.23 And John also was baptising in Enon near to Salim because there was MVCH WATER there But besides the 3. Math. 16. saith of Jesus that when he was baptised he went Up straitway OUT of the water And so Mark 1.9 10. and how could he be said to go up out of the water except he first went down into it As the Scripture saith expresly of Phillip and the Eunuch I say as expresly as they can speak read else Acts 8.38 And Phillip and the Eunuch went both DOWN INTO the water and he baptised him and when they were come Up OUT of the water And can any body with any shew of reason conceive that they went down into the water to be sprinkled of the face Justin Martyr therefore telleth us that in their Baptisme they were BORN of water which he propoundeth as their practise from the Primitive custome Mr. Baxster Saints Rest p. 179. Now the whole man its coming out of the womb of the water hath a perfect Analogy to a natural birth to which he doth allude but in the sprinkling of the face there is no likeness at all to any such thing as a birth Calvin himself as much a friend as he was to Infant-sprinkling yet was so honest as to affirm its practise was not from the
not at all to its inconvenience And whereas you say that Baptisme was ordained for Disciples of the first peep out of the shell and greatest weakness in the faith and from thence argue that surely Christ intended it not to be so offensive to the flesh and the rather because the other Sacrament which yet is ordained for the strong is of a more welcome import To this I answer 1. 'T is true Baptisme was ordained for young Disciples but that this is any Argument why it should not be greivous to the flesh I understand not I am sure it is not scriptural Christ saith to those that are young Disciples Luke 9.23 and he said to them ALL If any man will be my Disciple let him deny himself take up his crosse daily and follow me and to those that were looking towards Christianiy Christ putteth the worst to them and therefore would have them sit down and cast up the cost In the 8. of Math. 20. To the Scribe that said Master I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest Jesus saith to him the foxes have holes the birds of the air have nests but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head But 2. Why you should say the other Ordinance is provided for the strong as if it were so appropriately to them and exclusive of the weak or otherwise where lieth any strength in the Argument this is not onely unscripturall but anti-scriptural Acts 2. They all both weak and strong all that gladly received the word and were baptised continued in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship and breaking bread and prayer and indeed more for the weak sake than the strong who had less need and so I appeal to the conscience of the judicious Reader what weight there is in all this Argument against us and whether these be not carnal complaints against the hardness of Christs yoak and the fruit of such workings of heart as was found in Peter Math. 16.22 Your fourteenth Consideration for substance this THat for persons to mistake in the matter of Baptisme so as to judge they have no need to be baptised after beleiving because they judge themselves sufficiently baptised in infancy is a mistake of a veniall nature because almost all the judicious learned and grave all the zealous faithful and best conscienced Christians and Servants of God throughout the world Fathers Martyrs Reformers and others for sixteen Generations together even from the dayes of the Apostles until now have been so mistaken To which I answer 1. The Apostles did foresee in their time that there would be an apostasie from the primitive practise in the worship of God as well as the primitive faith for doctrine the mystery of iniquity beginning to work very early which was the reason of those items to hold fast the Ordinances 2 Thes 2 14. and Col. 2 6. and to beware of Philosophers that would carry them from the simplicity of the Gospel Accordingly it did fall out many departures there were even in the Apostles dayes 1 John 2.19 and more foretold amongst which this of Infant-sprinkling is one wherein there hath been a palpable deviation from the rule which yet notwithstanding many worthy men suffered supposing the Church to have power to make alterations in matter of Ordinances Com. upon Acts 8. Calvin himself acknowledgeth that the liberty of sprinkling whereas the antient custome was dipping the Church took to her self And Mr. Bedford as Mr. Baxster reporteth p. 301. of plain Scripture proof flieth to tradition for proof of Infant-Baptisme One Doctor Eck against the new Church Orders in the upper Marquesdome and Territories of Noremburge writeth That the Ordinances concerning the Baptisme of Children is without Scripture and is found to be onely a custome of the Church with a cloud of other witnesses yea even Luther himself the great Reformer in his book of Anabaptisme acknowledgeth That it cannot be proved by sacred Scripture that Childrens Baptisme was instituted by Christ or begun by the first Christians after the Apostles for many yeares since it came to be in use in the Church saith he and was established by Pope Innocentius And yet for all that he allowed of it so that though he was a godly man and a great Reformer yet allowed of alterations in worship upon that ground which Mr. Baxster abhorreth to doe now Mr. Baxster thinketh he hath plain Scripture proof for Infants baptisme or he would not own the practise because he looketh upon the Scriptures as a perfect rule as well he may and all deviations from them in worship in ordinary cases but so many complaints against the perfection of Scripture 2. If the judgements of the learned and godly be of so much consideration as that it may justly stop proceeding in the work of Reformation why did it not curbe you from that frightfull tearing your self off from the Nationall Church which had been in reputation with the godly many hundred yeares and that in the face of the Sun and that when such things were comparatively rare to the scandal and great offence of your brethren of the Ministry wherein as I remember you were pretty early in leading the way of separation from the womb that bear you and the paps that gave you suck or doe you think one of fourty of those antiently godly and holy men would have liked it and yet for conscience sake you did it notwithstanding 3. This Argument becommeth not you of all men living because it is no new thing with you to leave the road nay at this day and in this book that I am now answering you plead stifly for some things which rendereth you more alone than we in the point of denying Infant-baptisme namely in denying though not in plain words at length yet in effect that Baptisme is the Ordinance of entrance into the visible Church of Christ and that a Church may be of as found a constitution without it as with it and ordained upon the termes of the free-will Offering under the Law Water dipping p. 48.61 wherein I beleive you have no fellow except some Seekers and some few persons leaning that way others that have gone before have stumbled at the same stone and fell and never rise more which ought to be like pillars of salt in the eye of all good men to take heed of slighting and undervaluing any of the Ordinances of Jesus Christ least because they receive not the truth in the love of it I say in the love of it God deliver them up to a reprobate mind and send them strong delusions that they may beleive a lie But I hope better things of you though I thus speak and 't is my earnest prayer to God for you upon the bended knee of my soul to shew you the evill of these arguings that you may repent in dust and ashes before you goe hence and be no more seen Your fifteenth Consideration followeth THat Baptisme how duly soever administred is no Church-maker
that it was a standing law for all Pastors and Teachers to the worlds end 1. Because it fully appeareth that water-baptisme was never intended by God but either onely or cheifly for an introductory or planting Ordinance at its first coming unto a City or Nation till it should get some considerable rooting and interest among them not for a staple Ordinance in one and the same place with many other such like Pleas as this is to render it doubtful To which I answer but with much grief of heart to find such noble parts and abilities as God hath endowed you with so desperately engaged in so bad a cause But Sir if I prove by the Scriptures that it is sinful for Disciples to remain unbaptised and that by the precept of Christ then all your farre fetcht pleas will fall to the ground To prove then by the Scriptures that it is sinful by the precepts of Christ that his Disciples should neglect Baptisme I prove from the 2. Acts 37 38. that the commandments of the Apostles are to be looked upon as the Commandments of Christ it appeareth in that they had them from Christ Acts 1.2 Vntill the day in which he was taken up after that he through the holy Ghost had given commandments unto the Apostles whom he had chosen Paul 1 Corinth 11.23 pleadeth what he delivered them he had from the Lord. Peter therefore 2 Pet. 3.2 saith he wrote to them meaning the scattered Disciples to stirre up their pure minds by way of remembrance that they might be mindfull of the Commandments of VS saith he the Apostles of our Lord and Saviour besides the foundation of Religion laid by Christ and that laid by the Apostles the Spirit in Scripture maketh one and the same 1 Cor. 3.11 Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid which is Jesus Christ Now the same Apostle to the Ephesians Ephes 2 20. saith thus And are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets So that to build upon Christs doctrine and the Apostles doctrine is the same and that for the reason specified I conclude then that if the Apostles command every one to be baptised then Christ hath commanded every one to be baptised But the Apostle Peter in the 2. Acts 38. when the Disciples that were pricked at the heart by the word preached asked him what they should do He commandeth them to repent and be BAPTISED EVERY one of them for the remission of sins So that here is a plain positive command to all and every of the persons at whose heart the Word cometh not onely to repent but to be baptised If sin then be the transgression of the Law which the Apostle saith it is and that the Apostles Commands are Christs and that the Apostle hath commanded every one that repenteth to be baptised then doth the conclusion lift up its head that there is a precept of Christ in Scripture whereby it is made sinful for some persons to remain unbaptised But it may be Mr. Goodwin will object 'T is true this was a command which lay upon those new Converts as a duty but doth that prove it lieth upon us I answer Yes if the duty of repentance lie upon us as well as on them for they are both put together by the Apostle and if the precepts of the Apostles to the primitive Churches in any thing be precepts to us then is Baptisme as well as other things for as Repentance and Baptisme are both enjoyned to the first Churches by the Apostles so are they both put together in the Commission Math. 28.19 Disciple me all Nations baptising them and Mark 16.16 Goe and preach to every Creature He that beleiveth and is baptised shall be saved and the same presence promised to the end of the world as well to baptising as to teaching Mr. Baxster saith by the end of the world to understand a period of time is a peice of impudent violence This then is my first Argument for the standing of the Ordinance of Baptisme it is joyn'd with Teaching in the Commission and Christ saith what God hath joyn'd together let no man put assunder But God hath joyn'd Baptisme and Teaching together and for any man to presume to part them what is it but to offer an affront to the great God and God will surely reckon with them for it first or last how many are there of such that for slighting Christ in his Ordinances Salt marsh and his followers which was the first stone they stumbled at have had strong delusions sent them by God that they might beleive lies and since proved forlorn wofull spectacles of Gods indignation But to set home this Argument for the standing of Baptisme as long as Teaching I shall use Mr. Goodwins own words upon which I would fix the eye of the Reader Water dip p. 12. No Authority can discharge or dis-oblige but that which is either greater than or at least equall unto that which bindeth If so then are you not bound by your own principle to find us out an Authority equall to Christs that hath discharged Baptisme which is by so great an Authority enjoyned as is Christs the Lords the great Judge both of quick and dead which I am sure is impossible for you to do and therefore Baptisme standeth in full force and vertue and all your suggestions rendring it doubtful must not nor will not go for gold but dirt except with some that in matters of Religion are neitheir hot nor cold which luke-warm temper God abhorreth and without repentance will one day spue them out of his mouth Good Reader let but thy esteem of Baptisme stand till Mr. Goodwin shew us an Authority equal to Christs that hath discharged it and I will promise thee that mine and thine shall fall together My second Argument to prove Baptisme standing is this That opinion which tendeth to the destruction of all Religion can never be the truth but to conceive Baptisme out of date tendeth to the destruction of all Religion That to conceive Baptisme out of date tendeth to the destruction of all Religion I demonstrate that thus 1. By dividing Religion into two parts 1. That which is external standing in the exercise of external Ordinances and 2. That which is internal standing in a holy frame of heart and life Now that to conceive Baptisme out of date tendeth to destroy the external part of Religion I prove it thus If the standing of Teaching and breaking bread and other acts of Church fellowship have no other foundation but what Baptisme hath the same then to conceive Baptisme out of date is to disparage the standing of all the rest as out of date also because the same God out of the same infinite wisodme ordained Baptisme that ordained breaking bread and all the acts of Church-fellowship may he hath cast some degrees of honour more upon Baptisme then upon some other of the Ordinances in as much as he singled out Baptisme from
Answer is ready 1. It appeareth clearly these persons the Text speaketh of were baptised persons Acts 10.47 48. 2. The Communion Peter had with them was after their Baptisme for presently upon the testimony of their faith by Gods giving them the gift of the holy Ghost Peter commanded them to be baptised in the Name of the Lord which was the manner of Peter and the rest in the course of their ministry Now if Mr. Goodwin could prove Peter broke bread with them between the time of their faith and Baptisme which is the matter Mr. Goodwin would prove lawfull by it then it were something to favour his cause but not home to the point neither because an occasional act with some few persons will not justifie the constant proceedings of a Church But why doth Mr. Goodwin think that this instance will prove mixt communion lawful Because Peter in his justification when questioned for eating with Cornelius insisted onely upon Cornelius his having the holy Ghost not his Baptisme To which I answer 1. The Scriptures silence doth not prove that he did not mention his Baptisme and insist on it too because the Scriptures doth not contain all the Apostles sayings Acts 2.40 With many other words did he testifie and exhort saying So John the Baptist Luke 3.18 with many other words 2. There was no necessity upon Peter for the justification of his eating with Cornelius to mention his Baptisme by name though he could not have communion with him without it because in those dayes a beleiving person and a baptised person was presumed the same Paul proveth they all beleived because they were baptised Gal. 3.27 And that 1. Because by the Commission of Christ all Beleivers were presently to be baptised Math. 28.19 And 2. Because none but such was the regular subjects of it Acts. 8.37 And 3. Because it was the constant practise of the Servants of God to call the Beleivers to Baptisme without delay Acts 22.16 So that the Apostles and Brethren understood him sufficiently as to their Baptisme by telling them of their having the holy Ghost as a testimony of their faith If they did not take that for granted it must be either because they doubted his understanding of the Commission of Christ or else his faithfulness in executing it or else their will to be baptised but there was no cause to doubt either nor Peters understanding the Commission or faithfulness in executing it because they had experience before of Peter in the case of the three thousand Acts 2.41 who the same day that they gladly received the word were baptised not their willingness Acts 10.33 because Cornelius was so ready to obey God in every thing that he had but a few fellows so that the mentioning of his Baptisme would have been like a kind of an impertinency 3. There was no necessity upon him to mention their Baptisme by name in his justification of eating with them though he could not have communion with them without it Because it is common both in Scripture language and common converse with men to include all appurtenances in the mention onely of some cheif part see for this John 5.44 Galat. 3.23 Galat. 3.2 Roman 10.8 Mat. 21.25 Acts 10.37 Johns Baptisme put for his whole Ministry Luke 7.30 Calvin calleth Baptisme an appâ—rtenance of faith p. 207. of his Commentary of the Acts. And no doubt this language was well enough known and understoood by the Apostles and Elders so that having mentioned the holy Ghosts coming on them as a testimony of their faith what need had he to draw it out in words at length that they were baptised and thus thou seest good Reader how Mr. Goodwin indulgeth every light appearance from the Scripture being passionately desirous to make that strait which God hath made crooked Your twenty one Consideration for substance this THat Pastors and Teachers were given by Christ that all Saints one or other should be perfected by them and the whole body of Christ edified then certainly they have all right to Church-fellowship inasmuch as they have their callings onely by and resident in Churches neither are they in any probable way of perfecting them but onely when and whilst they are incorporated with them in their Churches respectively Eph. 4.8 11 12. To which I answer 1. It s true that Pastors and Teachers were given by Christ that all Saints should be perfected by them but it is as evident the Saints this Text speaketh of for whom they were given in speciall to serve as Officers in the Church and who had power to give them their call they were such Saints as were of the visible body of Christ who as they had other characteristical marks of the members of that body namely to have one God one Spirit one Hope one Lord one Faith so one BAPTISME consult the 4. and 5. verses of this 4. of Ephesians which Text Mr. Goodwin groundeth his Argument upon and you will find it so and although other persons that were discipled by the word taught but yet had not put on Christ visibly by baptisme into his Name The gifts of Pastors and Teachers were given for the perfecting of them too yet but secondarily not primarily those gifts primarily respect the body of Christ so marked as before is noted 't is plain in the 12. verse For the edifying of the BODY of Christ That unbaptised persons were not then reputed of the visible body of Christ I have proved at large already and although they might be Saints before Baptisme in the sight of God yet in the account of the Church none passe for Saints till then because their faith it self in Christ which maketh Saints could not be clear to the Church till then and that because Baptisme being one of the beginning doctrines of Christ Heb. 6.2 Acts 2.38 Mar. 16 16. and preached by the Apostles as a duty with repentance and faith and that in order to remission of sins and salvation in some sense or other should any man have stuck at it and refused Baptisme what ground would the Church have had to look upon the faith of such as sound nay had they not all the reason in the world to doubt the soundness of it because the character of a true lively saith would be found wanting namely universal obedience and they rejecters of the counsel of God Nothing in reason could appear as a ground to refuse it but the danger of the crosse following it I conclude then that though the truth of their faith made them Saints before God yet without publick profession of their faith by Baptisme they were not owned for Saints by the Church or any such persons whose faith was of the right kind let their professions otherwise be that they would be This is clearly the doctrine of the 3. Galat. 27. Ye are all the children of God by faith FOR mark as many of you as have been baptised into Christ have put on Christ he proveth their
in his demonstration and consequently to loose his Argument so that parting the Disciples amongst themselves can never be the design of the Spirit in those words AS MANY AS 2. To confirme the Reader therein I referre thee to that proof we have made in answer to Mr Goodwins third Consideration by which it fully appeareth that there was no such thing in those dayes as Church-fellowship before Baptisme where I hope thou wilt have full satisfaction as in divers other places of this Book 3. Consider this the same persons that in the 27. verse are noted under the words As many As in the 28. verse are called ALL as well as in the 26. verse for YE are ALL one in Christ Jesus that the object of the word YE is not a part of the Churches but the whole as well in the 28. verse as in the 26. there is no question because there is nothing affirmed between to enforce nay not to invite to a restrain'd understanding them But if any one ask what the reason should be that the Apostle chuseth such words as these which for the most part are partitive and yet by them intend all and every individuall I answer For variety the scope and context necessitating them to be understood universally yea the word MANY is upon that account as I apprehend often put in Scripture for ALL as in the 9. Hebr. 28. He was once offered to bear the sins of many Now the 1 Timot. 2.6 saith He gave himself a ransome for ALL and Mr. Goodwin understandeth the word ALL largely as well he may So in the 5. Romans 15. If through the offence of one many be dead but by the 12. verse it appeareth by this word MANY he meaneth the whole posterity of Adam for he saith Death passed upon ALL men Now the words As many As served the Apostles design in this place with as much advantage every jot as the word All would do There being two sorts of persons become proselites to Christian Religion namely Jewes and Gentiles and the Gentiles being apt to think that they should not be the children of God upon so good termes as the Jewes because of the high respect God bear from the beginning to the Jewes more than the Gentiles and that therefore onely so many of the Church as were Jewes should become heires of that priviledge through beleiving the Apostle for their comfort doth assure them that not onely so many of the Church as were Jewes became the Sons of God by faith and put on Christ by Baptisme but AS MANY as were baptised into Christ though they were never so many and of what rank sex condition soever whether they were Jewes or whether they were Gentiles and though they were like the starres in the skie for multitude they had all put on Christ and were all members of the same body according to the next words verse 20. There is neither Jew nor Greek nor bond nor free nor male nor female but ALL one in Christ Jesus So that there is a strain of Elegancy in the Apostles varying the word All to As many As so farre are they from necessitating us to understand them parting the Disciples amongst themselves So I have done with the Scriptures which Mr. Goodwin useth to overthrow my Brother Allens Arguments levied to prove the unlawfulness of mixt communion of baptised and unbaptised persons in Church-fellowship besides these eight I doe not find any he useth to found any Argument on to answer him if then it appear that the Scriptures Mr. Goodwin buildeth on like not the service but in truth bitterly complain of it and whether they doe not so I referre to the judgement of the judicious Reader and let him judge of Mr. Goodwins whole building accordingly And whether Mr. Goodwin find that heaving at my Brother Allens Answer to his fourty Queries be but like the heaving at a feather P. 55. Of Water dip which he saith is too childish a posture for a man or rather whether the truth in it be not like a mountain rather which the greatest Giant heaving at though Mr. Goodwin himself cannot make to stir And now let all the world judge between us and Mr. Goodwin 1. Whether we are as lie representeth us Persons of a maimed fancy P. 4. Of Water dip having our reasons judgements and understandings stupified distraught and confounded that all reason opposing us is a Barbarian to us that common sense is a mystery in accessible to our understandings men of sound intellectuals are as men that speak to us in a strange tongue P. 41 42. that if they speak any thing against our way we know not valleys from hills nor hills from valleys rivers from trees trees from rivers halfes from wholes nor wholes from halfes precepts from promises nor promises from precepts ceremony from substance nor substance from ceremony every distinction that attempteth to shew us the error of our way Ipso facto becometh a Chaos and confusion On the other hand for the maintenance and defence of our way the shadowes of mountains seem valiant and arm'd men stubble and rotten wood are turned into weapons of steel and iron before us letter becometh spirit face becometh heart promise becometh precept ceremony becometh substance Apostles become ordinary men and women disputables become demonstrations and peradventures become all Yeas and Amens in respect of these marvellous and sad distempers in our fancies and understandings to reason with us about our way or to endeavour our conviction seldome turneth to any better account than a beating of the air or their Diogenes his begging applications to the statues of men 2. Whether these expressions may not be justly numbred amongst those cruel mockings which the cruel persecutors of old tried the worthies of the Lord with Hebr. 11.36 even those of whom the world was not worthy 3. Whether such contemptuous revilings be not the way to harden fallen persons in their sin there being no sign of charity in them but hatred rather than recover them and as directly contrary to the rule as flesh is to spirit 2 Timothy 2.24 And the Servant of the Lord MUST NOT STRIVE but be GENTLE TO ALL MEN apt to teach patient in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves if peradventure God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devill So also Galations 6.1 If a man be overtaken in a fault ye which are spiritual restore such a one in THE SPIRIT OF MEEKNESSE considering thy self least thou also be tempted 4. Whether these expressions are not directly contrary to the advice of the Spirit of God in these Scriptures following Phillip 2.3 In lowliness of mind let each esteem other BETTER than themselves Romans 12.9 In honour preferring one another Titus 3.2 Speak evill of no man Colos 3.12 Put on therefore as the elect of God holy and beloved bowels of mercies kindness humbleness