make up the One Baptism Answ. I Answer This urgeth nothing unless it be granted also that both of them belong to the Essence of Baptism so that Baptism is not to be accounted as truly Administred where both are not which none of our Adversaries will acknowledge but on the contrary account not only all those truly Baptized with the Baptism of Christ who are Baptized with Water though they be uncertain whether they be Baptized with the Spirit or not but they even account such truly Baptized with the Baptism of Christ because Sprinkled or Baptized with Water though it be manifest and most certain that they are not Baptized with the Spirit as being Enemies thereunto in their Hearts by wicked Works So here by their own Confession Baptism with Water is without the Spirit Wherefore we may far safer conclude that the Baptism of the Spirit which is that of Christ is and may be without that of Water as appears in that Acts 11. where Peter testifies of these Men that they were Baptized with the Spirit though not then Baptized with Water And indeed the Controversie in this as in most other things stands betwixt us and our Opposers in that they not only oftentimes prefer the Form and Shadow to the Power and Substance by denominating persons as Inheritors and Possessors of the thing from their having the Form and Shadow though really wanting the Power and Substance and not admitting those to be so denominated who have the Power and Substance if they want the Form and Shadow This appears evidently in that they account those truly Baptized with the One Baptism of Christ who are not baptized with the Spirit which in Scripture is particularly called the Baptism of Christ if they be only baptized with Water which themselves yet Confess to be but the Shadow or Figure And moreover in that they account not those who are surely baptized with the Baptism of the Spirit baptized neither will they have them so denominate unless they be also Sprinkled with or Dipped in Water But we on the Contrary do always prefer the Power to the Form the Substance to the Shadow and where the Substance and Power is we doubt not to denominate the Person accordingly though the Form be wanting And therefore we always seek first and plead for the Substance and Power as knowing that to be indispensibly necessary though the Form sometimes may be dispensed with and the Figure or Type may cease when the Substance and Anti-type comes to be enjoyed as it doth in this Case which shall hereafter be made appear Proof IV § IV. Fourthly That the One Baptism of Christ is not a Washing with Water appears from 1 Pet. 3. 21. The like Figure whereunto even Baptism doth also now save us not the putting away of the filth of the Flesh but the answer of a good Conscience towards God by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. So plain a definition of Baptism is not in all the Bible and therefore seeing it is so Plain it may well be preferred to all the coined definitions of the School-men The Apostle tells us first Negatively what it is not viz. Not a putting away of the filth of the Flesh then surely it is not a Washing with Water since that is so Secondly He tells us Affirmatively what it is viz. The Answer of a good Conscience towards God by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ where he Affirmatively Defines it to be the Answer or Confession as the Syriack Version hath it of a good Conscience Now this Answer cannot be but where the Spirit of God hath purified the Soul and the Fire of his Judgment hath burned up the unrighteous nature and those in whom this Work is wrought may be truly said to be baptized with the Baptism of Christ i. e. of the Spirit and of Fire Whatever way then we take this Definition of the Apostle of Christ's Baptism it confirmeth our sentence For if we take the first or Negative part viz. That it is not a putting away of the filth of the Flesh then it will follow that Water-Baptism is not it because that is a putting away of the filth of the Flesh. If we take the second and Affirmative Definition to wit That it is the Answer or Confession of a good Conscience c. then Water-baptism is not it since as our Adversaries will not deny Water-baptism doth not always imply it neither is it any necessary Consequence thereof Moreover the Apostle in this place doth seem especially to guard against those that might esteem Water-baptism the true Baptism of Christ because lest by the Comparison induced by him in the preceding verse betwixt the Souls that were saved in Noah's Ark and us that are now saved by Baptism lest I say any should have thence hastily concluded that because the former were saved by Water this place must needs be taken to speak of Water-Baptism to prevent such a mistake he plainly affirms that it is not that but another thing He saith not that it is the Water or the putting away of the filth of the Flesh as accompanied with the Answer of a good Conscience whereof the one viz. the Water is the Sacramental Element administred by the Minister and the other the Grace or thing signified Conferred by Christ but plainly That it is not the putting away c. than which there can be nothing more manifest to Men unprejudicate and judicious Moreover Peter calls this here which saves the Antitypos the Anti-type or the thing figured whereas it is usually translated as if the like Figure did now save us thereby insinuating that as they were Saved by Water in the Ark so are we now by Water-baptism But this Interpretation crosseth his sense he presently after declaring the Contrary as hath above been observed and likewise it would Contradict the Opinion of all our Opposers For Protestants deny it to be absolutely necessary to Salvation And though Papists say None are saved without it yet in this they admit an Exception as of Martyrs c. and they will not say that all that have it are Saved by Water-baptism which they ought to say if they will understand by Baptism by which the Apostle saith we are Saved Water-baptism for seeing we are saved by this Baptism as those that were in the Ark were Saved by Water and that all those that were in the Ark were Saved by Water it would then follow that all those that have this Baptism are Saved by it Now this Consequence would be false if it were understood of VVater-baptism because many by the Confession of all are baptized with VVater that are not saved but this Consequence holds most true if it be understood as we do of the Baptism of the Spirit since none can have this Answer of a good Conscience and abiding in it not be Saved by it Proof V Fifthly That the One Baptism of Christ is not a VVashing with VVater as it
Or Occasional Queries submitted to the Judgment of such as would enquire into the True State of Things in our Times The whole Work revised by the Author the Proofs englished and augmented with sundry Material Discourses concerning the Ministry Separation Inspiration Scriptures Humane Learning Oaths Tithes c. With a brief Apology for the Quakers that they are not Inconsistent with Magistracy The Third Edition Price Bound 15. 6 d. God's Protecting Providence Man's Surest Help and Defence in Times of the greatest Difficulty and most eminent Danger Evidenced in the Remarkable Deliverance of Robert Barrow with divers other Persons from the devouring Waves of the Sea amongst which they suffered Shipwrack And also From the cruel Devouring Jaws of the Inhumane Cannals of Florida Faithfully Related by one of the Persons concerned therein Jonathan Dickenson Price 8 d. A Collection of the Christian Writings Labours Travels and Sufferings of that Faithful and Approved Minister of Jesus Chrâ—â—t Roger Haydock To which is added an Account of his Deaâ—â— and Burial Price 2 s. The â—â—or Mechanicks Plea against the Rich Clergys Oppression Shewing Tithes are no Gospel-Ministers Maintenance 〈◊〉 a brief and plain Method how that Tithes as now paid are â—oth inconsistent with the Dispensation of the Law and Dispeâ—tion of the Gospel Also how they were brought into the Châ—â—ch many Hundred Years after Christ and testified againstly several Ancient Christians and Martyrs With several Sobeâ— Reasons against the Payment thereof By John Bockett 〈◊〉 3 d. The Univâ—â—sality of the Love of God asserted in a Testimony to the â—ree Grace in Jesus Christ. By William Rawbinson Price d. A Plain 〈◊〉 of certain Christian Experiences Labours Service and Sufferings of that Ancient Servant and Minister of 〈◊〉 Roger Hebden Containing both Warning Consolation and Instruction in Righteousness Eph. 4. 5. 1 Pet. 3. 21. Rom. 6. 4. Gal. 3. 27. Col. 2. 12. John 3. 30. 1 Cor. 1. 17. From whence Idolatries and Heathen-Superstitions did spring The Pharisees the Chiefest Sect among the Jews Many things in Christendom are borrow'd from the Jews and Gentiles Of Sacraments so many Controversies The Name of Sacrament not found in Scripture is borrow'd from the Heathens The Definition of Sacraments agrees to many other things What Sealing Ordinance doth mean That outward Washing doth not cleanse the Heart One Baptism proved Whether Two Baptisms do make up the One If Water be the Type the Substance must remain They that had John's Baptism had not therefore Christ's One Baptism is no Part nor Effect of the other Who were baptized by John were still to wait for Christ's Baptism with the Spirit The Baptism with the Holy Ghost and that with Water differ Water Baptism is not the true Baptism of Christ. The Baptism of the Spirit needeth no Sprinkling or Dipping in Water The plainest Definition of the Baptism of Christ in all the Bible Water Baptism shut out from the Baptism of Christ. The Protestants deny Water-baptism its absolute necessity to mens Salvation Altho ' the Papists say none can be sav'd without it yet grant Exceptions The Effects and Fruits of the Baptism of Christ. Which Effects Water-Baptism wants Proved John's Baptism was of Christ's a Figure II. John's Baptism is Ceas'd our Opposers confess The Gospel puts an end to Carnal Ordinances Men are no more now than before by water baptism inwardly cleansed The Law distinguisht from the Gospel The Outward Baptism Worship Law distinguisht from the Inward That Water-baptism is no Badge of Christians like Circumcision of the Jews 1 Cor. 1. 14. Paul was not sent to baptize Matth. 9. 13. Hos. 6. 6. That Preaching is a standing Ordinance and not to be forhorn That which Converts to Christ is Baptism of the Spirit Why Christ was baptized by John What Baptism Christ doth mean in Matth. 28 Of the Name of the Lord how taken in Scripture The Baptism into the Name what it is Whether Christ did prescribe a Form of Baptism in Matth. 28. How Teaching and Baptising differ The Baptism with the Spirit â—â—scrib'd to Godly Men as Instruments How the Apostles Baptized The Apostles did scruples the Teaching the Gentils Whether Peter's Baptizing some with Water makes it a standing Ordinance to the Church Baptizing signifies Dipping or Washing with Water 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Immergo Intigo to plunge and dip in Those that of old used Water-baptism were dipt and plunged and those that were only sprinkled were not admitted to any Office in the Church and why The Water that Regenerates is Mystioal and Inward In the 4th Book of his Instit. Chap. 15. Necessitas Praecepti and Medii urged Circumcision a Seal of the first Covenant Water-baptism falsly called a Badge of Christianity Which is the Badge of Christianity What the Fathers say of Water-baptism and of the Sign of the Cross. Heathenish Ceremonies introduc'd into the Christian Worship Exorcism or Adjuration The Sign of the Cross. Many in former Ages testified against Water-baptism Ten Canonicks burnt at Orleans and why The Baptism of Infants an Humane Tradition 1 Cor. 10. 16 17. Joh. 6. 2 33 35. 1 Cor. 5. 18. Acts 15. 20. John 13. 14. Jam. 5. 14. The Body and Blood of Christ is Spiritual What the heavenly Seed is whereby formerly and also now Life and Salvation was and is Communicated The Origine Nature and Effects of the Body Flesh and Blood of Christ. Solid Reasons that it is Ilis Spiritual Body Christ speaks of 1 Cor. 6. 17. The Spiritual Light and Seed is as Bread to the Hungry Soul Christ's Outward and Spiritual Body distinguished The Patriarchs did eat of the Body and Flesh and Blood of Christ. Joh. 6. 60. 66. The Divine Light of Christ doth make the Saints Partakers of his Body Joh. 6. 35. and 55. The Lutherans and Calvinians Opinion of the Flesh and Blood of Christ in the Supper so called 2 Cor. 6. 14. How the Inward Man is nourisht Joh. 6. 53. Joh. 6. 57. Joh. 6. 56. Ver. 16. The True Spiritual Supper of the Lord. Man is not tied to the Ceremony of breaking Bread and drinking Wine which Christ did use with his Disciples This only was a Shadow What makes the Christian Religion hateful to Jews Turks and Heathens The Papists Faith of Christ his Flesh and Blood The Lutherans Faith The Calvinists Faith Inst. lib. 4. cap 17. J. Calvin's Faith of Christ his Flesh and Blood Uncertain The like the Papists Satan busies people in outward Sign Shadows and Forms whilst they neglect the Substance What hath been hurtful to the Reformation Two Errors the ground of the Contentions about the Supper Believers Souls do really feed upon the Flesh and Blood of Christ. That the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ has no special Relation to the Ceremony of breaking Bread neither by Nature nor Precept The Patriarchs and Prophets without this Ceremony's Use were true Partakers of Christ's Flesh and Blood The Paschal Lamb its End Matth. 26. 20. Mark 14. 22. Luke 22. 19. The Institution of the Supper or Narration of Christ's Practice therein The Woman of Samaria Joh. 4. 14. The Well the Loaves the Bread and Wine Christ takes occasion from to shew the Inward Feeding The Wickedest may take the outward Bread and Wine The Sacramental Union pretended is a Figment Christ's Act of Bread and Wine is not oâ—liging others The Pharisees guilt of the Blood of the Prophets Whether this Ceremony be a necessary Part of the New Covenant and Obligatory Mat. 26. 26. Mark 14. 22. Luke 22. 19. 1 Cor. 11. 23. The breaking of Bread was no singular thing but a Custom to Jews P. Riccius What it is To do this in Remembrance of Christ. Christ's Washing of Feet and its Manner related Compar'd with the Breaking of Bread The Washing one anothers Feet was left as an Example The Protestants use not Washing of Feet The breaking of Bread not used now in the same manner as Christ did The breaking of Bread was a Jewish Ceremony Contests between the Greek and Latine Churches concerning the Leaven'd and Unleaven'd Bread in the Supper Farellus The Clergy Taking Bread do bless and give it the Laity must Take and Eat not Bless it Hot Contests about the Manner of Taking it and to whom to Give it By Breaking of Bread they had all things in comman Remembring the Lord. Deacons appointed for serving at Tables At Troas the Supper till Midnight deferred They only did Eat for refreshing the Body By some called a Love-Feast The Christians began by degrees to depart from the Primitive Purity 1 Cor. 11. 17. Concerning the Supper of the Lord so called Explained Why the Custom of Supping in Common was used among Christians The Rise of that Custom That as often imports no Command of this Supper Christ's Outward and Inward Coming To Remember Christ't Death till he come To Arise in the Heart And likewise the other Oriental Versions as the Arabick and Aethiopick have it the same way To abstain from things strangled The Anointing with Oil. A Ceremony ought to Cease its Vertue failing Thus Laying on of hands The Ceremony of Bread and Wine is Ceas'd Col. 2. 'T is but a Sign and Shadow they confess And which do perish with the Using The Law was Meats and Drinks not so the Gospel The Law has Shadow the Gospel brings the Substance Their Sacraments confer not Grace Opposers claim a Power to give their Sacraments from whence do they derive it Tradition no sufficient ground for Faith The Supper they gave to Young Boys and Children Daleus Calvin's ingenuous Confession commended Eph. 5. 15. In tenderness of Conscience at Ignorance God winketh The Day is Dawn'd that God is Risen and Worshipped in Spirit
BAPTISM AND THE Lord ' s Supper Substantially Asserted BEING AN APOLOGY In Behalf of the People called QUAKERS Concerning those Two Heads By ROBERT BARCLAY LONDON Printed and Sold by T. Sowle in White-Hart-Court in Gracious-Street 1696. TO THE READER Friendly Reader HAving often observed upon serious Discourse with divers Persons concerning our Principles their having received general satisfaction excepting in these Two Heads viz. Baptism and the Lord's Supper and not knowing but that thou may be at a stand concerning the same I do here present thee for thy further information and satisfaction these following Sheets written and published several Years ago upon the same Subjects by my Father Robert Barclay in his Apology Dedicated to King Charles the Second The second and more particular reason of their being thus published by themselves is that being Bound up in a pretty large Book they may not be of such general Service in regard that some dissatisfied only concerning these Two Points may not much care to Buy the whole Being fully satisfied his aim in Penning them was for thy satisfaction I shall commend them no otherways than by recommending them to thy serious perusal not doubting if they be by thee received in the same Spirit of Love they were for thy sake designed they may prove advantageous I do likewise advise thee seriously to consider what woful consequence have been procured in the Titular Christian World since the first Apostacy after the Apostles Days about these things and the setting up of Forms and Ceremonies in the Church in Matters purely Religious and relying thereupon as there are too many in these Days do who by grasping at the shadow do lose the substance I pray God open the Eyes and enlighten the Understandings of such that seeing the emptiness and insufficiency as well as folly thereof they may with their whole Hearts and Souls lay hold upon him who is able to save and that to the uttermost I would have none offended that I call those Ceremomonies which they may think Essential Duties without their being first assured they are such Although I refer thee to the following Sheets for thy more particular Information yet it may not seem impertinent to put thee in mind of that saying of John the Baptist concerning himself I indeed baptize you with Water unto Repentance but he that cometh after me is mightier than I he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with Fire Mat. 3. 11. also HE must Increase but I must Decrease John 3. 30. likewise that of Paul to the Ephesians where he notably argues as there is but one Lord one Faith so there is but one Baptism Eph. 4. 5. which the Apostle Peter positively asserts is not the washing away of the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good Conscience towards God 1 Pet. 3. 21. These I leave without Commentary to thy impartial perusal It were greatly to be wished for that we who covet to be called by that Honourable Name of Christian were more inward less in show more in Substance that our Christianity were more in our Hearts and less in our Heads then would our Religion be pure and undefiled carrying along with it that Characteristick mark of visiting the Widow and the Fatherless and keeping our selves unspotted from the World this is the Description the Apostle James in his Day gave of True Religion James 1. 27. this is likewise the Path the True Christian ought now to walk in it being only as we here abide that we can stand approved in the sight of our Great Creator in which Reader as thou art found a Walker with a single Heart and Eye unto God thou wilt know an eating of the Flesh and drinking of the Blood of the Son of God by which thou vvilt knovv Life unto thy Soul according to that saying of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Except ye eat the Flesh and drink the Blood of the Son of Man there is no Life in you for saith he my Flesh is Meat indeed and my Blood is Drink indeed John 6. 53. 55. This Food is Inward it is Spiritual to the Nourishment of the inner Man not perceptible to the outvvard Notions of Carnal-minded Men this is the true Supper of vvhich the Saints do feed vvhereby they are refreshed to the comforting of their Immortal Souls being the same vvhich the Saints in all Ages vvere partakers of Which that thou may come to knovv and be made partaker of by Waiting for and being Obedient unto the Appearance of his Grace Light Spirit or Word of Life in thy ovvn Soul that being the only Way is the Desire of thy Sincere Friend Robert Barclay London the 12th of the 8th Month 1695. CONCERNING BAPTISM As there is one Lord and one Faith so there is one Baptism which is not the putting away the filth of the flesh but the Answer of a good Conscience before God by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. And this Baptism is a Pure and Spiritual thing to wit the Baptism of the Spirit and Fire by which we are buried with him that being washed and purged from our Sins we may walk in newness of Life Of which the Baptism of John was a Figure which was Commanded for a time and not to continue for ever As to the Baptism of Infants it is a meer Humane Tradition for which neither Precept nor Practice is to be found in all the Scripture WHen God in Condescension to his chosen people the Jews did prescribe to them by his Servant Moses many Ceremonies and Observations as Types and Shadows of the Substance which in due time was to be Revealed which consisted for the most part in Washings outward Purifications and Cleansings which were to continue until the Time of the Reformation until the Spiritual Worship should be set up and that God by the more powerful pouring forth of his Spirit and guiding of that Anointing should lead his Children into all Truth and teach them to Worship him in a way more Spiritual and acceptable to him though less agreeable to the Carnal and Outward Senses Yet notwithstanding God's Condescension to the Jews in such things we see that that part in man which delights to follow its own Inventions could not be restrained nor yet satisfied with all these Observations but that often-times they would be either declining to the other Superstitions of the Gentiles or adding some New Observations and Ceremonies of their own To which they were so devoted that they were still apt to prefer them before the Command of God and that under the Notion of Zeal and Piety This we see abundantly in the Example of the Pharisees the Chiefest Sect among the Jews whom Christ so frequently reproves for making void the Commandments of God by their Traditions Matth. 15. 6 9 c. This Complaint may at this day be no less justly made as to many bearing the Name of Christians who have introduced many things of this
kind partly borrowed from the Jews which they more tenaciously stick to and more earnestly contend for than for the weightier Points of Christianity because that Self yet alive and ruling in them loves their own Inventions better than God's Commands But if they can by any means stretch any Scripture-practice or Conditional precept or permission fitted to the Weakness or Capacity of some or appropriate to some particular Dispensation to give some Colour for any of these their Inventions they do then so tenaciously stick to them and so obstinately and obstreperously plead for them that they will not patiently hear the most-solid Christian Reasons against them Which Zeal if they would but seriously Examine it they would find to be but the prejudice of Education and the Love of Self more than of God or his Pure Worship This is verified concerning those things which are called Sacraments about which they are very ignorant in Religious Controversies who understand not how much Debate Contention Jangling and Quarrelling there has been among those called Christians So that I may safely say the Controversie about them to wit about their Number Nature Vertue Efficacy Administration and other things hath been more than about any other Doctrine of Christ whether as betwixt Papists and Protestants or among Protestants betwixt themselves And how great prejudice these Controversies have brought to Christians is very obvious whereas the things contended for among them are for the most part but Empty Shadows and meer Out-side things as I hope hereafter to make appear to the patient and unprejudicate Reader § II. That which comes first under Observation is the Name Sacrament which is strange that Christians should stick to and Contend so much for since it is not to be found in all the Scripture but was borrowed from the Military Oaths among the Heathens from whom the Christians when they began to Apostatize did borrow many superstitious Terms and Observations that they might thereby Ingratiate themselves and the more easily gain the Heathens to their Religion which practice though perhaps intended by them for good yet as being the fruit of Humane Policy and not according to God's Wisdom has had very pernicious Consequences I see not how any whether Papists or Protestants especially the latter can in reason quarrel with us for denying this Term which it seems the Spirit of God saw not meet to inspire the Pen-men of the Scriptures to leave unto us Obj. 1 But if it be said That it is not the Name but the Thing they contend for Answ. I Answer Let the Name then as not being Scriptural be laid aside and we shall see at first Entrance how much Benefit will redound by laying aside this Traditional Term and betaking us to plainness of Scripture-Language For presently the great Contest about the Number of them will evanish seeing there is no Term used in Scripture that can be made use of whether we call them Institutions Ordinances Precepts Commandments Appointments or Laws c. that would afford ground for such a Debate since neither Papists will affirm that there are only Seven or Protestants only Two of any of these forementioned Obj. 2 If it be said That this Controversie arises from the Definition of the Thing as well as from the Name Obj. 1 It will be found otherwise For whatever way we take their Definition of a Sacrament whether as an outward visible Sign whereby inward Grace is conferred or only signified This Definition will agree to many things which neither Papists nor Protestants will acknowledge to be Sacraments If they be expressed under the Name of Sealing Ordinances as some do I could never see neither by Reason nor Scripture how this Title could be appropriate to them more than to any other Christian Religious Performance for that must needs properly be a Sealing Ordinance which makes the Persons receiving it infallibly certain of the Promise or Thing sealed to them Obj. 3 If it be said It is so to them that are faithful Answ. I Answer So is Praying and Preaching and doing of every good Work Seeing the Partaking or Performing of the one gives not to any a more certain Title to Heaven yea in some respect not so much there is no Reason to call them so more than the other Besides we find not any thing called the Seal and Pledge of our Inheritance but the Spirit of God it is by that we are said to be sealed Eph. 1. 14. 4. 30. which is also termed the Earnest of our Inheritance 2 Cor. 1. 22. and not by outward Water or Eating and Drinking which as the Wickedest of Men may partake of so many that do do notwitstanding it go to Perdition For it is not outward Washing with Water that maketh the Heart clean by which Men are fitted for Heaven And as that which goeth into the mouth doth not defile a Man because it is put forth again and so goeth to the Dung-hill neither doth any thing which Man eateth purifie him or fit him for Heaven What is said here in general may serve for an Introduction not only to this Proposition but also to the other concerning the Supper Of these Sacraments so called Baptism is always first numbered which is the Subject of the present Proposition in whose Explanation I shall first demonstrate and prove Our Judgment and then Answer the Objections and Refute the Sentiments of our Opposers Part I As to the first part these things following which are briefly comprehended in the Proposition come to be proposed and proved Prop. I § III. First That there is but One Baptism as well as but One Lord One Faith c. Secondly That this one Baptism which is the Baptism of Christ is not a washing with or dipping in Water but a being baptized by the Spirit Thirdly That the Baptism of John was but a Figure of this and therefore as the Figure to give place to the Substance which though it be to continue yet the other is ceased Prop. I As for the first viz. That there is but one Baptism there needs no other Proof than the Words of the Text Eph. 4. 5. One Lord one Faith one Baptism where the Apostle positively and plainly affirms that as there is but One Body One Spirit One Faith One God c. so there is but One Baptism Obj. 1 As to what is commonly alledged by way of Explanation upon the Text That the Baptism of Water and of the Spirit make up this One Baptism by vertue of this Sacramental Union Answ. I Answer This Exposition hath taken place not because grounded upon the Testimony of the Scripture but because it wrests the Scripture to make it suit to their Principle of Water-Baptism and so there needs no other Reply but to deny it as being repugnant to the plain words of the Text which saith not That there are Two Baptisms to wit one of Water the other of the Spirit which
do make up the One Baptism but plainly that there is One Baptism as there is One Faith and One God Now there goeth not Two Faiths nor Two Gods nor Two Spirits nor Two Bodies whereof the one is Outward and Elementary and the other Spiritual and Pure to the making up of the One Faith the One God the One Body and the One Spirit so neither ought there to go Two Baptisms to make up the One Baptism Obj. 2 But Secondly If it be said The Baptism is but One whereof Water is the one part to wit the Sign and the Spirit the thing signified the other Answ. I Answer This yet more confirmeth our Doctrine For if Water be only the Sign it is not the Matter of the One Baptism as shall further hereafter by its Definition in Scripture appear and we are to take the One Baptism for the Matter of it not for the Sign or Figure and Type that went before Even as where Christ is called the One Offering in Scripture though he was Typified by many Sacrifices and Offerings under the Law we understand only by the One Offering his Offering himself upon the Cross whereof though those many Offerings were Signs and Types yet we say not that they go together with that Offering of Christ to make up the One Offering So neither though Water-Baptism was a Sign of Christ's Baptism will it follow that it goeth now to make up the Baptism of Christ. If any should be so Absurd as to affirm That this One Baptism here were the Baptism of Water and not of the Spirit That were foolishly to contradict the positive Testimony of the Scripture which saith the contrary as by what followeth will more amply appear Prop. II Proof I Secondly That this One Baptism which is the Baptism of Christ is not a Washing with Water appears first from the Testimony of John the proper and peculiar Administrator of Water-Baptism Matt. 3. 11. I indeed baptize you with Water unto Repentance but he that cometh after me is mightier than I whose shooes I am not worthy to bear he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with Fire Here John mentions two manners of Baptisings and two different Baptisms the one with Water and the other with the Spirit the one whereof he was the Minister of the other whereof Christ was the Minister of and such as were baptized with the first were not therefore baptized with the second I indeed baptize you but he shall baptize you Though in the present time they were baptized with the Baptism of Water yet they were not as yet but were to be baptized with the Baptism of Christ. From all which I thus Argue Arg. I If those that were baptized with the Baptism of Water were not therefore baptized with the Baptism of Christ then the Baptism of Water is not the Baptism of Christ. But the first is true Therefore also the last And again Arg. II If he that truly and really administred the Baptism of Water did notwithstanding declare That he neither could nor did baptize with the Baptism of Christ Then the Baptism of Water is not the Baptism of Christ. But the first is true Therefore c. And indeed to understand it otherwise would make John's Words void of good sense For if their Baptisms had been all one why should he have so precisely Contradistinguished them Why should he have said that those whom he had already baptized should yet be baptized by another Baptism Object If it be urged That Baptism with Water was the one part and that with the Spirit the other part or Effect only of the former Answ. I Answer This Exposition contradicts the plain words of the Text. For he saith not I baptize you with Water and he that cometh after shall produce the Effects of this my Baptism in you by the Spirit c. or he shall accomplish this Baptism in you but he shall Baptize you So then if we understand the Word truly and properly when he saith I Baptize you as consenting that thereby is really signified that he did baptize with the Baptism of Water we must needs unless we offer Violence to the Text understand the other part of the sentence the same way that where he adds presently But he shall baptize you c. that he understood it of their being truly to be baptized with another Baptism than what he did baptize with Else it had been Non-sense for him thus to have Contradistinguished them Proof II Secondly This is further confirmed by the Saying of Christ himself Acts 1. 4 5. But wait for the promise of the Father which saith he ye have heard of me For John truly baptized with Water but ye shall be baptized with th Holy Ghost not many days hence There can scarce Two places of Scripture run more parallel than this doth with the former a little before mentioned and therefore concludeth the same way as did the other For Christ there grants fully that John compleated his Baptism as to the matter and substance of it John saith he truly baptized with Water which is as much as if he had said John did truly and fully Administer the Baptism of Water But ye shall be Baptized with c. This sheweth that they were to be Baptized with some other Baptism than the Baptism of Water and that although they were formerly Baptized with the Baptism of Water yet not with that of Christ which they were to be Baptized with Proof III Thirdly Peter observes the same distinction Acts 11. 16. Then remembred I the word of the Lord how that he said John indeed Baptized with Water but ye shall be Baptized with the Holy Ghost The Apostle makes this Application upon the Holy Ghost's falling upon them whence he infers that they were then Baptized with the Baptism of the Spirit As to what is urged from his Calling afterwards for Water to it shall be hereafter spoken From all which Three Sentences relative one to another First of John Secondly of Christ and Thirdly of Peter it doth evidently follow that such as were truly and really Baptized with the Baptism of Water were notwithstanding not Baptized with the Baptism of the Spirit which is that of Christ and such as truly and really did administer the Baptism of Water did in so doing not administer the Baptism of Christ. So that if there be now but One Baptism as we have already proved we may safely conclude that it is that of the Spirit and not of Water else it would follow that the One Baptism which now continues were the Baptism of Water i. e. John's Baptism and not the Baptism of the Spirit i. e. Christ's which were most Absurd Object If it be said further That though the Baptism of John before Christ's was administred was different from it as being the Figure only yet now that both it as the Figure and that of the Spirit as the Substance is necessary to
hath been proved by the Definition of the One Baptism so it is also manifest from the Necessary Fruits and Effects of it which are three-times particularly expressed by the Apostle Paul As first Rom. 6. 3 4. where he saith That so many of them as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his Death buried with him by Baptism into Death that they should walk in Newness of Life Secondly to the Gal. 3. 27. he saith positively For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ and Thirdly to the Col. 2. 12. he faith That they were Buried with him in Baptism and Risen with him through the Faith of the operation of God It is to be observed here that the Apostle speaks generally without any Exclusive Term but Comprehensive of all he saith not Some of you that were baptized into Christ have put on Christ but As many of you which is as much as if he had said Every one of you that hath been baptized into Christ hath put on Christ. Whereby it is evident that this is not meant of VVater-baptism but of the Baptism of the Spirit because else it would follow that whosoever had been baptized with VVater-baptism had put on Christ and were Risen with him which all acknowledge to be most Absurd Now supposing all the Visible Members of the Churches of Rome Galatia and Coloss had been outwardly baptized with Water I do not say they were but our Adversaries will not only readily grant it but also contend for it suppose I say the Case so they will not say they had all put on Christ since divers Expressions in these Epistles to them shew the contrary So that the Apostle cannot mean Baptism with Water and yet that he meaneth the Baptism of Christ i. e. of the Spirit cannot be denied or that the Baptism wherewith these were baptized of whom the Apostle here testifies that they had put on Christ was the One Baptism I think none will call in question Now admit as our Adversaries Contend that many in these Churches who had been baptized with Water had not put on Christ it will follow that notwithstanding that Water-baptism they were not baptized into Christ or with the Baptism of Christ seeing as many of them as were baptized into Christ had put on Christ c. From all which I thus Argue Arg. I If the Baptism with Water were the One Baptism i. e. the Baptism of Christ as many as were baptized with Water would have put on Christ. But the last is false Therefore also the first And again Arg. II Since as many as are baptized into Christ i. e. with the One Baptism which is the Baptism of Christ have put on Christ Then Water-baptism is not the One Baptism viz. the Baptism of Christ. But the first is true Therefore also the last Prop. III § V. Thirdly Since John's Baptism was a Figure and seeing the Figure gives way to the Substance albeit the thing figured remain to wit the One Baptism of Christ yet the other ceaseth which was the Baptism of John That John's Baptism was a Figure of Christ's Baptism I judge will not readily be denied but in Case it should it can easily be proved from the Nature of it John's Baptism was a being baptized with Water but Christ's is a baptizing with the Spirit Therefore John's Baptism must have been a Figure of Christ's But further that Water-baptism was John's Baptism will not be denied That Water-baptism is not Christ's Baptism is already proved From which doth arise the Confirmation of our Proposition thus There is no Baptism to continue now but the One Baptism of Christ. Arg. Therefore Water-baptism is not to continue now because it is not the Baptism of Christ. That John's Baptism is Ceased many of our Adversaries confess but if any should alledge it otherwise it may be easily proved by the express words of John not only as being insinuated there where he Contradistinguished his Baptism from that of Christ but particularly where he saith John 3. 30. He Christ must Increase but I John must Decrease From whence it clearly follows that the Increasing or taking place of Christ's Baptism is the Decreasing or abolishing of John's Baptism so that if Water-baptism was a particular part of John's Ministry and is no part of Christ's Baptism as we have already proved it will necessarily follow that it is not to Continue Arg. If water-Water-baptism had been to continue a Perpetual Ordinance of Christ in his Church he would either have practised it himself or Commanded his Apostles so to do But that he practised it not the Scripture plainly affirms John 4. 2. And that he Commanded his Disciples to baptize with Water I could never yet read As for what is alledged that Mat. 28. 19 c. where he bids them baptize is to be understood of Water-baptism that is but to beg the Question and the grounds for that shall be hereafter examined Therefore to baptize with Water is no Perpetual Ordinance of Christ to his Church This hath had the more Weight with me because I find not any standing Ordinance or Appointment of Christ necessary to Christians for which we have not either Christ's own Practice or Command as to obey all the Commandments which comprehend both our Duty towards God and Man c. and where the Gospel requires more than the Law which is abundantly signified in the 5th and 6th Chapters of Matthew and elsewhere Besides as to the Duties of Worship he exhorts us to Meet promising his Presence commands to Pray Preach Watch c. and gives Precepts concerning some Temporary things as the Washing of one anothers Feet the breaking of Bread hereafter to be discussed only for this one thing of baptising with Water though so earnestly contended for we find not any Precept of Christ. § VI. But to make Water-baptism a necessary Institution of the Christian Religion which is Pure and Spiritual and not Carnal and Ceremonial is to derogate from the New Covenant-Dispensation and set up the Legal Rites and Ceremonies of which this of Baptism or Washing with Water was one as appears from Heb. 9. 10. where the Apostle speaking thereof saith that it stood only in Meats and Drinks and divers Baptisms and Carnal Ordinances imposed until the Time of Reformation If then the Time of Reformation or the Dispensation of the Gospel which puts an end to the Shadows be come then such Baptisms and Carnal Ordinances are no more to be imposed For how Baptism with Water comes now to be a Spiritual Ordinance more than before in the time of the Law doth not appear seeing it is but Water still and a Washing of the Outward Man and a putting away of the filth of the Flesh still And as before those that were so Washed were not thereby made perfect as pertaining to the Conscience neither are they at this day as our Adversaries must needs acknowledge
Therefore c. Allegat I But First They alledge That Christ's Baptism though a Baptism with Water did differ from John 's because John only baptized with Water unto Repentance but Christ commands his Disciples to baptize in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost reckoning that in this Form there lieth a great difference betwixt the Baptism of John and that of Christ. Answ. I Answer as to that John's Baptism was unto Repentance the Difference lieth not there because so is Christ's also For our Adversaries will not deny but that Adult Persons that are baptized ought ere they be admitted to it to Repent and Confess their Sins yea and that Infants with a respect to and Consideration of their Baptism ought to Repent and Confess So that the difference lieth not here since this of Repentance and Confession agrees as well to Christ's as to John's Baptism But in this our Adversaries are divided for Calvin will have Christ's and John's to be all one Inst. lib. 4. cap. 15. Sect. 7 8. Yet they do differ and the difference is in that the one is by Water the other not c. Secondly As to what Christ saith in commanding them to baptize in the Name of the Father Son and Spirit I confess that states the Difference and it is great but that lies not only in admitting water-Water-baptism in this different Form by a bare expressing of these Words For as the Text saith no such thing neither do I see how it can be inferred from it For the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is into the Name now the Name of the Lord is often taken in Scripture for something else than a bare sound of Words or literal Expression even for his Vertue and Power as may appear from Psalm 54. 3. Cant. 1. 3. Prov. 18. 10. and in many more Now that the Apostles were by their Ministry to baptize the Nations into this Name Vertue and Power and that they did so is evident by these Testimonies of Paul above mentioned where he saith That as many of them as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ This must have been a baptizing into the Name i. e. Power and Vertue and not a meer formal Expression of Words adjoined with water-Water-baptism because as hath been above observed it doth not follow as a natural or necessary Consequence of it I would have those who desire to have their Faith built upon no other foundation than the Testimony of God's Spirit and Scriptures of Truth throughly to Consider whether there can be any thing further alledged for this Interpretation than what the prejudice of Education and influence of Tradition hath imposed Perhaps it may stumble the unwary and inconsiderate Reader as if the very Character of Christianity were abolished to tell him plainly that this Scripture is not to be understood of baptizing with Water and that this form of baptizing in the Name of Father Son and Spirit hath no warrant from Matth. 28. c. For which besides the Reason taken from the Signification of the Name as being the Vertue and Power above expressed let it be considered that if that had been a Form prescribed by Christ to his Apostles then surely they would have made use of that Form in the administring of Water-baptism to such as they baptized with Water but though particular mention be made in divers places of the Acts Who were baptized and how and though it be particularly expressed that they baptized such and such as Acts 2. 41 8. 12 13 38 9. 18 10. 48 16. 15 18. 8. yet there is not a Word of this Form And in two places Acts 8. 16 19. 5. it is said of some that they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus by which it yet more appears that either the Author of this History hath been very defective who having so often occasion to mention this yet omitteth so substantial a part of Baptism which were to accuse the Holy Ghost by whose guidance Luke wrote it or else that the Apostles did no ways understand that Christ by his Commission Matth. 28. did injoin them such a Form of Water-baptism seeing they did not use it And therefore it is safer to conclude that what they did in administring Water-baptism they did not by vertue of that Commission else they would have so used it For our Adversaries I suppose would judge it a great Heresie to Administer Water-baptism without that or only in the Name of Jesus without mention of Father or Spirit as it is expresly said they did in the two places above cited Allegat II Secondly They say If this were not understood of Water-baptism it would be a Tautology and all one with Teaching I say Nay Baptizing with the Spirit is somewhat further than Teaching or Informing the Understanding for it imports a Reaching to and melting the Heart whereby it is turned as well as the Understanding informed Besides we find often in the Scripture that Teaching and Instructing are put together without any Absurdity or needless Tautology and yet these two have a greater Affinity than teaching and baptizing with the Spirit Allegat III Thirdly They say Baptism in this Place must be understood with Water because it is the Action of the Apostles and so cannot be the Baptism of the Spirit which is the Work of Christ and his Grace not of Man c. Answ. I Answer Baptism with the Spirit though not wrought without Christ and his Grace is Instrumentally done by Men fitted of God for that purpose and therefore no Absurdity follows that Baptism with the Spirit should be expressed as the Action of the Apostles For though it be Christ by his Grace that gives Spiritual Gifts yet the Apostle Rom. 1. 11. speaks of his Imparting to them Spiritual Gifts and he tells the Corinthians that he had begotten them through the Gospel 1 Cor. 4. 15. And yet to beget People unto the Faith is the work of Christ and his Grace not of Men. To Convert the Heart is properly the Work of Christ and yet the Scripture often-times ascribes it to Men as being the Instruments And since Paul's Commission was to turn People from Darkness to Light though that be not done without Christ co-operating by his Grace so may also baptizing with the Spirit be expressed as performable by Man as the Instrument tho' the Work of Christ's Grace be needful to concur thereunto So that it is no Absurdity to say that the Apostles did Administer the Baptism of the Spirit Allegat IV Lastly They say That since Christ saith here that he will be with his Disciples to the end of the World therefore Water-baptism must continue so long Answ. If he had been speaking here of Water-baptism then that might have been urged but seeing that is denied and proved to be false nothing from thence can be gathered He speaking of the Baptism of the Spirit which we freely confess doth remain
Manichees were Condemned for denying that Grace is universally given by Baptism and Julian the Pelagian by Augustine for denying Exorcism and Insufflation in the use of Baptism All which things Protestants deny also So that Protestants do but foolishly to upbraid us as if we could not shew any among the Ancients that denied Water-baptism seeing they cannot shew any whom they acknowledge not to have been Heretical in several things to have used it nor yet who using it did not use also the Sign of the Cross and other things with it which they deny There were some nevertheless in the darkest Times of Popery who testified against Water-baptism For one Alanus page 103 104 107. speaks of some in his Time that were burnt for the denying of it For they said that Baptism had no Efficacy either in Children or Adult Persons and therefore Men were not obliged to take Baptism Particularly Ten Canonicks so called were burnt for that Crime by the Order of King Robert of France as P. Pithaeus tells in his Fragments of the History of Guienne Which is also confirmed by one Johannes Floracensis a Monk who was famous at that Time in his Epistle to Oliva Abbot of the Ausonian Church I will saith he give you to understand concerning the Heresie that was in the City of Orleans on Childer-mass-day For it was true if ye have heard any thing that King Robert caused to be burnt alive nigh Fourteen of that City of the Chief of their Clergy and the more Noble of their Laicks who were hateful to God and abominable to Heaven and Earth for they did stiffly deny the Grace of Holy Baptism and also the Consecration of our Lord's Body and Blood The Time of this Deed is noted in these Words by Papir Masson in his Annals of France lib. 3. in Hugh and Robert Actum Aureliae publice Anno Incarnationis Domini 1022. Regni Roberti Regis 28. Indictione 5. quando Stephanus Haeresiarcha Complices ejus damnati sunt exusti Aureliae Now for their calling them Hereticks and Manichees we have nothing but the Testimony of their Accusers which will no more invalidate their Testimony for this Truth against the use of Water-baptism or give more ground to charge us as being one with Manichees than because some called by them Manichees do agree with Protestants in some things that therefore Protestants are Manichees or Hereticks which Protestants can no ways shun For the Question is Whether in what they did they walked according to the Truth testified of by the Spirit in the Holy Scriptures So that the Controversie is brought back again to the Scriptures according to which I suppose I have formerly discussed it As for the latter part of the Thesis denying the Use of Infant-baptism it necessarily follows from what is above-said For if Water-baptism be Ceased then surely Baptizing of Infants is not warrantable But those that take upon them to Oppose us in this matter will have more to do as to this latter part For after they have done what they can to prove Water-baptism it remains for them to prove that Infants ought to be Baptized For he that proves Water-baptism Ceased proves that Infant-baptism is Vain But he that should prove that Water-baptism continues has not thence proved that Infant-baptism is necessary That needs something further And therefore it was a pitiful Subterfuge of Nic. Arnoldus against this to say That the denying of Infant-baptism belonged to the Gangrene of Anabaptists without adding any further Probation Concerning the Communion or Participation of the Body and Blood of Christ. The Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ is Inward and Spiritual which is the Participation of his Flesh and Blood by which the Inward Man is daily nourished in the Hearts of those in whom Christ dwells Of which things the Breaking of Bread by Christ with his Disciples was a Figure which they even used in the Church for a time who had received the Substance for the sake of the Weak Even as Abstaining from things strangled and from Blood the Washing one anothers Feet and the Anointing of the Sick with Oil All which are commanded with no less Authority and Solemnity than the former yet seeing they are but the Shadows of better things they Cease in such as have obtained the Substance § I. THE Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ is a Mystery hid from all natural men in their first fall'n and degenerate State which they cannot understand reach to nor comprehend as they there abide neither as they there are can they be Partakers of it nor yet are they able to Discern the Lord's Body And forasmuch as the Christian World so called for the most part hath been still labouring working conceiving and imagining in their own natural and unrenewed Understandings about the things of God and Religion therefore hath this Mystery much been hid and sealed up from them while they have been contending quarrelling and fighting one with another about the meer Shadow Outside and Form but strangers to the Substance Life and Vertue § II. The Body then of Christ which Believers partake of is Spiritual and not Carnal and his Blood which they drink of is pure and Heavenly and not humane or Elementary as Augustin also affirms of the Body of Christ which is Eaten in his Tractat Psal. 98. Except a Man eat my Flesh he hath not in him Life Eternal And he saith The Words which I speak unto you are Spirit and Life understand spiritually what I have spoken Ye shall not eat of this Body which ye see and drink this Blood which they shall spill that Crucifie me I am the Living Bread which have descended from Heaven he called himself the Bread who descended from Heaven exhorting that we might believe in him c. Quest. If it be asked then What that Body What that Flesh and Blood is Answ. I Answer It is that Heavenly Seed that Divine Spiritual Coelestial Substance of which we spake before in the 5th and 6th Propositions This is that Vehiculum Dei or Spiritual Body of Christ whereby and where-through he communicateth Life to Men and Salvation to as many as believe in him and receive him and whereby also Man comes to have Fellowship and Communion with God This is proved from the 6th of John from verse 32. to the end where Christ speaks more at large of this matter than in any other place And indeed this Evangelist and beloved Disciple who lay in the Bosom of our Lord gives us a more full account of the Spiritual Sayings and Doctrine of Christ And it 's observable that though he speaks nothing of the Ceremony used by Christ of Breaking Bread with his Disciples neither in his Evangelical Account of Christ's Life and Sufferings nor in his Epistles yet he is more large in this account of the Participation of the Body Flesh and Blood of