or reason of his Exhortation to be of as large an extent as his Exhortation it self otherwise you reflect disparagement upon the wisdom of the Apostle that would use such an Argument to perswade the whole Church which concerned only but a part of them But now if you will suppose the Apostles foundation suitable to his building and such as would bear it then you must conclude that as the whole Church of Rome is perswaded to mortification upon the account of their engagement thereunto in and by their Baptism so also that the whole Church had formerly put themselves under such an engagement by their Baptism and consequently that the whole Church was baptized 3. Lastly besides all this such a supposition that these Churches did consist partly of persons unbaptized as well as of those that had been baptized does cross those other Scriptures by which we have proved that none doe duly in a visible way enter into the universal Church much less into a particular Church which is subordinate thereunto but by the door or through the water of Baptism The Apostle doth not say that some are but that all are baptized into one body i.e. into one Church body 1 Cor. 12.13 2. Others they object further thus Object 2 That such persons as have repented and do believe and which are sanctified are fit matter whereof to make a Church and accordingly are to be admitted into Church-Fellowship for the Christian Churches in the Apostles times are described to be such as are sanctified in Christ Jesus called to be Saints Rom. 1.7 1 Cor. 1.2 and sometimes the faithful in Christ Jesus Ephes 1.1 and the faithful brethren in Christ Col. 1.2 And therefore in as much as many of those who though they have not been baptized since they believed yet being godly sanctified persons and in that respect fit matter whereof to make Church-members ought to be admitted into Church-Fellowship upon their desire their non-Baptism notwithstanding To this I answer by distinguishing of fitness in men to make Church-Members Answ and of their right thereunto upon that fitness There is a mediate and an immediate fitness in men for Church-Membership for though these words and phrases are not found in the Scripture yet we shall find the matter of this distinction there That which I call an immediate fitness is such a qualification which does directly dispose a man for and render him regularly capable of admission into Church-fellowship without any other thing intervening or coming between That which I call a mediate fitness is such a qualification by which a man is remotely and to a degree yea it may be in all degrees one onely excepted rendred capable of such an admission as that is of which we speak but yet so that something else some other qualification then any yet he is invested with must intervene before he be regularly compleatly and according to Gospel-order capable of that admission According to this latter acceptation or notion of fitness I do with all my heart acknowledg that very many unbaptized persons as I count unbaptized are fit to make Church Members that is they are so fit for it that there wants nothing else to make them fit but onely their Baptismal obedience to wit their subjection to that part of the Gospel which requires them to be baptized in the Name of the Lord Iesus unless it be the Imposition of hands also with prayer in order to their receiving a greater presence of the Spirit which according to the Primitive practice was wont to follow Baptism Acts 8.15 16 17. and 19.5 6. Hebr. 6.2 We may well suppose the persons we speak of to be as fit for Church Communion as those converted Jews were Acts 2. and the Eunuch the Jaylor and others were upon their repentance and belief before they were baptized But that they are immediatly fit for admission into Church fellowship by vertue of their repentance faith or sanctification without Baptism is that which hath been and is still denied there being no ruled case in Scripture to justifie such an admission Whatever the faith or holiness of any man was before yet his Baptism did still precede his Church Membership in the Primitive times as hath been before declared Let a man in all other respects imaginable be as fit as fitness it self can make him to be the husband of such or such a woman yet he may not enjoy her as a man enjoys his wife this his fitness notwithstanding untill the solemnities of Marriage are passed between them In like manner may no man regularly and in due form of Gospel proceeding be admited into Church-fellowship upon any account of fitness otherwise if this fitting and preparatory qualification of Baptism be wanting in as much as God hath as well instituted Baptism as a means to bring men into visible communion with the body of Christ which is his Church 1 Cor. 12.13 Gal. 3.27 as he hath instituted marriage as a fitting means to bring man and woman into that civil Communion which is proper onely to man and wife And whereas those Churches to which the Scripture quotations mentioned in the Objection relate are described not by their being baptized into Christ but by their faith in him and by their Sanctification or Saintship I would to this say these three things briefly by way of answer 1. Though they are not described by their being baptized yet the persons so described were baptized as appears by other passages in those very Epistles where the said descriptions are as Rom. 6.3 1 Cor. 12.13 Col. 2.12 Eph. 4 5. and 5.26 compared with Acts 19.1.5 2. When they are said to be sanctified in Christ Jesus they are inclusively or by way of implication said to be baptized as the mentioning an effect supposes its cause so does their sanctification suppose their being baptized because their Baptism was a speciall means of their sanctification Ephes 5.26 The Apostle speaking of Christ giving himself for his Church saith he did it That he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water i.e. Baptism by the Word They Word and Baptism then were two great Instruments of their Sanctification And if you understand by their being sanctified their being separated from the rest of the world and set apart or dedicated unto God which most properly answers the notion of sanctification then their being said to be sanctifyed may be understood in respect of their Baptism in special though not that onely because by their Baptism they were visibly put into a new condition and into new relations being thereby transmitted or carried over from the fellowship of the world into the fellowship of Christ and of the Saints and solemnly set apart for the service of Christ 3. The Reason why the Apostle describes those of the Churches aforesaid rather by their sanctification then by their being baptized was not as may well be conceived because Baptism was not positively necessary as to their Church being but because
sanctification was more comprehensive of all particulars requisite not onely to their being a Church simply considered as such but also as unto the excellency of such a being For their sanctification the thing by which they are described includes in it both their Baptism and all other parts and degrees of that qualification by which they were or might have been eminently the Churches of God Whereas Baptism being one of the principles or beginning Doctrines of Christ and such as which the Apostle leaves behind as it were when he endeavours to advance the Hebrew Church to higher perfections Hebr. 6.1 2 3. if the Apostle had described them by this his description of them would have fallen beneath their qualifications they having now made some progress in Christianity when those Epistles were written to them These things then considered the Apostle his describing the Churches to whom he wrote by such qualifications wherein Baptism is not particularly mentioned will not minister any ground of making Church Members of such who are not baptized 3. Object 3 Another Objection and indeed all that I know further considerable is this The Apostles exhortation to the Church at Rome was that they would receive such as were but weak in the faith to wit such as erroniously held it necessary to abstain from such meats which in themselves were indifferent and lawfull to be used Rom 14.1 2. and if their weakness in the faith or error in their knowledg hereabout was no sufficient bar against their admission into Church fellowship then why should a like error and weakness in men now about Baptism be counted a sufficient and just impediment to their admission into Church Communion For answer to this Answ several things may be considered by which gradually we may come to a clear resolution and full satisfaction in the Case as touching the invalidity of this Objection As 1. That as on the one hand it is not every weakness in faith or errour in knowledge about the things of the Gospel that does exclude a man from Church-Fellowship as appears by the Scripture now mentioned in the Objection so on the other hand it is not every profession of the faith neither which men make that does render them duly capable of it For then the worst of men if but making any kind of profession of the Christian Religion should be admittable into the Communion of Saints which yet is a thing altogether dissonant unto the Laws of Church-communion Some errours then must be acknowledged to be in some men professing the Gospel which do justly debar them from Church-communion 2. This being granted in the next place to the end men may be upon terms of certainty is to know what errours they be which do de jure exclude men from Church-Fellowship and what do not recourse must be had to some fixed standing rule by which to make a right judgment in the case otherwise men will but rove at random and be in danger of making such errours exclusive of mens Church-membership which are not as likewise of making the door of this admission wider then God hath made it 3. That then which must be the standard by and according to which to make a right judgment in the case must be that thing what ever it be which is appointed by God as the next and immediate means appropriately of mens visible union with the Church and the reason hereof is because as on the one hand less then a mans coming up to that mean what ever it be which is the immediate inlet into the Church cannot minister either a right or opportunity of his being of the Church so on the other hand nothing more then this can be duly insisted on as absolutely necessary to make a man capable thereof and therefore who ever attains thereto cannot upon any account of infirmities otherwise be justly debarred his communion with the Church 4. That thing then which is the appropriate and immediate means of a mans visible entrance into and union with the Church is Baptism it being as the Bridge over which or as the Gate through which men declaredly pass over from the friendship of the world into the fellowship of the Saints this hath formerly been proved and therefore needs not here to be repeated It is true indeed Baptism is properly the immediate means of admission into the universal Church but whoever is by it duly made a member of the universal Church hath thereby a right of admission into a particular Church and not otherwise 5. Therefore in the last place If Baptism duly administred and received or mens coming up to the laws and terms of its due administration be the standard according to which men are to be judged meet or unmeet for Church-communion then it follows that whatever errours or infirmities are in men yet if they be not of that nature as to detain them from imbracing Baptism on Scripture terms those errours do not cannot justly debar them of Communion with the Church and on the other hand whatever other quallification there is in men towards the disposing and fitting of them for Church communion yet if they be under the power and command of any such errour which causes them to refuse baptism upon those terms according to which upon Scripture account it ought to be administred and so causes them to fall short of the formall and immediate mean of their regular union and visible conjunction with the Church that errour does necessarily deprive them both of right and opportunity of being of the Church visibly These things then being duly considered we may easily come to a resolution about the two Cases mentioned in the Objection viz. Whether this errour about Baptism of which we speak does no more deprive men of a right of admission into Church-Fellowship then that weakness in the faith did of which the Apostle speaks For that error about abstaining from meats which is the weakness in the faith of which the Apostle there speaks being an errour of that nature only which did not keep them that were under it from closing with Baptism as the means of their union with the Church I mean upon those terms according to which God had authorized the administration and reception of it but that they might and did repent and believe the main Principles of the Gospel the terms quallifying men for Baptism and did thereupon receive Baptism for all this weakness of theirs Hence it came to pass that they were to be admitted into Church-communion this weakness of theirs notwithstanding But now their errour about Baptism of whom we speak being an errour of that nature by which they are kept off from imbracing Baptism upon Scripture terms and so of attaining to and making use of that which is the appropriate mean of their visible union with the Church this errour of theirs does in a direct way unavoidably cut them short both of right and opportunity of a regular admission into Church-Fellowship There being then so broad a difference between the two errours compared in the Objection as you see there is the one consisting with the other being repugnant to that very mean without which a visible conjunction and union with the Church is not attainable on Scripture terms it therefore no wise follows that because the one was no just impediment unto mens Church-Fellowship that therefore the other is not neither for where things and cases do really differ as these do there the consequences of those things cannot be the same Thus having finished my Answers to these Objections I suppose it doth appear by what hath been offered to consideration on this behalf these Objections notwithstanding that persons baptized refusing to joyn themselves in Church-communion with those who are unbaptized is not without such grounds which will render them approved in so doing ERRATA PAge 6. l. 29. for to r. by p. 10. l. 15. r. is p. 16. l. 3. for end r. need p. 18. l. 19. for disciples read visible members p. 20. l. 35 for who r. we p. 21. l. 20. r. of p. 22. l. â— r. no. p. 22. l. 33. for any r. my p. 84. l. 20. for dealings r. deelinings p. 89. l. 7. r. to p. p 91. l. 4. r. upon p. 93 l. 38. omit old p. 93. l. 37. omit the deeds p. 94. l. 30. omit in p. 109. l. 7 for into r. unto p. 109 l. 19 for lights r. light The End
which should have rendred them worthy the name of Christians indeed whilest they have fancied themselves to be such upon account of their Christendome as they call it i. e. that Baptism which they received in their Infancy For whereas they are made to beleeve that they have been Baptized into Christ and thereby received into the number of Christs flock and incorporated into his Church by that Baptism they have hereupon presumed themselves good Christians and in safe condition and have taken it ill that any should make question to the contrary though otherwise they have had little more then this upon which to build such a confidence Whereas otherwise if they could not have attained so much as the name and repute of Christians much lesse the hope of that salvation which belongs to Christians indeed without a manifestation of repentance and faith preceding their Baptism and their reception of Baptism thereupon which yet is the Gospell way there is no doubt but that millions of men and women would have quit themselves upon far better tearms then now they have done in labouring after knowledge in the Gospell and such other qualifications as would have rendred them meet for Baptism and consequently for communion in other ordinances of the Gospell rather then they would have fallen short of the confidence of being Christians and the repute of such and the hope of salvation which belongs to those that are such indeed For mens extream impatience of not being reputed Christians indeed upon account of their Infant Baptism and that slender and contradictory profession which they make argues the name and repute of such and that hope they have thereby to be a thing so dear and precious to them as that they would do much more then now they do for the gaining of it if they had it not upon such easie terms as now they have as men have ordered the matter Secondly From what else then the practise of Infant Baptism hath proceeded the Churching of whole Nations and Kingdomes whilest all Infants in a Nation except such as have been prevented by death have been Baptized and thereby received into the Church and if so why may we not say that the national Church officers the Bishops yea the universal Bishop himself the Pope have grown out of the same root For if there had been no nationall Baptism in this kind as doubtlesse there would not if Baptism had not been to be had but upon Scripture terms viz. apparent repentance and faith preceding then there would have been no nationall Churches that being as to outward form the foundation upon which they are built and door of entrance thereinto and if there had been no nationall Churches there could have been no nationall Church officers and if no nationall Church officers then surely no universall officer over all nationall both Churches and officers So that Infant Baptism may well be conceived to be the cause sine qua non that without which neither the one nor the other of these would have been as now they are And therefore how small a matter or innocent thing soever Infant Baptism seems to most yet who may not see if they will but seriously consider it that the evils and mischiefes that have taken place in the world upon the taking place of nationall Churches and their Officers and the head of them all the Pope may in great part be charged upon that dangerous errour Infant Baptism of which we speake And what a dishonour and reproach hath it been to Jesus Christ that he should be looked upon as head of such Churches and that such vile and unworthy persons should be esteemed members of his body as those nationall Churches and the persons of whom they have mostly consisted have been as if Christ and Belial had been well agreed Besides these Nationall corrupt indeed Antichristian Churches have in great part thrust out the true Churches of Jesus Christ and his discipline and the purity of his administration of Ordinances and have contempered themselves in constitution discipline and worship unto the spirit of this world by which they have for the most part been inspired and acted And therefore however this After Baptism as it is called is charged with rending and tearing of Churches which in true construction is but a rending and dividing of persons from Churches of an undue and humane constitution that they might be gathered into the fold of Christs own making and such a division as this the Gospell hath always wrought in the world in respect of some or other of its truths Luke 12.51 yet indeed and in truth it is not fiduciall Baptism i. e. the Baptizing of men after they beleeve but Infant Baptism that is truely guilty of rending and tearing indeed of dissolving the true Churches of Jesus Christ in the world And therefore in the third place though those Congregationall or Independent Churches as they are called have conceived with themselves that they have provided well against that sin of corrupting and carnalizing Churches of which the Nationall and Parochiall associations are guilty by that separation which they have made from them yet upon due consideration it will be found that they have but only for the present lopt off some evill and corrupt branches but have not at all taken away the root that bears them for their practise of Baptizing their Infants and thereupon imbodying them with themselves will within the space and compasse of lesse then an age as is more then probable render these Churches also much-what as carnall as the Parochiall and Nationall are For whatsoever children are whilest but Infants during which time I cannot but hold their condition good and safe God-wards the Scriptures favourable aspect that wayes considered yet when they come to years of discretion they so corrupt themselves with actuall sin even the children of good men as well as bad as that that saying of our Saviour must take place concerning them Joh. 3.3 Except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdome of God And without controversie those who in reason cannot on this account be judged in a capacity to see the Kingdome of God cannot in reason be judged in a capacity to have communion with God and with his Saints in all the ordinances of God And whether it be not very rare for persons to be as early in their repentance and faith as in their actuall sinning which yet hath no promise of pardon without an actuall turning unto God I leave to themselves to consider whose experience and observation I doubt not will incline them to conclude it so to be And therefore it cannot be in all probability but that such Churches if they should continue for the space of an age in that way in which they now are they must of necessity consist in great part of carnall and unregenerate persons as the parochiall Churches do If any shall conceive this a convenient remedy against this evill viz. to Excommunicate children
or youth about the time in which they come to know the difference between good and evill at which time they make themselves guilty of actuall transgression and consequently put themselves under a necessity of conversion to wit repentance and faith for the obtaining remission of those actuall sins and therefore in reason cannot be looked upon as regenerate untill the fruites worthy amendment of life and of faith do appear though this remedy I say should be thought on which is not likely yet for them to retain them in the Church whilst Infants and to cast them out when they come to years of understanding is such a thing which as there is no rule prescribing it so I beleeve my own observation in some other cases prompting me hereunto it will prove a thing of greater difficulty then indulgent parentall members will know how to overcome If any shall think to prevent this more then inconvenience another way viz. by Baptizing Infants into the universall Church and not receiving them into any particular Church till they can give an account of their repentance from dead workes and faith towards God or else if they do receive them into a particular Church shall think to prevent this by not admitting them unto communion with the Church in other ordinances till they can give the aforesaid account herein likewise besides the evill of unregenerate persons permissive abode in the Church they shall give a rule unto themselves which God hath not given For whoever are fit to be and de facto are members of the universall visible Church are fit also to be members of particular Churches and whosoever are members of particular Churches cannot according to any rule in Scripture that I know be excluded part and fellowship in any the Ordinances there administred For during the time in which God would have Infants to be members of the nationall Church of the Jews and partakers of one ordinance to wit Circumcision he did neither order their excommunication out of the Church upon account of their unregeneration when they became actuall sinners nor yet debarre them communion with the Church in any other ordinance till signes of their regeneration appeared nor were they excluded communion in any the ordinances of that Church at any time from their very Infancy otherwise or longer then the terms of naturall necessity and debility did impose it upon them Nor does it at all follow that Infants are to be admitted Church members under the Gospell because they were so under the Law as some vainly imagine nor yet that persons of like disqualification may be admitted into or continued in Churches under the Gospell as might be both the one and the other under the Law no more then it followes that the Gospell ministration is carnall beggerly weak and unprofitable because that of the Law was such Heb. 7.18 9.10 Gal. 4.9 For under the Law Church membership was vested in Abrahams naturall seed in which capacity Infants were as well as men but under the Gospell that priviledg is proper only to those that are or appear to be his spirituall seed to wit beleevers Gal. 3.7 26-29 Rom. 9.8 in which capacity Infants are not Under the Law spirituall defilements such as were ignorance unbelief or morall pollutions such as are extortion railing covetousnesse c. did not exclude persons from Church membership if they did but keep the ceremoniall Law which according to the Apostle Heb. 9.9 10. stood only in meats and drinks and divers washings and carnal ordinances imposed on them untill the time of reformation which could not make him that did the service perfect as pertaining to the conscience which yet unregenerate men were in a capacity to perform But now under the Gospell both spirituall and morall defilements such as are ignorance of God and his wayes unbelief covetousnesse drunkennesse railing extortion c. doe de jure exclude persons from Church fellowship 1 Cor. 5.11 15.34 Under the Law as the service and administration of that Church did consist of elements of the world beggerly rudiments and carnall ordinances Gal. 4.3.9 Heb. 9.10 So the members of that Church that were permitted communion in those ordinances Isa 53.1 8 18. 10.22 Heb. 4 2. Psal 81.11 Isa 65.2 were at least sometimes for the most part but carnall likewise in which respect Infants and youths were not lesse capable of Church membership then they But now under the Gospell God requires such only to worship him in his Churches as can worship him in spirit and truth and will have his Churches to be spirituall houses built of living stones to wit such as are meet to be an holy priesthood to offer up spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ Joh. 4.23 24. 1 Pet. 1.5 in which capacity Infants are not So that notwithstanding all that can be pretended to the contrary for other pretentions besides these I know none Infant Baptism is in a little time like to prove a corrupter of the * And doubtlesse that is none of Christs Church wayes wherein provision for Church purity is made but only for one age or half one rather upon which account among others the way of Independency seems to me to fall short of the mark and to misse of Gods way Independent Churches themselves as well as it hath been of the Nationall which one would think were to them argument enough alone to cause them to lay aside the practise of it The premises therefore considered Infant Baptism that hath proved so great a snare to men to think themselves secure in an unsafe condition that hath been as it were the bottom means of erecting Churches contrary to the Gospell pattern to the great dishonour of Jesus Christ unto whom they pretend relation and setting of Antichristian officers over them yea and is likely also in a little time to leaven even those Churches themselves that have been looking after some reformation and purity that Baptism I say is questionlesse no doctrine according to Godlinesse as true Baptism is but of ungodlinesse of which to me it 's more then probable it hath been a great promotresse in the World And therefore to me it clearly appears to be the duty of all those that love the honour of Jesus Christ and the prosperity of his affaires both in his Churches and in the World both which have suffered so deeply by the springing up of this root of bitternesse as is in part before exprest to endeavour with all their might in a Christian way the extirpation of so evill a custome as this hath been and the restitution of primitive Baptism as one of those Lawes of our Lord which corrupt times have made void as indeed they have done many other Upon which account I shall further encounter the one and plead the cause of the other in the ensuing arguments to which I refer thee with humble requests to God to give thee an upright heart and single eye in thy
to Infants so likewise is there no more reason to imagine that Infants are intended when housholds are said to be baptized they being no more capable of that regularly then they are of believing In 1 Sam. 1.21 it 's said That the man Elkanah and all his house went up to offer to the Lord the yearly sacrifice and his vow and yet it is evident Vers 22. that Hannah Elkanah's wife and Samuel his son which were part of his houshold did not then go up to the place of publique worship And therefore when Lydia is said to be baptized she and her houshold it no more necessary hereby to understand her and her children if she had any then it is by Elkanah and all his house to understand both himself and his young son Samuel 3. Answ 3 I yet further answer That as concerning two of the three housholds mentioned in the Objection it is evident that they did believe before they were baptized for as it is said of the Jaylor that he was baptized and all his straightway Act. 16.33 so also is it said Vers 32. that they spake unto him the Word of the Lord and to all that were in his house and in Vers 34. that he rejoyced believing in God with all his house And whereas Paul is said to have baptized the houshold of Stephanus 1 Cor. 1.16 in Chap. 16. of the same Epistle Vers 15. this houshold of Stephanus is said to consist of such persons as addicted themselves to the Ministry of the Saints Ye know the houshold of Stephanus that it is the first fruits of Achaia and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the Saints If then it cannot reasonably be thought that Infants heard and understood the Word of the Lord or believed in God or addicted themselves to the Ministry of the Saints as those of these housholds which were baptized did no more can it with any colour of reason be supposed that Infants were baptized when those housholds were baptized And though there be not the same particular account given of the like qualifications in those that were baptized of the family of Lydia yet according to that rule by which those Scriptures that speak of things more generally and briefly are to be interpreted by or according to the tenor of those that treat of the same or like subject more particularly and expresly we are to reckon that the same or like qualifications were found in the houshold of Lydia which were in those of the housholds of the Jaylor and Stephanus and upon which they were alike baptized And thus much for the answering of this first Objection If it be further objected That this first Argument Object 2 which asserts Infant-Baptism unlawful because it is no where said in the Scripture that Infants were baptized is as well an Argument against womens having communion in the Supper of the Lord as against Infant-Baptism because it is no more said any where that women did participate of the Lords Supper then it is that Infants were baptized To this likewise I answer briefly Though it be no where expresly and in so many words said Answ that women did break bread or were partakers of the Table of the Lord c. yet there is that said by which it may be as safely collected that they did so do as if it had been asserted in so many words For it is said That those that were baptized continued as in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship so in breaking of bread and prayers Acts 2.41 42. But now women were baptized as well as men Acts 8.12 therefore women as well as men continued in breaking of bread and prayers Again Acts 20.7 it 's said that the Disciples came together to break bread but now women were Disciples as well as men and therefore we have every whit as much reason to understand that saying of them as of men Acts 9.36 Now then if any thing were asserted in Scripture concerning Infants by which it might be as plainly collected and gathered that they were baptized as it may be inferred that women did eat the Lords Supper from what is asserted concerning them then it might well be said indeed that this first Argument is as well against womens having communion with men in the Supper of the Lord as it is against Infants Baptism but till this appear or something like it this Objection is of no force to invalidate our Argument ARGUM. II. MY second Argument shall be taken from the nature of Baptism and from the declared ends and uses of it and it is this If that Administration of Baptism which is made to professed Beleevers do more conduce to and better answer the ends of Baptism then that does which is made to Infants then Baptism ought not to be administred to Infants but to professed Beleevers The reason hereof is clear because it is the duty of men to endevor as much as in them lies to observe and keep the Laws of every Ordinance of God in the best manner they know how and not to content themselves with a lower and meaner way of doing and performing the same when there is an opportunity before them of rising up to that which is more excellent and which doth more exactly answer the counsel and intendment of God in it If this were any mans doubt it might be confirmed from such Scriptures which condemn such practices of men as most unworthy and accursed who having an opportunity of presenting God with a better sacrifice or service do yet present him with that which is worse Mal. 1.14 Cursed be the deceiver which hath in his flock a male and voweth and sacrificeth to the Lord a corrupt thing Those Scriptures likewise vote the same thing which require That men seek to excel to the edifying of the Church 1 Cor. 14.12 That hold forth ways that are more excellent then others as to be more desired and striven for then others 1 Cor. 12.31 Phil. 1.10 But that Administration of Baptism The Assumption which is made to professed Believers does more conduce to and better answer the ends of Baptism then that which is made to Infants The truth of this will appear by comparing Baptism as administred to the one and to the other in relation to the several ends and uses of Baptism 1. One end of Baptism is to declare Jesus Christ unto the World Joh. 1.31 But that he to wit Christ should be made manifest unto Israel therefore am I come baptizing with water For he who is rightly baptized into Christ or Faith in his Name doth thereby profess Jesus Christ to be a worthy person meet to be believed in and himself his servant and disciple Besides the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ being represented in Baptism Rom. 6.3 4 5. Col. 2.12 it administers an occasion unto men to enquire what an one Christ is for what end he came into the World dyed was buried and rose again and so knowledg of
to this God puts his Laws in the minds of men and writes them in their hearts Heb. 8.10 which implies that he did not do so under the Old Testament or at least but very little comparatively Again Joh. 4.23 But the hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and truth implying that thither-unto or until then they had not so worshipped him or at least that there was but little of that found under the Legal Dispensation And according to the nature of this Ministration children voyd of understanding and faith were capable of holy things as Circumcision and Passover and the like and consequently of the ends and benefits of them in part upon a literal administration and reception of them Rom. 3.1 2. Exod. 12.44 48. But the case is far otherwise now under the Gospel which is the Ministration of the Spirit 2 Cor. 3.6 It is not the work done but the manner of doing of it in knowledg faith and fear of the Lord that entitles men unto the benefit and blessing of Gospel-Ordinances for so the Apostle affirms concerning Baptism it self 1 Pet. 3.21 when he says that it saves us now as the Ark did some in the days of Noah not saith he the putting away of the filth of the flesh i. e. not by the external letter of the Ordinance but the answer of a good Conscience towards God i.e. when accompanyed with such a frame of mind and conscience as does answer God in his intendments of Grace in that Ordinance So again Col. 2.12 when the Apostle saith that they were buryed with Christ in Baptism and that they were therein also risen with him yet he says that thus they were by the faith of the operation of God who raised Christ from the dead meaning such a faith as was produced by the operation of God or else such as had the operation of God in raising up Christ for its object however it was by the interveniency of this Faith that they became both buryed and risen with Christ in Baptism Now Infants as they are not capable of acting this Faith or making this answer of a good Conscience so they are not capable of those blessings and benefits intended by God in Baptism in as much as he hath suspended the donation thereof upon these in conjunction with Baptism And where any effect depends upon the taking place of more causes then one as it does in the case in hand it is not any one of those causes alone that will produce that effect 3. How ever the ends of Circumcision were attainable though administred to Infants in those respects before mentioned with their fellows yet doubtless the Ordinance it self was so much the less spiritual and so much the more weak and savoring of the Legal Ministration and suited to the then childish condition of the Church because administration thereof was made to Infants This I conceive might easily be made out from several of those rational principles consonant to the Scripture upon and from which I have already evinced Baptism to be more spiritual profitable and edifying when administred to men professing the Faith then when applyed to children Therefore doubtless what the Apostle speaketh of the Commandment in general meaning the Law which as he says made nothing perfect how that it is disanulled for the weakness and unprofitableness of it Hebr. 7.18 19. may well be understood to comprehend even this part of the Commandment also which enjoyned an Ordinance one or more to be administred to little children And how ever such a mean low way and method of enjoying Ordinances as was accommodated to the capacity of babes was not uncomely whilest the Church was in the condition of children as the Apostle speaks Gal. 4.3 no more then it is for a child whilest he is a child to speak and act as a child yet to retain this poor and low and barren way of administring a Gospel-Ordinance to Infants now the Church is raised both in capacity and administration to its manly condition is as incongruous and uncomely as it is for one still to speak and act as a child when he is become a man By this time I hope it appears that there is not the same reason why Baptism administred to Infants should reach the ends thereof as there was why Circumcision though applyed to Infants formerly should attain its end For the nature of the two Ordinances differ the terms of their Administration differ and the respective capacities of the Church then and the Church now differ and according to that rule in Logick Where the things themselves differ there the reasons of those things differ also ARGUM. III. 3. MY next Argument shall be taken from the different nature of the two Ministrations of the Old and New Testaments as rendering Infant-Baptism in that precise consideration of it as applyed to Infants disagreeable to the Ministration of the Gospel but withall more correspondent with the Ministration of the Law Therefore I thus further argue If Infant-Baptism be disagreeable to the Ministration of the New Testament then Infants ought not to be baptized The reason hereof is because so far as either this or any other way or practice does comply with the Legal Ministration and disagree with the Evangelical so far it does cross or oppose the design of God in changing the Ministration of the Law for that of the Gospel and consequently carries in it a spirit of antipathy against the very spirit of the Gospel Ministration This if it were not sufficiently evident of it self might receive abundant confirmation from such Scriptures as these and what might fairly and plainly be deduced from them Joh. 4.23 24. 2 Cor. 3.6 Gal. 4.9 Col. 2.8 17. Heb. 7.18 19. 8.6 7. 9.9 10 11. 10.1 But I presume of every mans plenary satisfaction as to this Therefore I proceed But Infant-Baptism is disagreeable to the Ministration of the New Testament Assumption 1. The truth hereof in the first place is conspicuous and perceptible by what hath been made good in our former Argument For there we proved Baptism as administred to Infants less edifying as to the several ends of it then when administred unto Believers and if less edifying then the more suitable and conformable to the Ministration of the Law which was a Ministration of less light and edification and to the same proportion disproportionate to the Ministration of the Gospel which is a Ministration of a greater light and a more rich edification 2. I might in the second place well suppose Infant-Baptism to savor strongly of the Legal Ministration because the principal Arguments produced in defence thereof are such as do arise out of and are deducted from the example of Infant-Circumcision a principal part of the Legal Ministration and from that analogy and proportion that is supposed to be between them and not only so but likewise because such Arguments and Pleas tend to draw down this
of the Gospel in building a spiritual house unto God then was under the Law in those that were typical For as Christ is faithful in all his house i. e. in all things belonging to his house as was Moses Heb. 3.2 viz. in his directions how he would have it built and the affairs thereof ordered as he received of his Father so ought the servants of Christ to be as faithful also in following their Original pattern For that exactness under the Law served as an example or shadow of Heavenly things i. e. spiritual or Gospel things Heb. 8.5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the Tabernacle For see saith he that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee on the Mount 2. As it was a Doctrine of Christ delivered by the Apostles that Churches should be founded upon Baptism as well as other principles of the Doctrine of Christ that is that men should first be baptized and then associate themselves in Church Bodies so in the second place we shall find it to have been the practise of believers and such as subjected themselves to the Doctrine of the Gospel in the Apostles time The first Church that was erected by the Apostles I mean the Church at Jerusalem observed this method Acts 2.40 42. Those that gladly received his word were baptized and here upon the same day were added to them viz. to the Apostles and other Disciples about three thousand souls and then it follows that they continued stedfast in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship and in breaking of bread and in prayers 1. They gladly received the word 2. Were baptized 3. Were added to the Church 4. Continued in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship and in breaking of bread and prayers So that as their gladsom receiving the word preceded their baptism so did their baptism in respect of order precede their addition to that particular body of Christians and their communion and fellowship together in the Ordinances of the Gospel as breaking of bread and the like The Apostle gives thanks to God in the behalf of the believing Romans For that though they had been the servants of sin yet had obeyed from the heart that form of Doctrine whereto they were delivered as it is in the Marginal reading i. e. unto the profession and practice of which they were delivered when they first turned Christians were baptized Rom. 6.17 For that now is evident that what ever this form of Doctrine was it was such doctrine as was first taught them first believed obeyed by them upon their becoming Christians For it was at that time in which they ceased to be any longer the servants of fin and did become the Servants of righteousness which must needs be the time of their conversion in which they are said to have obeyed that Form of Doctrine Now what reasonably can be imagined to be the forme of doctrine here spoken of which was subjected to at their first conversion but that which the Scripture elsewhere calls as we have already noted the beginning doctrine of Christ or the Principles of the Drctrine of Christ or that Systeme body or platform of doctrine which was made up of those six Principles wherein men were first instructed and which were laid as a foundation of what ever might be called a progress in Christianity afterwards Heb. 6.1 2. These believing Romans then did not only obey the doctrine of the Gospel simply considered and in the general but also in the formality of it or according to that method and order which does appertain to the laws precepts of it of which an account was before given That believers were baptized before their admittance into Church communion and in order to it is clear enough but that any were admitted to Church-Fellowship before Baptism in the Primitive times is a thing which to me no where appears from the Scripture but is a thing void of precept or example from Scripture in those that now practise it If then it was the practise of believers in the first times of the Gospel to associate themselves in Church-Fellowship with such only who were baptized a great inducement doubtless it ought to be to all Christians now to go and do likewise For the Scripture-injunction is To walk in the way of good men and to keep in the path of the righteous Prov. 2.20 To be followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises Heb. 6.12 To mark them which walked as the Apostles walked as having them for an Ensample Philip. 3.17 1 Cor. 11.1 And it was the great praise of the Church of the Thessalonians that they made the Churches of Judea which were Churches of the first Plantation their pattern and example 1 Thess 2.14 For ye brethren became followers of the Churches of God which in Judea are in Christ Jesus c. and what was praise-worthy in that Church will be commendable to any Church now 3. None are in a due and regular capacity of holding Church-Communion with a particular Church in her appropriate priviledges who are not regularly visible members of the universal Church as no man is in a due capacity of being a member of a particular Corporation in a Nation who not being free-born is not first made a free Denizen of that Nation For particular Churches receive their respective beings from the Universal as particular Rivers receive theirs from the Sea That Baptism is the Ordinance of visible initiation or admission into the universal Church of Christ is a thing which generally hath been acknowledged and is by Pedobaptists themselves constantly asserted and is that which I have already proved in the former part of this Treatise from 1 Cor. 12.13 Rom. 6.3 and Gal. 3.27 to which I refer the Reader for satisfaction herein What persons are or may be in Gods account and acceptation upon account of their faith and repentance c. preceding their baptism is not the thing in question if it were I hope I should not be found too narrow and straight in my Christian allowance as unto that but the question is what they are visibly unto men when they make a judgement of them according to rule And if Baptism be the means of visible admission into the Church and of visible ingrafting into Christ then this end is not to be expected without this means where there is opportunity of making use of it God never being used to vouchsafe things in an extraordinary way when ordinary means are at hand and neglected and consequently that none are to be looked upon as regularly visible members no not of the Universal Church who are not baptized For men are not left to their own liberty herein but are tied up to a rule to judg by And indeed should there not be a certain standing rule such as Baptism is by which to determine when men are visibly of
the Church universal and when not there would be a great deal of uncertainty by what how and when to esteem them members thereof Should we make any thing else the rule of this Judgement we should find our selves at a strange loss to give right judgement herein For example Should we make a mans profession of the Christian Religion in general this rule then the question will be whether every profession of the Christian Religion does render a man reputably a member of the universal Church If not as I suppose it will not be asserted that it doth then the question will be to what degree a man must profess before he be worthy that denomination And who is able here to give the rule unto his brother yea or unto himself either but that he will be in danger of making it too high or too low too narrow or too wide But now if we take the rule which God hath fitted to our hands Baptism I mean we shall then find our selves delivered from those uncertainties difficulties and dis-satisfactions yea from that un-evangelical arbitrariness in the things of God which otherwise will of necessity and unavoidably befall us herein For according to Scripture rule all they and only they are to be esteemed visibly of the universal Church who so far profess repentance from dead works faith towards God and the rest of the foundation principles as thereupon to submit to the Ordinance of Baptism as engaging themselves thereby to be no longer the servants of sin but thenceforth the servants of Jesus Christ and of righteousness I shall not here repeat the proof of this you have it already If then none are to be esteemed as visible members of the universal Church but only such as are baptized then none but such as are baptized may be admitted as members of a particular Church For it is altogether irregular indeed absurd to admit any into particular Church-Fellowship who are not first visibly members of the Universal because particular Churches and so particular Church-members receive their right of being such of and from the Universal Church and from that precedent standing they had there as branches and members of it As the special must and doth agree with the general kind in the general nature of it or else it is no special of that general as Logicians speak So must a particular Church agree with the universal in the universal nature of it otherwise it is no particular of the Universal but is something of another kind But now Baptism is so essentially formally and universally necessary to the visible being I say visible being of the universal Church and of every member of it as that it is the distinguishing mark between those that are and those that are not visibly of it For it is that mean or only visible door by which visibly men pass out of the world into the Church from under the dominion of sin and Satan into the Rule and Government of Jesus Christ That the Scriptures do assigne this office unto Baptism I have formerly proved as I suppose and is the vote and concession of all men generally a few only excepted of those that profess Christianity If the Scriptures do in any other quarters of them repeal this mean and ordain another in its stead or do assigne any other besides this to the same service I desire to be directed therein that I may know what it is and where I may find it for I must profess my total ignorance of any such thing though I have made diligent search for it Nor is it indeed Gods way and method to leavy more means for the same end when one is every way sufficient as I have formerly shewed Baptism then being so much of the general nature of the Churches visible being as that no man can according to Scripture-rule esteem any one duly and regularly a member thereof without it those particular Churches or Church-members then that partake not hereof cannot in due form of Evangelical Law nor according to the principles of reason be esteemed particucular Churches or Church-members of the universal but either of some other kind or at the best of an un-evangelical form and constitution 4. This being Gods method order and way of bringing men into the enjoyment of Church-communion and Church priviledges viz. through the door of Baptism as hath been already observed this very method and order of his ought to be very sacred unto us and inviolably observed by us For as God is the God of order and not of confusion so he hath commanded us to do all things viz. which he hath commanded in Church-Affairs decently and in order 1 Cor. 14.40 Now what is it to do all things in order but to do every thing in its due place that first which in order of institution is first and that afterwards which hath a relative dependance upon that which goes before There is indeed a beautiful harmony and comely agreement between the wayes of Jesus Christ Ordinance and Ordinance when each of them is observed in that order that is proper to them in which respect I suppose the Tabernacle or House of God of old was called the Beauty of holiness or the Ordinannances thereof the comely honours of the Sanctuary as Master Ainsworth tenders it which yet were but a pattern of heavenly i. e. Spiritual or Gospel things Heb. 9.23 and 8.5 The which spiritual beauty being beheld by the Apostle in the Church at Colosse he was much taken there with Joying and beholding your order c. Coloss 2.5 i.e. Joying to behold your order which argues that this order of theirs was a lovely object And doubtless it is a duty incumbent upon every one of them who have devoted themselves to Jesus Christ and the Affairs of his Gospel to endeavour as much as in them lies the honour of their Master and of the Affairs of his house and therefore if there be any piece of comeliness or beauty more in one way then there is in another as doubless there is more in God's order and method then there is in that which is but of man it will well become the servants of the Lord Jesus to be zealous of that The best way and method of doing the best things is to be coveted as well as the best things themselves And as it is a thing very well pleasing unto God to have his own things done in his own way and order so it is a provocation to him to have his way and order neglected and another introduced instead of it yea though such a disorder proceed from no wicked intent out from inadvertancie only The Lord our God saith David made a breach upon us for that we sought him not after the due order 1 Chron. 15.13 meaning in that stroke upon Vzzah who did but touch the Ark out of an intent doubtless to uphold it upon the stumbling of the Oxen otherwise then Gods order was And shall we think that the