having forgiven its sins by the grace of justification he might render it holy by the grace of sanctification the one as well as the other being applied conveyed or communicated to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the washing of water with the word that is by Baptism Mundatum lavacro hoc est baptismate Theophylact Oecumen the washing here spoken of Now this the cleansing that is the remitting or taking off the guilt of sin from the Church being here by the Apostle ascribed unto Baptism and that as the Instrument used by Christ for that end who is therefore said to cleanse the Church by that washing it is evident that by Baptism as by an Instrument ordained and used by Christ for that end the Grace of justification is conveyed and communicated to the party baptized Thus the Scriptures of God say § 6. And thus say the Fathers of the Church also St. Chrysost saith * Divinae autem gratiae lavacrum non corporis sed animae maculam sordesque â—mundare consuevit D. Chrysost Hom. ad Baptizandos It is the use of the Laver of the divine grace to cleanse the spots and filth not of the body but of the soul And that they are perfectly purged from sins who are baptized Theophylact saith a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Theophyl in John 5. 4. that though the water of baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chr. Hom. 40. in Act. be simply water yet when the grace of the Holy Ghost comes thereto through calling upon God it looses the diseases of the soul And these we know are sins and corruptions St. Cyprian speaking of his own baptism b Scis ipse profecto mecum pariter recognoscis quid detraxerit nobis quidve contulerit mors ista criminum vita virtutum D. Cyprian l. 2. Ep. 2. calls it that death of sins and life of vertues Baptism is the Death of sins by the Grace of Justification and the Life of vertues by the Grace of Sanctification We are washed saith c Lavamur igitur in Baptismo quia deletur chirographum damnationis nostrae gratia haec nobis confertur nè nobis jam concupiscentia noceat si tamen à consensu abstineamus D. Bern. Serm. 1. in Coen Dom. St. Bernard in Baptism because therein the handwriting of our damnation is blotted out that is our sin is pardoned and this grace is given us not to be hurt of concupiscence unless we consent unto it St. Augustin d Quam causam si voluerimus admittere eo usque progressu proveniet ut hortandi sint homines tum potius se interimere cum lavacro sanctae regenerationis abluti universorum remissionem acceperint peccatorum D. Aug. de Civ Dei l. 1. c. 27. Quod utique si fecissent sc ut Christum negarent etiam hoc eis in illo lavacro dimitteretur quod timore mortis negaverint Christum in quo lavacro etiam illis facinus tam immane dimissum est qui occiderant Christum Id. ib. l. 13. c. 7. tells us that if that be admitted which some contend for that it were ones advantage to kill himself to prevent his falling into sin through pleasure or grief it would come to this that men were to be exhorted then above all other times to kill themselves when being washed in the laver of holy regeneration they had received remission of all sins In which laver he saith that sin even that great sin of killing Christ himself was remitted Hence Juvencus calls the waters of Baptism e Pergite ablutos homines purgantibus undis Nomine sub sancto Patris Natique lavate c. Javenc purging waters and Lactantius f Cum primùm caepit adolescere tinctus est sc Christus à Johanne Propheta in Jordane flumine ut lavacro spiritali peccata non sua quae utique nulla habebat sed carnis quam gerebat aboleret ut quemadmodum Judaeos suscepta circumcisione sic etiam Gentes baptismo id est purifici roris perfusione salvaret Lactant. Instit l. 4. c. 15. calls the act of baptizing the pouring on of the purifying dew which by the way is a good instance of baptizing by way of persusion or pouring on of water so early as within three hundred years of Christs time § 7. These instances not to tire you with more sayings either of the same or other Fathers to this purpose are enough to secure you of the Catholickness of this Doctrine which being found in and founded on the Scriptures hath been generally held by all Orthodox Writers And therefore having shewn you what efficacy there is in Baptism for the taking away of sin from the Baptized I shall now proceed to shew that Infants are under the guilt of sin § 8. Only by the way let me observe that the Scriptures and Fathers which I have alledged do not speak restrictively either as to the sins remitted in baptism but so as extending the remitting efficacy thereof unto all sin Original as well as Actual or as to the Persons whose sins are in baptism remitted but so as comprehending all Persons to whomsoever sin may be imputed whether Men or Infants CHAP. XVII Childrens Need of Baptism in regard of their being under the guilt of sin § 1. NOw as to the Point of Infants being under the guilt of sin this also as the former I shall shew first from the Scriptures and then from the Fathers § 2. The Scriptures that speak to the Point are many Amongst them that of St. Paul Rom. 5. 12. is very notable By one man sin entred into the world and death by sin and so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned The one man here mentioned is the Father of all mankind Adam The World into which sin entred by this one man is mankind so then if Infants be any part of mankind any of the natural descendents from Adam then by Adam hath Omnes enim unus fuerunt D. Aug. 7 Serm. de Verb. Apost Ecce primus homo totam massam damnabilem facit Id. ib. sin entred on and passed through even to them they through the imputation of his fault are concerned in his guilt as having all been in him when he sinned Again ver 14. it is said Death reigned from Adam to Moses even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression that is who can it be else but Infants who die not upon the account of any actual sin of their own but upon the account of Adams first sin Again ver 15. Through the offence of one many be dead Many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the many i. e. even all Again by the offence of one i. e. Adam judgment i. e. a sentence came upon all men and so on Infants to condemnation Again ver 19. By one mans disobedience many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the many i. e. even all were made sinners and so
to be so long in Adam as till it be enrolled in Christ and so long defiled as it is unenrolled contracting the sully of sin from its society with the flesh Athanasius saith i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Athan. cont Arianos Orat. 10. when Adam transgressed his transgression passed unto all men Origen k Sciebant enim illi quibus mysteriorum secreta commissa sunt divinorum quia essent in omnibus genuinae sordes peccati quae per aquam spiritum ablui deberent Origen l. 5. in Rom. Hom. 14. in Luc. speaks of it as a thing known to those whom the secrets of the divine Mysteries were committed to that there are in all the genuine pollutions of sin which ought to be washed away by water and the spirit and himself affirms that there is none clean from pollution no if he be but of a days age Gratian l Firmissime tene nullatenus dubites omnem hominem qui per concubitum viri mulicris concipitur cum originali peccato nasci impietati subditum mortique subjectum c. Gratian. de Consecrat Distinct 4. bids believe it firmly and doubt not in the least of it that whosoever is conceived by the concumbency of man and woman is born with Original sin c. Yea Vincentius Lirinensis asks m Quis ante prodigiosum discipulum eâ—us Coelestium reatu praevaritationis Adae omne genus humanum negavit astrictum Vinc. Lirinens advers Hares c. 34. who ever before Caelestius the prodigious Disciple of Pelagius denied that all mankind was bound under the guilt of Adams transgression § 11. And if all mankind be bound under it then Infants sure no small part of mankind are not free from it No not they nor any else are free in the judgment of the Fathers but all guilty Jesus Christ alone excepted whom God sent not in sinful Solus per omnia ex natis de foemina Sanctus Dominus Jesus qui terrenae contagia corruptelae immaculati partûs novitate non senserit coelesti majestate depulerit D. Ambros Com. in 2 Luc. Profectâ—o peccatum etiam major fecisset sc Christus si parvulus habuisset Nam propterea nullus est hominum praeter ipsum qui peccatum non fecerit grandioris aetatis accessu quia nullus est hominum praeter ipsum qui peccatum non habuerit infantilis aetatis exortu D. Aug. contr Julian Pelag. l. 5. c. 9. Sine quo generalis velamine confusionis nemo filiorum hominum intravit in hanc vitam uno sane excepto qui ingreditur sine maculâ Emanuel is est D. Bern. super Cantic Serm. 78. Solus enim Deus sine peccato solus homo sine peccato Christus quia Deus Christus Tertull. de Animâ flesh but only in the likeness of it Rom. 8. 3. and who thence is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the thing born holy holy in its very birth Luk. 1. 35. § 12. Children then having so great a Malady upon them as Original sin is and Baptism being that Remedy yea the onely ordinary one by which they may be freed * For if there be no Salvation for Infants in the ordinary way of the Church but by Baptism and this appear in Scripture as it doth then out of all doubt the consequence is most evident out of that Scripture That Infants are to be baptized that their Salvation may be certain For they which cannot help themselves must not be left onely to extraordinary Helps of which we have no assurance and for which we have no warrant at all in Scripture while we in the mean time neglect the ordinary way and means commanded by Christ A. B. Laud. Confer §. 15. Num. 4. from this Malady how can it then be but that Children must have need of Baptism § 13. And truly with the Ancient Christians this consideration was of very great weight and force Upon this account to be sure what ever they did upon other accounts they baptized their Infants Why saith Critobolus the Pelagian are Infants baptized St. Hierom a Quare infantuli baptizantur Ut eis peccata in baptismate dimittantur D. Hier. Ep. 17. Tract 2. par 1. answers that their sins may be remitted unto them in Baptism So Origen b Per baptismum nativitatis sordes deponuntur propterea baptizantur parvuli Orig. Hom. 14. in Levit. By baptism the filth of our birth is taken away therefore are even Children also baptized And saith St. Chrysostom c Praedicat Ecclesia Catholica ubique diffasa debere parvulos baptizari propter Originale peccatum D. Chrysost Hom de Adam Eva. It is a thing which the whole Catholick Church every where diffused doth preach namely that Infants ought to be baptized because of Original Sin But what stand I upon the testimony of single Doctors when we have it from a Council that upon the account of that Rule of Faith as the Fathers in the Milevitane Council d Item placuit ut quicunque parvulos recentes ab uteris matrum baptizandos negat aut dicii in remissionem quidem peccatorum eos baptizari sed nihil ex Adam trahere originalis peccati quod regenerationis lavaero expietur unde sit consequens ut in cis forma baptismatis in remissionem peccatorum non vera sed falsa intelligatur anathema sit quoniam non aliter intelligendum est quod ait Apostolus Per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum per peccatum mors ita in omnes homines pertransit in quo omnes peccaverunt nisi quemadmodum Ecclesia Cathelica ubique diffusa semper intellexit Propter hanc enim regulam fidei etiam parvuli qui nihil peccatorum in semetipsis adhuc committore potuerunt ideo in peccatorum remissionem veraciter baptizantur ut in cis regeneratione mundetur quod generatione traxerunt Concil Milevitan Canon 2. apud Caranz call that Text of the Apostles Rom. 5. 12. By one man sin entred into the world c. understood as they say the Catholick Church of Christ every where diffused did always understand it of Original sin are Infants which could as yet commit no sin of themselves truly baptized into the remission of sins that that may be cleansed in them by Regeneration which they have drawn upon themselves by Generation And therefore St. Augustine saith e Non est superfluus baptismus parvuloram ut qui per generationem illi condemnationi obligati sunt per regenerationem ab eadem liberentur D. Aug. Ep. 89. The baptism of Infants is not superfluous and then sure there is some need of it that they who by generation are obliged to that condemnation which came by Adam may by Regeneration be freed from the same § 14. Unless then we will say with the Pelagian Hereticks that children have not in them the Malady of sin or will contradict our Saviour and say that
the happy Sacrament the key of the kingdom of heaven So that it not only sends ‖ Aqua baptismatis baptizatos ad regnum coeleste mittit Greg. in Evang. hom 17. the Baptized to but lets them into that kingdom § 3. And from a well-grounded confidence hereof undoubtedly it is that our Church not only prays for the Infant to be baptized Office of Publ. Bapt. of Infants that he may come to the land of everlasting life and to the eternal kingdom which God hath promised and be made an heir of everlasting salvation and an inheritor of Gods everlasting kingdom but also gives assurance to the Sureties for the Infant upon the word and promise of our Saviour that he will give unto him the blessing of eternal life and make him partaker of his everlasting kingdom even the kingdom of heaven § 4. And in this her sense she agrees with the sentiment of the Ancient Church For St. Chrysostom saith For this cause do we baptize Hac de causâ infantulos baptizamus ut eis addatur sanctitas justitia adoptio haereditas D. Chrysost Hom. ad Neoph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Athan. q. ad Antioch 114. Tom. 2. p. 377. Infants that there may be added unto them holiness righteousness adoption and an inheritance And Athanasius grounding his inference on two Scripture-Texts the one the words of our Saviour in my Text Suffer little children to come unto me for of such is the kingdom of heaven the other the words of St. Paul but now are your children holy saith That the baptized Infants of Believers do as undefiled and believing enter into the kingdom of heaven § 5. Yea so highly conducing unto an entrance into heaven both for Infants and others was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Chrysost Hom. 1. de Poenit. Quum vero praescribitur nemim sine 〈◊〉 Baptismo competere salutem ex illa maxime pronunciatione Domini qui ait Nisi natus ex aquâ quis erit non habet vitam suboriuntur scrupulosi c. Tertull. de Bapt. Lex enim tingendi imposita est forma praescripta Ite inquit docete nationes tingentes eas in nomine patris filii spiritus sancti Huic legi collata definitio illa Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua spiritu non intrabit in regnum coelorum obstrinxit fidem ad baptismi necessitatem Itaque omnes exinde credentes tingebantur Id. ib. Nisi enim quis renatus fuerit ex aqua Spiritu Sancto non potest introire in regnum Dei Utique nullum excipit non infantem non aliqua praeventum necessitate D. Ambros de Abrah Patriarcha l. 2. c. 11. Sine baptismo mortuos periisse non dubium est Id. de Voc. Gent. l. 2. c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Nyssen de Bapt. Baptism anciently thought that it was the opinion of some that there was no entrance for either in thither without that and this opinion of theirs was grounded on our Saviours saying that Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God § 6. And even our own most modest and moderate Church cannot Beloved ye hear in this Gospel the express words of our Saviour Chirst that Except a man be born of water whereby ye may perceive the great necessity of this Sacrament where it may be had Office of Bapt. of those of riper years but upon the same ground conclude some and that a great necessity of Baptism in order to entrance into the kingdom of God § 7. And truly though Whitaker Praelection de Eccles Cathol qu. 1. c. 4 5. D. Bernard Ep. 77. ad Hugon de Sancto Victore with Dr. Whitaker and others I do believe that the mere want of baptism where it cannot be had is not absolutely exclusive of all unbaptized ones out of heaven but only the contempt of it where it may be had yet two things may be observed from that Text of John 3. 5. which carry it high for a necessity of Infants baptism at least so far as to be an excuse for those who gathered therefrom an absolute necessity of it § 8. The first is this That the kingdom of God here in the notion of it includes not only Gods spiritual kingdom on earth or the visible Church which is all that the Anabaptists will have it to signifie and upon this design because they would by this distinction avoid the force of the Argument hence for Infants Baptism for whose salvation they conclude it not necessary that they be made members of the visible Church as having devoted them all without exception of any to be eternally saved if dying in infancy though dying unbaptized but it doth also in the notion of it include Gods eternal kingdom in heaven Because the kingdom here that a man cannot enter into except he be born of water and of the spirit is the same kingdom that in ver 3. a man cannot see except he be born again Now it is not true of Gods kingdom on earth that a man cannot see it except he be born again of water and of the spirit that is baptized for it is therefore called the visible Church because it is a Church that may be seen And seen it may be of such as desire to come to it joyn with it before they be of it for how else shall they desire to come to it Seen also it is and may be of such as are of it and even of those that do oppose fight against it But of the kingdom of God in heaven it is most true that except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot see that Therefore that kingdom which a man cannot enter into except he be born of water and of the spirit doth in the notion of it include the kingdom of God in Heaven § 9. And if the Kingdom of God here in John 3. 3. 5. be the same with that which is called in Matth. 19. 14. the kingdom of heaven which again St. Luke in my Text renders by that very same expression in St. John the kingdom of God then we shall find the Anabaptists when it is for their turn interpreting it of Gods kingdom in heaven For that very Text do they alledge to prove that Confess of Faith Art 10. not any Infant dying in Infancy before the Commission of actual sin shall suffer eternal punishment in hell for Adams sin for of such as they please to speak belongs the kingdom of God And if it must be interpreted there in John 3. 5. of the visible Church then it must be here also in Luke 18. 16. and Matth. 19. 14. And so then children will be such as belong to the Church Catholick as members of it of whom it is and then why should they not be admitted into it that belong unto it § 10. And if any thing be objected against
Infants being no way excepted are included the sin of their first father being by imputation made theirs and they accounted of as having sinned in him § 3. And unless all had sinned in Adam what account of it can be given that all should die in Adam 1 Cor. 15. 22. If Infants partake not in Adams fault why should they partake in Adams Quod si nullum esset sc primi peccati originale contagium profecto nulli malo parvuli obstricti nihil mali vel in corpore vel in anima sub tanta justi Dei potestate paterentur D. Aug. Cont. Julian Pelag. l 3. c. 5. punishment Why should they have paid unto them the wages of sin who were no way concerned in the work of sin § 4. And if all Infants be not conceived in sin how then came David to be so conceived was it only his particular mishap to be born under the guilt of his forefathers sin Or rather is it not the common condition of all mere men that are born into the world § 5. That which is born of the flesh is flesh John 3. 6. that is such flesh as that is that it was born of sinful flesh of flesh that is sinful as that was of which we were all born it being in his own likeness not in the likeness Fatendum est primos quidem homines ita fuisse institutos ut si non peccavissent nullum mortis experirentur genus sed eosdem primos parentes ita fuisse morte mulctatos ut etiam quicquid eorum stirpe esset exortum eâdem poenâ teneretur obnoxium Non enim aliud ex eis quam quod ipsi fuerant nasceretur pro magnitudine quippe culpae illius naturam damnatio mutavit in pejus ut quod poenaliter praecessit in peccantibus hominibus primis etiam naturaliter sequeretur in nascentibus câ—teris Quod est autem parens homo hoc est proles homo Et quod homo factus est non cum crearetur sed cum peccaret puniretur hoc genuit quantum quidem attinet ad peccati mortis originem c. D. Aug. de Civ Dei l. 13. c. 3. of God that our first father begot us in his own likeness as vitiated and defiled by his transgression not in Gods likeness the spotless purity and unstained integrity of his first creation § 6. And if there be not one that can bring a clean thing out of an unclean Job 14. 4. how then can man be justified with God or how can he be clean that is born of a woman Job 25. 4. § 7. So then we must conclude with that of the Apostle Rom. 3. 13 that all have sinned all young and old Fathers and Children Adam and his Posterity He in himself his Posterity in him he actually they Originally nay and actually too if living till capable of adding sin unto sin actual to original and so are come short of the glory of God not only of that glory to which God had ordain'd us the glory of happiness but also of that glory in which he did create us the glory of holiness § 8. And thus you see that as the Apostle saith Gal. 3. 22. the Scripture hath concluded all under sin Infants themselves not excepted who dying before the commission of actual sin would have had no need * Nam quis 〈◊〉 dicere non esse Christum Infantum salvatorem nec redemptorem Unde autem salvos facit si nulla in cis est originalis aegritudo peccati D. Aug. de pecc merit remiss l. 1. c. 23. Quid necessarium habuit Infans Christum si non aegrotat D. Aug. Serm. 10. de Verb. Apost of Christ to save them were they not under the guilt of so much sin as might condemn them § 9. Thus speak the Scriptures to the Point let us now again see what the Fathers say to it § 10. Primasius saith a Cum peccato concipimur cum peccato nascimur Primas in Heb. 4. 15. With sin we are conceived and with sin we are born St. Ambrose saith and cites Psal 51. 5. to prove it b Omnes homines sub peccato nascimur quorum ipse ortus in vitio est D. Amb. de Poenit. l. 1. c. 11. that all men are born in sin and our very birth is in fault Chrysologus saith c Per peccatum primi hominis natura lethale vulnus accepiâ— caepit esse origo mortis quae erat initium vitae Petr. Chrysolog Serm. 143. Nature got a deadly wound by the sin of the first man and that began to be the original of death which was the beginning of life St. Cyprian saith d Prohiberi à baptismo non debet infans qui recons natus nil peccavit nisi quod secundum Adam carnaliter natus contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate contraxit D. Cyprian l. 3. Ep. 8. The Infant ought not to be denied baptism who being new born hath no way sinned but that it hath contracted the contagion of the old death by its first birth that is is guilty of Original sin St. Gregory saith e Quia à statuÌ„ rectitudinis primus homo peccando corruit peccati poenam ad filios misit D. Greg. in Psal 51. 5. Peccatum quippe originale à parentibus trahimus nisi per gratiam baptismatis solvamur etiam parentum peccata portamus quia unum adhuc cum illis sumus ex originali peccato anima polluitur prolis D. Greg. Expos in c. 21 Job l. 15. c 31. Because the first man fell by sinning from his state of Integrity he derived the punishment of his sin upon his children St. Bernard saith f Dixi saepius vobis nec mente excidere debet quoniam in casu primi hominis cecidimus omnes c. D. Bern. Serm. in Coen Dom. de Bapt. de Sacram Altar de Ablut Pedum A planta pedis usque ad verticem non erat in nobis sanitas erraveramus ab utero in utero damnati antequaÌ„ nati quia de peccato in peccato concepti D. Bern. Serm. 2. in die Pentecostes In the fall of the first man we all fell and thereupon were damn'd ere born because conceived of and in sin St. Augustin g Nos certe causam cur sub diabolo sit qui nascitur donec renascatur in Christo peccati ex origine dicimus esse contagium D. Aug. contr Julian Pelag. l. 3. c. 5. saith Why he that is born should be under the power of the Devil till he be new born in Christ i. e. baptized the cause we say is the contagion of sin by his birth that is Original sin Tertullian h Ita omnis anima co usque in Adam censetur donec in Christo renascatur tamdiu immunda quamdiu recenseatur Peccatrix autem quia immunda recipiens ignominiam ex carnis societate Tertull. de Anima c. 39. reckons every soul
Peccat Merit Remiss c. 9. God obtained for them by the prayers not onely of their Paren's in particular but of the Church in general have a principle of Faith inspired into them by the secret operation of that invisible Spirit of grace who works how and where and when and how far himself pleaseth And where it is so in any one who dares deny that person sufficiently qualified in point of Faith for Baptism Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the Holy Ghost as well as w◠Acts 10. 47. And of what Infant of any one Believer can any man say that it is not so with him And if there be never an Infant of any one believer of whom it can be absolutely affirmed that he is in respect of a divinely infused inwardly working principle of Faith utterly unqualified for Baptism then why should any one be denied Baptism of whom it cannot be said but that he is in some degree and measure qualified for it § 7. But being under no necessity for the supporting of the cause I maintain to assert these grounds I shall no further insist thereon but to the Objection against Infants capableness of baptism founded in their want of Faith give my Answer that their not believing is no hindrance to their baptizing § 8. It is no hindrance to their salvation even in the judgment of our Anabaptists who declare it as one Article of their Faith That all children dying in Infancy that is before they can act faith in their own persons and be believers qualified for baptism according to their account having not actually transgressed against the Law of God in their own persons are onely subject to the first death and that not any one of them dying in that estate shall suffer for Adams sin eternal punishment in hell which is the second death It is no hindrance then to their salvation in their judgment that they believe not And why then should it be a hindrance to their Baptism Is more required to their baptism than to their salvation to the means than to the end § 9. But to make short work where or by whom is faith required of Infants in their own persons to render them capable of baptism What one Text is there in all the Bible that saith either in particular that Infants shall not be baptized because they believe not or in generall that no persons whatsoever whether capable or incapable of believing shall be baptized but those that believe Let the Adversaries of Infants baptism produce the place and the controversie I believe will quickly be ended We all Paedobaptists will readily yield all that shall of right be fit to be yielded to it or unto them from it But if the Scripture say no such thing either in words or in sense then for ought that as yet appears our Infants will be capable of Baptism though they do not believe § 10. Why but doth not our Saviour say in Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned § 11. Yes And what then must not therefore our Infants be baptized because they do not believe or not till they believe No such matter What is here said that makes believing a condition necessarily antecedent unto Baptism It is neither said negatively he that believeth not shall not be baptized nor so much as affirmatively he that believeth shall be baptized But believing and being baptized are made conditions not the one of the other but both of being saved And now in the name of God what is here that can possibly exclude Infants from baptizing for want of believing § 12. Yea but believing is set before baptizing He doth not say he that is baptized and believeth but he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved And what then Why then believing must go before baptizing and none must be baptized but those that first believe § 13. To this I answer that if the order of things must universally answer to that order of words wherein the Scripture sets them down then Repentance which is a Fruit of Quomodo aget poenitentiam homo qui necdum credit D. Hieron advers Lucifer Faith must go before Faith whose Fruit it is because our Saviour set repenting before believing saying first repent ye and then believe the Gospel Mark 1. 15. Then the outward baptism of water must always go before the inward baptism of the spirit because our Saviour said Except a man be born first of water and then of the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God John 3. 5. Whereas the contrary hereto fell out in the family and company of Cornelius Acts 10. 44. which drew from Peter that question in ver 47. Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we Then the Ruler in Luke 18. 22. must have given nothing to the poor till he had sold all he had because our Saviour saith first set all that thou hast and then distribute to the poor § 14. But to shew the weakness of this way of Arguing it may be proved by this same Argument and from the same Text that Infants ought to be baptized And then let them judge what strength there is in this way of Arguing For as our Saviour sets believing before baptizing so he sets baptizing before being saved And if none must be baptized but he that believes because believing is set first then none must be saved but he that is baptized because baptizing is set first And then what better argument can be made for Infants baptism They must be baptized if we will have them saved because they cannot be saved without being baptized for baptizing goes before saving And yet from the same Text and by the same way of a guing it may be proved contrary to what the Anabaptists say of the Universal salvation of all Infants dying before the commission of actual sin that no Infants are saved but those that believe because believing is set before being saved and not onely so but whereas it is not said he that believeth not shall not be baptized it is said he that believeth not shall be damned § 15. And this may suffice to shew tho absurdity of this way of arguing to the order of things from the ordering of the words § 16. As to the thing it self I think it will be granted them that in Persons capable of believing or disbelieving the Gospel faith or at least a profession of it is to go before baptizing § 17. This we gather from the Apostles baptizing no adult persons that we read of without some evidence given of their believing § 18. Thus it was with the Converts in Acts 2. 41. with the Samaritans Acts 8. 12. with the Eunuch Acts 8. 37. with Cornelius his family Act. 10. 44. with Lydia and the Gaoser Acts 16. 14 33.
their Sureties the Infants are doubly obliged First by the infinite advantages that come to them by it which unless they be fools or mad they will hasten all that ever they can as soon as they know it further to assure unto themselves by a personal engaging in it Secondly by the forfeiture of all benefits by it besides many other obligations before mentioned upon their disavowing and disclaiming of it § 18. No profession then beâ—ng required from themselves and a sufficient one being made for them by others they are not uncapable of entring into Covenant with God on this account neither § 19. And thirdly that their want of understanding renders them not incapable of entering into Covenant with God is evident by one instance beyondexception in Deut. 29. 10 11 12. Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God your Captains of your tribes yâ—ur Eldâ—rs and your officers with all the men of Israel your little ones your wives and thy stranger that is in thy camp from the hâ—wer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy water That thou shouldst enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God and into his Oath which the Lord thy God maketh with thee this day See! even the little ones as well as Elders and Officers were capable of entring and did actually enter into Covenant with God and into the Oath of God their want of years and understanding to know the condition of the Covenant and Oath which they entred into or to make profession of entring into it not at all withstanding So that want of years and unâ—erstanding cannot render children incapable of entring into Gods Covenant And then much less can it render them uncapable of receiving the sign or seal of his Covenant § 20. And however that it cannot is evident because the Jewish Infant was capable as of the Covenant it self as we have seen before so of Circumcision the sign and seal of the Covenant which to receive at eight days old he was bound upon pain of excision He that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you every man-child in your generations And the uncircumcised man-child whose flesh of hâ— foreskin is not circumcised that soul shall be cut off from his people he hath broken my Covenant Deut. 17. 12. What he was so bound to receive surely he was capable of Now why the child of a Christian should be less capable of receiving one seal of a Covenant than the child of a Jew was of another I am yet to learn § 21. And so there is nothing in Baptism it self rendring Infants uncapable of being baptized CHAP. XXV Children not incapable of Baptism by any Text of Scripture that forbids it either directly or by consequence § 1. ADmit Infants never so capable of Baptism in all other respects yet if the Scripture do forbid it then it becomes unlawfull for them to have it and they upon that account become uncapable of it § 2. Thirdly therefore and lastly I affirm that upon the diligentest search that I was ever able to make I could never find any Scripture that forbad it Search the Scripture from end to end and not one Text appears wherein it is forbidden As the Antipaedobaptists call but for one Scripture that commands it and upon that say they will yield to it so on the other hand the Paedobaptists call for a Scripture that forbids it and upon that say they will not contend for it But there is none no not one it would else have been shewn ere this being so much and so long called for § 3. Yea though there be never a Scripture that expresly and in terms forbids it yet if there be but one wherein by direct and evident consequence it is forbidden though our adversaries will yield nothing to all the many Scriptures from whence we do by good consequence deduce it because we produce not a Text that doth in express terms command it let it be shewn and we shall pay all due respect unto it the Contest will instantly be given over by us who seek not victory without truth but truth whether with or without victory we shall believe the baptizing of our Infants unlawfull and upon the account of its unlawfulness believe them uncapable of it § 4. But if there be no such Text in all the Scripture as doth so much as by consequence forbid the baptizing of Infants we must then beg to be excused if we hold the baptizing of them lawfull and upon the account of that lawfulness think them not uncapable of it § 5. For if sin be a transgression of the law as St. John defines it 1 John 3. 4. and where there is no law there is no transgression as St. Paul determines it Rom. 4. 15. then can it be no sin either to Infants to be baptized or to others to baptize Infants because no law is by either †For therefore any thing is unlawful because it transgresseth a law W. Penn. Eng. Present Interest p. 24. transgressed there being none that either forbids them to be baptized * It is an evidence that Infants are not to be excluded from Baptism because there is no divine Law which doth prohibit their admission into the Church by it Dr. Stilling fleet Irenic p. 7. or forbids others to baptize them therefore their baptism is lawfull and they upon the account of its lawfulness are capable of it § 6. And put case we should grant that there were no Text in Scripture whereon to ground it yet would it not follow thence that it were unlawfull For the mere uncommandedness of a thing doth not infer the unlawfulness of it a thing is not therefore unlawfull onely because it is not commanded To make a thing necessary indeed there must be a law for it and to make a thing unlawfull there must be a law against it But to make a thing onely lawfull it is not necessary there be any law for it it is sufficient that there be no law against it If then we cannot prove it necessary because the Antipaedobaptists say we have no law for it they cannot prove it unlawfull because we are sure they have no law against it It remains therefore that it be lawfull and that our children upon the account of the lawfulness of it be capable of it § 7. Why but our Saviour sets Teaching before Baptizing Matth. 28. 19. saying to his Disciples when he commissionated them to be his Apostles to all the nations of the world for the gathering of a Church out of it Go ye therefore and teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Well and what then Why then saith the Antipaedobaptist none must be baptized before he be taught and so taught as that they do learn And this because Infants are incapable of therefore they are uncapable of baptism § 8. This Argument of theirs is like that former which they
being observed that Christians Decernimus ut extra tempora decreta baptismi nullus filios suos baptizet nisi infirmitas nimia vel dies extremus compulerit filios suos baptismum suscipere Conc. Matisc c. 3. Omnes omnino 〈◊〉 die quadragesimo cum infantibus suis ad Ecclesiam observare praecipimus ut impositionem manus c. Synod Matisconensis ap Magdeb. Cent. 6. c. 9. Col. 613. did not observe the solemn set day for baptizing of their children but baptized them at other times so that there were scarce found above two or three to be baptized at Easter that custom was prohibited unless in case of extream infirmity and necessity and an order was given for the attendance of all with their Infants at the Church on the solemn festival to receive their imposition of hands Chrysm and Baptism § 49. The Second Council of Braccarum Anno 580 ordered the Bishops to signifie throughout their Churches that if they that Placuit ut unusquisque Episcopus per Ecclesias suas hoc praecipiat ut hi qui infantes suas ad baptismum offerunt si quid voluntarè pro suo offerunt voto suscipiatur ab eis c. Concil Bracarense Can 7. ap Magd. Cent. 9. Col. 354. Caranz fol. 250. brought their Infants to baptism pleased to offer any thing voluntarily it should be accepted but that nothing should be extorted from those whose poverty rendred them unable to make any offering lest thereby they should be discouraged from bringing their children unto baptism and they dying unbaptized their loss should be required at their hands through whose violence this was occasioned This Synod placed by Alsted in the year above mentioned is placed by the Magdeburgenses in the seventh Century Anno 610 and so if it witness not for this Century it will for that And the Council of Vivense ordained the very same as H. D. informs us from Vossius de Bapt. p. 179. § 50. Isidor Hispalensis whose time is placed by Alsted about Anno 596 is of this judgment touching Infants dying without baptism That for Original Sin alone newly born Infants do suffer pains Pro solo peccato originis luune in inferno nuper nati infantuli poenas si renovati per lavacrum non fuerint Proinde pro hac causa nuper natus damnatur infans si non regeneratur quia originis noxitate perimitur Isidor de sum bono cap. 23. apud Magd. Cent. 7. c. 4. Col. 98. Mag. Cent. 6. c. 6. Col. 331. in hell if they be not renewed by baptism What his judgment was as to the baptizing of Infants is not to be questioned when this was his judgment of those that died unbaptized He is quoted by the Magdeb for the Seventh Century but placed by Alsted in the Sixth and so will serve for the one or the other The Centuriators tell us that some having in the time of Gregory made some change in the dippings of Infants Isidore notes that Gregory did earnestly reprove them for not dipping them but once or else thrice § 51. Justinus the Emperor who reigned about Anno 570 Ordained as H. D. tells us concerning the children which in regard of Treat of Bapt. 2 Edit p. 112. their years cannot receive Divine Doctrine that they shall without delay be made worthy or partakers of Baptism And Justinian the Emperor who reigned about Anno 530 Ordained That children should be admitted to Baptism Justinian Novel Institut 44. ap 11. Danvers Tre at of Bapt. p. 112. Edit 2. and that those that were come to their full growth should be taught before they were baptized § 52. Johannes Maxentius a Monek and Priest of Antioch Anno 520 thus writes in the Confession of his Faith Therefore do we believe that little children newly born are Propterea recentes ab utero parvulos non tantum ut adoptionem mereantur filiorum aut propter regnum Coelerum sicut Pelagii Caelestii sive Theodori Mansuestini disciputi c. sed in remissionem peccatorum eos credimus baptizari nè pereant in aeternum Maxent ap Magdeb. Cent. 6. c. 6. Col. 227. l. 4 c. baptized not onely that they may obtain the adoption of sons or for the kingdom of Heaven like the Disciples of Pelagius Coelestius but for remission of sins also that they may not perish for ever § 53. The Council of Gerunda about Anno 517 or 520 as some decreed That little children Ut parvuli si infirmari contingat codem die quo nati sunt baptizentur Concil Gerund Can. 4. ap Caranz fol. 179. in case of weakness should be baptized the same day that they were born § 54. Not to be endless in testimonies the Magdeburgenses tell us from Adon and Gaguin how Androvera wife of Chilperic was forced upon a surprize to be both Witness and Adon in Comment 4 aetatis Gaguinus l. 2. narrant Androveram Chilperici uxorem infidiis circumventam ipsam natae suae filiolae baptizandae testem commatrem extitisse Cent. 6. cap. 6. Col. 332. lin 28 c. Godmother at the baptism of her own little daughter And thus much for this Age. § 55. Go we on to the Fifth Century And here we meet with plenty of evidences of Infants Baptism § 56. The Council of Milevis Anno 418 in the time of Pope Innocent and the Emperor Arcadius as the Centuriators tell us Item placuit ut quicunque parvulos recentes ab uteris matrum baptizandos negat aut dicit in remissionem quidem peccatorum eos baptizari sed nihil ex Adam trabere Originalis peccati quod regenerationis lavacro expictur unde sit consequens ut in cic forma baptismatis in remissionem peccatorum non vera sed falsa intelligatur anathema sit Quoniam non aliter intelligendum est quod Apostolus ait Per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum per peccatum mors ita in omnes homines portransiit in quo omnes peccaverunt nisi quemadmodum Ecclesia Catholica ubique diffusa semper intellexit Propter hanc regulam fidei etiam parvuli qui nihil peccatorum in semetipsis committere potuerunt ideo in peccatorum remissionem veraciter baptizantur ut in cis regeneratione mundetur quod generatione traxerunt Synod Milevitana ap Magdeb Cent. 5. c. 9. Col. 835. Caranza fol. 123. decreed an Anathema to him that should deny baptism to new born Infants The ground of their decree they make to be Original Sins being drawn from Adam by all and death by sin and that according to that sense which the Catholick Church diffused every where ever had of that saying of St. Pauls By one man sin entred into the world and death by sin and so death passed upon all men for that all had sinned For which rule of Faith even little ones say they which in themselves were uncapable as yet of committing of any
sins might be forgiven them He was born Anno 332 and died Anno 420. § 67. St. Ambrose about the year 374 on that saying of our Saviour Except a man be born again of water and of the Holy Nisi enim quis renatus fucrit ex aqua Spiritu Sancto non potest introire in regnum Dei Vtique nullum excipit non infantem non aliqua praeventum necessitate D. Ambr. de Abr. Patriarch l. 2. c. 11. Hinc evacaatio baptismatis parvulorum qui sola adoptione donari nullo autem reatu dicerentur absolvi D. Ambr. l. 10. Ep. 84. pag. 217. Spirit he cannot enter iâ—to the kingdom of God observes that our Saviour therein makes no exception of any not the Infant not him that is prevented by any necessity And speaking of some that made Adams sin no otherwise hurtfull to posterity than by the example of it he presseth them with this absurdity that would follow thereon that hereby the baptism of Infants would be evacuated who could onely be said to have adoption given them but not to have any guilt forgiven them Likewise on Luke as Dr. Hammond notes by Jordans being driven back he saith are Per quae in primordio naturae suae qui baptizati fuerint parvuli à malitia resormantier D. Ambr. in Luk. ap Dr. Ham. Def p. 103. Non autem latet quantum cordibus fidelium dâ—fidiae gigneretur si in baptizandis parvulis nihil de oujusquam negligentia nihil de ipsorum esset mortalitate metuendum D. Ambros de Vocat Gent. l. 2. c. 8. cujus titulus est Quare tanta multitudo non regeneratorum infantium à perpetua alienetur Salute Tom. 2. p. 32. 33. Nolite ergo à Christo arcere infantes quia ipsi pro Christi nomine subiêre martyrium Talium est enim regnum Coelorum Vocat eos Dominus tu prohibes De ipsis enim ait Dominus Sinite eos venire ad me D. Ambros De Virginib l. 3. Tom. 1. pag. 93. Nec frustra scriptum est Nemo mundus à sorde nec infans cujus unius diei vita est super terram Et. Quis inquit poterit facere mundum de immundo conceptum semine Non tu qui solus es Propter quod ficut nunc in Ecclesia manet constitutio salvatoris dicentis Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua Spiritu Sancto non intrabit in regnum Coelorum â— itae sacratissime eraâ— in lege praecautum ut natus puer nisi die circumcideretur octavo exterminaretur anima ejus de populo suo nullum in haereditate Israel habitura consortium D. Ambros l. 10. ep 84. ad Demetriad Virg. Vide Magdeb. Cent. 4. Cap. 5. Col. 239. lin 7 c. signified the mysteries of baptism by which the little ones that are baptized are reformed from their malignity to the first state of their nature Yea that St. Ambrose affirms Paedobaptism to be a constitution of our Saviour is affirmed by A. B. Laud. Conf. Sect. 15. p. 55. § 68. The Third Council of Carthage about the year 397 decreed that nothing should Non est aliquid ab his exigendum qui infantes suos ad baptizandum adducunt Caranza fol. 99. Nam de infantibus baptizandit qui necdum baptizati nascuntur quoties necessitas exegerit Regula Ecclesiastica per beatum Siricium prolata demonstrat dicens Ita infantibus qui non lum loqui potuerunt per aetatem vel his quibus in qualibet necessitate opxs fuccit sacri undâ baptismatis omni volumus celeritate succurri nâ— ad nostram perniciem â—cndat animarum â—i negato defiderantibus fonte salutis exiens unusquisque de seculo regnum perdat vitam Hincmar apud Magd. Cent. 9. c. 4. Col. 140. lin 34 c. be exacted from those that brought their Infants to be baptized § 69. Siricius Pope of Rome who died Anno 388 is by Hincmarus produced as an Author for Infants Baptism as saying that he would have baptism administred with all speed to Infants who as yet are not able to speak for want of age as also to those that are in any necessity to prevent and it is worth marking what he saith in this case its tending to the destruction of our souls if any through our denial of baptism to them depart unbaptized and lose at once both kingdom and life § 70. St. Chrysostom who died Anno 407 saith For this cause namely because of the so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Chrys Hom. ad Neophytos apud St. Augustin l. 1. contra Julianum Pelagianum cap. 2. many benefits as there are by baptism do we baptize little children though they have not sins that is not any actual sins of their own as St. Augustin shews his meaning to have been from the right rendring of the words against the Pelagians who misrendred them as Dr. Hammond shews Def. of Infants Bapt. pag. 103. Where as the words of St. Châ—ysâ—stom declare the practice of the thing so St. Augustine's interpretation clears the meaning of his words Again in his fortieth Homily on Gâ—nesis speaking of Baptism as of the Christian Circumcision * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Chrysost Hom. 40. in Genes Tom. 1. Edit Savil. p. 328. l. 4 c. he saith it hath no determinate time but 't is lawfull both in the first age and in the middle and in old age it self to receive this Circumcision made without hands Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Dr. Hammond notes signifies childhood as being applied to the time of circumcision which was on the eighth day and given then as the Father notes for two reasons †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Chrys Hom. 39. in Genes Edit Savit Tom. 1. p. 222. lin 10 c. Ideo ergo praedicat Ecclesia Catholica ubique diffusa debere parvulos baptizari propter originale peccatum quia filios procreare ex praecepto Dei venit cupiditas verò quae facit silios procreare ex poenâ peccati venit c. D. Chrysost Hom. de Adam Eva. Tom. 1. Col. 447. B. Illud etiam quod circa baptizandos in universo mundo sancta Ecclesia sive sint parvuli sive juvenes uniformiter agit non ocioso contemplemur intuitu Id. ib. Col. 448. Adducit quispiam infantem adhuc ubera sugentem ut baptizetur statim Sacerdos exigit infirmâ aetate pacta conventa assensiones c. Id. in Psal 14. one because then the trouble of circumcising was the easilier born the other to signifie that what was done did nothing conduce to the soul but was onely for a sign For what could 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forgoing an Infant of eight days old reap of advantage to his soul by things which he had neither knowledge nor sense of § 71. Gregory Nazianzen flourished about the year of Christ 370 and died in the
Dedication and of Purim But the leaving off to do what God hath once commanded cannot but be against his revealed will and so neither acceptable to him nor lawfull unless there be good and competent ground for the What may be a sufficient ground in this case See Dr. Stilling fleets Irenic part 1. c. 1. S. 3. p. 12 13. leaving it off and a sufficient evidence of the ceasing of that obligation to it which was once by vertue of a Divine command upon it If then there may be any thing shewn which was once expresly commanded by God and practiced in obedience to that command whose practice is now left off and by the Anabaptists themselves without any express command to the contrary and yet lawfully then it will follow and convincingly I hope that there may be something practiced by us which yet never was in Scripture expresly commanded us and so Infants Baptism may be lawfull enough though never expresly in Scripture commanded Now I instance in the Sanctification of the seventh day and in the Circumcision of Infants at eight days old both expresly commanded both accordingly practiced and both now left off to be observed and yet without any express command for the disobserving of either I speak all this while of things sacred and not merely civill or naturall And say an express command because I find nothing else will satisfie Else enough hath long enough and often enough been offered to shew the lawfulness of Infants Baptism Which if nothing else had been offered is sufficiently proved by this Argument following which they are as far from being ignorant of as they are from being able to answer § 14. That which is no sin cannot be unlawfull Infants Baptism is no sin Therefore it is not unlawfull That Infants baptism is no sin either to the Baptizer or Baptized is plain because it is no transgression of any Law For that which is no transgression of a Law is no sin Infants Baptism is no trangression of any Law Therefore it is no sin That that can be no sin which is no transgression of any Law is most evident not onely because St. John hath positively defined sin to be the transgression of a law 1 John 3. 4. but also because St. Paul hath concluded negatively that where no Law is there is no transgression Rom. 4. 15. And these men that conclude Infants baptism unlawfull which must needs signifie its being sinfull I wonder how or whence they come to know it and conclude it Sure they do not know more than St. Paul did And his Rule to know sin by and so what is lawfull and what unlawfull was the Law For saith he by the Law is the knowledge of sin Rom. 3. 20. And I had not known sin but by the Law for I had not known lust i. e. had not known it to be a sin except the Law had said Thou shalt not covet Rom. 7. 7. So then Infants Baptism being no transgression of any law because there is no law against it for there can be no transgression of a law which is not it must follow that it can be no sin and so cannot be unlawfull § 15. The Scripture I say being laid down to be the Rule of Lawfull and Vnlawfull in sacred Things as that which the Scripture commands is not onely lawfull but necessary and that which the Scripture forbids is not onely unnecessary but also sinâ—full so that which the Scripture neither commands nor forbids is neither necessary nor yet sinfull but of a middle nature betwixt both and that is Lawfull So that though the Scripture had never spoke word either in particular or in general of Infants baptism yet it must have been granted lawfull and could not have been concluded unlawfull because neither in particular nor in general hath the Scripture spoke any one word or title against the baptizing of Infants CHAP. XXXII Infants Baptism no Addition to the Word of God The Scriptures objected on that account considered and cleared § 1. YEa but argues the Antipaedobaptist Nothing is lawfull that is not commanded in Scripture Infants Baptism is not commanded in Scripture Therefore it is unlawfull But why is nothing lawfull that is not commanded in Scripture Because the doing of any uncommanded thing is an Adding to the word all additions to the word are forbidden by the Word and so unlawfull Now the Scriptures that forbid all additions to the word are many Deut. 4. 2. Deut. 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6. Isa 1. 12. § 2. But what if not every doing of an uncommanded thing be an adding to the word Or what if the baptizing of an Infant suppose it never so much uncommanded be no such addition to the word as is forbidden Why then Infants Baptism for all its supposed uncommandedness may be no sin And so the whole force of the Argument falls to the ground But because the best trial hereof will be a particular view of the Scriptures objected on this account I will therefore instantly address my self to the consideration of them and from that view I shall hope to find as that not all doing of a thing beside the word is an addition to the word so that Infants baptism is none of those culpable additions to the Word which are forbidden by it § 3. And the first is that in Deut. 4. 2. Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you neither shall you diminish ought from it that you may kâ—ep the Commandments of the Lord your God which I command § 4. To this I answer first that the Adding here forbidden cannot possibly be so understood as to make it unlawfull to do any thing even appertaining to the worship of God which is not expresly commanded in the word of God And that will be enough to overthrow their ground and secure Infants Baptism from the guilt of unlawfulness For it is evident that the word here commanded to Israel to which they were not to add and from which they were not to diminish are the Statutes and the judgments which Moses taught them to do ver 1. namely in this Book of Deuteronomy and the several chapters and verses of it and however in the whole book of the Mosaical Law Now it is most certain that those Statutes and judgments as they lie dispersed in the whole book of Moses Law do reach unto all sorts of duties of common life towards our selves and towards our brethren as well as of worship towards God If then all doing any uncommanded thing be an adding to the word and that adding to it which is here forbidden by it then all other uncommanded actions as well as uncommanded acts of worship and service towards God must hereby be forbidden and so be unlawfull and we must no more do any action of common life than any act of worship and service towards God but what is expresly commanded in the word for fear of incurring the guilt of adding to the