and Customs of it till they come to understanding to learn them and when they learn then they are scholars or disciples and to them that learn it is given to know c. So also I believe that little children according to the Scriptures do belong to the kingdom of heaven and partake of the priviledges of divine protection and likewise of the redemption that is in Christ Jesus although they know nor believe nothing of it till they be of yeers and discretion to be disciples of Christ and begin to learn of him and then To them it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom as aforesaid Argument VIII My eighth Argument is from Luke 14.27 in these words And whosoever doth not bear his cross and come after me cannot be my disciple Whence I reason thus If none can be the disciples of Christ but those that bear the cross of Christ and so come after him then little children that know not what the cross of Christ is nor yet what belongs to following of him as dear children in love cannot be his disciples But none can be his disciples but such as do bear his cross and follow him Therefore little babes cannot be Christs disciples Argument IX My ninth Argument is from Luke 14.33 in these words So likewise whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath cannot be my disciple From whence I reason thus If none can be Christs disciples but such as considering before what it will cost are willing to forsake all that they have yea and their own lives also for his sake then little children that can neither consider what it will cost nor yet resolve in themselves what to do cannot possibly be Christs disciples But none can be Christs disciples without they have the use of their Will Reason and Affections so far as to consider before what it will cost and to resolve after whatsoever it cost to forsake all and their own lives also as is proved by all these Scriptures Luk. 14.26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33. compared with Matth. 10.37 38. and Mark 8.34 Matth. 16.24 25. Therefore they which say little children that can do none of these things are Christs disciples it is much to be feared that they never yet learned to know what a disciple of Christ is and are none themselves Thus having shewed the deceit of Mr. Cooks and Mr. Baxters Arguments in general by which they would prove that Infants are Church-members and Christs disciples and so fit subjects for Baptism I leave it to the view of all both friend and foe and proceed to answer Mr. Baxters eight Arguments by which he saith he proveth the Anabaptists way of Baptizing sinful His first Argument is this If there be no word of precept or example for baptizing the childe of any one Christian at yeers of discretion then to delay their baptism till yeers of discretion and then to baptize them is not the Scripture-way But there is no one word of precept or example in all the Scripture for the baptizing of the childs of any one Christian at yeers of diseretion Therefore to defer it till then and then to baptize them is not the Scripture-way Answ 1. I would gladly know whether Mr. Baxter do or dare judge Mary the mother of Jesus to be no Christian who said Luk. 1.46 47. My soul doth magnifie the Lord and my spirit hath rejoyced in God my Saviour c. if he will deny her to be a Christian who rejoyced in God her Saviour then I will be bold to say he doth not know what a Christian is yea and that he is none himself Again if he confess her to be a Christian then his Argument is worth nothing for her childe viz. her Son Jesus was baptized at yeers of discretion when he was thirty yeers of age Luk. 3.21 22 23. And thus I have given him an example And our way of baptizing of people at yeers of discretion is a Scripture-way and therefore not sinful And now I shall retort his Argument upon himself that all men may see his folly thus If there be no word of precept nor example in all the Scripture for baptizing the childe of any Christian before they come to yeers of discretion then so to baptize them is not the Scripture-way But there is no word of precept nor example in all the Scripture for baptizing the childe of any one Christian before yeers of discretion Therefore to baptize them before yeers of discretion is not the Scripture-way and therefore sinful And thus is Mr. Baxter wounded with the edge of his own sword and his folly manifest Now to the second Argument which is this That practice which is utterly inconsistent with the obeying of Christs rule for baptism is a sinful practice But the baptizing of children of Christians at yeers of discretion is utterly inconsistent with obedience to the rule for baptism Therefore such baptizing is a sinful practice Answ This is the same with the first Argument therefore the same answer may serve But yet to make Mr. Baxter's folly manifest I shall give him his Argument again thus That practice which is utterly inconsistent with the obeying of Christs rule for Baptism is a sinful practice But the baptizing of children of Christians or others before they come to yeers of discretion is utterly inconsistent with the obedience to Christs rule Therefore it is a sinful practice 2. Whereas Mr. Baxter would make us offenders for doing of nothing that is to say for not baptizing children in their non-age I answer He can never make it a sin till he shew us what command we have broke in not baptizing them for all sin is the transgression of some law therefore saith the Apostle where there is no law there is no transgression But there is no law nor commandment in all the Scripture to baptize little babes that cannot speak before they come to yeers of discretion Therefore no sin to let it alone 3. There is both precept and example for baptizing men and women at yeers of discretion viz. when they believe Mar. 16.16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved and Acts 8.12 When they believed Philips preaching they were baptized both men and women And Acts 10.48 Peter commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus c. And now seeing there is both precept and example for it therefore it is no sin to baptize men and women at yeers of discretion 4. That Mr. Baxters Mr. Halls and Mr. Cooks way of baptizing is sinful is evident First because they baptize little babes before they come to yeers of discretion for which they have neither precept nor example therefore utterly inconsistent with Christs rule for baptism and a sinful practice as Mr. Baxter himself hath granted in these former Arguments and thus out of his own mouth he is judged and condemned for a sinner Secondly that this their way of baptizing infants before
be judged for For Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth the Law for sin is the transgression of the the Law Joh. 3.4 and where there is no Law there is no transgression saith Paul Rom. 4.15 but in such little babes there is no Law therefore there can be no transgression imputed And indeed I much wonder that men should be so wicked as to think that God who is so merciful as to forgive the worst of sinners their sins and transgressions should yet cast poor babes into hell and everlasting torments for Adams sin Obj. But hath God one way to save Men and Women and another way to save little Children Answ Yea or else Children must never be saved as I shall shew thus for the Scripture saith Rom. 5.18 that as by the offence of one Judgement came upon all to condemnation even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all to justification of life And if none but men and women that can hear understand and beleive the Gospell may partake of the benefits of Christs death to life and salvation then no Infants that are capable of receiving faith which cometh by hearing the word preached could have any salvation by him But that some Infants as saved by him all will grant Therefore I conclude First concerning Infants that fell in Adam without any actuall sin or knowledge of Adams transgression even so they dying in their infancy before they know good or evill they are saved by vertue of Christs death without any actuall faith or knowledge of Christs obedience or else it is not even so as Rom. 5.18 saith Secondly concerning Men and Women that have lived to commit actuall sins against conscience and knowledge of such God requireth actuall faith in Christ and actuall obedience to Christ without which they have no promise of salvation by Christ And thus its plain according to Rom. 5.18 As by the offence of one viz. Adam Judgement came upon all to condemnation even so by the righteousness of one viz. Jesus Christ the free gift came upon all to justification of life Again that God hath one way to bring Men and Women to life and salvation and another way to bring little baces to it is evident thus We find the Lord speaking words to Men and Women that are to be understood and observed by them that have Ears to hear and Hearts to understand and therefore we find the holy Ghost crying out so oft in the Scriptures to them that have Ears to hear that they should hear what the Spirit saith to the Churches see Rev. 2.7 ver 11. ver 17. ver 29. chap. 3.6 ver 13. and 22. with many more places to that purpose but we never find him calling to little babes in the flesh to hear and obey Commandments and beleive pomises Again we find the Scripture pronouncing life and Salvation to all those that beleive in Christ and obey his voice Joh. 3.15 16. with Heb. 5.9 but we never read that litte Children are promised it upon these terms Again the Scripture threatneth death and damnation to those that know not God and obey not the Gospell of our Lord Jesus Christ who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of God and the glory of his power 2 Thes 1.7 8 6. But little babes of 8 daies weeks or months old cannot know God nor yet obey the Gospell of Christ for they know not their right hand from their left and yet we find them not threatned with this punishment and if it were but this it were enough to satisfy all rationall men fearing God that God hath one way to bring Men and Women to life and salvation and another way to bring little babes to it that is to say he requireth faith in Christ and obedience to Christ as necessary to salvation to those of ripe years but in Infants he requireth none let any man prove it by Scripture if he can Lastly Gods ordinary means by which he bringeth Men and Women to life and salvation is by the preaching of the Gospell which is the power of God to salvation to every one that beleiveth Rom. 1.16 and it pleaseth God by the foolishness of preaching to save them which believe 1 Cor. 1.21 for with the heart man beleiveth unto righteousness but with the mouth confession is made unto salvation Rom. 10.10 But little babes that can neither speak nor understand cannot beleive with the heart unto righteousness nor confess with the mouth unto salvation for they cannot speak at all therefore they are not saved by that ordinary means that Men and Women are saved by And thus is their great and invincible objection or rather cavill answered clearly and plainly by the Scriptures of truth And the truth is they may as well debar little babes from food because the Scripture saith He that will not worke let him not eat as to debar them of salvation because they are not Church-members for it is as easie for babes to worke and get their own bread as to perform the work of a Church-member Therefore he that gives them food without labour in their non-age will also give them salvation without observing of Church-ordinances for the Scripture speaketh to Men and Women that have Ears to hear and not to babes in their nonage Thus having taken away the chief ground upon which Mr. Cook and Mr. Baxter build I shall now proceed to shew the rottenness of their building by the following Arguments by which I come to shew that such infants as they baptize cannot be Church-members neither can Church-membership do them any good but rather the contrary Argument I. My first Argument is from Joh. 15.2 in these words Christ faith I am the Vine and my father is the husbandman every branch in me that beareth not fruit be taketh away c. What the fruit is is expressed in the seventh and eighth verses If ye abide in me and my words or Commandments abide in you ye shall ask what ye will and it shall be done unto you herein is my Father glorified that you bring forth much fruit From whence I Argue If every branch in Christ must bring forth fruit and the fruit be to abide in his words that God may be glorified then infants that cannot speak nor understand cannot bring forth such fruit Therefore they are not branches in him nor members of him or if they be then they must be cut off and cast into the fire because they bear no fruit which is absurd Argument II. My second Argument is from Act. 8.1.4 where we read that the Church at Jerusalem were all scattered abroad except the Apostles and they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the word Whence I argue thus If all the Church were scattered abroad except the Apostles and those that were scattered did go up and down preaching the Word then there were no infants that could not speak nor understand in the Church at Jerusalem for as for the
Deut. 17.11 From Jeremiah 35.6 some there are contend to maintaine the law and customes we have in this Nation received from our fathers because the Rechabites stuck so close to theirs To which I answer 1. That the Rechabites were subject to the judicial law as the other Jews were 2. These traditions of theirs were not forbid nor commanded of God that the magistrate could not forbid the doing what they did 3. Nor cause c. saith In the Congregation of God confession of sins is always the first the which in times past went before before baptism for commonly children were baptized when they came to their understanding c. Idem super Mat. Christ hath nowhere commanded to Baptize infants 19 Calvinus in Institutionibus lib. 4. cap. 16. Confesseth that it is nowhere expresly mentioned by the Evangelists that any one childe was by the Apostles hands baptized 20 Dathenus in the Frankendalische Colloquium fol. 549. We believe that christian children ought to be baptized albeit it stand no where plainly with such words written That Christian children shall in the New-Testament be baptized And folio 605. Now we have plainly confessed that we have no such express commandment that you should baptize the Christians children And fol. 663. Also in Protocol Printed in Netherlandish 274. 1 He confesseth that there is no evident example that the Apostles did baptize children 21 Beza in Annotationibus super Matth. John taught those that were to be baptized and admitted none to baptism but those that gave testimony that they believed the forgiveness of their sins such Confession was also in the Primitive Church required of the Catechumens before baptism For in that the Sacraments are Seals it is requisite that Doctrine or Instruction should go before the use of those things by which the Doctrine it self is to be sealed 22 Luther in his book of the civil Magistrate The Sacraments neither can nor may be received without Faith but with great hurt Wherefore we hold our selves to the words of Christ He that believeth and is baptized so that either before or else even then present when Baptism is administred there must needs be Faith or else there is a contempt of the divine Majesty who offers his present grace when there is none to receive it Thus much out of those Teachers own writings which observe and use childrens baptism from whence the Reader may take notice of the unsoundness of their principles and what little ground 1 There is for it in the Word of God as they themselves confess 2 Therefore what great cause have we to search the Scriptures for better information let the sober-minded judge Moreover I shall further prove out of their own writings that the baptism of infants and sucklings is a Ceremony and Ordinance of man brought into the Church by Teachers after the Apostles times and Instituted and Commanded by Councels Popes and Emperours Proofs out of the Ancient and latter Teachers 1 ORigen calleth Baptism of children a ceremony and tradition of the Church In Levit. Hem. 8. In Epist ad Rom. lib. 5. 2 Augustine calleth it a common custom of the Church De baptismo contra Donat. lib. 4. cap. 23. Et de Genesi ad literam lib. 10. cap. 23. 3 Pope Gregory the 4. calleth it a Tradition of the Fathers In decretis distinct de consecrat 4 Erasmus lib. 4. de ration concio saith that they are not to be condemned that doubt whether Infant-baptism was or was denyed by the Apostles and think that the same is to be received as the placita Scholasticorum theologicorum which cannot be proved by sacred Scripture 5 Eckins calleth it a commandment and ordinance of man In Enchiridion 6 Luther in his book of Anabaptism acknowledgeth that it cannot be proved by sacred Scripture that childrens baptism was instituted by Christ or begun by the first Christians after the Apostles For many yeers since it came to be in use in the Church and was established by Pope Innoceneius 7 Cassander in his book de infantium Baptismo saith That it came to be used by the Fathers which lived three hundred yeers after the Apostles 8 Cyprianus lib. 3. Epistolarum 8. Epistle 9 Augustinus Epist 28. ad Hieroni. 10 Cassander de infantium baptismo 11 Bullinger in his House-book 12 Justus Menius of the Spirit of the Anab. 13 Melancthon in his Answer to the Anab. Articles About the yeer of our Lord 248 and after the departure of John the oldest Apostle 158 yeers lived a Priest called Fidus the same would that men should according to the manner of Circumcision baptize young children upon the eighth day Against whom Cyprianus with sixty six Bishops and Elders more gathered together opposed themselves ordaining that every one without delay should receive Baptism and that the young children should timely be brought thereto Thus have you the time when and the persons by whom it was brought in viz. The time when in the yeer of our Lord 248. the persons by which it was brought in namely Fidus by name who was a Priest who then lived Thirdly the opposition that he then had by Cyprianus and 66 other Bishops and Elders so that by their own Confessions it is an Ordinance and Tradition of man which will and must perish with the using And that it is Will-worship and Idolatry appeareth by their own Confessions as followeth 14 Bullingerus in ex Augustino contra Julianum lib. 1. cap. 2. saith The Carthaginian Councel concludeth thus to Innocentium Forasmuch as we believe that Christ the Son of God was holy born of the pure Virgin Mary to fulfil and ratifie the promise of God which excludeth not children from salvation but much rather comprehends the same within the Covenant We will therefore that they be baptized Thus we see it is We will therefore Will-worship 15 In Tomis Conciliorum Synodorum ex Concilio Carthag 5. cap. 6. saith Concerning Infants we will that they be baptized if there be no certain witness to testifie that they are baptized c. 16 Item Gregorius quartus Bonifacio Those young children whose parents are absent or unknown whether they be baptized or not let them according to the Tradition of the Fathers be baptized Here the Reader may take notice that it is a Tradition of the Fathers according to their own confession 17 Ex Concilio Miletano cui interfuit Augustinus Anselmus Romae Ecclesiae legatus It is also our will that all those that will not that children which are new born from their mothers womb should be baptized to the washing away of Original sin let them be excommunicated 18 Ex Tomis Conciliorum Franck. in Chronologia In the second Bracharense Councel holden 610. Baptism of children was adjudged and holden to be needful 19 Tuicensi Divinis officiis lib. 4. cap. 18. In times past the children in the Church were throughout the whole yeer instructed in the word And at the feast of Easter to rehearse the Faith which
c. but this is the Covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those daies saith the Lord I will put my laws in their mind and write them in their hearts and I will be to them a God they shall be to me a people and they shall not teach every man his neighbour and every man his brother saying Know the Lord for all shall know me from the least to the greatest c. This is the new Covenat of grace Now that Children that cannot speak nor understand cannot be in it is evident by the following reasons 1. Because they that are in this Covenant have the Laws of God put in their minds and written in their hearts but little babes that cannot speak nor understand have not the Laws of God in their minds nor written in their hearts therefore they are not in this Covenant Now that such little Children are not in a capacity to know the mind and Laws of God is most plaine Isa 7.14 15 16. Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and shall call his name Immanuel butter and hony shall he eat that he may know how to refuse the evil and chuse the good for before the child shall know how to refuse the evil and chuse the good the Land that thou abherrest shall be for saken of both her Kings Thus its evident that even the Lord Christ as he came in the flesh of the seed of David there was a time in which he was not capable of discerning between things which differ and therefore it is said againe that he grew and waxed strong in spirit and the grace of God was upon him Luke 2.40 And againe Jesus increased in wisedome and stature and in favour with God and man ver 52. From all which I conclude that if it were thus with the Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh as he was man much less do other Children understand the Laws of God in their non-age to have them written in their hearts and minds and therefore not in Covenant Obj. But it may be some for want of wisdome will object that upon this account Christ will be excluded the Covenant in his infancy Answ To which I answer Such people know not what they say for the Lord hath given him for a Covenant of the people and for a light of the Gentiles Isa 42 6. chap. 49 8. And he is the Mediator of the new Covenant Heb. 12.2.4 And his blood is the blood of the everlasting Covenant chap. 13.20 with Luke 22.40 And he is the seed to whom all the promises were made and in him they are yea and in him amen Gal. 3.15 with Cor. 1.20 and without him could be no Covenant of life and peace for he is the substance and life of the Covenant Therefore vain and foolish it would be for any man to make such an objection Again those that are in the new Covenant shall know the Lord from the greatest to the least Heb. 8.11 but little babes born of the flesh of a week or a month old cannot know the Lord for they know not their own parents nor their right hand from their left Jonah 4.11 therefore the Lord saith plainly that children are innocent yea the children of those which worship and do sacrifice to the devil Psal 106.37.38 in these words They sacrifice their sons and daughters to devils and shed innocent blood even the blood of their sons and daughters whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan therefore little babes though innocent are not nor cannot be in Covenant for that which is born of flesh is flesh but the new Covenant is a spiritual Covenant and they which enter into it must be born again for those that worship God must worship him in Spirit and in truth Joh. 4.24 Thus have I plainly proved that little babes that cannot speak words nor understand Reason cannot possibly be in the new Covenant Obj. But now followeth that great and unanswerable objection as Mr. Cook and Mr. Baxter supposeth which is this If children be not in Covenant they cannot be saved therefore saith Mr. Baxter in his 21 and 22 Arguments pag. 71 72. that Doctrine that leaveth us no sound grounded hope of the justification and salvation of any dying infants in the world is certainly false Doctrine But that Doctrine which denies any Infants to be members of the visible Church doth leave us no sound grounded hope of the justification and salvation of any Infants in the world therefore it is certainly false Doctrine The same saith Mr. Cook in his 13. Argument pag. 44. That Doctrine and practice is to be abhorred as most contrary to the Covenant of God which puts the Infants of Christians into the same condition with the children of Turks and Infidels and leaves them in the visible kingdom of the devil as no visible members of the Church c. But the Doctrine of the Anabaptists is such therefore to be abhorred To all which I answer first denying that any children are saved by vertue of visible Churth-membership or being in the Covenant as believers are and let Mr. Baxter Mr. Cook or any for them prove it by the Scriptures if they can Secondly I answer there is no difference between the children of believers and unbelievers in their non-age for the children of believers are but innocent when we make the best of them and the children of unbelievers also are innocent Psal 106.37 38. yea though their parents be such as worship and do sacrifice to the devil yet the Lord hath pronounced them innocent ver 38. saying They shed innocent blood even the blood of their sons and daughters whom they sacrificed unto the Idols of Canaan Thus it is plainly proved by the word of the Lord that the children of the murtherers and Idolaters that worshipped and sacrificed to the devil as ver 37. were innocent and those that are innocent God will not destroy See Exed 23.7 with Job 22.30 and Prov. 6.16 17. Again there can be no difference between the children of believers and unbelievers because no such children have actual sin and the best of children of men have that which is called original sin viz. the sin that came by Adams transgression for which they must all dye and return to their dust even the best of Saints as well as the worst of sinners for it s appointed for all once to dye and after that cometh judgement but the Scripture doth not say that any shall be judged according to their original sin or condemned for Adams transgression but it saith They shall be judged according to their works Rev. 20.13 and that every one shall receive according to that he hath done in his body whether it be good or bad 1 Cor. 5.10 therefore no ground to fear the salvation of children dying in their non-age for although they must dye for Adams sin yet Christ is become their Resurrection and they have no actual sin to