and Experience abundantly sheweth So that the matter of it which is a Washing with Water and the Effects of it which is only an Outward Cleansing being still the same how comes Water-baptism to be less a Carnal Ordinance now than before Obj. 1 If it be said That God confers inward Grace upon some that are now baptized Answ. So no doubt he did also upon some that used those Baptisms among the Jews Obj. 2 Or if it be said Because 't is commanded by Christ now under the New Covenant Answ. I Answer First That 's to beg the Question of which hereafter But Secondly We find That where the Matter of Ordinances is the same and the End the same they are never accounted more or less Spiritual because of their different Times Now was not God the Author of the Purifications and Baptisms under the Law Was not Water the Matter of them which is so now Was not the End of them to signifie an Inward Purifying by an Outward Washing And is not that alledged to be the End still And are the necessary Effects or Consequences of it any better now than before since men are now by vertue of Water-baptism as a necessary Consequence of it no more than before made Inwardly Clean And if some by God's Grace that are baptized with Water are inwardly purified so were some also under the Law So that this is not any Necessary Consequence nor Effect neither of this nor that Baptism It is then plainly Repugnant to Right Reason as well as to the Scripture-Testimony to affirm that to be a Spiritual Ordinance now which was a Carnal Ordinance before if it be still the same both as to its Author Matter and End however made to vary in some small Circumstances The Spirituality of the New Covenant and of its Worship established by Christ consisted not in such superficial Alterations of Circumstances but after another manner Therefore let our Adversaries shew us if they can without begging the Question and building upon some one or other of their own Principles denied by us wherever Christ appointed or ordained any Institution or Observation under the New Covenant as belonging to the Nature of it or such a necessary part of its Worship as is perpetually to Continue which being one in Substance and Effects I speak of necessary not accidental Effects yet because of some small difference in Form or Circumstance was before Carnal notwithstanding it was commanded by God under the Law but now is become Spiritual because commanded by Christ under the Gospel And if they cannot do this then if Water-baptism was once a Carnal Ordinance as the Apostle positively affirms it to have been it remains a Carnal Ordinance still and if a Carnal Ordinance then no necessary part of the Gospel or New Covenant-Dispensation and if no necessary part of it then not needful to Continue nor to be Practised by such as live and walk under this Dispensation But in this as in most other things according as we have often observed our Adversaries Judaize and renouncing the Glorious and Spiritual Priviledges of the New Covenant are sticking in and cleaving to the Rudiments of the Old both in Doctrine and Worship as being more suited and agreeable to their Carnal Apprehensions and Natural Senses But we on the contrary travel above all to lay hold upon and cleave unto the Light of the Glorious Gospel Revealed unto us And the Harmony of the Truth we profess in this may appear by briefly observing how in all things we follow the Spiritual Gospel of Christ as contradistinguished from the Carnality of the Legal Dispensation while our Adversaries through rejecting this Gospel are still labouring under the burthen of the Law which neither they nor their Fathers were able to bear For the Law and Rule of the Old Covenant and Jews was Outward written in Tables of Stone and Parchments So also is that of our Adversaries But the Law of the New Covenant is Inward and Perpetual written in the Heart So is ours The Worship of the Jews was Outward and Carnal limited to set Times Places and Persons and performed according to Set Prescribed Forms and Observations so is that of our Adversaries But the Worship of the New Covenant is neither limited to Time Place nor Person but is performed in the Spirit and in Truth and is not acted according to set Forms and Prescriptions but as the Spirit of God immediately acts moves and leads whether it be to Preach Pray or Sing and such is also our Worship So like wise the Baptism among the Jews under the Law was an outward Washing with outward Water only to Typisie an inward Purification of the Soul which did not necessarily follow upon those that were thus baptized But the Baptism of Christ under the Gospel is the Baptism of the Spirit and of Fire not the putting away of the filth of the Flesh but the Answer of a good Conscience towards God And such is the Baptism that we labour to be baptized withal and contend for Arg. § VII But again If Water-baptism had been an Ordinance of the Gospel then the Apostle Paul would have been sent to Administer it but he declares positively 1 Cor. 1. 17. That Christ sent him not to Baptize but to Preach the Gospel The Reason of that Consequence is undeniable because the Apostle Paul's Commission was as large as that of any of them and consequently he being in special Manner the Apostle of Christ to the Gentiles if Water-baptism as our Adversaries contend be to be accounted the badge of Christianity he had more need than any of the rest to be sent to baptize with Water that he might Mark the Gentiles Converted by him with that Christian Sign But indeed the Reason holds better thus That since Paul was the Apostle of the Gentiles and that in his Ministry he doth through all as by his Epistles appears labour to wean them from the former Jewish Ceremonies and Observations though in so doing he was sometimes undeservedly judged by others of his Brethren who were unwilling to lay aside those Ceremonies therefore his Commission though as full as to the Preaching of the Gospel and New Covenant-Dispensation as that of the other Apostles did not require of him that he should lead those Converts into such Jewish Observations and Baptisms however that Practice was Indulged in and practised by the other Apostles among their Jewish Proselites for which cause he thanks God that he baptized so few intimating that what he did therein he did not by vertue of his Apostolick Commission but rather in Condescendence to their Weakness even as at another time he Circumcised Timothy Obj. 1 Our Adversaries to evade the Truth of this Testimony usually alledge That by this is only to be understood that he was not sent principally to baptize not that he was not sent at all Answ. But this Exposition since it Contradicts the positive Words of
kind partly borrowed from the Jews which they more tenaciously stick to and more earnestly contend for than for the weightier Points of Christianity because that Self yet alive and ruling in them loves their own Inventions better than God's Commands But if they can by any means stretch any Scripture-practice or Conditional precept or permission fitted to the Weakness or Capacity of some or appropriate to some particular Dispensation to give some Colour for any of these their Inventions they do then so tenaciously stick to them and so obstinately and obstreperously plead for them that they will not patiently hear the most-solid Christian Reasons against them Which Zeal if they would but seriously Examine it they would find to be but the prejudice of Education and the Love of Self more than of God or his Pure Worship This is verified concerning those things which are called Sacraments about which they are very ignorant in Religious Controversies who understand not how much Debate Contention Jangling and Quarrelling there has been among those called Christians So that I may safely say the Controversie about them to wit about their Number Nature Vertue Efficacy Administration and other things hath been more than about any other Doctrine of Christ whether as betwixt Papists and Protestants or among Protestants betwixt themselves And how great prejudice these Controversies have brought to Christians is very obvious whereas the things contended for among them are for the most part but Empty Shadows and meer Out-side things as I hope hereafter to make appear to the patient and unprejudicate Reader § II. That which comes first under Observation is the Name Sacrament which is strange that Christians should stick to and Contend so much for since it is not to be found in all the Scripture but was borrowed from the Military Oaths among the Heathens from whom the Christians when they began to Apostatize did borrow many superstitious Terms and Observations that they might thereby Ingratiate themselves and the more easily gain the Heathens to their Religion which practice though perhaps intended by them for good yet as being the fruit of Humane Policy and not according to God's Wisdom has had very pernicious Consequences I see not how any whether Papists or Protestants especially the latter can in reason quarrel with us for denying this Term which it seems the Spirit of God saw not meet to inspire the Pen-men of the Scriptures to leave unto us Obj. 1 But if it be said That it is not the Name but the Thing they contend for Answ. I Answer Let the Name then as not being Scriptural be laid aside and we shall see at first Entrance how much Benefit will redound by laying aside this Traditional Term and betaking us to plainness of Scripture-Language For presently the great Contest about the Number of them will evanish seeing there is no Term used in Scripture that can be made use of whether we call them Institutions Ordinances Precepts Commandments Appointments or Laws c. that would afford ground for such a Debate since neither Papists will affirm that there are only Seven or Protestants only Two of any of these forementioned Obj. 2 If it be said That this Controversie arises from the Definition of the Thing as well as from the Name Obj. 1 It will be found otherwise For whatever way we take their Definition of a Sacrament whether as an outward visible Sign whereby inward Grace is conferred or only signified This Definition will agree to many things which neither Papists nor Protestants will acknowledge to be Sacraments If they be expressed under the Name of Sealing Ordinances as some do I could never see neither by Reason nor Scripture how this Title could be appropriate to them more than to any other Christian Religious Performance for that must needs properly be a Sealing Ordinance which makes the Persons receiving it infallibly certain of the Promise or Thing sealed to them Obj. 3 If it be said It is so to them that are faithful Answ. I Answer So is Praying and Preaching and doing of every good Work Seeing the Partaking or Performing of the one gives not to any a more certain Title to Heaven yea in some respect not so much there is no Reason to call them so more than the other Besides we find not any thing called the Seal and Pledge of our Inheritance but the Spirit of God it is by that we are said to be sealed Eph. 1. 14. 4. 30. which is also termed the Earnest of our Inheritance 2 Cor. 1. 22. and not by outward Water or Eating and Drinking which as the Wickedest of Men may partake of so many that do do notwitstanding it go to Perdition For it is not outward Washing with Water that maketh the Heart clean by which Men are fitted for Heaven And as that which goeth into the mouth doth not defile a Man because it is put forth again and so goeth to the Dung-hill neither doth any thing which Man eateth purifie him or fit him for Heaven What is said here in general may serve for an Introduction not only to this Proposition but also to the other concerning the Supper Of these Sacraments so called Baptism is always first numbered which is the Subject of the present Proposition in whose Explanation I shall first demonstrate and prove Our Judgment and then Answer the Objections and Refute the Sentiments of our Opposers Part I As to the first part these things following which are briefly comprehended in the Proposition come to be proposed and proved Prop. I § III. First That there is but One Baptism as well as but One Lord One Faith c. Secondly That this one Baptism which is the Baptism of Christ is not a washing with or dipping in Water but a being baptized by the Spirit Thirdly That the Baptism of John was but a Figure of this and therefore as the Figure to give place to the Substance which though it be to continue yet the other is ceased Prop. I As for the first viz. That there is but one Baptism there needs no other Proof than the Words of the Text Eph. 4. 5. One Lord one Faith one Baptism where the Apostle positively and plainly affirms that as there is but One Body One Spirit One Faith One God c. so there is but One Baptism Obj. 1 As to what is commonly alledged by way of Explanation upon the Text That the Baptism of Water and of the Spirit make up this One Baptism by vertue of this Sacramental Union Answ. I Answer This Exposition hath taken place not because grounded upon the Testimony of the Scripture but because it wrests the Scripture to make it suit to their Principle of Water-Baptism and so there needs no other Reply but to deny it as being repugnant to the plain words of the Text which saith not That there are Two Baptisms to wit one of Water the other of the Spirit which
to the End of the World yea so long as Christ's Presence abideth with his Children Obj. III § IX Thirdly They Object the Constant Practice of the Apostles in the Primitive Church who they say did always Admini-Water-baptism to such as they Converted to the Faith of Christ And hence also they further urge that of Matth. 28. to have been meant of Water or else the Apostles did not understand it in that in baptizing they used Water or that in so doing they walked without a Commission I Answer That it was the Constant Practice of the Apostles is denied for we have shewn in the Example of Paul that it was not so since it were most absurd to judge that he Converted only those few even of the Church of Corinth whom he saith he baptized nor were it less absurd to think that that was a constant Apostolick Practice which he that was not Inferior to the Chiefest of the Apostles and who declares he laboured as much as they all rejoyceth he was so little in But further the Conclusion inferred from the Apostles Practice of baptizing with Water to evince that they understood Matth. 28. of Water-baptism doth not hold For though they baptized with Water it will not follow that either they did it by vertue of that Commission or that they mistook that place nor can there be any Medium brought that will infer such a Conclusion As to the other insinuated Absurdity That they did it without a Commission It is none at all For they might have done it by a Permission as being in use before Christ's Death and because the People nursed up with Outward Ceremonies could not be weaned wholly from them And thus they used other things as Circumcision and legal Purifications which yet they had no Commission from Christ to do to which we shall speak more at length in the following Proposition concerning the Supper Object But if from the Sameness of the Word because Christ bids them baptize and they afterwards in the Use of Water are said to baptize it be judged probable that they did understand that Commission Matth. 28. to authorize them to baptize with Water and accordingly practised it Answ. Although it should be granted that for a season they did so far mistake it as to judge that Water belonged to that Baptism which however I find no necessity of granting yet I see not any great Absurdity would thence follow For it is plain they did mistake that Commission as to a main part of it for a Season as where he bids them Go teach all Nations since some time after they judged it unlawful to Teach the Gentiles Yea Peter himself scrupled it until by a Vision constrained thereunto for which after he had done it he was for a season until they were better informed judged by the rest of his Brethren Now if the Education of the Apostles as Jews and their Propensity to adhere and stick to the Jewish Religion did so far influence them that even after Christ's Resurrection and the pouring forth of the Spirit they could not receive nor admit of the Teaching of the Gentiles though Christ in his Commission to them commanded them to Preach to them what further Absurdity were it to suppose that through the like Mistake the Chiefest of them having been the Disciples of John and his Baptism being so much prized there among the Jews that they also took Christ's Baptism intended by him of the Spirit to be that of Water which was John's and accordingly practised it for a season it suffices us that if they were so mistaken though I say not that they were so they did not always remain under that Mistake Else Peter would not have said of the Baptism which now saves that it is not a putting away of the filth of the Flesh which certainly Water-baptism is But further they urge much Peter's baptising Cornelius In which they press two things First That Water-baptism is used even to those that had received the Spirit Secondly That it is said positively he commanded them to be baptized Acts 10. 47 48. But neither of these doth necessarily infer Water-baptism to belong to the New Covenant-Dispensation nor yet to be a Perpetual standing Ordinance in the Church For First All that this will amount to was That Peter at that time baptized these Men but that he did it by vertue of that Commission Matth. 28. remains yet to be proved And how doth the baptising with VVater after the receiving of the Holy Ghost prove the Case more than the use of Circumcision and other Legal Rites acknowledged to have been acted by him afterwards Also no wonder if Peter that thought it so strange notwithstanding all that had been professed before and spoken by Christ that the Gentiles should be made Partakers of the Gospel and with great difficulty not without a very extraordinary Impulse thereunto was brought to come to them and eat with them was apt to put this Ceremony upon them which being as it were the particular Dispensation of John the Fore-runner of Christ seemed to have greater Affinity with the Gospel than the other Jewish Ceremonies then used by the Church but that will no ways infer our Adversaries Conclusion Secondly As to these Words And he commanded them to be baptized it declareth matter of Fact not of Right and amounteth to no more than that Peter did at that time pro hic nunc Command those persons to be baptized with Water which is not denied but it saith nothing that Peter commanded Water-baptism to be a Standing and Perpetual Ordinance to the Church neither can any Man of sound Reason say if he heed what he says that a Command in matter of Fact to Particular Persons doth infer the thing commanded to be of general obligation to all if it be not other ways bottomed upon some Positive Precept Why doth Peter's Commanding Cornelius and his Houshold to be baptized at that time infer Water-baptism to Continue more than his Constraining which is more than Commanding the Gentiles in general to be Circumcised and observe the Law We find that at that time when Peter baptized Cornelius it was not determined whether the Gentiles should not be Circumcised but on the contrary it was the most general Sense of the Church that they should And therefore no wonder if they thought it needful at that time that they should be baptized which had more Affinity with the Gospel and was a Burthen less grievous Obj. IV § X. Fourthly They Object from the Signification of the Word baptize which is as much as to Dip and Wash with Water alledging thence that the very Word imports a being baptized with Water Answ. This Objection is very weak For since baptizing with Water was a Rite among the Jews as Paulus Riccius sheweth even before the coming of John therefore that Ceremony received that Name from the Nature of the Practice as used both by the Jews and by John
Manichees were Condemned for denying that Grace is universally given by Baptism and Julian the Pelagian by Augustine for denying Exorcism and Insufflation in the use of Baptism All which things Protestants deny also So that Protestants do but foolishly to upbraid us as if we could not shew any among the Ancients that denied Water-baptism seeing they cannot shew any whom they acknowledge not to have been Heretical in several things to have used it nor yet who using it did not use also the Sign of the Cross and other things with it which they deny There were some nevertheless in the darkest Times of Popery who testified against Water-baptism For one Alanus page 103 104 107. speaks of some in his Time that were burnt for the denying of it For they said that Baptism had no Efficacy either in Children or Adult Persons and therefore Men were not obliged to take Baptism Particularly Ten Canonicks so called were burnt for that Crime by the Order of King Robert of France as P. Pithaeus tells in his Fragments of the History of Guienne Which is also confirmed by one Johannes Floracensis a Monk who was famous at that Time in his Epistle to Oliva Abbot of the Ausonian Church I will saith he give you to understand concerning the Heresie that was in the City of Orleans on Childer-mass-day For it was true if ye have heard any thing that King Robert caused to be burnt alive nigh Fourteen of that City of the Chief of their Clergy and the more Noble of their Laicks who were hateful to God and abominable to Heaven and Earth for they did stiffly deny the Grace of Holy Baptism and also the Consecration of our Lord's Body and Blood The Time of this Deed is noted in these Words by Papir Masson in his Annals of France lib. 3. in Hugh and Robert Actum Aureliae publice Anno Incarnationis Domini 1022. Regni Roberti Regis 28. Indictione 5. quando Stephanus Haeresiarcha Complices ejus damnati sunt exusti Aureliae Now for their calling them Hereticks and Manichees we have nothing but the Testimony of their Accusers which will no more invalidate their Testimony for this Truth against the use of Water-baptism or give more ground to charge us as being one with Manichees than because some called by them Manichees do agree with Protestants in some things that therefore Protestants are Manichees or Hereticks which Protestants can no ways shun For the Question is Whether in what they did they walked according to the Truth testified of by the Spirit in the Holy Scriptures So that the Controversie is brought back again to the Scriptures according to which I suppose I have formerly discussed it As for the latter part of the Thesis denying the Use of Infant-baptism it necessarily follows from what is above-said For if Water-baptism be Ceased then surely Baptizing of Infants is not warrantable But those that take upon them to Oppose us in this matter will have more to do as to this latter part For after they have done what they can to prove Water-baptism it remains for them to prove that Infants ought to be Baptized For he that proves Water-baptism Ceased proves that Infant-baptism is Vain But he that should prove that Water-baptism continues has not thence proved that Infant-baptism is necessary That needs something further And therefore it was a pitiful Subterfuge of Nic. Arnoldus against this to say That the denying of Infant-baptism belonged to the Gangrene of Anabaptists without adding any further Probation Concerning the Communion or Participation of the Body and Blood of Christ. The Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ is Inward and Spiritual which is the Participation of his Flesh and Blood by which the Inward Man is daily nourished in the Hearts of those in whom Christ dwells Of which things the Breaking of Bread by Christ with his Disciples was a Figure which they even used in the Church for a time who had received the Substance for the sake of the Weak Even as Abstaining from things strangled and from Blood the Washing one anothers Feet and the Anointing of the Sick with Oil All which are commanded with no less Authority and Solemnity than the former yet seeing they are but the Shadows of better things they Cease in such as have obtained the Substance § I. THE Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ is a Mystery hid from all natural men in their first fall'n and degenerate State which they cannot understand reach to nor comprehend as they there abide neither as they there are can they be Partakers of it nor yet are they able to Discern the Lord's Body And forasmuch as the Christian World so called for the most part hath been still labouring working conceiving and imagining in their own natural and unrenewed Understandings about the things of God and Religion therefore hath this Mystery much been hid and sealed up from them while they have been contending quarrelling and fighting one with another about the meer Shadow Outside and Form but strangers to the Substance Life and Vertue § II. The Body then of Christ which Believers partake of is Spiritual and not Carnal and his Blood which they drink of is pure and Heavenly and not humane or Elementary as Augustin also affirms of the Body of Christ which is Eaten in his Tractat Psal. 98. Except a Man eat my Flesh he hath not in him Life Eternal And he saith The Words which I speak unto you are Spirit and Life understand spiritually what I have spoken Ye shall not eat of this Body which ye see and drink this Blood which they shall spill that Crucifie me I am the Living Bread which have descended from Heaven he called himself the Bread who descended from Heaven exhorting that we might believe in him c. Quest. If it be asked then What that Body What that Flesh and Blood is Answ. I Answer It is that Heavenly Seed that Divine Spiritual Coelestial Substance of which we spake before in the 5th and 6th Propositions This is that Vehiculum Dei or Spiritual Body of Christ whereby and where-through he communicateth Life to Men and Salvation to as many as believe in him and receive him and whereby also Man comes to have Fellowship and Communion with God This is proved from the 6th of John from verse 32. to the end where Christ speaks more at large of this matter than in any other place And indeed this Evangelist and beloved Disciple who lay in the Bosom of our Lord gives us a more full account of the Spiritual Sayings and Doctrine of Christ And it 's observable that though he speaks nothing of the Ceremony used by Christ of Breaking Bread with his Disciples neither in his Evangelical Account of Christ's Life and Sufferings nor in his Epistles yet he is more large in this account of the Participation of the Body Flesh and Blood of