begin at the leaft Novum Nomen a new name now christened you have two names the one is nomen naturae the other nomen gratiae commonly called Sirname Christen name But objected what am I bettered Much if thou have wit or grace thy two names put thee in minde of thy two natures and with Rebesca that there are two strugling within the womb of thy heart Nature and Grace Old Man New Man the Flesh the Spirit yea thy Sirname puts thee in minde of thy sinful Generation thy Christen Name of thy Spirituall Regenration by the Grace of our Lord Jesus thus whilest the one makes me fear the other puts me in hope whilest the one tells me I am of a sinful seed and to suffer and the other comforts me assuring me I am a Member of Christ Jesus 2. The second good got is recorded Gal. 3.27 I can assure you it is a very comfortable place and a spur to prick every Christian on to baptize their yong ones the words are these Ye who are baptized have put on Christ you are hapt with him as with a garment he is the Robe of Righteousness all over-spreading the late Biptized you are armed with his as with a coat of mail able to bear off all the fiery assualts of the devil Saith the Spouse in the Canticles I have put off how can I put on again Being baptized we put on Christ with a resolve never to put him off any more and it is this Church Cognizance whereby we are known to be of the Household of God The third good got is Admittance into Heaven and hence sayes our Saviour Except you be born again of Water and the Spirit you cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven The Baptism of Water assures the Visible Church that you are made Members of Christs Congregation here the Baptisme of the Spirit when you are of ripe years asserts you shall be Members of the invisible Church hereafter our outward Baptisme ingrafts you into the Church Militant an Ordinance of Grace conducting to the Baptisme of the Spirit being an assurance you shall be admitted into the fellowship of the Church Triumphant if wilfully you sleight this 't is not probable how God will bestow upon you the other the laying hold on this Ordinance within humane reach puts me in hopes to attain that other onely conferred by the Divine Power when I scornfully neglect what proffered by Gods Church what hopes have I to attain that without which I cannot come to Gods Kingdom since you cannot enter into Gods Kingdom except you be born of Water and the Spirit let us use the water lest we deprive our selves of the hopes we have to acquire Gods Spirit The words recorded by the Evangelist are spoke to all of all Sexes Ages and since the major part are Younglings there being more children then men let not us disinherit so many Infants to humour a few Hereticks hinder not your children from Baptism for not having the perfect use of reason since we are unsure whether theelder believe but onely by professiion it were to be wished at one instant we might be baptized flumine flamine with water and the Spirit but the aged may receive the first want the latter Let us then who have prayed for the Infant that he may receive the latter not debar him from the former The Catholick Church way is a safe way to walk in and who so obstinately scorns Baptisme hath small hopes that the Spirit will land at the haven his heart nay 't is to be feared that he shall never enter into the Kingdom of Heaven As none in Rome could enter into the Temple of Honour but first went thorow the Temple of Vertue so none can be admitted into the Kingdom of glory but such who first have had admitttance into the Kingdom of grace And this Sacrament is the ordinary key which opens your children the door that they may enter in by and may rest assured this Water Baptisme takes away the mulct though not the guilt the blame though not the stain and that the Infant baptized who dies before it have usum rationis to sin with a free will shall certainly depart in peace to a place of immortal bliss whither God of his mercies send all of us And so I come to the sixth and last thing to be discust upon Whether it be lawful to baptize Infants in discoursing upon this controversie I shall first set down the Adversaries Arguments against Baptisme and by the help of my God the answer to every of them then give you my Reasons why Infants ought to be baptized lastly shew you the punishments have been enacted to be inflicted upon Anabaptists And because this age is desirous to read much in few lines therefore I will rather offer the courteous Reader matter then words and as much as I can match solidity and brevity both together and with the one win the ear of the more judicious and by the other prove my self not much to prejudice such as have high employments The Anabaptists the more hopefully to lay their foundation against Infants Baptisme have first cunningly gone about to prove rebaptizing lawful which Block I purpose to remove out of our way that so we may the better answer all they object against baptizing Infants To countenance their cause they labour to prove out of the Acts That those whom John baptized that had not heard of the Holy Ghost Paul again baptized To this hear what St. Augustine saith Discipulos Joannis iterum baptizatos fuisse non iterato Baptismate for as Philip Melancton saith Ioannis Baptismum The Baptisme of John was signum mortificationis Christi Baptismum signum vivificationis for to Christs was added condonatio peccatorum oportuit iterum baptizari qui Ioannis Baptismo loti erant quo certi essent se jam consecutos esse remissionem peccatorum To Christs Baptism was added remission of sin and it was most might and right for those who were washed with Iohns Baptisme to receive also Christs Baptism that so they might be ensured of remission of sin by being baptized into the Faith of our Lord Jesus The Anabaptist let him produce any so baptized by Iohn and we shall not refuse them Christs Baptism till such a one be produced this Argument must be shouldered out We have not now to do either with the Novatians who were admitted into the Church without any new Baptism or yet with the Hereticks sprung from the corrupt lungs of Samosatenus who were excluded from being members of the Church Catholick till anew baptized because they denied Fundamentalls but with Anabaptists who will allow no Infant to be baptized and yet this Heresie the very Hereticks called the Donatists and Pelagians cried down It is at least a thousand years since this execrable Tenet sprang up and the new Fomenters of it in Germany were Nicholas Stock Iohn of Leiden and Knipperdolin but now it is ferried over into England
also all the now Papists and Conformist Protestants and the Presbyterians all concuring in the necessity of Baptizing children building the Structure of their Salvation in part upon this Foundation 2. We take John 3. ver 5. to be a good Scripture ground for Baptizing of Infants where is said Verily verily except a man be born of water and the Spirit be cannot enter into the Kingdome of Heaven Not without the one into the kingdom of Grace not without both into the kingdom of Glory I speak so far as is revealed to us we dare give no farther a warrant then God a precept and must tye our selves to the revealed means though not our God at all times to such tearms as he hath revealed himself to us But this place of Scripture the Anabaptists tell us is to be understood of men of years not of Children who are of less age then the tenth of one year As a reverend Doctor writes they might as well put in an Exception against women no more named then Children This they dare not that they ought not for our Saviour in that place speaks of man Specifice I mean of mankinde of every person sprung from Adam which since the youngest is defiled as well as the eldest as appears by Psal 51.5 therefore Infants while Infants ought to have the Medicine Baptisme administred to them as well as if elder people especially considering it is the onely Church cure to free such who are conceived in sin and born in iniquity from the guilt of Original sin of which Ordinance I take new born Babes to be capable though not Activè yet Passivè for in all the work they are passive being prayed for and belessed and washed and none can doubt but capable of this Seal of grace at those young years as well as the children under the old Law were capable of Circumcision at eight dayes old And this is that Murus Aheneus that Brazen Wall which all the Anabaptists are never able to leap over not yet lay flat but under this Analogy our Children will finde a perpetual shelter for baptisme in the greatest storm of Anabaptists 3. Acts 16. 33. wintnesses how the Jaylor was baptized 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all that were his his children then were not to be excluded or if they had been to have been debarred doubtless our Apostle would have entred his Caveat against Infants Baptisme and as he said 1 Cor. 1. 14. I thank God I baptized none of you save Crispus and Gaius as also the houshold of Stephanus so â—ere he would have told us how all of the Jaylors household he had baptized but the young ones but his non-exception is a sure confirmation that old and young were there and then baptized 4. I answer how the Anbaptists can bring no express place of Scripture commanding us to give the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to women or for changing the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week nor finde they the Creed word by word in Gods word nor yet the words Trinity and Unity and Unity in Trinity and yet they acknowledge a Trinity in Unity believe the Creed observe the Lords day and give the Communion to Women why then not Baptisme to Children for which we have fair evidence how it belongs unto them And now the premises considered how that many things are approved of for Divine Truths not exprest at large in so many lines of the Text. Secondly since whole families were baptized our Apostle telling us whom he did not baptize but entering no Caveat against Infants Baptisme Thirdly Since Scripture tells us this is the way for man or mankinde to enter into the kingdom of Heaven by being born of Water and the Spirit this water charter being granted by the God of heaven to all men of what age of sex upon earth Fourthly since our Saviour assures us heaven belongs to our young children and that at their years there is no way to free them from their birth-sin and ensure them heaven but by Baptism with these few smooth stones taken out of the bag of the shepheard of our souls we have knockt in the forehead the Anabaptists great grand Goliah argument and made it of as little force as Samson when his locks were shaven And now to pass from our adversaries most material Objections to our Arguments which are as so many Champions to defend the baptizing Infants and my first is this This salve was never forbid us to apply to our Infants sores who are all over wounded with original sin by Adam let the Anabaptists point out where God forbids it and we will leave it methinks it had been time enough to cry out of us for baptizing children when they had shewed us Christs prohibition but where there is in Scripture so universal a silence I know no cause why they should make so open an out-cry we much desire they would cease to quarrel with us on earth till the God of heaven declare for them They tell us how we have no express place in Scripture to justifie what we do we tell them how they have not the least appearance in any text in Gods word which contradicts what we do it were wisdome in them to let us without disturbance baptize our Infants till they finde a Law to condemn us or a Gospel to forbid us The second Argument Our second Argument to justifie baptizing Infants is this Our Doctrine is Catholick and was practised both in the Primitive Church as also till this day in all Nationall Churches Christian You know what is said 2 Thes 2.15 Hold fast the Traditions which I have delivered unto you whether by word or our Epistle Now this Church Doctrine of baptizing Children being an Apostolical Tradition we hold it warranted by Gods word and a Doctrine not to be oppugned especially considering God hath promised to be with his Church unto the end of the world And though the Churches of Asia have their golden Candlesticks removed and are fallen from the Faith yet the Universall Church never erres and of this judgement are all our Learned Divines nor dare our Adversaries make the least Mutiny against it if the question seriously and soberly be propounded to them And now the Task I have undertaken is to prove Infants Baptisme a Church Tenet all the time of the Primitive Church for since it is undeniable for practised by the Greek and Latin Churches witness the Churches in all Graecia where there are Christians as also in Syria in India in Muscovia in Ethiopia And as for the Churches in this part of the world what I have delivered will appear to be truth by the confession of the English Scottish and Irish Churches by the practice of the Romish Church to which I may adjoyne as supernumerated up to my hand the Augustine Confession the Bohemian the Belgick the Helvetian the Saxon with many moe all asserting Infants Baptism for of such as saith our Saviour are the
and by such bloody Saints who will either force us to lose our estates if not lives or else put in peril our Infants souls hard chap-men who would force upon us so hard a bargain I need not recount unto you the several forts of Anabaptists fourteen in all Alstedius hath saved me this labour nor will I blur my paper with their abominable Opinions lest my making them too publickly known might move the spiders to suck in poison whence the laborious Bees might gather honey yet since our Land is infested with these Locusts who contumeliously against the Tenet of the Church Catholick maintain it is unlawfull to baptize children for this cause give me leave to shew you the weapons they fight against us with and then disarm them what are these weapons but so many Arguments which they use wherewith to abuse us Cassander pag. 740. hath quoted their champion reason this they say Non sunt capaces Baptismi quod doceri profiteri nequeant Children are not capable of Baptism that are not capable to learn and believe To this we answer that the ground of their Argument is taken out of Matthew 28.19 20. where it is said Go and teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost teaching them to observe all things which I have commanded you Upon this foundation they reer up this building that teaching must go before baptizing my answer The words in the Original are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teach but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say make Disciples which infants in their swadling belts may attain to by being by Baptisme admitted into Christs School while their Sureties give in their names and by this Sacrament record them amongst Christs Disciples And again it is plain from the Text that baptizing ushers in teaching as appears verse 20. Teaching them to observe all things to which they have several conducts their Christian Parents instructing the Bishops Confirmation with prayers for them and their growth in the mystery of the faith of our Lord Jesus 2. We might answer that all the world but a few were Jews and Gentiles ignorant generally of Christ and Christianity and denying the Saviour of our souls now if we were to go to such as are now the Indians teaching must precede baptizing but you know what is said The Covenant is made to you and to your seed 3. The Anabaptists might as well say that since it is said Mark 1.25 Repent and believe that repentance goeth before faith which is as known an untruth as that preaching to Infants must necessarily precede baptizing of them And thus since the setting repentance before faith bindes me not to believe how faith is not before repentance Secondly since these words Mat. 28. were spoke concerning people unconverted and therefore first to be taught Thirdly since all enjoyned is first make disciples then baptize and after teach This considered makes the Anabaptists Argument weak and invalid The Anabaptists 2. Objection Signum frustrae datur non intelligenti say they it is a vain and footlish custom to give the Sacrament to ignorant Infants that know nothing of the vertue of it nor what it means Give me leave to tell these Anabaptists what answer a late Reverend Doctor of our Church gave to this saith he These gyant-like fight with God for if this Argument were in force it would be available to overthrow the circumcising of Children instituted in the Old Law by God himself as Infants Baptisme in the New For they then knew no more what Circumcision meant then these now what Baptisme Secondly These bold Hereticks by this Argument do seem to condemn our Lord and Saviour as if in vain he laid his Hands upon children and blessed them seeing they knew not what he meant Thirdly Physick is given to the Patient sometimes when senseless and doth him good so though children perceive not what they receive yet may get good by receiving this Seal of Grace And thus since health may be restored by administred physick when the Patient is senseless since Christ blessed those whose young years did impede their present cognition of a Blessing Lastly since God ordained circumcision for children of eight dayes old and not in vain this considered makes invalid this second Argument unless these Anabaptists will condemn all Physicians who give physick to Patients in a trance or will inveigh against the Lord who ordered circumcision on the eight day or else conclude our Savivors blessing yong children was in vain Their third Objection Christ was not baptized till thirty years of age ergo Infants ought not to be baptized To this I answer Baptisme was not in esse at Christs Birth but no sooner instituted but he was baptized though not as one saith in his infancy yet in the infancy of Baptism and because he lived in the time of the Law he was circumcised the eighth day and so soon as the New Law was proclaimed baptized according to the Gospel Again the example of Christ bindes not without a precept for then we should as Christ did onely receive the Lords Supper at the closure of our life and all our life time till then abstain from the Blessed Communion And now all considered the Anabaptists Argument is invalid And since our Saviour binds us not for all his example from Communion till our dying Secondly since he received this Sacrament so soon as it was instituted Thirdly since it was impossible for him to receive a Sacrament before ordained These seriously considered blunt the edge of the Anabaptists argument And though they would seem to give us a great down-right Blow yet have drawn from us no Blood Fourth Objection Their fourth Objection in this You have no express place in Scripture that injoyns Ministers to Baptize Children and man ought not to have a Mouth to speak for that which God alloweth not a Pen to write for Answ This Gordian knot long since hath been unloosed I mean divers Doctors of our Church have resolved this doubt it is almost impossible for me to adde one mite into their Treasury yet to recollect in short what hath been said at large is neither dishonourable to the Writer not will be unsatisfactory to the Reader I answer then though we finde it not set down totidem verbis in so many words Go and Baptize Infants yet Mark 10. ver 14. tells how unto little children belong the Kingdome of Heaven which must be understood of Infants because as followes Chirst tooke them up in his armes and blessed them And it is a sound Argument à majori ad minus that if heaven belong to them then the means to be assoiled of their sin which otherwise would obstruct their going to heaven into which no uncleane thing can enter and the means at their Age in viacognita can be no other but Baptism And of this judgement were the Primitive Fathers and are our now Modern Writers as