divine institution is from Heaven the promise which it leads to â—s perpetual and Universal it belong to the whole body There is one body and one Spirit even as ye are called i◠〈◊〉 hope of your calling A POST-SCRIPT Taken out of the Works of Dr. Jer. Taylor in defence of laying on of Hands as a never-failing Ministery WE have seen the Original of laying on of hands from Christ the practice and exercise of it in the Apostles and the first converts in Christianity that which I shall now remark is that this is established and passed into a Christian Doctrine The Waranty for what I say is the words of St. Paul where the holy Rite of confirmation so called from the effect of this Ministration and expressed by the Ritual part of it imposition of hands is reckoned a Foundamental point 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not laying again the foundation of Repentance from Deas works and of faith towards God of the Doctrine of baptism and of laying on of hands of Resurrection from the dead and of Eternal Judgement Here are six foundamental points of St. Pauls Catechism which he said as tâ—e foundation or beginning of the institution of the Christian Church and amongst these imposition of hands is reckoned as a pâ—rt of the foundation and therefore they who deny it dig up foundations Now that this imposition of hands is that which the Apostles used in confirming the baptized and invocating the Holy Gâ—ost upon them remâ—ins to be proâ—â—â— Absolution of penitents cannot be meant here not only bâ—cause we never read that the Apostles did use that Ceremony in their absolutions but because the Apostâ—e speaking of the foundation in which baptism is There needâ—d no absolution but bapâ—ismal for they and we believiâ—g gone baptism for the remâ—ssion of sins this is al the absolution that can be at the first and in the foundation The other was secunda post 〈◊〉 fragâ—â—m tabula 〈◊〉 me in after when men had mâ—de Shipwrack of their good Conscienscience and were as St. Peter saith unmindful of the former cleansing 2. It cannot be meant of Ordination and this is also evident 1. Because the Apostle saves he would thence forth leave to speak of the foundation and go on to perfection that is to higher misteries Now in Riâ—uals of which he speaks there is none higher then Ordination 2. The Apostle saying he would speak no more of laying on of hands goes presentlâ— to discourse of the misteriousness of the Evangelical Priest-hood and the honor of that vocation by which it is evident he spake nothing of Ordination in the Catechism or Narrative of Foundamentals 3. This also appears from tâ—e context not only because laying on of hands is Immediately set after baptism but also because in the very next words of this discourse he does enumerate and apportion to baptism and impâ—sition of hands their proper and proportioned effects To bâ—ptism ilâ—umiraâ—ion And to Confirmaâ—ion he reckons tasting the Heavenly gift and being made parâ—akers of the Holy Ghost By the thing sigâ—ified declaring the sign and by â—he misteâ—y the 〈◊〉 Upon these words â—t Chrisostomâ— discoursing sayes That all these are foundamental Articles that it that â—e ought to repent from dead works to be baptized â—â—to the Faith of Christ and be made worthy of the gift of the spirit who is given by imposition of hands and we are to be taught the misteries of the Resurrection and Eternal Judgement This Catechism sayes he is perfect so that if any Man have Faith in God and being baptized is also confirmed and so tasts the Heavenly gift and partakes of the Holy Ghost by hope of the resurrection tasts of the good things of the World to come if he falls away from this state digging down and turning up these foundations he shall never be built again he can never be baptized again Confirmed again God will not begin again c. He cannot be made a Christian twice This is the full explication of this excellent place and any other ways it cannot be reasonably expâ—icated I shall observe one thing more out of this Testimony of St. Paul He calâ—s it the Doctrine of baptism and laying on of hands by which it does not only appear to be a lasting Ministry because no part of the Christian Doctrine could change or be abolished but hence also it appears to be divine Institution For it were not St. Paul had been guilty of that which our blessed Savior reproves in the Scribes and Pharises and should have taught for doctrines the Commandements of Men. Which because it cannot be supposed it must follow that this doctrine of confirmation or imposition of hands is Apostolicall and divine The argument is clear and not easily to be reproved Yea but what is this to us it belong'd to the days of wonder and extraordinary The Holy Ghost breathed upon the Apostleâ— and Apostolicall men but then he breath'd his last vecendente gratiae recessit disiplina when the grace departed we had no further need of the cerimony In Answer to this I shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by divers particulars evince plainly that this Ministry was not temporary and relative only to the Acts of the Apostles but was to descend to the Church for ever This indeed is done already in the proceeding Sect in which it is clearly manifested that Christ himself made the baptism of the spirit necessary to the Church He declar'd the fruits of this baptism and did particularly relate it to the descent of the holy spirit upon the Church at and after that glorious Peâ—tieâ—st He saâ—ctified it and commended it bâ— hiâ— example just as he sanctified the flood Jordan and all other waters to the misticall washing away of sin viz. by his great example and fulfiâ—ling this righteousness also This doctrine the Apostles first found in their own persons and experience and practised to all their Converts by a solemn and externall rite And all this pâ—ssed into an Evangelicall doctâ—ine the whole mistery being signified by the externall rite in the words of the Apostle as before it was by Christ expressing only the internall So that there needs nâ— more strength to this argument But that there may be wanting no moments to this tâ—uth which the holy scripture affords I shall add more weight to it And 1. The perpetuity of this rite appears because this great gift of the Holy Ghost was promised to abide with the Chuâ—ches for ever And when the Jeâ—s heaâ—d the Apostles speak with tongues at the first and miraculous dâ—sâ—ent of the spirit in Penâ—â—câ—st to take of the straâ—geâ—ess of the wondâ—r and the envy of the power St. Peâ—er at that very time tells them plainly Reâ—â—nt and be baptizâ—d eveâ—y one of you and 〈◊〉 shall receâ—â—e the gift of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not the meanest person among you all but shall receive this great thing which ye observe us to have received and not
THE Paedo-Baptists Apology FOR THE Baptized Churches Shewing The invalidity of the strongest grounds for Infant Baptism out of the works of the learned assertors of that tenent AND That the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins is a duty incumbent upon all sinners who come orderly to the profession of Christianity ALSO The Promise of the Spirit â—eing the substance of a Sermon on 1 Cor. 12. 1. To which is added A POST-SCRIPT Out of the works of Dr. Jer. Taylor in defence of imposition of hands as a never failing Ministery By Tho. Grantham Mr. Perkins on Gal. 3. 27. Baptism alone is no mark of Gods Child but Baptism joyned with Faith for so must the text be consideres All the Galations that believe are baptized into Christ Printed in the Year 1671. To the Reader Friend I Have a few things to say before thou read this ensuing Apology and first The occasion of it is from the late unkind usages which the Baptized Churches have received from the Paedo-Baptists by violently dispersing their Assemblies by defacing and taking away their meeting places by imprisoning their persons seizing and wasting their Estates by injuring them in their Trade by means of excommunications by Writs de Capiendo and other penall proceedings both confining their Persons and exposing them to great inconveniencies And all this only as I conceive for their conscionable observance of the will of God in Preaching the Gospel to sinners â—â—r the obedience of faith and for adhearing to that form of Doctrine once deliâ—ered to the Saints Heb. 6. 1 2. In which Doctâ—ine and sufferings being through the mercy of God a pertaker with them I thought I might lawsully write an Apology for them or at least for the Truth professed by them And that I might the â—ore effectually do this I chose to speak â—o their adversâ—ries by the learned â—ens of their own Doctors 2. My design in writing this Apoâ—ogy is to abate if it may be that great enmity which hath appeared generally between the parties concerned and more perticularly that spirit of opposition and disrespâ—ct which too much appears in the more refined sort of the Paedo-Baptists against such as labor to reform or rather to restore the Doctrine of Baptism to its first integrity and estimation among all that profess the name of our Lord Jesus Christ under what Epethets or denâ—minations soever And me thinks thâ— truth should prevail with all that do consider the authority and force thereof to be such that men are constrained as it were to speak for it though to the overthrow of their dearest errours so that we may say their Rock is net as our Rock our enemies being judges 3. I have not injured the sense of my authours and where I have added any thing for explycation of any word or passage I have distingushed the same partly by a different Letter and partly by this Character nor have I said much in the Apology as indeed it was not necessary considering the evidence of the word of God for us and the Record which our opposers do bear in favour of our Cause and beside they that will may see what may be further said in the case depending if they please to peruse the Learned works of those of our way viz. Denn his Answer to Dr. Featley Tombs his Antipaedo-Baptist Fisher his Christianismus Redivâ—vous and many others 4. The second part intitled Of the Promise of the Spirit I though fit to be annexed because Acts 2. 38 39. such as are Baptized with the Baptism of Repentance for Remission of fins have the promise of the Spirit made to them which being sought for in the way ordained of God shall be received according to his will for he is faithfull that promised Thy servant in Christ Tho. Grantham THE Paedo Baptists Apologie FOR The Baptized Churches c. THere is no point of the Christian Faith of greater importance in order to the composure of Divisions among such as conscientiously profess the Name of Christ then the Doctrine of holy Baptisme in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins for as many as have been Baptixed into Christ have put on Christ And where this foundation truth hath been neglected or essentially corrupted there hath ensued great disorder in Religion because the being of the Church as visible is so concern'd therein that there can be no orderly proceeding in any Church Act nor participation in any Church Priviledge where Sacred Baptisme is not Antecedent And though Reformation or rather the restoration of this Truth be hard to accomplish yet must we not be discouraged but still pursue all lawful and probable wayes to effect it in this as well as in other cases And the way which I have chosen to help on this needful work at this time is to shew that notwithstanding the discord in point of practice yet there is a very great concord in doctrine touching the main questions which concern this Heavenly Institution between the Paedo-Baptists and the Baptized Churces The questions are these 1. What are the Qualifications required of all such as are to be baptâ—zed 2. What is the aue Act or right Form to be observed and done in this solemn rite of Baptisme Touching the first the doctrine of the Baptized Churches is well known namely That Repentance toward God and Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ are prerequisites to the baptisme of every sinner And to this agrees the holy Scripture with full consent â—aying Repent and be baptized every one of you They were all baptized confessing their sins When they beleived Philip preaching the things concerning the Kingdome of God c. They were baptized both men and women many of the Corinthians hearing believe'd and were baptised And hence this holy Ordinance is well called the Laver of Regeneration the Baptisme of repentance foâ—thâ— râ—misâ—ion of sins Now let us hear the doctrine of the Paedo-Baptists touching this question 1. The Church of England both in her Articles and vulgar Catechism delivers her mind clearly to this purpose that such repentance whereby sin is forsaken and such Faith as by which the promises of God are stedfastly beleived is required of persons meaning all persons which are to be baptized and that in Baptism Faith is confirmed c. 2. Mâ— Perkins a Learned Son of â—he same Church upon these words â—each all Nations baptizeing them saith I explain the words thus mark first of all it is said Teach them that is make them my Disciples by calling them to believe and to repent Here we are to consider the order which God observes in makeing with man the Covenant in Baptism first of all he calls them by his word and commands them to beleive and repent then in the second place God makes his promise of mercy and forgiveness and thirdly he feals his promise by Baptism they that know not nor consider this order which God used in Covenanting with them in
righteousness of Faith Which wheâ—her it did any such thing to anâ— sâ—ve to â—braham only â—n mâ—ch doubten so by vertue of iâ—'s 〈…〉 and remanemâ—y in their flâ—sh it did that work when the 〈◊〉 came to age But in Christian Infants tâ—e case is otherwise for the new Covenant being estabâ—ished upon better promises is not only to beâ—ter purposes but also in a distinct manner to be understood when their spirits are as receptive of a spiriâ—ual act or impress as the bodies of jewish children were of the sign of circumcision then it is to be consign'd but the business is quickly at an end by saying that God hath done no less for ours then for their children for he will do the mercies of a Father and Creator to them and he did no more to the other but he hath done more to ours for he hath made a Covenant with them and built it upon promises of the greatest concernment And note further we have as much ground of comfort concerning our dying Infants as the faithful had for the first two thousand years during all which time the Covenant of grace reached to Infants though there was no external ceremony to consign it to Infants For the insinuation of the precept of Baptizing all Nation of which children are a part does as little advantage as any of the rest because other parallel expressions of the Scriâ—ture do determine and expound themselves to a sence that includes not all persons absolutely but of a capable condition as adoâ—ate â—um omnes gentes persallirae Deo omnes Nationes terra And Nation shall rise against Nation where Infants are excluded and divers more But Erasmus hath well expounded this text where he restrains the baptizing to such as are repentant of their former life As for the Conjecture concerning the Family of Stephanâ—s at the best it is but a conjecture and besides that it is not prov'd that there were children in the Family yet if that were granted it follows not that they were baptized because by whole Families in Scripture is ment all Persons of reason and age within the Familie for it is said of the Ruler at Capernaum that he beleived aâ—d all his house Now you may also suppose that in his house were little babes that is like enough and you may suppose that they did beleive too before they could understand but that 's not so likely and then the argument from baptizing Stephen's Family may be allowed just as probable but this is unmanlike to build upon such slight and airy conjectures But tradition by all means must supply the place of Scripture and there is pretended a Tradition apostolical that Infants were baptized but at this we are not much moved for we who rely upon the written word of God as sufficient to establish all true Religion do not value the allegations of Traditions and however the World goes none of the reformed Churches can pretend this argument against this opinion because they who reject Tâ—adition when 't is against them must not preâ—end it at alâ— for them But if we should allow the Topick to be good yet how will it be verified for so far as it can yet appear it relies wholly upon the Testimony of Origen for from him Austin had it Now a Tradition apostolical if it be not consign'd with a fuller testimony then of one person whom all after ages have condemn'd of many errours will obtain so little reputation among those that knâ—w that thing have upon greater authority pretended to derive from the Apostles and yet fâ—sly that it will be a great argument that he is credulous and weak that shall be deâ—ermined by so weak probation in matters of so great concernment And the truth of the business is as there was no command of Scripture to obliedge children to the susception of it so necessity of â—aeâ—o-baptism was not determined in the Church till the eight age after Christ but in the year 418. in the Mileritan couâ—cel a principal of Aâ—râ—ca there was a Cannon made for Paedo Bapt never till then I grant it was practised in Africa before that time and they or some of them thought well of it and though that be no Argument for us to think so yet none of them did ever before pretend it to be necessary none to have been a precept of the Gospel St. Austin was the first that ever preach'd it to be absoâ—utely necessary and it was in his heat and anger against Pelagâ—us who had warm'd and chafed him so in that question that it made him innovate in other doctrines possibly of greater concernment then thâ—s And that although this was practic'd antiently in Africa yet that it was without an opinion of necessity and not often there nor at all in other places we have the testimony of a learned Paedo Baptist Ludovicus Vives who in his annotations upon Augustin De Civit. Dei l. 1. c. 27. afirms Neminem nisi adultum antiquitus solâ—re baptizari And because thâ—s Testimony is of great import I will set down the very words of Augustine and Ludovicus Vives as I find them in the English Edition of the said book of the City of God cap. 26. Where Augustine puts forth this question What is the reason then that we do spend so much time in our exhortations endeavouring to annimate thâ—se whom we have baptâ—zed eiâ—her unto Virginity or câ—â—st widdow-â—ood or honest and honourable marriage Now upon these words â—hose whom we have baptizâ—d Vives comments tâ—us Least any man should mistake this place understand thaâ— in times of old no man was brought unto baptism but he was of sâ—fficient years to know what that mistical water meant and to require his baptism and that sundry times I hear that in some Cityes of Italy they do for the most part observe the antient Custome as yet And it is to be observed that in the Margent are two Notes the 1. is that this is the old manner of baptizing The 2 That all this is left out in the Paris Edition whence we may note how the writings of the Antients are abused and how ingeniously it is confessed Paedo-Baptism is not the old manner of baptizing And here we will insert some other testimonies from the learned Paedo-Baptists touching the Novelty of Infant baptism The first is out of Robertus Fabianus his Chron. 4. part in fol. 107. where he brings in Augustine the Monk speaking thus to the Brittain Bishops Since ye will not assent to my Hâ—sts generally assent ye to me specially in three things the first is that ye keep Easter-day in due form and time as it is ordained The second THAT YE GIVE CHRISâ—ENDOM TO CHILDREN c. But THEY WOULD NOT THEREOF This was about the fifth Age after Christ whence its remarkable that Infant bapâ—ism was then opposed by â—he joynt consent of the Britaâ—n Bishâ—ps which were sent to the Assembly to consulâ— the affairs of Religion at
that time Our next testimony is from the Learned Casuist Hugo Grotius who tells us To defer baptism till ripe years was in old time left at liberty now the observation is otherwise Plainly giving the case that Paedo-baptism is not the old way but a new observation But here we will again give place to Doctor Taylor who saith That besides that the tradition cannot be proved to be Apostolical we have very good evidence from antiquity that it was the opinion of the primitive Church that INFANâ—S OUGHâ— NOT TO BE BAPTIZED And this is clear in the sixâ—h Cannon of the Câ—unsel of Neâ—â—aesarea The words have this sence A woman 〈…〉 may be baptized when she please for her baptism concerns not the Child The reason of the connection of the parts of that Cannon is in the following words Because every one in that confession is to give a demonstration of his own choice and election meaning plainly that if the baptism of the mother did pass upon the Child it were not fit for a pregnant woman to receive baptism because in that Sacrament there being a confession of faith which confession supposes understanding and free choyce it is not reasonable the child should be consign'd with such a mistery since it cannot do any act of choice or understanding The Cannon speaks reason and it intimates a practice which was absolutely universal in the Church of interrogating the catechumens concerning the Articles of the Creed which is one argument that either they did not admit Infants to baptism or that they did prevaricate egregiously in asking questions of them who themselves knew were not capable of giving answer and to supply their incapacity by the answer of a Godfather is but the same unreasonableness acted with a worse circumstance and there is no sensible account can be given of it for that which some imperfectly murmure concerning stipulations civil performed by tutors in the name of their pupils is an absolute vanity for what if by positive constitutions of the Romanes such solemnities of Law are required in all stipulations and by indulgence are permitted in the case of a notable benefit acruing to Minors Must God be tyed and Christian Religion transact her misteries by proportion and complyance with the Law of the Romanes I know God might if he would have appointed Godfathers to give answer in behalf of Children and to be Fâ—de-jussors for them but we cannot find any authority oâ— ground that he hath and if he had then it is to be supposed he would have given them comission to have transacted the solemnity with better circumstaâ—ces and given answers with more truth and if the Godfathers answer in the Name of the Child I do believe it is notorious they speak false and ridiculously for the Infant is not capble of beâ—ieving and if he were he were a so capable of dissenting and how then do they know his mind And therefore Tertullian gives advice that the bapâ—ism of Infants 〈◊〉 be deferred till they could 〈◊〉 an account of their faith and the same also is the counsel of Gregory bishop of Naziazum although he allows them to hasten it in case of necessity for though his reason taught him what was fit Namely that none should bâ— baptized till they were of understanding yet he was overborn with the practiâ—â— and opinion of his Age which began to bear too violently upon him and yet in another place he makes mention of some to whom baptism was not administred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of infancy To which if we add that the Parents of St. Austin St. Jerome and St. Ambrose although they were Christian yet did not baptize their Children before they were thirty years of age it will be very considerable in the example and of great efficacy for destroâ—ing the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles and for further evidence we may well alledge in this place that of Theodosius the Emperor born in Spain his Parents being both Christians and he from his youth educated in thâ— Christian Faith who falling sick at Thessâ—onica was baptized and recovered of his sickness but however Paedo baptism it is against the perpetual analogâ— of Christs Doctrine to baptize Infants for besides that Christ never gave any precept to bapâ—ize them nor never himself nor his Apostles that appears did baptize any of them all that either he or his Apostles said concerning baptism requires such pretious dispositions to it of which Infants are not capable and these are faith and repentance and not to instance in those innumerable places that require faith before baptism there needs no more but this one saying he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned Plainly thus faiâ—h and baptism in conjunction will bring a Man to Heaven but if he have not faith baptism shall do him no good So that if baptism be necessary then so is faith and much more for want of Faith damns absolutely it is not said so of the want of baptism Now if this decretory sence be to be understood of persons of age and if Children by such an answer which indeed is reasonable enough be excused from the necessity of Faith the want of which regularly does damn then it is sottish to say the same incapacity of reason and Faith shall not â—xcuse them from the actual susception of baptism which as less necessary and to which faith and many other acts are necessary predispositions when it is reasonably and humanely â—eceived The conclusion is that bapâ—sm is also to be defer'd till the time of â—aith and whether Infants have faith or no is a question to be disputed by â—ersons that care not how much they 〈◊〉 nor how little they prove 1. Personal and actual faith they have none for they have no acts of â—nderstanding and besides how can â—ny man understand that they have since he never saw any sign of iâ— neither was he told so by any oâ—â— that could tell 2. Some sâ—y they have imputativâ— Faith but then so let the Sâ—cramenâ— be too that is if they have the Parent faith or the Churches then so leâ— baptism be imputed by derivatioâ— from them also For since faith 〈◊〉 necessary to the susception of baptisâ— and they themselves confess it bâ— striving to find out new kinds of faitâ— to daub the matter up such as thâ— faith is such must be the Sacramenâ— for there is no proportion betweeâ— an actual Sacramen and an imputative faith this being in immediaâ—â— and necessary order to that anâ— whatsoever can be said to take oâ— from the necessiâ—y of actual Faith aâ— that and much more may be said tâ— excuse from the actual â—usception 〈◊〉 baptism 3. The first of these devices waâ— that of Luther and his Schol arâ— the 2 of Calvin and his And yet there is a third device which the Church of Rome teaches and that is