so far ingage them in the Christian Religion that all the Philosophicall deceits of men should never be able to turn them from it And where is so much as one word to your purpose I must needs say That out of all the Texts you have prest I cannot see water enough to sprinkle upon the face of one Child And whereas you tell me Mr. Kellie I Might have saved you this labour and my selfe too if I had minded the Books of Dr. Featly Mr. Marshall Mr. Gerce Mr. Church Mr. Cobbet Mr. Baxter Mr. Cooke Mr. Blake Mr. Fuller Mr. Sidenham besides many other excellent men who have written in Latine as Hossius Calvin Beza Bullinger and all the best lights in the Christian world full and clear against me Mr. Ive's TO this I Answer That you might have saved me a lobour if you had found out of all your Observations of these men but one plain Command or example for infants baptism and given it me at your house or sent it in your Paper which makes me think that either these men have said as little to the purpose as you or else that you have minded them but a little because you otherwise would have said more to the purpose then I doe perceive you have done But 2 I have not lived without some observations of if not all yet many of these mens works for I have not as yet taken up any Opinion wherein I differ from you or others but I have seriously weighed it in the ballance of the Sanctuary And I have not declined the way of these men you name nor any other but when I have upon serious examination found that they have declined the footsteps of the Primitive Purity either in Doctrine or Discipline And whereas you talk of learned men and fathers and best Lights in the Christian world that they are all against me I tell you that if God and his word be for me I care not who is against me And I tell you further that I had rather have one Testimony from the word of God for my practice then ten thousand of these Authors without it I Shall therefore shew you 1 Plain Scripture Proof for believers baptism 2 Plain Example for it 3 Plain Command and Example for the manner of the Administration of it 4 And lastly That the footsteps hereof since you talk of learned and godly men was not wholly defaced in the three first Centuries after the Apostles nor then neither Nay a man may make a shift to know this was the practice by those relicks of it that remained in the Church of England till the memory of man That Christ our Lord Commands this who we must hear in all things or else we shall be destroyed appears first from Mat. 28.19 Teach all Nations baptizing them c. Which most of your own Authors doe acknowledge * See Mr. Baxter in his plain Scripture proof for Infants baptism p. 15. as I have shewed should be read Make Disciples baptizing THEM and not the Nations as you would somtimes have it Though at your house you granted the Text ought to be so Translated as I have now rendred it therefore you proceeded from hence to prove infants Disciples which you could not have done but by granting what I have said The next Text is Mark 16.16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved c. Acts 10 48. And he Viz. the Apostle commanded them to be baptized with water who were converted by his Preaching in the name of the Lord Jesus Mark 1.4 John did Preach the baptism of repentance which could not be infants baptism Acts 2.38 Peter said Repent and be baptized every one of you Acts 22.16 Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins Secondly We have plenty of Example of this in the Scripture Rom. 6.4 We Viz. believing Romans are buried with him in baptism Mat. 3.6 They were all baptized of John in Jordan confessing their sins Mark 1.9 Jesus was baptized of John in Jordan Mat. 3.15 Acts 2.41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized c. Acts 8.12 When they did believe Philips preaching the things concerning the Kingdome of God they were baptized both men and women Acts 8.38 when the Eunuch profest faith Vers 37. 't is said Vers 38. that Phillip baptized him Acts 9.18 Saul when he was converted the Text saith He arose and was baptized The Jaylor Acts 16.33 when he and his house believed the Text sayes He and all his were baptized Acts 18.8 And Crispus the chief Buler of the Synagogue believed on the Lord with all his house And many of the Corinthians hearing believed and were baptized Acts 19.5 When they heard this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Thirdly Command and Example in plain words for the manner of it which was by dipping the person all over in the water and not by sprinkling water upon the face as the manner of the Nation is This appears by the Command Make Disciples for so it must be read of all Nations dipping them into the name of the Father Son and Spirit for that is the English signification of the word And I desire you to shew me where baptizo signifies aspersio in all the Bible And the like Command you have Mark 16.16 But that you may know that dipping and not sprinkling was the Command of Christ and the Practice of the Primitive times however it is now laughed at appears by the Practice of Christ himself Mat. 16.3 Jesus when he was baptized went UP OUT of the water c. Mark 1.5 They were all baptized of him in the River Jordan c. John 2.23 John was baptized in Aenon near to Salim because there was Much water there and They Came and were baptized Acts 8.38 39. 't is said Vers 38. that They viz. Philip and the Eunuch went both downe into the water And when Philip had baptized him it is said Vers 39. That they came out of the water I shall appeale to all unbiassed men whether baptizing men and women in Rivers upon their professing faith in Christ doth not better accord with these Scriptures then sprinkling water upon the face of infants Besides Fourthly This was the Practice of the Church long after the Apostles as appears first by what Socrates Scholasticus in his Ecclesiasticall History reports of Constantine the Great That though he was the Son of Hellena a zealous Professor of Christ lib. 1. cap. 13. yet he was not baptized till he was 65 years old which was after he had left Constantinople and Helenopolis and came to Nicomedia where dwelling in a Mannor without the Town-walls he was baptized into the faith of Christ in which baptism he greatly rejoyced lib. 1. cap. 26. Again the same Author saith That in Alexandria the Holy Sciptures were read and interpreted by the UNBAPTIZED which he cals Cathecumenists aswell as by them that were baptized which saith he was contrary to the Custome of
other Countries and Churches who did not suffer any to doe so till they were baptized Socrates lib. 5. cap. 2â— Which plainly shewes that infants baptism was not a tradition of the Apostles for if it had this Church of Alexandria that had for the space of some hundred years been converted to the faith of Christ would by this time if all believers had baptized their infants as the Church of England and others doe now adayes one Generation after another have been without any that were able to read and interpret the Scriptures before baptism as we see the Nation of Engl now is a few Anabaptists Children so called excepted otherwise where are your Oathecumenists that are able to read understand the holy Script before you baptize them And that they in those times did follow the way of Christ in baptizing and not your Bason way appears for the same Socrates lib. 7. cap. 4. speaks of a Jew which was baptized by Soticus Bishop of Constantinople who saith he as soon as he was TAKEN OUT OF THE WATER his Palsie left him Can it be said so of any that you baptize that they are taken out of the water The same Author further saith lib. 7. cap. 17. of a Jew that was to be baptized upon his profession of faith by Paulus the Novatian Bishop that all things were provided for his baptism among which he saith The Bishop did provide him a linnen Garment which was to no purpose if he had not been to dip the person in water And Bellarmiue himself acknowledges that in old time they had women in the Church whom they called to the Office of Deaconnesses to attend upon the women that were baptized with baptizing cloaths And Jerome Translating the Lamentation of Origen saith That Origen lamented and bewailed the Vow that HE MADE WHEN HE WAS BAPTIZED in that he had now by sin walked contrary to it However Origen is himself thought to favour this practice afterwards yet those things are but the supposed works of Origen and it 's hard to say whether it was his or no. Again Eusebius who writ the Ecclesiasticall History of the first 300 years after Christ though he tells us of all the most observable passages of those times yet he doth not so much as mention the baptizing of one infant but doth often times mention things in favour to the baptizing of men upon profession of faith as appears lib. 7. cap. 8. of his Ecclesiasticall story where he relates of a man that heard the Questions that was by the Minister asked of persons to be baptized and THEIR ANSWERS TO THEM fell down and wept at the Ministers feet because the baptism that he had received of the Hereticks was not like the baptism THAT WAS IN USE THEN which plainly sheweth That at this time the Churches did not receive men to baptism but upon profession of faith and also that it was no Apostolicall Custome to baptize infants Further Beza himself upon Acts 17.3 saith That they professed in baptism the doctrine propounded by John And besides this how often have Mr. Tombs and Mr. Den and others produced sufficient proof that this practice of baptizing infants was not so much the Custome of the Primitive times as you imagine That memorable instance of Gregory Nazianzen whose father was a Bishop and his mother a vertuous woman yet himselfe was not baptized till he came from Athens where as Socrates saith lib. 4. cap. 21. he had spent much of his time in the study of Rhetorick Again That other instance of Mr. Tombes out of Hugo Grotius in his Annotations upon Mat. 19.14 That even Chrysostome though born of Christian parents was not baptized till he was 21 years of age The same Grotius adds That the Canon of the Synod of Neosesarea held in the year 315 determined that a woman with Child might be baptized because baptism did not reach the fruit of her womb because in the confession made in baptism EVERY ONES FREE CHOICE IS SHEWED He adds further That many of the Greeks to his time did defer the baptizing little ones till they could themselves make a confession of their faith Again Was not the Image of this Custome to be seen in the practice of the Church of England when they asked What was required of persons TO BE BAPTIZED and the answer was Repentance whereby they forsake sin and Faith whereby they believe the Promises of God Which afterwards by changing the Command of God into a Tradition of their owne they did use to ask the God-fathers and God-mothers a conceit that was never heard of till the Churches had apostatized from their Primitive Purity And as for the manner of baptizing by dipping the Person in the water however it is now laught at you see it was not onely that which as I have said Christ and his Apostles Commanded and Practiced but it was used in the Church for a long time after the Church of England did look upon it as a more commendable way in as much as they in their Service-Book did place dipping before sprinkling and therefore they said the persons DIPPED or sprinkled c. Now may I not better say That if you had looked over the Command of Christ and the Practice of the Apostle and traced the foot-steps of the Primitive Practice in this Point for 300 years after you might have saved me a labour and your self too then you could say I might have saved you a labour if I had looked over the writings of a few men that you have named who have not in all their Books cited either a Command or Example for infants sprinkling but onely some far-fetched non-sequitors which most of your Paper is filled withall I shall now conclude leaving what I have said in Answer to your Arguments for your Practice and the plain Scripture I have urged for my own Practice to your judgement and the judgement of all to whom this shall come and desire that like the Bereans you and all others that shall peruse this would search whether what I have said in the premisses be of God or no and if in your Conscience you or any else doe so fied it to be take heed then what you do in opposing of it least you be found sighters against God And what hath fallen from my pen that is not according to Gods word I shall desire that you or any else would shew it me either in word or writing and it shall thankfully be received as a favour by SIR Your Friend to Serve you JER IVES FINIS
they know thee the onely true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent Or else we must conclude that some Children shall be damned dying in their infancy for not knowing God in Jesus Christ when they were no way made capable of such a knowledge Lastly The Scriptures say Deut. 1.39 that Children in their infancy have no knowledge of good or evill the like is said of Christ himself in his infancy Isa 7.14 15 16. How then can you imagin that infants can know God in Jesus Christ and yet not know good when the knowledge of God in Christ is the knowledge of the best good of all But you goe on and tell us That infants dying in their infancy are saved Which is not the thing denied but the thing denied is That they cannot be saved without the knowledge of God in Christ and instead of this you would prove that infants shall be saved which I never denied Only let me tell you That you miserably abuse the Scripture you bring to prove their salvation which is Isa 65.20 from which Text you observe That they dye in as good a case as Disciples of a hundred years standing O miserable blindnesse the Text saith There shall not be in the New Jerusalem an infant of dayes and yet you bring this in favour to your eight dayes infants Again You say That infants dye in as good a condition as Disciples of a hundred years standing whereas the Text saith The Child shall dye a hundred years old I pray how many such infants doe you baptize So that this Text I believe you urged without Book for there is not the least word of such infants as you plead for nor of such old Disciples to whom you would compare them But are you so charitable towards infants that you believe they shall be saved then pray let not the Midwives baptize for fear they should be damned which some of your cloath have allowed making the sprinkling water upon their face a cause of their salvation rather then the knowledge of God in Christ that you now plead for But you goe on and tell us Mr. Kellie THat if we judge infants shall be saved then they should be daily added to the Church by Baptism And for this you cite Acts 2. ult Mr. Ive's I Shall first speak to your Argument and then to the Text. This is a palpable non sequitor for by this Argument Moses might have Circumcised Children the first day they were born for Moses might have said I judge these Children have a right to salvation the first day they are borne therefore they have a right to be added to the Church by circumcisiō the first day they are born Upon this account he might have circumcised the females because he judged that salvation did belong to them But if you shall think to salve this sore by saying He was commanded to circumcise the eigth day and to circumcise the male Children let me tell you that he was not forbid either the one or the other But if you shall say that in as much as God commanded the eighth day he did forbid doing of it before and in as much as he did Command the Circumcising of males he forbid the circumcising of females Let me tell you then that in as much as God hath prescribed believing to be the time of baptizing it will be found a sin to doe it upon any persons at any other time but when they believe with all their hearts according to Acts 8.37 And as for that Text which you urge Acts 2.47 The Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved Compare this but with vers 41. and you will find these to be no such Babies as you baptize and add to your Church for the Text saith Then they that gladly received his word were baptized and the same day there was added to them about three thousand soules And Acts 5.14 Believers were added to the Lord. What serves this to prove that which you would have Doth it not strongly carry the contrary That infants were not baptized because they are no where called believers You now face about as though all were not safe in the Rear and goe back to the Text in Esay 54. Surely you feared all the hay and stubble that you built upon that Text was set on fire by the Answers that I gave to it at your house and now you are returning to quench it But you must know that your clouds of Arguments are without water as I shall make appear upon Examination First You say Mr. Kellie THat teaching must be inward and effectuall in Isa 54.13 1 Because it hath the great peace of God going along with it From whence you Argue thus They that have the great peace of God going along with their teaching are inwardly and effectually taught But all the Children of Gods people have the great peace of God goe along with their teaching Therefore they are inwardly and effectually taught Mr. Ive's I Answer this by denying the major for all the world gave the great peace of God going along with their teaching in as much as God holds forth life and peace in the Gospel And yet you will not say that all the world are inwardly and effectually taught 2 Again to your minor if by all the Children of Gods people you mean all their natural Children in their infancy as you must or else you say nothing to your purpose then I doe deny the minor because it supposeth God doth inwardly and effectually preach peace to believers infants whereas he preacheth nothing at all to them Neither doth the Text say he doth for then they must viz. all the infants of believers be actually saved although they should live to perpetrate never such horrible wickednesses for if they to wit all the naturall Children of believers are in this condition in their infancy what sin can deprive them of eternall life when they come to years unlesse as I have said before you will hold falling from this grace and peace you speak of totally and finally which is an opinion that you doe not reckon among the least of errors Again if believers naturall Children as such are thus priviledged as you speak of with this grace and peace then the Children of the flesh are the Children of God But the Children of the flesh are not the Children of God Ergo. They are not as believers naturall Children thus priviledged You goe on to a second Reason to prove the teaching in Isa 54. to be inward and effectuall teaching which what if it were granted doth it prove that this was to infants in the Cradle of eight dayes old But we have before shewed the contrary that it is not meant of such But however let 's hear your other Argument which is Mr. Kellie THat if it were not inward and effectuall teaching it were rather a judgement threatned then a mercy promised Mr. Ive's BElike then by this kind of reason when God teacheth
so of any infants that they have not a naturall birth for though Solomon saith We doe not know how the Children are formed in the womb yet he denies not but they are all formed in the womb But you as you doe not know how so you confesse you doe not know who are spiritually thus born But is not this strange that you should spend so many Arguments as you did a little before to prove that all infants of believers are inwardly and effectually taught drawn and come to Christ and that now you should tell us that some of them are not called till the last houre And if you should think to excuse the matter by saying that you mean some unbelievers Children are not called till then that will not doe because you told me in the beginning of your paper that it was for believers infants that you pleaded and the whole scope of your paper speaks forth the same thing and not one word of unbelievers Children c. You tell us That some that we baptize are not effectually taught till afterwards To this I answer That it justifieth us if they doe professe so to be when they are baptized For with the heart man doth believe and with the mouth confession is made to salvation Rom. 10.10 And so it would justifie you if that there were a confession of faith made at the time you did baptize and a life conformable thereunto which is all that we are to look after because it 's Gods work to search the heart and not ours You proceed to prove if you can that infants are Disciples thus Mr. Kellie THey to whom we may give a Cup of cold water in the name of Disciples are Disciples But we may give a Cup of cold water to little Children Therefore little Children are Disciples Mr. Ive's I Answer first by denying the major for may I not as well say that they to whom we may give a thing in the name of a King are Kings and they to whom we may shew favour in the name of God and Christ are so many Gods and Christs as you can say they to whom we may give a cup of cold water in the name of a Disciple are Disciples Who seeth not the weaknesse of this kind of arguing But now to the minor Proposition where you assume that we may give to little children a cup of cold water in the name of a Disciple I answer If by little Children you mean such as John means 1 John 2.1 Little Children these things I write that you sin not And ver 12. I write unto you little Children because your sins are forgiven I say if you doe mean such I doe grant the minor Proposition viz. That to such little ones we may give a Cup of water in the name of a Disciple But this I suppose cannot be your meaning in as much as you are to prove that infants are Disciples and there is nothing to that purpose in the Text However I take notice of your wandring up and downe in saying Sometimes infants are Disciples not telling us whether you mean believers or unbelievers infants Sometimes that all believers infants are Disciples And sometimes that some are not called till the last houre Only we take for granted what you said at first that you would undertake for believers Children if so then suppose that the little ones here in Mat. 10. last were understood of infants yet how doe you prove that they were believers infants But it will be a task too hard for you to doe either the one or the other You goe on to tell us Mr. Kellie THat you have five things more to say for infants Disciple-ship The first is this If that infants may be called his servants though they doe no service Lev. 21.41 42. Then they may be called Disciples though they doe not appear to learn But they may be called Gods servants though they doe him no service Ergo. They may be called Disciples though they doe not appear to learn Mr. Ive's I Answer first by denying the major for if it be granted that Children were called his servants though they did God no service yet it followes not that therefore they are Disciples though they doe not learn May not a man as well prove the unprofitable servant Luke 19. by the same Logick to be a Disciple as thus If one may be called Christs servant though he doe him no work then he may be called Christs Disciple though he doe not appear to learn But the unprofitable servant Luke 19. was called Christs servant as appears by vers 13. and Mat. 25.14 and yet he did him no work Ergo. He was Christs Disciple though he did not appear to learn And by this Rule the non sequitor of your major Proposition appears But now to your minor that Children are called Gods servants though they did him no service I answer first That infants of eight dayes old are not called Gods servants any where in Scripture 2 As to the Text urged in favour to this Lev. 25.41 42. if you compare it with vers 39. you will see it was not spoken to prove infants in the Cradle Gods servants but rather to shew that because the Nation of Israel that he brought out of Aegypt were his servants therefore they should not be slaves one to another and sold as bond men which they never did use to doe to Children in the Cradle 3 Again Cannot God speak many things concerning Children as that they are his servants c. and yet not speak of Children in their infancy May not a man as well say because Israel was bid to teach their Children that therefore they were to teach infants of eight dayes old And because Josh 22.10 it 's said The Children of Gad built an Altar therefore the infants of Gad were Masons and Stone-cutters And because it 's said of the vertuous woman Prov. 31.20 Her Children rise up and call her blessed therefore her little infants of eight dayes old did call her blessed Is not this as good reason as that which you bring viz. Because God saith the Israelites children were his servants therefore their infants of eight dayes old were his servants 2 You goe on and tell us that Mr. Kellie PEter in Acts 15.10 calls infants Disciples Mr. Ive's ARe you not ashamed to speak such a notorious falsity Doth that Text say that Peter calls infants Disciples Oh what a mercy is it that we can read surely if we could not you might as well say that Peter said you should have the fifth penny of our estate for preaching as say he saith Infants are Disciples Now indeed Peter blames them for putting the yoke of Circumcision upon Disciples but this doth no more prove infants to be Disciples then if a man would say The Clergy are opprest by Taxes therefore every one that 's opprest by Taxes is a Clergy-man for is it not the same that you bring The Disciples were circumcised therefore all that
Mr. Kellie THat infants may be baptized because they are holy Which you indeavour to prove from 1 Cor. 7.14 Mr. Ive's I Doe deny that the holinesse of these infants gave a right to baptism for by the same rule the believers wife must be baptized though she was an unbeliever for the same Text saith That the believers unbelieving wife was sanctified And may I not as well say That all that are sanctified in any sense may be baptized as you may say Because infants in some sense are holy therefore they may be baptized You further urge Gal. 2.15 which I believe you did mistake your selfe in as any body may see that shall but compare the Text with the matter in hand To as little purpose you urge Dan. 8.24 where the Text saith The King of fierce countenance should destroy the holy people Therefore the infants were holy May not a man as well say from Dan. 12.7 where it 's said He shall scatter the power of the holy people that therefore the infants had power The like answer serves to Dan. 11.8 8 You say Mr. Kellie THey are included in baptism to whom all the promises of baptism belong But the promises of baptism belong to infants Acts 7.38 39. Mr. Ive's I Shall say nothing to this but leave you to read over Acts 7.38 39. and consider if the least promise be made relating to baptism in any of those verses But I am apt to think you meant Acts 2.38 39. which is as little to your purpose as the other where the Apostle bids the Jewes Repent and be baptized where note That if their being Abrahams naturall seed would have given them a right to baptism what need had they to have repented in order to their baptism He further saith That the promise is to them and their Children To that I have formerly said and proved That in the Scripture Dialect many things may belong to a mans Children that hath no respect to his infants in the state of their infancy for Christ tells the same people Mat. 23.27 That he would have gathered their Children together c. Can any man think that Christ here means their infants in the Cradle In like manner the Apostle concludes That the promise was to them and their Children he plainly shewes that he did not mean their infants but that Gods promises should be made good to their Children upon the same tearms that they were to them which was upon their Repentance Faith and Baptism and therefore he afterwards urgeth That it was not onely to them and their Children but to all that were after off even as many as the Lord our God should call And now you conclude and say Mr. Kellie THus much for the proof of infants baptism from Scripture precept Mr. Ives's WHich if all the Scriptures you have urged have any one Precept for infants Baptism I shall leave to judgement You now come in the last place to prove infants baptism from Scripture practice and your first is Mr. Kellie THat they were all viz. the infants of the Israelites baptized to Moses in the cloud and in the sea 1 Cor. 10.2 Psal 77.17 Mr. Ive's 1 WHat 's this to prove infants were baptized to Christ if one should grant that in a sense they might be said to be baptized to Moses 2 How doth this saying They were baptized to Moses prove that infants were baptized to Moses If you say They were baptized to Moses because they also came through the sea with their fathers Then I demand in The last place whether a man may not as well say That their Cattle were baptized to Moses because they also came through the sea with Moses Let him that 's least among you judge if this Text proves that infants were baptized in water in the name of Jesus because that infants came through the red sea with Moses Your second instance for the practice of infants baptism is laid downe in a down right lame Argument thus Mr. Kellie THe Apostles practised what they were to preach But they were to preach all that Christ commanded Mat. ult ult But Christ commanded that they should suffer little Children to come to him and not to forbid them that he might lay his hands on them and blesse them Therefore the Apostles practiced this in suffering little Children to come to the Ordinance and not forbidding them to that of baptism Mr. Ive's TRuly I could wish that this Argument had been born a little sooner that so it might have been at Oxford or Cambridge the last Comencement because it is in a new mood and figure that was never heard of before in any of the Schooles it may be it might have purchased for you the good degree of a Prevaricator against the next year But however I fear a worse thing that it is still born and hath no strength in it For may you not as well say That the Apostles in all ages were commanded to bring Asses to Christ because when he was upon the earth he did Command them so to doe because he had need of one for so sayes the Text Mat. 21.2 3 6. as say that because Christ when he was in person upon the earth did bid his Disciples to let infants come to him that therefore this was part of their Commission when Christ left the earth But 2 May you not from hence as well command some of your Parish to goe and fetch you an Asse and bring him to you as you may from this Text injoyne them to bring their Children to you for baptism because they were injoyned to come to Christ for a blessing What Command is this to bring my Children to you because Christ commanded them to be brought to him any more then it is for me to bring my Horse or my Asse to you because Christ commanded one should be brought to him But if this be a good Argument to justifie infants baptism I wonder that any Clergy man of your opinion will goe one foot But more hath been spoken to this elsewhere and fore I shall proceed to your third instance of the practice of infants baptism and that is say you Mr. Kellie WHole Houses Cities and Families were baptized And for proof hereof you cite Acts 8.12 where the Text saith That when they believed Phillips preaching the things concerning the kingdome of God they were baptized both men and women Mr. Ive's WHat man would urge this Text but he that was minded to quit the field of this controversie to prove the Apostles baptized the Samaritans infants You say the whole City of Samaria was baptized therefore you would make us believe they baptized infants when the Text saith no such thing but that They that RECEIVED THE WORD were baptized and not the whole City as you would have it Again you urge Mr. Kellie THat the family of Cornelius and his near kindred were baptized Acts 10.24 44 48. And the houshold of Stephanus 1 Cor. 1.16 The Jaylor and all