they be not yet formed in them yet by the secret operation of the spirit the seed of either lieth hid in them and in the same chapter he saith as Paul there reasoneth That the Jews are sanctified of their parents so in another place he teacheth That the children of Christians receive the same sanctification of their fathers Also in the same chapter be saith not that I mean rashly to affirm that they be indued with the same faith which we feel in our selves or that they have at all knowledg of faith which I had rather leave in suspence c. but concerning imputative faith I find neither device nor approbation of Calvins Why did you not rather say that this device was P. Lombards who mentioneth the Imputative faith you speak of or some of the following Schoolmen Or Polydor Virgil who in his fourth book concerning the Inventors of these things cleareth Calvin from this invention saying Seeing infants by reason of their age cannot testifie their own saith as Cyprian saith it was provided from the beginning that they should profess their faith by others that as anothers fault to wit Adam cur first parents sin was evil to them in so much that from their birth they were subject to originall sin so others endeavour might be good to them Who therefore as Ambrose saith in his second book concerning the calling of the Gentiles believe and are baptized by anothers confession Or why do you not rather lay the invention hereof to Justin Martyr who living long before any of these saith They are made worthy of the good things of Baptism by their faith who present them to be baptized The Reader may hence gather how little Calvin said for imputative faith and if he had affirmed any such thing yet how untrue it is that Calvin or any of his invented it But the pleader saith further Can an infant sent into a Mahumetan Province be more confident for Christianity when he comes to be a man then if he had not been baptized Pag. 241. Yes caeter is paribss for though the Sacraments work not the same effect in all receivers yet Gods holy Spirit deserteth not his ordinance in the elect though for causes ever just though most unknown to us it doth not always alike shew its power in the recipient It is true that the seal and ministration of man can nothing profit where God giveth not the inward Baptism by his holy Spirit though the inward may save without the outward as hath been noted but your supposition being rightly laid concerning an elect infant baptized and so carried away you must grant that God whose election can by no means be defeated or made voyd will give and make effectuall the means to the end that is salvation whether by acquainting the party baptized with his will declared in his word preached to him or by his secret work within him if he will take him away in infancy in the adult coming to the knowledg of Gods covenant in Christ and of his own sealing in infancy it must make him more confident of his implantation into Christ then if he knew that he never had been baptized What then Must this be by vertue of baptism by water onely or the externall ministration thereof No but by the power of Gods Spirit working on his ordinance and accomplishing his own decrees do we follow your supposition dividing preaching of the word to such when they come to years from the precedent seal Truly such a strange invention were absolutely without Art without Scripture reason or authority I would say as is your argument here alledged against insant-baptism but that you call it Demonstrative and Unanswerable but consider how to overcome before you cry victory To answer your supposition suppose that an infant were not by any habituall faith so much as disposed to any actuall belief without a new master what could this conclude more then that it is necessary to the actuall faith of an insant come to fit years that he be taught the doctrine of faith repentance c. which we constantly affirm what makes this against infant-baptism We unanimously confess and solemnly profess that the infant so soon as it shal be able to learn ought to be and shall be taught the mysteries of eternall life and salvation by Christ so your demonstration proves but a poor fallacie you utterly mistaking or willingly dissembling the question We affirm not that the Word ought to be divided from the Sacrament whereof new-born infants are capable but that the word is to be preached to them they are to be instructed in all the Rudiments of Christian Religion so soon as they shall be able to learn I only add hereto what have you said in this your so much applauded argument against infant-baptism which might not as reasonably and religiously have been urged against infant-circumcision Could they if sent into Painim-Countreys with all the terms of your supposition have been more disposed to an actual belief without a new Master yet they had and we have right to the seal of the righteousnesse of Faith not for any excellency or ability to produce any good and saving effect in our selves but through the merits of our Saviour the free mercy of God and the right of our Fathers with whom God made his Covenant for their persons and posterity Next you say To which also this consideration may be added That if baptism be necessary to the salvation of infants upon whom is the imposition laid Concerning Baptism in generall 't is considerable which Tertullian saith The Lord himself who owed no repentance was baptized and was it not necessary to sinners his reason will reach possibly beyond his opinion to infants also except we should say with Pelagius that they are not sinners Further we say that Baptism the laver of regeneration is necessary to the salvation of infants yet in case of privation or impossibility they are saved by the peculiar and extraordinary goodness and providence of God So that the necessity of Baptism as hath been avowed is not absolute as if none could be saved without it but necessary on our part who are to obey the ordinance of God God is not tied to his ordinance but we are he can otherwise save but we cannot be saved in the contempt thereof God saith Tertullian hath bound faith to the necessity of Baptism therefore Cernelius and those that were with him after they were sanctified by the holy Ghost were yet baptized neither is the visible sanctification superfluous because the invisible preceded seeing God alone giveth the one and appointeth man to do the other for a seal and confirmation of his covenant You say more To whom is the commandement given To the Parents or to the children Not to the children for they are not capable of a law not to the parents for then God hath put the salvation of innocent babes into the power of others and infants may
baptized under the Gospel for the same end for baptism answereth circumcision and is called by the same name Col. 2 11 12. as having the same end effect to seal up the same grace unto faith mortification remission of sins admission into the visible Church If it be excepted that under the Law there was an express command for Infant-circumcision on the eighth day but there is none for Infant-baptism We say 1 Because there was an express command under the Law never repealed in the Gospel and the same end and use still remain therefore there need be none in the Gospel more then that general opening the kingdom of heaven to all believers in taking away the stop of the partition wall by that which is said Baptize all Nations None but Israelites and their proselytes were sealed under the Law none but male children at eight days old but now go baptize all nations without exception to nation age sex or condition 2 There is in all the Scripture no express prohibition neither can any by any sound consequence imply it The assumption is thus confirmed Those whom Christ saveth are members of his body for he is the head of the Church and Savior of the body Eph. 5. 23. But Christ saveth Infants of believing parents therefore Infants are members of Christs body the Church The major is evident for Christ saveth none but those who are members of his body the Church The minor is as evident it being granted that any Infants are saved which is apparent from the covenant of God Gen. 17. 7. and the words of Christ of such is the kingdom of God as also by this argument Those whom Christ loved and for whom he gave himself to deathâ— those he will sanctifie and cleanse with the washing of water by the Word Eph. 5. 26. that they may be received into the Church and be made partakers of the benefits of his death but Christ not only loved and gave himself for persons of years but also for Infants therefore he will sanctifie and cleanse Infants with the washing of water by the Word c. 2 All Infants were by Adam capable of sin and the expressions of Gods justice punishing the same by death sickness c. but Infants are not less capable of the grace and mercy of God in Christ in respect of the expressions thereof then they were of his justice in Adam Therefore Infants are capable of the expressions of Gods grace and mercie in Christ which in the ordinary dispensation thereof is baptism The major is evident Rom. 5. 12. 1 Cor. 15. 22. The minor Rom. 5. 20 where sin abounded grace did much more abound that is Gods grace doth more abundantly appear in holding out the visible remedy then his justice inflicting the denounced punishment which could not be if Infants visibly involved in the condemnatorie sentence and execution thereof should be excluded from the ordinary and visible means of recovery and salvation by Christ which in them can be no other external means but baptism the laver of regeneration it can be no less then a sacrilegious injury to the grace mercy of God in Christ to suppose that the sin of man is more powerful to hurt then the grace of God in Christ is to heal and save 3 If we ought not to baptize Infants then there must be some apparent let and impediment thereto either on Gods part prohibiting or on the Ministers part or in the Sacrament it self or in the incapacitie of the receiver but there is no apparent let or impdiment on the part or in any of these therefore there is none at all 1 There is no impediment on Gods part for God no where expresly or by good consequence saith Baptize not Infants or Baptize none but those who do first testifie their faith and repentance 2 There is no impediment on the Ministers part for he can as easily baptize Infants as persons of years 3 There is no impediment in respect of the Sacrament it self for all the essentials of baptism may be placed on children profession of faith repentance c. are conditions of baptism in persons of years and effects of it which may in due time appear and follow in baptized Infants those therefore are not of the essence of baptism nor so much as universal conditions thereof for the present sprinkling washing or dipping in water in the name of the Father the Son and the H. Ghost are the essence of baptism so are not faith repentance or newness of life for it may be a true baptism where these graces do neither precede nor follow it though without these preceding or following baptism cannot be effectual to salvation which need not seem strange to him that considereth that Judas Simon Magus and many who were and now are truly baptized are not saved 4 Neither can the let be in the Infant who cannot by any actual hardnes of heart impenitency or positive unbelief or contempt of the ordinance of God refuse or despise the grace of God offered in baptism Therefore they are to be admitted to that whereof they are apparently undeniably capable which is the external seal at least which is all that man for present can administer or we will contend for being most willing to leave secret things to God and to hope the best where the contrary cannot appear unto us only add hereto if the issue be put upon the capacitie or incapacitie of the Infant with relation to any condition so much insisted on let any of our Antagonists shew us how or wherin Infants under the Gospel covenant of grace in Christ have less capacity in respect thereof then Infants under the Law of Moses had or that baptism is not the seal of the same righteousness of faith in Christ wherof circumcision for the time was the seal 4 That which without any expressed exception to particulars Christs commission holds forth to all nations belongs to Infants as well as persons of years for Infants are alwayes a great part of all nations but Christs commission holds forth baptism to all nations without any expressed exception to particulars therefore baptism belongs to Infants of believing Parents as well as to persons of years 5 No man may forbid water that is the outward administration where God hath given the inward operation of his H. Spirit which maxim the Apostle built on in that then difficult question whether the Gentiles might be sealed into the covenant of grace But God hath given the inward operation of his H. Spirit to Infants Ier. 1. 5. Luk. 1. 15. 1 Cor. 7. 14 therefore no man may forbid water or the outward administration for the baptism of Infants The reason of the major is that all they who are partakers of the grace both signified exhibited in baptism have right to the sign and sacrament thereof and therefore may not be barred from it for that were to withstand God Act. 11.
man to abridge abjudge and bar him of admission into the visible Church of Christ by baptism which sinfull and ignorant man can administer and which reprobates as wel as the elect may and do receive But what follows The conclusion would be with more probability derived thus Christ blessed children and so dismissed them but baptized them not therefore infants are not to be baptized 'T is a pretty argument wherein both Antecedent and Consequent are lame 't is true and granted that Christ in his own person baptized them not but how prove you that he baptized them not by some one of his Disciples What because 't is not written The Apostle may give you satisfaction herein who saith There are also many other things which Jesus did the which if they should be written every one I suppose that even the world it self could not contain the books How invalid is the Moderators Agument à non scripto ad nonfactum Can there be a sound conclusion from rotten premises Christ blessed children and so dismissed them but baptized them not therefore Infants are not to be baptized Antonii gladios potuit contemnere si sic omnia dixisset Would it not as well follow à non scripto Jesus granted the Centurions request and cured his servant and so for ought we read dismissed them but baptized them not Mat. 8. 10 3. Christ healed the sick of the palsie and dismissed him but for ought we read baptized him not Matth. 9. 2 6 7. Mark 2. 23. 5. 11 12. He healed the woman of the bloody issue but for ought we read baptized her not Mat. 9. 22. Mark 5. 34. So the Ruler of the Synagogues daughter Matth. 9. 25. Mark 5. 41 42. So he dismissed the man out of whom he had cast many Divels Luke 8. 38 39. we read not that he baptized him So he pronounced pardon accepted the repentance and dismissed the penitent sinner in peace Luke 7. 50. It were too long to repeat all So he cured the lame at Bethesda John 5. 8. Where though so neer the convenience of water we read not that he so much as once spake of Baptism to him neither when finding him in the Temple he said to him thou art healed sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee can any therefore reasonably conclude those men and women of years whose bodies Christ cureth whose repentance he accepteth whose faith his self testifieth who cannot be deceived were not and therefore are not though of years to be baptized He that had his time of doing those favours to them was free to take his time of enjoyning their baptism And how could you prove that these children were not baptized before or after they were brought to Christ Before you censure our Arguments as invalid and weak do your self the right to consider your own As we are sure that God hath not commanded Infants to be baptized True God hath not given the command to the Infant himself but to others whom it concerneth we are sure he hath if you mean the first you triste if the second you do upon the matter beg the question Quid ego festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem peccatorum was the question of Tertullian lib. de Bapt. he knew no such danger from their originall guilt as to drive them to a laver of which in that age of innâ—cence they had no need as he conceived Whether infants can make haste to baptism I appeale to experience Whether they are innocent and have no need of baptism as Pelagius affirmed I appeal to your own conscience Do you think there is no danger from infants original guilt which maks them stand in need of the laver of regeneration for the remission of their sin If you do not why do you urge against us an authority which your self consenteth not unto To let pass what Tertullian meant when he affirmed such a necessity of baptism as that he said It is prescribed that no man shall be saved without baptism which he inferreth from John 3. 5. pray teach me what he meant when he said Man from his beginning circumvented so as that he would transgress Gods command therfore was condemned to death whereby he also made all mankind being infected from his seed a traduction or derivation from one to another of his own damnation Think you damnation no danger or did not Tertullian know what he wrote How he forgat himself and the truth when he would have children come to Christ onely then when they could learn and know Christ whereas Christ said Suffer little children to come unto me and forbid them not I can give no better account then for other his errors onely let the Reader note that in the same place he affirmeth that the unmarried also are to be deferred and not baptized untill they are married or setled in continency but I spare this We look for truth and shall be glad to own and embrace it in what Author soever we find it but against the truth we are bound to none onely we may note that if Tertullian spake in the fore-cited place concerning Infants that Pedobaptisme was in his time in use in the Church and so it must appear most false which you before said that it was Augustines device What need all this stirre As infants without their own consent without any act of their own and without any exterior solemnity contracted the guilt of Adams sin and so are liable to all the punishment which can with justice descend upon his posterity who are personally innocent so infants shall be restored without any solemnity or act of their own c. What need this stirre you make to trouble the peace of Christs Church Why trouble you your self with our stir to do that which Christ commandeth us Shall we suffer the Wolf quietly to take away sheep from Christs flock as we daily see by the sleepy cowardize and dangerous silence of some temporizing Pastors who possibly have learned from that old Courtier Crispus qui nunquam direxirbrachia contra torrentem nay but we know there is a dangerous silence See Ezek. 3. 18. Ester 4. 14. But to the matter we say that as in Adam all die so in Christ shall all be made alive 1 Cor. 15. 22. which being restrained according to the Apostles intention to the faithfull and elect might reasonably conclude that as all men even the faithfull and elect were by naturall propagation condemnable in Adam God justly imputing to his whole posterity that his act whereby he not onely made his own person guilty but also corrupted his nature so are they by regeneration saved in Christ God mercifully imputing his merits to them for their justification so that as they were condemnable for that they did not in their own persons commit so shall they be saved by that which Christ not they did freely without the works of the Law but of what
In which it seemeth to us a very weak querie And why cannot God as well do his mercies to Infants now immediately c. However you say there is no danger that Infants should perish for want of this externall ministery c. Not to dispute Gods secret counsels we say the danger will be to the despiser and neglecter of Gods Ordinance wherein Tertullians Assertion may serve for a reason Because saith he he shall be guilty of a mans destruction who shall omit to do that which he freely might have performed For say you Water and the Spirit in this place John 3. 5. signifie the same thing and by water is meant the effect of the Spirit cleansing and purifying the soul c. It is true that Calvin Oecolampadius and some others do not think that Christ doth there precisely speak of Baptism but that he either opposed it to Pharisaicall washings and purifications to which possibly Nicodemus with whom he then discoursed might be too much addicted Or that those words are simply to be interpreted concerning Regeneration but Justin Martyr Chrysostome Theophilact Cyril Euthymius Augustine Rupertus Bonaventure Musculus B. Aretius R Rolloc Pelargus and others expound these words concerning Baptism the Sacrament of Regeneration the present speech of Christ being concerning Regeneration and it is most probable that Christ therein respected the common order of the Church mentioning the Spirit and Water to shew that we must be baptized if we will be saved yet 't is not the water but Gods holy Spirit which washeth away our sins Neither doth he so simply and necessarily tie the grace and efficacy of Gods Spirit to the Sacrament of Baptism as if none could be saved without Baptism and that God could not extraordinarily and immediately save Whatsoever Papists say to the contrary to assert their bloody decree and cruell doctrine concerning Infants dying without Baptism yet their Schoolmen and they in their more sober fits confesse that God hath not absolutely tied his grace to the Sacraments Christ saith He that shall believe and be baptized shall be saved but in the Antithesis he saith not Whosoever shall not be baptized shall not be saved to shew us that faith alone may sometime be sufficient to salvation as in the penitent Thief but nothing can suffice without faith because without it it is impossible to please God And because faith onely apprehendeth Christ in whom alone there is salvation Acts 4â—â—â—â— To conclude it doth not appear that Water and the Spirit in the fore-cited place John 3. 5. signifie one and the same thing Although Christs Baptisme with the Spirit which gives the effect of Baptism were more excellent then John Baptists or any Ministers of the Gospel for so is it still and yet no sober man will deny that the water in baptism and the Spirit do differ as the externall sign and inward grace thereby signified You say further You may as well conclude that infants must also passe through the fire as through the water c. This assertion might better have suited with the dream of some fanaticall Jacobite What will not such an advocate say for his Clients I appeal to your own conscience may we as well conclude against Gods word as for it God expressly saith Deut. 18. 10. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to passe through the fire and it is above all rationall controversie that he instituted baptizing with water who said Baptize all Nations without any exception at all to infants this is a poor trick of yours to elude Scripture And where doth Peter say the same thing that we may as well conclude that infants must also pass through the fire as through the water No no Peter by the Spirit of truth speaketh another thing indeed intimating by those words 1 Pet. 3. 21. Not the washing of the flesh but the confidence as we translate but the answer of a good conscience toward God the effects of the inward baptism which the Syriac in his Paraphrasticall interpretation of that place maketh more clear but confessing God in a pure conscience as when in the peace thereof we call upon him with an holy security of his hearing us which can be onely in the inward Baptism which the Spirit of Jesus giveth by faith and sanctification wherein we have peace toward God in the assurance of our justification Rom. 5. 1. Rom. 8. 15 16. So that the sum is that the outward sign the water and washing of the body in baptism is not sufficient to salvation if the Spirit of Jesus give not the inward effect thereof and therefore it is dangerous to live securely in sin and unbelief as too many do in vain confidence that they must needs be saved because they have been baptized into the visible Church of Christ No but the externall sign availeth not where the inward grace thereby signified is wanting So in the preaching of the Gospel administration of the holy Eucharist mans ministery can nothing prevail to the receivers salvation without Gods Spirit giving the inward effect so that Peter briefly toucheth the power use of baptism recalling us to the testimony of a good conscience that confidence therein which can endure the sight of God and his Tribunal and flye unto him in all wants through Christ But this Scripture is fanatically Perverted by Schuincfeld others who would hence coÌ„clude against the effect of the Sacrament in the elect whereas the Apostle affirmeth not that the institution of Christ for baptizing the body with water is vain or effectless but secretly admonisheth carnall Gospellers that they rest not in their security but consult their own consciences whether they find there the effect of their baptism so that he neither saith that infants may as well pass through the fire as through the water as you trifle nor is this place any thing to the purpose in this question of Infant-baptism so that your following confused Hypotheses are of no value or use except to puzzle the Reader to find out what you mean which he hardly shall Therefore when you express your self more orderly and clearly we owe you an Answer This you say no more inferres a necessity of Infants Baptism then the other words of Christ inferre a necessity to give them the holy Communion Nisi comederitis carnem filii hominis c. This is another argument of Anabaptists à pari if infants say they are to be baptized they are also to be admitted to the Lords Supper But in this agument there is a Sophisma â—lenchi for first it wants the condition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if we follow your sense concerning spirituall infants taking infants for spirituall or regenerate persons in the major and for those who are literally infants in the minor and it wanteth also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is no question but that baptized
our God shall call what is it of force only to men and women of yeares where 's the infants part where is his priviledge of federall holynesse as being borne of believing parents What must they be interessed onely when they come to that act of which by nature they have the faculty That is the act of understanding faith and repentance In those acts the persons and children of Turks and Jews have a right in the same promises you cannot exclude any person from baptism who believes in Christ repenteth and desireth baptism at your hands Thus you make the promise of God concerning the children of the faithfull of no effect by your tradition and vain opinion But to amend this you say Baptism is not the means of conveying the holy Ghost I suppose you mean the ordinary gifts and graces of the holy Ghost as faith love hope sanctity c. if not there may be a double fallacy in your assertion First in the term conveying and next in the term holy Ghost both which may be homonymically intended and then your discourse is meerly captions and â—o discover it is a sufficient answer and indeed by your following words God by that miracle did give testimony c. it seems you mean that baptism is not now the ordinary means of conveying the holy Ghost that is the gift of miracles unto the baptized if so here is both an homonymia and an ignoratio elenchi Your reason being reduced to a Syllogisme you might take these words the holy Ghost for the ordinary gifts and graces of God necessary to salvation in the one proposition and for the extraordinary in the other and so the question were mistaken which is not whether baptism be an ordinary means of conveying the extraordinary gifs of the holy Ghost into the baptized as speaking divers unstudied languages curing the sick raising the dead casting out devils c. which we affirm not but whether baptism as the word preached be not the external ordinary means by God appointed to seal us up to a lively hope in Christ to beget faith and to engage us to repentance and newness of life to which all that you here trifle concerning imposition of hands and insinuation of rite to confirmation is nothing to purpose neither is the case of Cornelius and Peters argument thereon any waies advantagious to you for you confess it a miracle and how then is it pertinent to our present question You say that God by that miracle did give testimony that the persons of the men were in great disposition to heaven and therefore were to be admitted to those rites which are the ordinary inlets into the kingdom of heaven I then demand if that argument be good Are not children of believing parents to be admitted to those rites which are the ordinary inlets into the kingdom of heaven seeing they are also in great disposition to heaven whom Christ blessed and proposed for paterns to all that shall enter therein But we answer 1. That the great disposition which you talk of was not so much the gift of miracles as the persons inward baptism by the spirit of regeneration and sanctification for the gift of miracles is not of it self any certain argument of salvation see Matth 7. 22 23. but this was a sufficient warrant to Peter to baptize them as being marked out thereby for the visible Church at least into which elect and reprobate may come 2. To the main we answer That as by delivering a key putting in possession of an house is not only signified but also livery and seisin the conveyance and chirogrophuâ—â— are passed confirmed and actually made sure So in baptism by water the washing which is wrought by the blood of Christ is not only figured but also at last fulfilled in the elect by Christ. 3. In a right use of the Sacraments the things therby signified are ever held out and convey'd together with the fignes which are neither fallacious empty nor void of a due effect or without the thing represented because they are of God who cannot deceive and is able to give the effect if the receiver do not ponere obicem therefore the Sacraments are rightly called the Channels or Conduits of grace that is the ordinary means to convey the graces of God into the receivers 4. God confirms his mercies to us by the Sacraments wherein the Minister by Gods own deputation beareth his person or place in the Church as well as in preaching the word so that what they doe who are his Ministers by his appointment he doth both in respect of the institution and effect So the Lord is said to have aâ—ointed Saul whereas Samuelâ—nointed â—nointed him so Jesus made and baptized more disciple then John whereas Jesus baptized noâ— but his disciples by his assignement Therefore although these signes neither convey grace nor confirm any thing to them for good who keep not the Covenant for God made no promise to them yet are they means to convey the graces of God to those that do To conclude we affirm not that baptism conveyeth Gods grace to all that are baptized but to the elect only as that whereof he hath made a peculiar promise to them and that so certain as are those things which God himself sealeth covenanteth for and testifieth in heaven and earth as 't is written There are threo that bear record in heaven the father the word and the holy Ghost and there are three that bear witness in earth the spirit and the water and the blood Now if we receive the witness of men the witness of God is greater Under the mouth of two or three witnesses every word must be confirmed and taken for sure how much more when we have by Gods blessing the same witnesses of our faith who are also the promisers workers and sureties of our salvation But from thence you say to argue that wherever there is a capacity of receivinig the same grace there also the same signe is to be ministred and from thence to infer poede-baptism is an argument very fallacious c. Quis tulerit Gracchos your dispute is fallacious upon your grounds on which we go not and so all your impertinent superstruction here falleth together They that are capable of the same grace are not alwaies capable of the same signe for women under the law of Moses although they were capable of the righteousness of faith yet they were not capable of the signe of circumcision I would gladly be resolved quanta est illa propositio is your meaning Some of them that are capable of the same grace are not alwaies capable of the signe thereof If so alta pax esto We say so too for infants being capable of the same grace which is exhibited and received in the Lords supper are not alwaies that is while they are children capable of the same signe because they cannot examin themselves nor shew forth the Lords death and
out to fill up the measure of impious calumny You say They invocate the holy Ghost in vain doing as if one should call upon him to illuminate a stone or a tree 1. I wonder what they will be ashamed to say who blush not at such assertions 'T is true that the Apostle useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be illuminated for to be baptized as the Syriac Interpreter gives it Hebr. 4. 6. Hebr. 10. 32. and that the Greek Fathers so commonly used the word and it is no improbable conjecture that there was an allusion to the Hebrew manner of speaking who by one and the same word express illumination and a River or Source of water and by a Metaphor Illumination of the mind For they who are baptized by water and the spirit of Jesus are in Gods good time and the measure he knows fit illuminated and find not only a River of elementary water but of that water which floweth to eternal life whereof Christ spake John 7. that is the spirit of illumination and sanctification 2. I would desire you again consider is the case all one or alike when we pray that God would be pleased to illuminate sanctifie and save an elect infant for whom Christ shed his precious bloud for whose salvation he came from heaven became an infant and man of sorrows to the death whom he blessed of whom he said Of such is the kingdom of heaven and except ye become as one of these ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven Is I say the case all one when we pray according to Gods word and promise for these as if we should pray God to illuminate sanctifie and save a stone or a tree hath a stone or tree any habitual faith or reason or any capacity of the holy Ghost illumination or sanctification Do any creatures under the degrees of man bear the image of their Creator in immortality sanctity and light of understanding Would God you could be ashamed of blaspheming and laying such pernicious stumbling-blocks before the blind to make them fall Since you say there is no direct impiety in the opinion of Anabaptists nor any that is apparently consequent to it and they with so much probability do or may pretend to true perswasion they are with all means Christian fair and humane to be redargued or instructed I hoped that the Plea being ended the Pleader would have come to himself again but this and another strain promise no more but a lucid interval I answer As to your charitie towards the persons of the Anabaptists I also wish they may by all Christian fair and humane means be reproved convinced or instructed but that there is no direct impietie in their opinion nor any that is apparently consequent to it is apparently untrue for that which is displeasing to Christ is directly impious and such is with-holding Infants from him that which is uncharitable is direct impietie and such is that opinion which barreth Infants from the Seal of Gods Covenant with them and the Communion of Saints as also in that it damneth so great a part of the world presupposing that God had no Church in the world for so many hundred years as Infant-Baptism hath been the general inlet to the same except a little while in the schism of Pelagians and Donatists and again when the same Heresie revived in Germany in Charls 5. his reign and now again in these distracted and calamitous times much more hath been and might be said herein but I shall be so far from being their accuser that I heartily pray the Lord to open their eyes that they sleep not in death only I say to the Pleader who would so courteously vail others impietie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lastly you say that you think That there is much more truth then evidence on our side and therefore we may be confident as for our own particulars but not too forward peremptorily to prescribe to others much less to damn or to kill or to persecute them that only in this particular disagree That we may be confident of the truth on our side I assent likewise that none be too forward peremptorily to prescribe except where the Word of God and necessary consequence from thence prescribeth that none should persecute kill or much less for opimons less then blasphemous against God or destructive to Religion and salvation of souls saving to Supreme Authoritie their lawful right agenda est ut sit voluntas Longe diversa sunt carnificina pietas I also assent to but can by no mean◠be of your opinion that there is less evidence then truth or our side as any ways intimating a defect of evidence therefore I say 1. That evidence sensu forensi in common sense of controversies or matters of judicatuye importeth sufficient proof so we say that witnesses give in evidence that is not alwayes in terminis and express words as in actions of case is requirable nor as they say ore rotundo as to say Verres is a Thief c. but from considerable circumstances or necessarie consequences sufficient to evince and to inform to sentence This evidence on our side you will not denie in this case nor I suppose affirm that falshood hath more proof or evidence in Scripture then truth 2. Sometimes we speak of evidence in relation to the partie or parties to be informed in which not only his or their capacitie is considerable but also other circumstances as the Informers expression which possibly may be defective the Informeds attention for want whereof that may not appear which were otherwise sufficiently evident Again In case of Gods judgment over the disobedient given over to strong delusions that they should believ lyes and he damned who received not the love of the truth of it self evident enough ◠that they might be saved here of see Isa. 6. 9 10. Mat. 13. 13 14 15. To a blind man or one that winketh in the clearest most evident light no colours or proportions are evident because men if blind cannot if obstinate schismatical wil not see understand 3. There is a notius natura and a notius nobis if in the evidence you speak of you mean the first and that errour and falshood is more known in nature that is manifestly false for the truth is first and best known in nature If you mean the second that is that we less know the truth then the evidence what blame you in our cause or advantage your Clients If you say we see no evidence nor can the blind see the Sun what can you gain hereby it may be and certainly is that the Gospels light is hid to some the Apostle will tell you to whom and why 2 Cor. 4. 3 4. It is hid to them that are lost in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ should shine
What Illumination Infants have by the secret working and influence of Gods holy Spirit belongeth to Gods secret councel and therefore not to our inquest 3. Sanctification more then Ecclesiastical in order of time doth not always precede the Seal and Sacrament thereof as may be proved from Infant Circumcision but by the Sacrament which implanteth us into Christ and which is therefore the washing of Regeneration and Renovation the seeds of Faith Sanctity and good conscience are sowed in us which by a powerful and secret working of the Holy Ghost sheweth it self in due season without which work of the Spirit the Gospel most powerfully preached and Sacraments duly administred to the most knowing men and women could bring forth no better effects then a savour of death unto death and condemnation Seeing then the effect to Sanctification and Salvation is neither in the Minister nature of the Water and Washing therewith but in the Ordinance of God nor in the capacity or ability of the most prudent sons of men but in the sole working of Gods gracious Spirit why should any rest in opeâ—e operato the work it self done or deny it to any within the Church needing Regeneration that they may be saved Christ joyneth these two together Teach and Baptize and Believe Repent and be Baptized But Infants are not capable of Faith and Repentance Therefore they ought not as such to be Baptized We answer Here is an Ignoratio Elenchi in the mistake of the Question which is not Whether that teaching ought to be divided from Baptism which we affirm not but the contrary persons of years ought first to be taught to believe and repent and then to be baptized But our question is not concerning the Baptism of Adults or persons capable of these things for the presenâ— but of Infants here again the question is mistaken and therefore such disputes are fallacious It is true the water without the Word can make no Sacrament nor give any sacramental effect therefore neither young nor old may be baptized where the Gospel is not first preached and received For Baptism is a seal of the Gospel but believing Parents have been taught received the Gospel and been sealed into Gods Covenant therefore they ought to present their children to Baptism who are joynt Covenanters with them Again Baptism is administred with the words of institution by Christ appointed take away the Word and what is the Water but ordinary water The Word is added to the element and makes the Sacrament of the Water that it but toucheth the body and cleanseth the heart but by the Word not because it is spoken but because it is believed Moreover though God taught Abraham concerning the Sacrament of Circumcision and so he was circumcised and all his Males yet he circumcised Isaac at eight days old so long before that word of faith could be preached to Isaac he received the sameâ— Sacrament and Seal of the same Righteousness of faith in Christ in whom believing we also are saved Men of ripe years were first instructed concerning the institution end and use of Circumcision and then received the Seal but Infants as such not capable of instruction first received the Seal of Faith and if they lived to years then they were taught yet the Word and the Seal were not parted in either So is it in Infant-Baptism now Those Infants whom Christ blessed and of whom he pronounced Theirs or Of such is the Kingdom of heaven were such as were fit to be taughâ— for so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also signifieth And Christ in the persons of children blesseth those that were such in humility and innocency not in age We answer 'T is true that in their persons Christ commended humility and innocency and also shewed their interest in the Kingdom of heaven saying Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven that is of such persons and of persons of such quality for he proposeth Infants for a patern Now as they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which sometimes signifieth a Son or Servant of years yet not always as common use of that word shews Matth. â—2 13 14 20. Luke 2. 21 c. so are the same called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 18. 15. which without controversie properly signifieth Infants lately born as Luke 2. 12 16. Acts 7. 19. 1 Pet. 2. 2. new born babes and sometimes children in the womb as Luke 1. 41 44. that which is said 2 Tim. 3. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From a childe thou hast known the holy Scriptures is as much as the Greeks proverbially said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Latines à teneris unguiculis from thy tender years that is so soon as it was possible for thee to learn so Psal. 58. 3. The wicked are estranged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the womb they go astray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab utero as soon as they are born speaking lyes So Psal. 22. 9. Thou didst make me hope 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when I was upon my mothers breasts that is very soon very yong The Syriac 2 Tim. 3. 15. translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from a childe from thy tender years so soon as it was possible for thee to learn by a word indifferently signifying Infancy Childhood or Youth but that Luke 18. 15. the same render by the word which signifieth Infants 1 Tim. 2. 15. Acts 7. 19. 1 Pet. 2. 2. and Mark 10. 16. it is said that Christ took them up in his arms put his hands upon them and blessed them which sheweth that they were little portable children had they been of mans growth though never so humble or innocent they would have been too heavy to have been carried in the arms Lastly there can be no rational doubt but that he blessed Infants properly so called who took on him Infancy to save them Nor may we think that they are less then blessed of Christ who are saved by his blood as Infants are That which God Commandeth not in some express precept concerning his worship is not any better then mans invention Will-worship and may not be done But Infant-Baptism is no where in Scripture commanded in any express Precept Therefore it is no better then mans invention Will-worship and may not be done We answer 1. By demanding quanta est major Propositio if it be universal the sense running thus All that is Will-worship which is not commanded in some express Precept it is evidently false For there is no express Precept for many things left arbitrary and falling under the Rule of Decency and Order which yet are not Will-worship Next we say That the substance and Institution of Gods worship must have an express precept for it or it will fall under the notion of Will-worship but in the circumstances and accidents it is not alwayes so for example had not Christ somewhere commanded to baptize it had been Wil-worship for any
seal of a writing obligatory is not set all over the deed but to some one part by which the whole is confirmed and as in Livery and Seisin a little turf of grass with a twig or smal bough delivered to the Purchaser investeth him in the whole state of the demeasn So here 't is the seal and subscription of a just Deed which passeth the estate not the quantity of the wax or largeness of the parchment nor greatness of the Character whether Text-hand Chancery Court-hand Secretary all these things are circumstantial and no more and so is it in the matter of much or little water in baptism the essence whereof is applying water to the body of the baptized in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost There is therefore no simple necessity of dipping the whole body under water it is sufficient if the face which is as it were the representative or epitome of man in which are united all the senses be dipped washt or sprinckled 4. In baptism lawfully administred by washing sprinkling or dipping the elect have the same interest in the death burial and resurrection of Christ as if they were baptized in the deepest channel of Jordan or any other water Faith which instrumentally gives them interest in Christ being no effect of deep waters but of those Rivers of living waters whereof Christ spake John 7. 38 39. to wit the Holy Ghost 5 Sprinkling doth also aptly signifie our sprinkling with the blood of Christ in baptism cleansing us from our sins and sealing our election 1 John 1. 7. 1 Pet. 1. 2. and pousing water signifieth the effusion of the Spirit upon us Tit. 3. 5. and those sprinklings of the blood of sacrifices signified the very same Christ being baptized is said to have come up out of the water Matth. 3. 16. therefore he was in it And the Eunuch went down into the Water with Philip in neither appears any sprinkling or washing but rather dipping We answer 1. It appears that Christ and the Eunuch were baptized it appears not that either they or any other whom John B. or any of Christs Disciples baptized were dipped all under water as hath been said any more then that they were washed or sprinkled with water The word Baptizingâ—n â—n the original signifying sprinkling washing or dipping â—herefore we take it to be indifferent which of the three ways baptism be administred respect being had to convenience of times places and persons 2. The Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the cited places rendred Out of signifieth properly From as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From not from under the ships and so Christ might come from the water though he were never dived under it or though he had gone only to the depth of the first or second measure of the Sanctuary waters to the anckles or to the knees 3. Philip and the Eunuch are said to have gone down into the water Act. 8. 38. for it was a descent to them the waters though shallow or possibly not within very low or hollow banks as Jordan and all great waters of Rivers usually run yet always running lower then the Superficies of the earth near the sources and channels thereof 4. The words Acts 8. 38. are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And both of them descended c. so the word also signifieth to descend or to alight as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to alight from not to come from under an horse or to descend or lot down ones self or to come down from some higher place as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Budaeus after Suidas or to go down to some even place as to invest an enemy to wrestle fight or encountre also to go from one place to another as Acts 17. 15. it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jacob descended or went into Egypt Acts 10. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Get thee down and go with them So Acts 14. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they went down unto Attalia for so they usuually expressed going from one place to another as the Hebrews by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So far is that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 8. 38. they Went down both to or into the water from inforcing the conclusion aimed at therefore the Eunuch baptized was dived under water that it makes nothing for it more then that Jacob going down into Egypt was therefore duckt in Nilus or Peter in the waters of Cesarea or Paul and Barnabas in some Attalian waters because these were said in the very same word to go down to these places all which being frivolous and vain your assertion must be left unconcluded for any thing to the contrary in these cited Texts appearing Add hereto that here is nothing said of the Eunuch as going down into the water more then of Philip for they both went down c. now I suppose you will not affirm that Philip as and then when he baptized the Eunuch in that administration stood all under water with the Eunuch or that John B. in the like action in Jordan was ever doused over head and ears for company And how then can it hence appear that the baptized were more dived then the baptizers Behold upon what unsound grounds our Antagonists build their pretended necessity of ducking their disciples in Rivers or deep waters CHAP. V. Protestants arguments against the supposed necessity of dipping rather then sprinkling or washing with water in Baptism THat which the word used by Christ enjoyning the duty of Baptism doth indifferently signifie and commonly import there being neither express example nor precept to restrain it precisely to either that is lawfully and warrantably to be done in baptizing But the word used by Christ enjoyning the duty of Baptism or Baptizing doth indifferently and commonly signifie dipping washing or sprinkling and there is no express example or precept in Scripture to restrain it precisely to either Therefore in Baptizing we may lawfully and warrantably pro more loci temporis statu personarum either dip wash or sprinkle in water In the name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Ghost The major is out of controversie The minor thus confirmed The Word used by Christ Matthew 28. 19 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth indifferently to was sprinkle or dip and as the learned Mr. Leigh well noteth it is taken largely for any kinds of Washing Rinsing or Cleansing even when there is no dipping at all So AEmilius Portus gives it by mergo immergo tingo intingo madefacio lavo abluo c. Suidas interpreteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lavant The same word signifieth washing or sprinkling in many places of Scripture and from necessary consequences 1. From the types of that which was signified in the old Testament which the holy Ghost as hath been noted calleth Baptisms or Washings to wit by Sprinklings for how were
they performed see Numb 19. 2◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 70. gives it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the water of Separation hath not been Sprinckled upon him so is it often named there and Leviâ— 4. 17. The Priest shall dip his finger in the blood and Sprinkle it Seven times c. 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So Lev. 14. 16. and Lev. 16. 14 15. he shall take the blood of the bullock 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and shall sprinkle it with his finger So Numb 8. 7. Thus shalt thou do unto them to cleanse them Sprinkle water of purifying upon them So Numb 19. 18 19. A clean person shall take hysope and dip it into the water and Sprinkle it upon the Tent and upon the persons so Exod. 24. 8. Moses took the blood and Sprinkled it on the people and said Behold the Blood of the Covenant which the Lord hath made with you which signified the blood of Christ to cleanse them from sin as the water of Baptism now doth And these very Sprinklings the holy Ghost calleth Baptisms Heb. 9. 10. 13 2c where the mystery is clearly unfolded 2. From the truth thereby signified So Ezek. 36. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will sprinkle you with clean water or clean water upon you and ye shall be clean how The Apostle telleth us 1 Pet. 1 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto obedience that is by the Spirit of Sanctification and Sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ as Heb. 10. 22. Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith having our hearts Sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water that is the water mentioned by Ezekiel the purifying water of baptism and Heb. 12. 24. We are come to Jesus the Mediator of the new Covenant and to the blood of Sprinkling that is the application of the blood and merit of Christ in Baptism for the remission of our sins 3. From necessary consequences from the common use of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Scriptures where they cannot reasonably be interpreted by dipping but by washing or sprinkling as Matth. 26. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. he did not dip his whole fist into the dish but only wet his fingers therein So Matth. 20. 23. Christ mentioneth his baptism which all understand of his blood-shedding not dipping therein but besprinkling therewith So Luke 11. 38. when the Pharisee invited Christ to dinner he wondred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he had not first washed before dinner it cannot there reasonably be interpreted that he had not first been dipt over head and ears in water So 1 Cor. 10. 2. They were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea No reasonable man can think that all Israel with their wives and children were dowsed into the sea nay but they passed through dryâ— foot nor were they dived into the cloud but only as those who were rinsed or wetted under a rainy cloud by the drops thereof distilling on them So Mark 7. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the letter Except they baptizeâ— or be baptized he meaneth not by dipping the whole into the water but as it is clearly manifested by the Holy Ghost the best interpreter of himself a little before they ear not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with common hands that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwashen and in the same place as hath hath noted we read also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the letter Baptisms of beds which was not by dipping into but though understood of tables which they commonly made of Couch-beds set together by sprinkling them with a little wateâ— which manner of purification they too superstitiously and commonly used As for the second clause of our minor proposition we appeal to Scriptures whether there be any express example or precept restraining baptism only to dipping over head and ears 2 In the Lords Supper the efficacie of the Sacrament is not in the quantitie of the element a little bread therein is as good and effectual as a whole loaf so hereâ— it is not as hath been said in the quantitie of the element but in the ordinance of God and operation of his Spirit Now herein Christ never gave any precept concerning the quantum the Word and the Element make the Sacrament and a few drops sprinkled are as truly water as all Jordan 3. If Baptism in the type thereof were administred by God by sprinkling then it is lawfully and effectually so to be administred by man in the truth for in the main Analogy the truth must answer the type But Baptism in the type was administred by sprinkling infants as well as persons of years for all Israel were baptized under the Cloud 1 Cor. 10. 2. Therefore Baptism may lawfully and effectually be administred by sprinkling of water 4. That administration of Baptism whereby Christ cleanseth his Church is lawfull and effectuall But Christ cleanseth his Church with the washing of water through the word Ephes. 5. 26. Therefore that administration of Baptism which is by washing with water according to his precept Matth. 28. 19. is lawfull and effectuall 5. The Goaler Acts 16. 33. was baptized about midnight and it is improbable that he had any such store and convenience of water in his house as to dip himself and family or that they went out to some river at such a season neither was it probable that three thousand added to the Church in one day dursâ—in those times when Christians were so eagerly persecuted go publickly with the Apostles to the poole of Bethesda Siloam or the brook Cedron or any like place to be doused more probably they were baptized by washing or sprinkling with water as they had private accommodation thereto nor could so many in one day have been baptized by a few Apostles if all had been baptized by dipping 6. If immersion were simply necessary and of the Essence of Baptism then it might not be dispensed withall in case some sick Convert should desire it before his death for the comfort and peace of his afflicted conscience which were extream uncharitableness which belongs not to any Ordinance of God Therefore it cannot be simply necessary 7 That which can neither be proved by example of Christ John Baptist or any of the Apostles baptizing nor by any precept of Christ concerning the same is not essential or simply necessary to baptism but dipping or dowsing in baptism can neither be proved by example c. or any precept of Christ concerning the same therefore diping or dowsing is not essential or simply necessary to baptism and indeed were there to be found in Scripture any example hereof without a precept to lay the same universally upon the Ordinance it were not binding as hath been proved from Christs administring the communion with unleavened bread after supper in an upper room
to twelve men only and no women So that if that which you can never prove should be granted you that John Baptist and Christs disciples did then and there baptize by dipping yet it would not follow that we ought to baptize in the like and no other manner In the infancie of the Church they had not Baptisteries or Churches as we have there was a kind of necessitie for them as they met with occasions to make use of waters as they could find them in rivers or sources wherein it cannot be proved that they dipt nor could it conclude our Antagonists pretended necessitie if it were supposed 8 Whatsoever was or is essential to baptism or simply necessary thereto is mentioned in some clear example or express precent of Christ But dipping the whole body in baptism is neither mentioned in any clear example nor any express precept of Christ therefore it is not essential or simply necessary to baptism Christ omitted nothing necessary and the holy Scriptures are able to make men wise to salvation And let our Antagonists now seriously consider what they do when they rebaptize upon that fancie that washing or sprinkling with water in the Name of the Father the Son and the holy Ghost is not true baptism CHAP. VI. Anabaptists Arguments for their dangerous practice of Re-baptizing examined and answered THE malitious Serpent ever attempting to poison or trouble these sanctuary-waters obstructing or hindering their effect lest they should heal sin-wounded souls somtimes moved Pelagius Donatus and others reviving their errors to deny the most innocent children of believers baptism sometimes he teacheth them to except against the manner of baptizing as if the vertue of the Sacrament depended on the quantitie of the element and not solely on the Ordinance and power of God working thereon sometimes he causeth deluded people to annul their baptism and in effect to renounce their faith and Christ whom they had sacramentally put on in baptism by receiving a second third or iterated baptism we read that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 baptized every day supposing that their former baptisms were made void by any sin after committed on which fancie possibly the Novatians thought that baptism ought to be deferred to the end of their lives Auxentius the Arrian taught that baptism ought ro be iterated the Marcionites baptized their disciples three times The Anabaptists rebaptize baptized Infants coming to age and affirm that the assuming of baptism in ripe years by those who were washed in Infancie is not a renouncing baptism but a firmer avouching thereof according to Christs mind errors are fruitful one absurdity granted many will readily follow they think first that Infants having no present actual faith and repentance not present use of reason to understand the Gospel preached are not as such to be baptized but until they â—ome to years to be taught and to make profession of their faith and repentance to be kept from baptism and that so Infant-baptism is void and to be esteemed no baptism Secondly they dream that those who are not dived under water are not baptized and therefore they rebaptize them who were baptized in Infancie though that ground may often fail them because some have been baptized by immersion Now that which hath been said on our part is enough to satisfie those in those things who are not wilfully bent with Simo in the Comedian rather to erre then to be directed by any Therefore to avoid repetitions let the issue be if Infant-baptism in the name of the Father the Son and the holy Ghost either by washing sprinkling with or dipping into water be indeed a compleat and warrantable baptism according to the institution of Christ then Anabaptists rebaptizing do impiously seduce and teach simple people to renounce that baptism by which they had at least sacramentally put on Christ and thereby were re-admitted into that Church out of which can be no salvation And let the prudent Reader judge whom I herein refer to an impartial and serious consideration of that which hath been said which being proved the Anabaptists whole fabrick of dowsing and rebaptizing falleth heavily on their Dippers heads The Church of Christ holds that Infants of enchurched Parents or others of yeaâ—s converting to the faith being once sprinkled washed or dipt in the name of the Father the Son and the holy Ghost according to Christs institution ought not on any pretence to be rebaptized I say thus baptized according to the ordinance of Christ because the Samosatenians Sabellians Marcionites Arrians or the like who any wayes opposed the holy Trinity or denied any persons thereof did not baptize according to the prescript of Christ and therefore in case any of their disciples converted the true Church baptized them because the former pretended baptism was not according to the Ordinance of Christ and so no true baptism it being the peculiar prerogative of Christ to appoint the seals of his own Covenant of free Grace and mercie with man But the Anabaptists after their manner object We are regenerate not only by Baptism but also by the Word Ephes. 5. 26. 1 Pet. 1. 23. but the Word is often repeated and therefore so may baptism We answer 1 The word mentioned Eph. 5. 26. is that which comming to the element makes the Sacrament as Chrysostom wel interpreteth that he might sanctifie and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word What Word saith he why this In the name of the Father of the Son and of the holy Ghost that Word which coming to the element makes the Sacrament ought not to be more repeated then the Sacrament it self because it is essential thereto 2 The regeneration of man is only one whose principal efficient cause is the holy Ghost the means or instrumental causes on Gods part are the Word and Sacraments on our part faith which the holy Ghost begetteth encreaseth and confirmeth ordinarily by those external means Therefore when they are baptized who were before regenerate by the Word as a spiritual feed they have not need of any other regeneration nor can they be twice regenerate but then baptism is to them an obsignation and confirmation of their regeneration So Abraham first believed as so was regenerate and afterward was sealed So Cornelius spiritual sanctification preceded in the gift of the holy Ghost and then he received the Sacrament of regeneration to confirm the same to him But when the elect who being baptized dye in their infancy it is certain that they are regenerate by the Sacrament without the ministry of the word preached unto them whereof they are not capable who yet without regeneration could not enter into the Kingdom of God John 3. 5. And if the baptized Infant live to be capable of teaching and so receive the word as that it begets in him actual faith repentance and obedience to God then that word is as Sincere milk to nourish and confirm not to
baptism give another faith if ye give another faith give another Christ if ye give another Christ give also another God c. You see to what damnable absurdities rebaptizing drives unto That whereby men crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to open shame may by no means be done But to rebaptize or to be willingly rebaptized in the Apostles sense is to crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and to put him to open shame therefore it may by no means be done This point the Apostle layeth down Heb. 6. 4 5 6. It is impossible for those who were once enlightned saith our Translation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who have been once baptized saith the Syriac to renew them again to repentance c. that is baptiâ—mal repentance the baptism of repentaence as it is called Act 19. 4. and so Heb. 10. 12. Call to remembrance the former dayes in which after ye were illuminated Gre. 〈◊〉 which the Syriac the best and nearest Interpreter of the New Testament rendreth in which ye were baptized So the Greeks were wont to call baptism 〈◊〉 illumination possibly because persons converting from darkness of Idolatry were ordinarily enlightned by being taught the doctrine of the Gospel see Mat. 4. 16. Luk 2. 32. Ad. 26. 18. so the Hebrew â—â—â— in one signification importing taught is rendred by the LXX illuminated or also in respect of extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost in the knowledge of the mysteries of the Gospel and unstudied tongues with other admirable enlargments of heart then flourishing in the Church Now those who are described v. 4 5. who have been once baptized and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the holy Ghost and have tasted the god word of God and the powers of the world to câ—me if they shall fall away saith our Translation Gre â—â—â—â—â—â—â—â—â— and falling away which and the Syriac omitteth rendring the sense as others also non possum iterum pâ—â—care ut denâ—ò renoventur ad resipiscentiam â—â—â— crucifigant c. they cannot so sin that is unâ— death that they should again be renewed to repentance and crucifie afresh c. that is in a second baptism where noâ—e by the way that this place of Scripture so much wrested by the enemies of truth against the comfortable doctrine of the Saints perseverance maketh mainly for it for the â—â—â—stle saith not that those who are described v. 4 5. de â—â—â— may fall away but that it is impossible isto supposito to he renewed because in such a supposition the merit of Christs Cross being abolished and made void by whicâ— they were renewed it must needs follow that so Christ should be crucified afresh and be put to open shame thaâ—â—â— they might be renewed by a second and new merit of his Cross which seeing it is impossible to be the Apostle will inferr that it is impossible that these here described v. 4 5. should finally fall away The foundation of the Lord remaining sure and having this seal The Lord knoweth who are his whose prescience cannot possibly be deceived in electing any who shall fall away But to return to our purpose the work 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to themselves is very considerable The Son of God they cannot now possibly crucifie afresh nor put him again to open shame who sitteth at the right hand of the glory of the Father had they the malice of the Jews and power of the Romans ` who once crucified him to help them yet in iterating on themselves baptism the sign of heir implantation into the similitude of his death they crucifie to themselves that is as much as in them is the Son of God Chrysostome excellently expresseth it Baptism saith he is the Cross for therein our old man is crucified with him Again we have been planted together in the likeness of his death as therefore Christ may not be crucified again for that were to put him again to open shame so neither may we be baptized again for if death have no more dominion over him if he be risen in his resurrection a conqueror over death c. and should again be crucified then all these things were meer fables and mockeries therefore he that rebaptizeth himself doth again crucifie him But what is crucifying again As Christ died on the Cross so do we in baptism not in the flesh but to sin therefore there may be no second washing for if there be there may be a third and a fourth for the first is made void by the second and that by another even to an infinite Where there are all the essential parts of baptism rightly administred according to the commission given by Christ to his Apostles there baptism cannot be made void or no true baptism by any thing accidental circumstantial or less then essential neither expresly nor by any necessary consequence any where in holy Scripture forbidden But in baptizing of Infants of Church-priviâ—edged Parents by sprinkling or washing with water in the â—â—â— of the Father and the Son and the holy Ghost there are all the essential parts of baptism according to Christs commission given to the Apostles to wit the Element and the Word which constitute the Sacrament Therefore that their baptism is not neither can be made void or no true baptism by or in respect of Infant-age or of only washing or sprinkling them with water which are things circumstantial accidental less then essential and no where expresly or by necessary consequence forbidden in holy Scripture So that whatever Anabaptists pretend in their eager pursuit of their opinion that they do not rebaptize supposing that there preceded no essential or true baptism in regard of the persons being baptized in their Infancie or because they fancie dipping the whole body to be essential to baptism and so necessary that without it they think there can be no true baptism neither of which have any ground in Scripture and whereas Christ is the Saviour of every age sex and condition therefore male and female aged and Infants have right to the seal as hath been â—shewed it highly concerneth them seriously to consider how dangerous a thing it is upon a mere opinion to pull off the seals of their Disciples salvation under pretence of putting on a new unwarrantable seal to renounce their Saviour whom they put on in their lawful baptism at least sacramentally to make more baptisms then faiths and Saviours into the similitude of whose death and resurrection all Christians are baptized and to crucifie again to themselves the Son of God and to put him to open shame Alas they discern not Satans mischievous Legerdemain who like a cunning finger-jugler hereby takes from them the true seal of redemption and salvation by Christ put on all his who are baptized by pretending and seeming to put them on a new better or more perfect one And now Brethren I commend you to God to the Word