is sufficient for the eviction of a truth 16 12. That way of worshipping God wherein a mans soul hath prospered and prospereth yet daily is not lightly to be forsaken or exchanged 17 18 13. To make any thing necessary which God hath not made such is to Lord it over the consciences of men and to usurp divine Authority pag. 19 14. The subject of an Ordinance is no part of this Ordinance 19 20 15. The Law of Nature and personal accommodation is to super-intend and over-rule Ordinances and Institutions 20 21 16. Some things being exâ—ra-essential to the nature and end of an Institution though observed in the first administration may be lawfully yea and commendably in some cases omitted in after administrations 21 22 17. Every defect in the administration of an Ordinance doth not voyd the effect of it 23 24 18. The same ground which giveth right to an Ordinance unto any one person or persons giveth the same right unto all in whom it is found 24 25 26 19. It is not necessary that Signs Seals or Sacraments should correspond in any natural similitude 26 27 28 20. Institutions may be regularly used and observed without the observation of any circumstance not enjoyned 28 29 21. He is superstitious and a wil-worshipper who placeth Religion in any circumstance or observationont prescribed by God 29 30 22. Sacramental engagements the more early imposed or taken up are so much the more improveable binding also 30 31 23. Adult Baptism a seminary of contentions in constituted Churches 31 32 24. Infant-baptism more edifying both to the Church and to the baptised themselves when come to years of discretion 32 33 25. Children admitted unto Baptism in the daies of Christ and of the Apostles 33 26. Baptism a Seal under the Gospel of the righteousnesse of Faith as Circumcision was under the Law 33 34 27. Church-membership a gracious priviledge vouchsafed by God unto Children under the Law 35 28. The Children of the Jews were involved together with their Parents in their rejection from God 36 37 29. The Jewish children were baptized into Moses as well as their Parents 37 38 39 30. The door of entrance into the Christan Church is more easie and accommodate for children then it was into the Jewish Church pag. 39 31. The Baptism of Children born of Christian Parents was not deferred until adultness of yeares in the Apostles daies 40 41 32. Infant-church-membership was no Levitical ceremony nor abolished by Christ 42 43 44 33. Infant-baptism was practised by such Christians who conversed if not with the Apostles yet with their disciples 46 47 34. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to baptize frequently signifieth any kind of washing or rinseing even where no dipping is 47 35. The derivative verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is never in the New Testament used to signifie the act of dipping but the primitive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only pag 47 48. As on the other hand the Sacramental act of baptizing is never expressed by the primitive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but by the frequentative or derivative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. 36. The administration of water-baptism is very frequently expressed by a baptism with water seldom or not at all by a baptizing into water 48 49 37. No Baptismal administration can regularly be performed either in whole or in part by the person who is baptized 50 51 38. The water wherein the Eunuch was baptized was not deep enough for dipping 51 52 39. Baptizing with the Holy Ghost and baptizing with Water expressed in the Scriptures by one and the same preposition 52 53 40. To pour water on the body of the person baptized doth more significantly resemble burial then the dâ—pping into water doth 53 54 41. The nature of Baptism representeth the gracious act of Christ applying himself unto us 54 55 42. No kind of washing is performed or made onely by the application of the thing to be washed unto the water but of the water unto it 55 56 43. Dipping either naked or cloathed inconvenient 56 44. To dip or wash all over was the practice of Idolatrous nations 58 45. It cannot be proved that any Baptismal Administration recorded in the Scripture was performed by dipping but is exceeding probable that many were performed without it 59 60 c. 46. The baptizing children of Christians ordinarily at years of discretion is inconsistent with the Gospel rule for baptizing 70 71 47. The custom of adult Baptism amongst thâ—se born in the Church first entered into the Church by unhallowed door and was entertained when practised upon unwarrantable and Popish grounds 73 74 48. The generation of men commonly known by the name of Ana-baptists have alwaies been injurious to the Gospel 75 76 c. 49. The wrath of God hath been from time to time revealed from heauen against the way of Ana-baptism and those who unrepentingly have walked in it 80 81 c. 50 It hath very seldom been known that any opinion or practise though never so wicked uncouth or absurd was ever set on foot amongst Christian Professors but that it gathered a considerable number of Proselytes to it 89 51. By-opinions and practises which bear or seem to bear hard upon the flesh are apt to take with four sorts of persons 90 91 52. No kind of Sect have more generally been more hardened in the way of their errour or more un-perswasible out of it then those who have been able to pretend the plain Letter of the Scripture though misunderstood for their opinion or practise especially when a letter of like plainess cannot be produced against them 91 92 53. When men and women are inordinate in valuing or prizing an erroneous whether opinion or practise there is the less hope of reclaiming them from either 92 93 54. Aâ— the Scripture sometimes under the word MEN comprehendeth Women as well as Men yea and sometimes Children also so under the expression MEN AND WOMEN it more frequently comprehendeth Children 94 55. It is lawful yea commendable for beleevers to devote separate and design their children whilst it is yet early with them even from the conception and the womb to the service of God and Jesus Christ pag. 95 96 56. The truth of an Ordinance or Gods approving or allowing of an Ordinance as his cannot better be estimated or known then when he blesseth it unto those who receive it 96 97 57. Baptism received in Infancy and this without dâ—ppiâ—gâ— is neither a nullity nor device or institution of man 97 98 58. Baptism as all types and typical Ordinances is one of those things which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. which are instituted and given for some greater things sake than themselves 98 99. The Contents of the latter part of the ensuing Discourse according to the respective Sections thereof 1. STicklers about Baptism now and about Circumcision of old compared Sect. 2 2. The present controversie not properly
upon this account baptized did with their families who were together baptized with them make up the number of three thousand But though this be very probable yet the cause of Infant-Baptism aboundeth in strength without it Consectary This Consideration being true it plainly followeth that the frequent mention found in the Scriptures of men and women baptized without any expresse mention of any children baptized with them doth no ways prove that therefore no children were baptized with them but the contrary rather because more usually where men and women are onely named children are also understood and comprehended at least when those things which occasion the mention of Men and Women and are attributed unto them are such whereof their children also are naturally capable as well as they Postscript CONSIDERATION II. IT is lawfull yea commâ—ndable and worthy for beleevers to devote separate and design their children whilâ—st it is yet early days with them even from the conception and the womb to the service of God and Jesus Christ Proof That which is offered in this Consideration needs no proof with intelligent and considering men For by devoting and designing our children from the womb to the service of God and of Jesus Christ we mean nothing but our purposing and intending as soon as God giveth us children that as far as in us lieth to procure and effect it they shall be the faithfull servants of God and of Christ And what can with reason be imagined why such a purpose as this should not be lawfull yea of good acceptance with God Hannah purposed and vowed whilest as yet she had no son or child that if God would vouchsafe her the blessing of a son she would give him unto him all the daies of his life 1 Sam. 1. 11. when the Lord said that he knew Abraham that he would command his children and his houshould after him and that they should keep the way of the Lord c. it implieth that even then Abraham had a real purpose and intent in case any more children should after this be born unto him to procure as far as he was able that they also should keep the way of the Lord. The like is to be conceived concerning Joshua Jos 24. 15. So that there is little question to be made but that for Christian Parents to devote their children even from the womb unto the service of God and Jesus Christ is a devotion well becoming them and approved of God accordingly Consectary If it be commendable and Christian for Christian Parents to devote their children from the womb to the service of God and of Christ then is it lawful at least to make known or manifest this their act or councel of devoting them unto the world If so I demand by what means they can manifest or make such a thing known unto the world better or more Christian-like then by that which Christ himself hath appointed for a special cognizance of persons devoted unto his service I mean Baptism Postscript CONSIDERATION II. Omitted under the third Head THe truth of an Ordinance or Gods approving or allowing an Ordinance as legitimate cannot be estimated or known better or to more satisfaction then when he blesseth it unto those who receive it and causeth it to prosper to the producing of those gracious ends or effects for which it is appointed Proof The reason hereof is because the Scripture from place to place maketh this signal difference between the Ordinances of God with their regular Administrations and the devices and inventions of men that whereas the former are benedict of a gracious and happy influence upon the hearts and souls and consciences of men the latter are alwaies either noxions and destructive or else vain and fruitlesse at the best Peruse and compare diligently for your satisfaction herein these texts of Scripture with others of like Consideration without number 1 Sam. 12. 21. Levit. 20. 23. Deut. 5. 33. Deut. 12. 13. 25. 28. 30. Deut. 30. 16. 17. c. Jos 2. 5. 1 King 13. 33. 34. Jer. 2. 5. Jer. 19. 13. 14. c. Jer. 10. 3. Ezek. 20. 11. 13. 25. Ezek 33. 25. Hos 12. 1 2. 11. Hos 13. 1 2 3. Mat. 15. 9. Nor is it indeed reasonable to conceive that God whom the Scripture calleth a God of judgement and who will not suffer the ungodly to stand in the Congregation of the righteous nor make the wicked equal in favour or reward with the just should make the faces of humane inventions shine with that oil of joy and gladness which he hath prepared to anoint the faces of his own institutions So that Gods blessing either accompanying or following an Ordinance is his countenancing and owning it from Heaven and in vain do men labour to abase that which he will exalt Consectary If the blessing of God upon an Ordinance or Administration or the prospering of a soul under and by means of either be a sufficient and satisfactory argument that both the one and the other are legitimate owned and attested by God accordingly then is that Baptism with the administration of it which hath been dispensed unto many in their infancy regular and legitimate and attested by God for such inasmuch as thousands of souls have spiritually prospered and this to an eminent degree under it yea and by means of it at least with as much or more likelihood and proof then it can be proved that ever any soul thus prospered under or by means of that after-dipping which is obtruded by many upon the Christian world as the onely Baptism a Mr. S. Fisher with his fellowcon-subscribers Postscript CONSIDERATION IIII. Omitted under the 4th Head BAptism received in infancy and this without dipping is neithâ—r a nullity nor dâ—vice or institution of man Proof The rule which our Saviour delivereth Mat. 7. for the dijudication of good and corrupt trees and so of true and false Prophets By their fruits ye shall know them is of like service for the discerning of true Baptism from false A corrupt or false Baptism cannot bring forth the fruits of a true For in as much as no baptism no more that which is true then that which is false can operate or yeeld any spiritual or saving fruit but by the gracious interposure of God with it which is the seal of his approbation it clearly follows that in case it appears that Baptism received in infancy and this without dipping yeeldeth spiritual saving fruit yea such which is proper for true Baptism to yeeld this must be true Baptism and so approved by God A corrupt Tree saith our Saviour cannot bring forth good fruit Now that the Baptism we speak of and for which we plead yeeldeth all the real fruits of true Baptism yea and richly accommodates all ends and purposes which can reasonably or upon Scripture grounds be either expected from or ascribed unto true Baptism hath been demonstratively argued and evinced by us elsewhere a Water-dipping
about Bapâ—ism it self sect 3 5 3. The present contest relating unto Baptism better laid aside by the party 's contesting then weak consciences disturb'd with it 5 4. Mr. A. doth nâ—t state his question clearly so much as to his own sence 6 5. Mr. A. and his Scripture-proofs divided about the way to satisfaction 7. 9 6. God hath authorized the Lâ—w of Nature to over-rule administrations of Institutions 8 7. Persons not truly repentant may be duly baptized 10 8. Primitive practises may be lawfully varyed from upon exigencie of circumstances 11 9. 〈…〉 eer matter of fact no good foundation to prove eithâ—r the lawfulness or unlawfulness of a practise about an instituted Ordinance in all cases 13 10. Conclusio sequitur deteriorem partem 14. 48 11. No particular Administration of an Ordinance can answâ—r the whole mind or counsel of God in or about the said ordinance 14 12. Wâ—y the Apostles might omit though not neglect the baptizing of children notwithstanding they might lawfully have done it 15 13. How the reasons upon which the Apostles might forbear Infant-baptism may and may not be binding to the like forbearance now 16 14. Two reasons why the Pastors of Churches now may be in a better capacity of baptizing Infants then the Apostles or their Assistants were 18 19 20 15. How Christ and the Apostles to be imitated in what they did and did not sect 21 16. The total silence of the Scriptures about baptizing Infants what kind of proof and how it may be construed 22 23 17. How the baptizing of Housholds in the Scripture proveth Infant-baptism 24 18. How Christ's laying on hands on Children c. proveth Infant-baptism 25 40 132 157 158 19. Augustin a frequent and constant assertor of Infant-baptism from the Apostles 26 20. The testimony of Antient Writers for the practise of Infant-baptism by the Apostles upon what grounds authentique 27 21. No History recordeth the original of Infant-baptism 28 22. Auxentius an Arrian the first opposer of Infant baptism and Ludovicus Hetzer another Arrian and somwhat worse the first reviver of the opposition in Germany 29 23. Mr. A's Baptism a nullitie according to his own principles 29 24. No contests heard of from the Jews against the Apostles for excluding their Children from Baptism an argument that they were baptized 30 31 25. No reason imaginable why the Precept or Ordinance of Christ about the subject of Baptism should be changed by the Primitive Fathers 32 26. Practise of Ana-baptism standeth â—onely upon foundations that are either loose or irrelative 33 27. A submission unto Baptism no argument of the great successe of the Gospel 35 36 38 39 28. The Holy Ghost at libâ—rty in drawing up his own records 36 29. Vnder the expression of Men and Women in the Scriptures children also are sometimes comprehended 37 30. Baptizing of Men and Women no proof of the success of the Gospel 38 39 31. Suffer little children to come unto me how proveth that Infants were baptized in the Apostles daies 40 41 158 32. A non-scriptum proveth not a non-factum 42 33. Neither the qualifications nor the persons described of all that were baptised 42 34. No firm arguing from order of expressing 43 35. To teach and to make Disciples how widely differ 44 36. When a mans grounds for his opinions are insufficient and so evicted answering of some objections though never so substanâ—ially will not relieve them 45 168 37. Mr. A's second argument as much against the counsel of God in circumcision as against the opinion of his Adversaries in the point of Baptism 46 49 38. The greater serviceableness of a thing in one case proveth not the unlawfulness of it in all others 47 48 53 118 39. The manifestation of Christ to the world no end of Baptism 50. 51. nor yet to the baptised themselves 53 40. When Baptizing is customary and in fashion it is no sign or proof of any mans Faith or Repentance 54 41. Infant-baptizing as much or rather more instructing edifying quickning c. unto spectators as men-baptizing 56 73 159 160 42. How the Priests and Elders rejected the counsel of God against themselves not hauing been baptized of John 57 58 43. Persons duly baptized do not alwaies take up the Ordinance out of a principle of Repeâ—tance 60 44. Remission of sins to be looked for upon Repentance without or before Baptism 61 131 175 45. Circumcision not a sign and seal of the righteousnesse of Faith unto Abraham only 61 46. The Verb substantive oft used in a declarative sence 62 47. What it was that properly constituted Abraham the father of all that beleeve 62 48. Rom. 4. 11. thoroughly understood gives a great light into the Question about Baptism 64 49. Children in a capacity of engaging to the practise of Repentance as wel as men 64 65 68 69 182 50. One end of Baptism better answered or provided for by mens-baptism doth neither prove the baptizing of children unlawful nor yet that another end thereof may not be better provided for hereby 67 98 51. The end of planting not made frustrate by the non-fructifiâ—ation of the tree immediately upon the planting of it 69 152 52. Baptism how needfull for children Sect. 71. 53. No profession or declaration made unto the world by Mr. A's Baptizing 72. 75. 73. 54. Profession made by Parents at their childrens baptizing aâ— available unto others as by other men at their Baptism 73. 55. A person duly baptized is not an Agent but a patient in his Baptism 76. 56. Whâ—ther a man be to sign and seal the Articles of his Covenant with God at the time of his entring hereunto before witnesses c. 75. 76. 98. 57. Baptism not to be taken up in order to râ—mission of sins 77. 61 58. Mr. A most unchristianly taxeth the whole Christian world 79. 59. Arguments proving that a Declaration of a mans Repentance by Baptism is not required on his part to interess him in remission of sins 80. 81. 82 c. 60. Faith and repâ—â—tance according to Mr. A but dead works until Baptism quickeneth them 81. 89 61. Submission to a carnal commandment is not of more accepration with God then unto a spiritual 80. 62. Mr. A. adjudgeth the whole generation of Christians a very fâ—w only excepted both ancient and modern as well Fathers Martyrs and Reformers as others unto eternal condemnation 81. 63. Baptism can be no Declaration of any mans Repentance 82. 52 64. The Apostle Paul no where interesseth Baptism in justification or in the obtaining of remission of sins 83. 65. The remission of his sins who truly repenteth or beleevâ—th is not suspended upâ—n what another man may possibly refuse to do unto him § 83. 18. much less upon what would be sinful in himself to yeeld unto 84. 88. 66. Abrahams spiritual children are justified after the same manner â—ith him 85. 67. Baptism may relate unto salvation as some other of the Commandments of God may do and yet
benefit by being taken into communion and fellowship with that Church or people to whom God bare and shewed from time to time more and greater respects of Grace and love then to any other people under Heaven especially considering that the Apostle having demanded thus What advantage then hath the Jew or what profit is there of Circumcision returneth this answer to his question much every ways Rom 3. 1. Consectary If it were a priviledge of Grace unto children under the Law to be incorporated with the holy People and Church of God then in being then must it needs be a priviledge of like Grace unto children under the Gospel to be in like manner incorporated with Gospel Churches And consequently such Parents who are in a capacity of procuring this priviledge or blessing unto their children by causing them to be baptized and yet shall neglect or refuse to do it must needs be looked upon as Parents of hard bowels and un-Christianly injurious to their Children And if God should interpose by any prohibition of his against children in this behalf under the Gospel he also should be found by many degrees estranged in his care and affection from children since the comming of his own Son Jesus Christ in the flesh in comparison of his respects towards them under the Law especially considering that under the Gospel he hath not invested them with any other priviledge of like Grace and favour with that in-Churching them under the Law neither indeed are they investible with any like to it CONSIDERATION XXVIII VVHen the Jews through the just judgement of God were for their Sins cast off from being a Church or people any longer unto him their children were involved in the rejection as well as themselves I mean as well as their men and women and those who were Parents and had from henceforth no right to any Church Ordinance unlesse happily it be unto Baptisme and this in such cases and upon such terms onely as those specified Part. 2. of this discourse § 171. Proof This consideration also may well be numbred amongst those which carry self-evidence enough in themselves and need no labour of proof to commend their truth and some of our Re-Baptizers themselves do acknowledge it However most certain it is that circumcision with the whole retiâ—ue of the Mosaical or Levitical Ordinances depending hereon Gal. 5. 3. is abolished by the death of Christ and promulgation of the Gospel in which respect no person whether Jew or Gentile whether Parents or children are in any regular capacity of any of these Therefore if the Jewish Children under the rejection of their Nation or Parents be not in a capacity of Baptism they are in no capacity of any Church Ordinance whatsoever Consectary If the Jewish children were together with their Parents dis-franchised and deprived of their former rights and priviledges in respect of Church-membership and Church-Ordinances when their Parents were rejected by God and their Church state dissolved and abolished then can it not reasonably nor with any tolerable accord to the righteousnesse and goodnesse of God be imagined but that in case their Parents should repent and return unto God by Faith consequently be re-inchurched by him they also the children I mean should partake of this Grace and be together re-invested with them and consequently hereunto should by Baptism be members of the same Christian Churches respectively with them Yea it is the judgement and sence of some of our Adversaries and these not inconsiderable in their tribe that when the Jews shall return by faith unto him whom they have crucified and imbrace Christian Religion they will expect and demand Baptiâ—m for their children also Now there is no reason to think that the children of Jewish Beleevers as such should have any priviledge in Church affairs above the the children of Gentile Beleevers who by faith are the children of Abraham a well as they If so then are the children of these beleeving Gentiles regular subjects of the Ordinance of Baptism at the present as the children of the other the Jews will be when their Parents shall beleeve CONSIDERATION XXIX THe Jewish children were baptized into or unto Moses as well as their Parents in the cloud and in the Sea Proof This Assertion is the Apostles expresse Doctrine Moreover Brethren I would not that ye should be ignorant how that all our Fathers were under the cloud and all passed thorough the Sea And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the Sea 1 Cor. 10. 1 2. Now 1. That by all our Fathers he means all the Jewish children at those times in being whereof he speaks as well as their Parenrs is evident Because those who were now children at the time of the Baptizing here spoken of were Fathers to the Jewish generation in Pauls time as well as those who were then men in as much as this generation descended from them who were then children as well as from their Parents Besides if the Jewish children now in being were not Baptized into Moses as well as their Parents by the Cloud and by the Sea then were they no whit ingaged to obey Moses in his conduct or government over them during their passage thorough the wildernesse upon the account either of the miraculous protection or direction of the cloud here spoken of or of their miraculous deliverance through the red Sea both being vouchsafed by God unto them under Moses his conduct for the confirmation of it unto them as being from himself I mean from God But this I presume is no mans thought therefore the children of the Jews as well as their Parents are affirmed by Paul to have been baptized into Moses by the means specified Consectary If all the Jewish children were baptized into Moses by the cloud and by the Sea then may all Christian children be by water baptized into Christ There can be nothing considerable objected against this consequence For 1. Moses was a typical Christ and his conduct or leading of the people unto Canaan was a typical leading of men to Heaven 2. The children of Christians are altogether as capable of being baptized by water into the true Moses I mean Christ as the children of the Jews were of being baptized by the cloud and by the Sea into their typical Christ I mean Moses nor can any material difference be shewed between the one case and the other If it be objected that the Jewish children are metaphorically onely and improperly said to have been baptized into Moses when as the baptizing into Christ is literal and proper I answer let this difference be admitted yet it no waies disableth the consequence in hand For what can there be required to give a capacity of a literal or proper baptism more then is required to give a like capacity of a metaphorical typical or mystical baptisme Nay in reason more should be required to qualifie for this then for the other For things literally and properly such
yet to retain more simplicity then the other concerning this other he saith that it is as it were a most intricate and perplexed labyrinth of mad conceits so absurd that strange it is that creatures in the shape of men should be so far berest oâ— reason and sence as to fall into those imaginations which the bruit beasts themselves would abhorre a Altera est velati implicatissima Labyrinthus deliriorum quidem adeò absurdorum â—t mirum sit creaturas figuram humaâ—am gerâ—ntes ita ratione sensu destitâ—i ut in â—as incidant imaginationes a quibus bestiae ipsae mutuae abhorrerent He that desireth to know some of the more horrid and execrable opinions and Doctrines held forth and maintained by these men needeth onely to peruse the sequell of the said discourse That sort or kind of Anabaptist in which he observeth somewhat more ingenuity and simplicity of heart then in their fellows consisteth I suppose of such of them who are green comparatively in this profession coming more lately from under the Ministry of sober and sound Teachers and from the acquaintance and converse of good and worthy Christains For as the saying is Nemo repente fuit turpissimus No man comes to the height of impiety all at once And according to another saying Quo semel est imbuta recens servabit odorem Testa diâ— The cask a long time will retain the scent Which was at first by seasoning to it lent An Anabaptist is not to be estimated by what he is or continues to be ordinarily for 5 or 7 years space next after his proselytism Neronis quinquennium was proverbiall amongst the Romans Nero's goodnesse held out very commendably for the first five years in his Empire for the most part he reteins somewhat of the spirit of that Christian ingenuity with which he was seasoned under the propitious influence of his former his best and most benedict Baptism and comes not to his natural Genius or to be an Anabaptist indeed untill he hath out-worn all the candor and simplicity of his former profession and comes wholly to settle upon the lees and dregs of his latter But this onely by the way in this place Vrsin as we formerly heard describing the Anabapâ—istical sect as he termeth it saith that without doubt it hath been raised up by the Devil and is an execrable Monster composed and made up of various heresies and Blasphemies Melchior Adamus in the life of Zuinglius writeth to this effect In the mean time as the Divel alway usâ—th to sow his tares the Heresie of the Catabaptists crept in whilest Zuinglius was carrying on the work of Reformation At first they forbad the baptizing of Infants and rebaptized themselves Afterwards they brought in a puddle of all the Heresies that ever were c. At Augusta Basil and in Moravia there were Anabaptists as Bullinger reporteth that affirmed that Christ was but a Prophet and that the Divels and wicked men should be saved This last most dangerous and pernicious errour viz. that the Divels and all men without exception shall at last be saved hath lately taken the Fancy of a great Female Teacher and Actress in the cause of Anabaptism not far from this City as I have been lately informed by a person of her own Baptismal perswasion The same grave and pious Author Mr. Henry Bullinger further speaking of this sort of men saith This no man can deny that most of them do forsake their wives and children and laying by all labour do live idly and are fed by other mens labours and when they abound with filthy and abhominable lust they say it is the command of their Heavenly Father perswading women and honest Matrons that it is impossible they should be partakers of the Kingdom of Heaven unlesse they filthily prostitute their bodies alledging that it is written that we must renounce all those things which we love best and that all kinds of infamy are to be swallowed by the Godly for Christ's sake and that Publicans and Harlots go first into the Kingdom of Heaven A while after having challenged any man to deny the truth of these things and affirmeth that all he hath said may be be proved by signed letters and certain testimonies he addeth For my part I have in prudence silenced their crimes and speak lesse then they have committed so much the more doth it grieve me that men are so blind they do not observe these things nor lay them to heart yea that a great part of men do imbrace and follow these erroneous men even as though they came down from Heaven and were Saints among mortals who preach nothing but what is Divine and Heavenly when as they farre exceed the Nicholaitans and Valentinians in filthinesse It were endlesse to recite all that which approved Authors and of unquestionable credit have recorded concerning the most absurd horrid and blasphemous Doctrites and opinions which in all forreign parts where that generation of men we speak of have had to do have been held maintained and importunely propagated by them It is wel known that the gravest and most judicious writers since the late reformation as Calvin Bucer Zanchy P. Martyr Musculus Beza Chemnitius Scultetus Aretius with many others of like note do in their writings commonly stile the sect of Anabaptists furious and fanatique in respect of the wild uncouth and mad opinions held and vented by them But it may be our English soil is more proper for the way and breeds a more composed and better-headed kind of Anabaptist lesse obnoxious to fumes and fancies to strange notions and erroneous conceits then other countries or that God intreateth the Anabaptists amongst us more graciously then to deliver them up to such enormous and vile opinions as those found amongst persons of the same denomination in other places of the world The truth is that Nec lacte lacti nec ovum ovo similius milk is not more like unto milk nor one egg to another Whether this be true or no I am content shall be adjudged by the Native result and conclusion arising from those unquestionable premises which are delivered and asserted by Mr. Ri. Baxter in his book of Baptism so oft-mentioned pag. 147 148 149. In the beginning of that part of his discourse to which I now refer he writeth thus And as Anabaptism hath been no greater friend to mens salvation with us so every man knows that it is the ordiâ—ary inlet to the most horrid opinions How few did you ever know that came to the most monstrous Doctrines but it was by this door And how few did you ever know that entred this dore but they went yet further except they died or repented shortly after I confesse that of the multitudes of Anabaptists that I have known at the present I cannot call to mind any one that hath stopt there c. Afterwards he subjoins many instances for the proof of these things from the very books and writings
temper being over-obnoxious to jealousies and fears they seek to fortifie and arm themselves against them or to qualifie them by a conceit that they do more to please God then the ordinary sort of Christians do The reason why the second sort are propense or apt to be inclined the same way is because any strein of devotion which is singular is a wind proper to fill their sails and to gratifie that fleshly humour which worketh in them The reason why the third sort are alike obnoxious with both the former is because they finding themselves straitned in their inward comfort and peace by doing lesse in religion then ordinary men hope to recover themselves by a contrary course viz. by doing more then ordinary men The reason why the fourth and last sort are apt to be taken in the same snare with all the former is because they who look upon themselves as doing more to please God then other men are apt to claim a liberty as it were by a kind of right to please themselves likewise more then other men Consectary The Premises considered together with the great numbers both of men and women ingaged in a profession of the Gospel who fall under one or other of the four heads or sorts of persons mentioned it needs be no cumber or trouble at all to any mans thoughts to see the way of Anabaptism so pestered and throng'd with Professors CONSIDERATION LIIII NO kind of Sects or Opiners have more generally been more hardned in the way or found more imperswasible out of the way of their errour then those whâ— have been ablâ— to prâ—tend the plain letter of the Scripture though mis-understood for their opinion or practise especially when a letter of a like plainnesse is not to be found or cannot be produced against them Proof The Papists we know mis-understanding these words of Christ Hoc est Gorpus meum this is my body arâ— so transported with confidence of truth in their most absurd and blasphemous Doctrine of Transubstantiation it being no where in Scripture said concerning the same thing Hoc non est Corpus mâ—um this is not my body that they resolve with fire and sword to maintain it against all opposers So likewise because they find it written Ye see then â—ow that by works a man is justified and not by faith onâ—ly Jam. 2. 24. and no such words as these ye see then that a man is not at all justified by works but by faith onely found to contradict the other therefore there is no removing them from their dangerous Doctrine of justification by works Thus also the Arrian goeth a way rejoicing with an high hand over his accursed Doctrine wherein he denieth the God-head of Christ because Joâ— 14. 28. he findeth Christ himself speaking thus My Father is greater then I and cannot be opposed in this his rejoycing with any such words as these found in the Scripture I am as great as my Father I shall not need to multiply instances Câ—nsectary This Consideration being unquestionably true it needs the lesse trouble or offend any man to meet with that enormous confidence in many Anabaptists touching the goodness of their Opinion and practise wherewith they amuse the consciences of many weak unlearned and unstable souls although the truth is they can no more find any such words as these in the Scriptures infants are not to be baptized then we such as these infants ought to be baptized nor yet again any such words as these beleevers onely ought to be baptized more then we such as these Beleevers onely are not to be baptized CONSIDERATION LV. WHen men and women are inordinate in valuing or prizing an erroneous whether opinion or practise there is the lesse hope of reclaiming them from either Proof The reason hereof is ready of apprehension What a man possesseth with contentment and with an opinion of receiving good by it or from it he is carefull and indeavours to fortifie and secure himself in the possession of it And the greater the contentment and expectation of good is in and from that which a man possesseth he is the more studious and industrous to make good his possession hereof and the more unwilling to part with it Now there is nothing which any man who is not of a meer Atheistical perswasion possesseth of which he maketh greater treasure then of his principles notions and apprehensions in things appertaining unto God and the saving of his soul especially of such of these notions and perswasions without which or without the practique of which he conceives that he cannot or very hardly be saved That which made the Jews of old so importunely yea even desperately tenacious of their opinion and practise of circumcision that all the Apostle could say or argue against them in these things could not make them to relent in the least was their conceit of the absolute necessity of this ceremony to salvation according to that Act. 15. 1. And certain men which came down from Judea taught the Brethren and said except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses YEA CANNOT BE SAVED Consectary If there be lesse likelihood or hope of recovering men out of the snare of an errour or erroneous way when and whilest they value either at an excessive rate then need it not seem strange unto any man that that spirit which worketh in men and women of the new baptismal perswasion should generally be so stiffe necked peremptory and resolv'd that though the truth should arise upon them like the Sun in his might yet they would see nothing to make them so much as to doubt considering their overgrown yea monstrous and prodigious conceit of the worth and goodnesse of their way Postscript These two Considerations following were omitted under the third Head of Considerations Postscript CONSIDERATION I. AS the Scripture sometimes under the word MEN comprehendeth women as well as men yea and sometimes children also so under the expression MEN AND WOMEN it more frequently comprehendeth children Proof The truth of this discourse is sufficiently evinced § 37. of the latter part of this discourse and repetitions where originals are so near at hand are altogether needlesse Onely that may here be added that as threescore and fifteen souls Act. 7. 14. importeth women and children as well as men so the three thousand souls which are said to have been added viz. to the Lord Act. 2. 41. and implied to have been baptized consisted of women and children as well as men as Cajetan observeth upon the place Nor doth it hinder that in the former part of the verse it is said Then they that gladly received his word were baptized For this doth not necessarily imply that onely they who thus received his word were baptized or that the three thousand souls presently said to have been added did all receive the word gladly but may with much probability import onely this that the number of those who did thus receive the word and were
practise in question by those very reasons from the bond or obliging force whereof the Apostles might be discharged by others of a preponderant consideration Therefore the arm of Mr. A's reason is too short to reach his conclusion Sect. 21. In the upshot of his proof of his major proposition he tells us that it might be backed if needfull he might more truly have said bellied or made more bulky then backed or strengthned from Philip 3. 17. 1 Cor. 11. 1 2. From which Texts he would prove that we ought to follow Christ and his Apostles in what they did as being rules and examples to us what to do and what not in all manner of worship or actions which they did or did not Either this must be his inference from these Scriptures or else his citation of them is no waies relative to his purpose But evident it is from what hath been already argued neither these Scriptures nor any other of their calculation do require any further or any other imitation either of Christ himself or of the Apostles then 1. In such waies and actions which are prescribed unto us by some Commandement or other of God and 2. In such cases when we are ingaged by or are found under the same circumstances to follow by which they were ingaged to go before But the said Scriptures do at no hand nor with any tolerable face of probability impose it as a duty upon us to refrain all actions or practises which for ought we know they refrained especially not to refrain all such actions or practises which in case they did refrain they had ground and reason to refrain and we not Yet unlesse Mr. A. can tamper these Scriptures to speak this they will in effect say to him and his cause for which he seeks their advocation Depart from us we know you not Thus we see by a light as clear as any the Sun shines at noon day that the major proposition in Mr. A's first argument is very crazie and so no competent material to make a pillar for any mans Faith or practise And if this proposition be shaken the whole strength and glory of the Argument according to the rule mentioned § 14. is already in the dust Notwithstanding lest any man should be so ignorant or weak as not to give credit to the said rule but think that if either of the propositions in an Argument will stand the Argument may by vertue hereof be authentique and in force let us bring the minor proposition which he calls The assumption to the touch-stone also The tenor of this proposition is this But Baptism was not administred to Infants neither in the daies of John the Baptist nor of the Apostles If this proposition were true and could be demonstrated yet it comes too late to salve the credit of the Argument as was lately said But being carefully weighed in the ballance of the Sanctuary it will be found too light as the former also was For Sect. 22. 1. It is no where said or affirmed that Infants were not baptized by John the Apostles c. Therefore unlesse it can be proved by some light and pregnant consequence from somewhat that is written that they were not baptized which to do would make a new thing under the Sun the proposition before us is no proposition of Faith nor stands any man bound to beleeve it 2. Mr. A's proof from the total silence of the Scripture herein is as good as total silence or the speaking of nothing For it is a common and true rule that Argumentum ab authoritate ductum negativè non valet a negative Argument from Authority proves nothing And Mr. A. from the total silence of the Scripture may as well prove that neither husband men nor Merchants nor Taylors nor Shoe-makers nor persons of twenty other callings besides were baptized as well as that infants were not baptized There is alike total silence of the Scripture concerning the baptizing of the one and the other or if there be any difference in this kind the silence is not so perfectly or absolutely total concerning the baptizing of children as of the others as will appear presently Sect. 23. 3. That total silence of the Scriptures which he pleadeth to prove the non-baptizing of children in the Apostles days may with as much reason be construed as an argument that they were baptized constantly and of course For matters of common and known practise the knowledge whereof doth not much concern future times especially when these practises may beâ—evinced otherwise are frequently and as it were of course pretermitted in Historical narrations There is very little mention made of children circumcised in the old Testament the reason questionlesse is because their Circumcision was so common a practise There is much more notice taken of the Circumcision of men see Gen. 17. 23 24 25. Gen. 34. 24. Jos 5. 7. 8. because this was a practise besides yea and contrary to the letter of the institution I conclude therefore saith Mr. Baxter p. 116. of his Discourse for Infant-Church-membership and Baptism that it is a most evident truth that Christ did not speak about Infants-Church-membership because it was a known truth beyond controversie Nor was there any one man found in those days that we read of that ever denied it and all the Jews yea and all other Church-members were in actual possession of it and Christ never questioned their possession Upon the like account it very well may be that there is so much spoken in the New-Testament of the baptizing of men and women and so little or nothing at all in so many words of the baptizing of children The frequent mention of men and women baptized may with as much probability if not more argue that the first administrations of Baptism were out of course and contrary to the order setled by the institution made unto them as that they should be exemplary or binding unto future ages As the recording of so many men circumcised about the first institution of Circumcision was not intended to make these administrations standingly or in ordinary cases exemplary or obligatory unto after-times because this had been to defeat the express letter of the institution but rather to shew that in like cases and under like circumstances viz. when male Jews or Proselites had not been circumcised the eight day they might be circumcised afterwards when ever they had opportunity And prâ—bâ—ble it is that the circumcising of so many men Jos 5. was warranted unto Joshua by the record of those examples In like manner the reason why the Holy Ghost maketh such frequent report in the New-Testament of men and women baptized may with greatest â—â—obability be not to leave these examples for patterns or rules in all no nor yet in ordinary cases but onely in such cases which parallel those wherein the said administrations are reported to have been made viz. when men and women should at any time be converted from an idolatrous
and false Religion and not have been baptized before Much more might be added in confirmation of what hath been now asserted but the thing it self hath so much face as well as heart and strength of reason in it that untill I hear whether that which hath been already said will satisfie or why it should not I shall forbear any further ingagement for the proof of it Sect. 24. If children were not baptized by the Apostles or in their daies it is at no hand to be beleeved that the Holy Ghost would have cast any such snare upon the Christian world in after-times as so frequent a report of housholds and families baptized made in the New-Testament and this without any limitation or exception of persons amounteth unto especially considering that it both was and is a thing generally known that under the Divine dispensation immediately preceding I mean that of Moses children in families were the more appropriate subject of that Ordinance which was a seal of the same Covenant with baptism viz. of the righteousnesse of Faith i. e. of remission of sins upon beleving Rom. 4. 11. as we shall evince and prove in due time and did perform the same or like service in the main unto the Church of God under the Law which Baptism now performeth under the Gospel as some of the Doctors of the way of Ana-baptism themselves do acknowledge though Mr. A. following his over-confident and sufficiently-ignorant leader weeneth otherwise For what though that which Mr. A. laboureth to prove pag. 10. though his enterprize be too hard for him should be granted viz. that there were no children in those families which are reported to have been baptized by the Apostles or by their order yet from the very tenor of this expression that they baptized Housholds it is evident enough that they did baptize children or that which is every waies equivalent hereunto that the mind of the Holy Ghost is that children should be baptized For it being left upon sacred record simply and indefinitely that housholds were baptized and it being the ordinary dialect and language of the Scriptures by the word houshold and house to understand and comprehend as well children who are very considerable parts or members of an houshold where they be as persons of riper yeers a Therefore we may conclude that the Apostles did baptize children or infants and not onely men of lawful age and that the house or houshold is taken for man woman and child is manifest in the 17th of Genesis and also in that Joseph doth call Jacob with all his house to come out of the land of Canaan into Egypt Mr. J. Philpot Martyr in a letter directed unto §. 27. it cannot reasonably be thought but that the Holy Ghost did intend that housholds simply and ablolutely as well those which have children in them as those which have none yea and these children themselves being as was said parts of these housholds might be baptized And if so doubtlesse the Apostles who complied with the mind and intent of the Holy Ghost in their sacred administrations did baptize children And if Mr. A. and his from the simple and general reports of beleevers being baptized argue and conclude that therefore all beleevers may be baptized why from the like report of housholds being baptized where the grown members did beleeve may not we infer and conclude likewise that all housholds where the grown members do beleeve may be baptized also Or if the intent of the Holy Ghost had been that onely actual Beleevers in an house should be baptized would he have informed the Christian world that housholds whole housholds or all in an house were baptized without giving some intimation at least that children in every house were ought to be excepted He that is so careful and desirous above measure to way-lay and prevent every sin and every transgression in men even to the speaking of an idle or vain word yea to the conceiving or tolerating of a vain thought doubtlesse would not have neglected at that turn we now speak of especially not having done it elsewhere to insert some word or other by which so great a sin as the baptizing of children if it be a sin might be prevented much lesse would he have ministred such an occasion unto his Saints as that specified to draw and incourage them to the perpetration of such a sin Sect. 25. 5. To me it is one of the Congregation of the first born of Probabilities that the Children brought to Christ with a desire in them that brought them that he should lay his hands on them and pray Mat. 19. 13. c. had been already baptized For it is expresly said Mar. 10. 16. that he put or laid his hands upon them Now we never read in the New-Testament of the laying on of hands upon any unbaptized person unlesse haply it were in order to the working of some miraculous cure on him on whom they were laid See Mar. 5. 5. 8. 23. Mar. 16. 18. Luke 4. 40. Luke 13. 13. Acts 9. 17. Acts 28. 8. In all other cases imposition of hands was practised upon baptized persons onely Acts 6. 6. Acts 8. 17. Acts 13. 3. Acts 19. 6. 1 Tim. 4. 14. 2 Tim. 1 6. And more usually this imposition of hands was practised on those that had either formerly or lately been baptized and this in order to the receiving of the Holy Ghost the Apostles it seems haply with some Elders of Churches besides in those daies having received this gift from God viz. by laying on of hands and prayer to obtain and impart the gift of the Holy Ghost unto Christians Yea several Churches of the Anabaptists themselves amongst us glory in the outward ceremony of laying on hands upon their proselytes newly baptized as if they were the Apostles heirs and by descent inherited all their spiritual royalties and heavenly prerogatives herein much resembling that ridiculous effeminate Emperor who out of a foolish desire to be thought Hercules or a man of strength and courage like unto him would needs attire himself with a Lyons skin But now it no waies appears nor is it in it self a thing likely that the children we speak of were brought unto Christ to obtain any cure of any malady or disease from him Besides if Christ had performed any miraculous cure upon them there is little question but that this would as well yea much rather have been mentioned by the Evangelists at least one or other of them as his laying of hands upon them Therefore in all likelihood they were baptized before they were brought to Christ to obtain the laying on of his hands upon them Or if we shall say that Christ layed hands on them that they might receive the Holy Ghost supposing them at present un-baptized yet being made partakers of the Holy Ghost by or upon the laying on of Christs hands they were hereby put into an immediate capacity of receiving Baptism according to that of
Antesignanus vir trium linguarum peritissimus sed qui de multis fidei capitibus singulares opiniones habuit Negavit divinitatem Christi Causam supplicij de illo sumpti Blarerus in Anabaptismum rejicit alij in crebra ejus adulteria quae nonnunquam è Scripturis defendere sit ausus Quorum omnium seria ductus poenitentiâ c. Scultet Annat Dec. 2. circa finem Anni 1529. Those who of later times and since the beginning of the Reformation attempted first by Luther revived this opposition whereas before the followers of the Lamb as well as of the Beast had continued the practice of baptizing infants time out of mind as the saying is without interruption are known to have been one Nicholas Ciconia in English Stork Mark Stubner Martin Cellar and Thomas Munster these in the yeer 1521. went up and down from place to place in Germany and insnared many unlearned and simple people with their pernicious Doctrine as my Author termeth it Their manner was to boast of colloquies or private conferences with God to talk and inveigh both against Ministers of the Gospel and men in civil authority to clamour that all things in the Church were corrupt and out of order and therefore must be reduced that there must be a new Church built and the Citizens or members initiated with a second Baptism What kind of persons these were together with the far greatest part of those whom they drew into their opinion how they disturbed both the Ecclesiastical and civil peace in all places almost where they came especially where they grew to any head or numbers considerable I shall forbear here to relate referring the Reader desirous of satisfaction in such particulars to unpartial histories of those times Or to contract his labour in this kind I recommend unto him upon this account the perusal onely of the 14th chapter of the second part of Mr. Baxter's book intituled Plain Scripture Proof for Infants Church-membership and Baptism Onely I shall mention this concerning Martin Cellar one of the four and the learnedst man of them that after he had stood by his sect several years and had writ much for it at last perceiving that his party declined and matters did not answer his expectation he went and setled at Basil married and lived quietly taught Divinity and as being ashamed to be known or called by that name under which he had professed Ana-baptism he changed his name from Cellarius into Borrhaus under which name he wrote learned Commentaries upon the five books of Moses with some others which are now extant under this name By the way I marvell not a little upon what ground Mr. A. and his partisans can satisfie themselves touching the authentiquenesse of their new Baptisms considering that which I suppose is their own principle also that no unbaptized Person hath any right or is in any regular capacity to administer Baptism and consequently that Baptism administred by and received from such a person is a meer nullity and no true Baptism For all persons baptized in infancy being judged by them unbaptized and there being no other but such in the nation when their new Baptism was first administred here it undeniably follows that the first administration of it was a meer nullity and upon this account how the second or third or thousandth or ten thousandth administration should become any other then a nullity also and this according to their own principles I cannot understand And to prove that their first administration here had an immediate Commission from God as John Baptist had or from Christ as possibly the Apostles had to erect that kind of Baptism in this Nation which he administred is I suppose far above the line of their learning Certain I am that they must ascend far above that which is written to prove it Sect. 30. 9. Had not children as well as men and women been baptized by the Apostles or in their daies why do we not hear of exceptions quarrels and contests made against them in that behalf by some or other of their Antagonists Lawyers Sadduces Scribes Pharisees or other Zealots amongst the Jews This nation we all know had now for many generations even from the dayes of Abraham their Father been possest by God of an holy priviledge and accommodation for themselves and their children I mean circumcision yea and were wont to boast not onely or simply of their prerogative of circumcision but likewise of their admission unto it and reception of it in their infancy and at the eight day as is clear from that of the Apostle Philip 3. 4 5. If any other man thinketh he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh I more CIRCVMCISED THE EIGHT DAY c. Yea Mr. Fisher himself Baby-baptism pag. 182. acknowledgeth or rather as making for his cause confidently avoucheth that the circumcising of their children was a businesse which the Jews so doted on that of all things they were unwilling to let it go Yea it seems they were highly incensed against Paul upon a rumour that he prohibited the circumcising of their children Act. 21. 21. Now then if Christ or his Apostles should by their new Doctrine of the Gospel against which they sought all manner of exceptions and pretences lightly imaginable have excluded their children not onely from circumcision it self but from all other accommodations or priviledges whatsoever that should any waies answer or counterpoize it is it to be beleeved that they would have taken no notice of it or made it no matter of offence and quarrel Or if they did stumble at it and disparage or fault the Gospel or the managing of it in the world upon such an account can it be thought that the Holy Ghost would have made no record of such a thing nor yet of Christs or the Apostles vindication or justification of themselves and their practice against such an imputation especially considering that very many things are recorded by him of far lesse moment then such a vindication would have been Yea doubtlesse the reason why the Apostle Peter immediately upon his exhortation to the Jews to repent and be baptized subjoineth the mentin of their children as interessed in the same grace and priviledge with them was to prevent the offence which they might justly have taken in case themselves onely had been admitted to Gospel priviledges and their children excluded Sect. 31. 10. Whereas the Apostle Paul informs the Colossians who it seems were bending towards the Jewish Circumcision that they were COMPLEAT in Christ in whom he saith they were circumcised also with a Circumcision made without hands Buried with him in Baptism c. Manifestly implying that Baptism was an Ordinance as much or as well if not more or more significantly compleating them as Circumcision with all the retinue of legal observations depending thereon did or ever had done the Jews if it be not supposed that their children whilest such had been or might be baptized as well as
Scripture reproofs 1. Of mens intruding themselves into those things which they have not seen And 2. Of being wise above what is written fall more directly upon himself and his Symmysts then upon his Adversaries For certain it is that the non-baptizing of Infants in the Apostles daies is not written and yet Mr. A. maketh himself so wise as to know it Sect. 11. To his second proof wherein with its fellows he rejoyceth as being of a proper and potent tendency to carry the minds of men that are at liberty to beleeve any thing and not under the bands of prâ—judice and partiality to think and conceive that no Infants were baptized in the daies mentioned a p. 3. We answer likewise 1. That the Evangelist Luke did not set himself to expresse and set forth the power and great successe of the Gospel in Samaria Answer to Mr. A's 2d consideration to prove no baptizing of Infants in the Apostles daies p. 3 4. c. in those words They were baptized both men and women but rather in those in the former part of the verse But when they beleeved Philip preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God Acts 8. 12. A cordial and sound beleeving of the things of the Gospel by men and women argues the power and great successe of the ministry thereof but a prevailing with them onely to be baptized is of no such interpretation or import Jerusalem and ALL Judea and all the Region round about Jordan were so far prevailed with by John as to be content to be baptized b Mat. 3. 5 6. And yet John himself speaking of Christ complaineth that no man i. e. exceeding few receiveth his testimony c Joh. 3. 32. i. e. truly beleeved on him And notwithstanding the vast multitudes that were baptized by John a very little while before yea and greater by Christ himself and his Disciples * Joh. 4. 1. yet the number of the names of the Disciples at the time of Christs ascention amounted onely to an hundred and twenty d Acts 1. 15. Nor was the great multitude that was baptized by John any argument of the great power or successe of his ministry because many who in all likelihood had never heard him preach yet upon the common fame of his being a Prophet came forth with a desire and intent to be baptized of him For we read not of his preaching any where but onely in the Country about Jordan and in the Wildernesse where he baptized e Luke 3. 3. See §. 177. whereas as well Jerusalem and all Judea as we heard as all the Country about Jordan went forth to be baptized of him f Mat. 3. 5. Mar. 1. 5. Therefore a perswasion wrought in men and women to be content to be baptized is a weak proof of the power or great successe of the Gospel Thus we see the very basis and ground-work which is but Mr. A's own supposition of all he pleads pag. 4. and 5. to be a pure mistake Sect. 36. 2. The Power and great successe of the Gospel is expressed by Luke and this in several places where he makes no mention at all of the baptizing of any person man or woman but onely of the conversion of persons to the Faith and of some worthy fruits or testimonies thereof far greater then a willingnesse to be baptized Atd the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified And many that beleeved came and confessed and shewed their deeds Many also of them which used curious Arts brought their Books together and burned them before all men and they counted the price of them and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver SO MIGHTILY grew the Word of God and PREVAILED a Acts 19. 17 18 c. See also Acts 4. 4. Acts 11. 21. 24. Acts 13. 43. 48. Acts 14. 21. Acts 16. 5. Acts 17. 3 4. 11 12. 34. In all these places Luke questionlesse intended to set forth the power and great successe of the Gospel yet mentioneth not the baptizing of so much as any one person Therefore according to Mr. A's principles if we shall suppose that there were any such thing as baptizing amongst any of the persons recorded in these passages to have been converted to the Faith we must suppose that the Holy Ghost not recording it scarcely did that to the one half which he should have done totally and intirely in relation to his proposed end These kinds of reasoning are most lamentable grounds whereon to build the pulling down of Churches 3. Whereas he urgeth the record of Moses declaring Abraham's obedience to the Word of God not onely and barely by his own personal circumcision but by his circumcising first himself after that his Son and then his servants also it seems that if Moses had not been thus punctual and particular in drawing up this record M. A. would have blamed him for it and arraigned him of unfaithfulnesse had he known that such things had been done by Abraham and he Moses not recorded them Is it so hard a thing for Mr. A. to allow unto the Holy Ghost the liberty of his own understanding in framing his records and reports of matters done Or must it needs be supposed that because he is more particular express in one place he must needs be so in another or in all Or must he be charged either with superfluity in Matthew because he in making the report of the greatnesse of the miracle wrought by Christ in feeding several thousands with five loaves and two fishes besides the number of the men who were fed maketh mention both of women and of children a Mat. 14. 21. or with deficiency in his two other Evangelists Mark and John because they in their reports of the same miracle mention onely the number of the men but take no knowledge at all either of the women or children b Mat. 6. 44 Joh. 6. 10. Or doth it follow that because he directed his penman Luke to record the baptizing of men and women in Samaria upon their beleeving and did not direct him to make the like record concerning those who beleeved in Jerusalem Acts 4. 4. or in Ephesus Acts 19. 18. 20. that therefore he was either superfluous in the former direction or defective in the latter Sect. 37. 4. His marginal instances pag. 5. make much more against him then for him For if Children in the Old Testament were brought by their Parents before the Lord in their holy Assemblies is it not a pregnant argument that then they were Church-members and consequently in a sufficient and regular capacity of this member-ship And if God be no accepter of persons more under the Old Testament then in the times of the New children being every waies qualified alike and in the same capacity of Church-member-ship under both how they should enjoy the priviledge of such a relation under the former and yet be excluded from it under the latter I confesse I understand not
especially considering 1. That Infant-Church-member-ship was no Mosaical ceremony nor ever hath been so adjudged by any understanding man as far as I have heard and so not liable to that abrogation or dissolution of ceremonies that was made by the body of Christ as the Apostle speaks 2. That the grace of God in the vouchsafement of priviledges and means of Salvation is not more contracted no more I mean in respect of ages then either of sexes or of nations under the Gospel then it was under the Law but rather every waies inlarged where there is place or opportunity for inlargement 5. There is somewhat alike consideration of his observation from Acts 21. 5. where he finds Luke reporting how the Disciples at Tyre accompanied Paul on his way with their wives and children For if he grants that the wives of the Disciples here spoken of were Disciples also which I presume he will not stick to do then why he should not grant that their children likewise who are joyned with them in the same action of service and respect unto the Apostle were Disciples I beleeve he is no whit more able then I to give a reasonable account Or is it reasonable to suppose that when Luke saith that the Disciples accompanied Paul on his way with their wives and children that his intent or meaning should be that they accompanied him with their baptized wives and unbaptized children or that the Apostle should accept of a Linsey-woolsey retinue compounded partly of Christians partly of Pagans or little Heathens But however though it should be granted to Mr. A. that this act of the Disciples accompanying Paul with their wives and children should be lesse i. e. an act of lesse weight or consequence then the act of Parents causing their children to be baptized yet supposing this to have been frequently and ordinarily done which Mr. A. knows to be the sence of his adversaries and such acts as that of the Disciples accompanying Paul with thâ—ir wives and children more exemplary and rare the reason is apparent enough why there should be mention made of children in the record of this act though there were no record at all made of the other It is recorded concerning Barnabas Acts 11. 24. that he was a good man full of the Holy Ghost and of Faith but no mention of his having been baptized But will Mr. A. upon the account of a non-mention of his baptizing give us leave to conclude that therefore he was not baptized If he will not give us leave to conclude upon such premises he must not take it himself Instances in this kind might be produced without number Sect. 38. 6. Under the expression of men and women in the Scriptures children are sometimes comprehended yea sometimes where men onely are named both women and children are understood When Mark saith And they that did eat of the loaves were about five thousand men he meant besides women and children otherwise he must contradict his fellow Evangelist Matthew who speaking of the same businesse saith And they that had eaten were about five thousand men besides women aâ—d children Mat. 14. 21. Compare also herewith Joh. 6. 10. again Jâ—s 8. 25. And so it was that all that fell that day both of men and women were twelve thousand even all the men of Ai. Here is mention made onely of men and women Yet evident it is from v. 26. and from the context of the story round about that under these terms both of men and women children also were comprehended The Evangelist Mark recording the other miraculous feeding of multitudes by Christ and comming to report the number of those that were fed saith onely thus And they that had eaten were about four thousand and he sent them away Mar. 8. 9. Whereas Matthew recording the same miracle reporteth the number of those that had eaten to have been foâ—re thousand BESIDES WOMEN AND CHILDREN Mat. 15. 38. So that it is customary and frequent in the Scriptures both under the word men to comprehend as well women and children as men and again under men and women to comprehend children And it is the probable opinion of some that amongst the three thousand said to have been added unto the Church or rather unâ—o the Lord as Acts 11. 24. there were both women and children 7. Whereas p. 6. he laboureth to prove that the scope and intent of the Evangelist in the words They were baptized both men and women Acts 8. 12. was to set forth the great successe of the Gospel in Samaria sufficient proof hath been made of the contrary § 35 36. the perusal of which two Sections is upon this account commended unto the Reader Yet let us weigh the double proof he levieth to get his conceit the victory First he argueth from likâ—nesse of phrase and words Acts 5. 14. used as he supposeth by the same Evangelist to the same purpose viz. to set forth the great successe of the Gospel c. 2. From the scope of the place and context To the former of these I answer 1. That when it is said Acts 5. 14. And Beleevers were the more added unto the Lord multitudes of men and wowen the great successe of the Gospel is not at all set forth by the bare mention of both sexes men and women but by the BELEEVING of MVLTITVDES of both sexes 2. I wouldly gladly know of Mr. A. whether there be any thing at all in this his parassel place concerning the baptizing not of both but of either men or women If not I would gladly learn of him what likenesse of phrase or words here is to prove that Luke intended to set forth the power and great successe of the Gospel in those words Acts 8. 12. they were baptized both men and women more then there is in these Jos 8. 25. And so it was that all that fell that day BOTH OF MEN AND WOMEN were twelve thousand 3. And lastly for this I would soberly ask Mr. A. whether in case there had been no mention at all of women either as beleeving or as baptized in either of the places compared by him but onely that so many men more as the number of the women whatsoever it was amounted unto had beleeved in the one and been baptized in the other would not this have argued and set forth the successe of the Gospel as considerably as now the mention of women beleevers and women baptized in conjunction with men doth If so then his plea from the phrase both men and women amounts to little for his purpose Sect. 39. To his latter plea from the scope and contâ—xt p. 6. I confesse I cannot well tell where to strike with my answer because I cannot wel discern where the vein of proof lieth For though it be granted that Luke speaketh v. 12. of the same person of whom he had spoken ver 10. 11. and who had given heed from the least unto the greatest unto Simon the Sorcerer yet what is
this to prove that therefore his intent was to set forth the power and great success of the Gospel in these words they were baptizâ—d men and women considering as hath been lately observed and proved viz. § 35 and 36. that in this verse he speaks of the beleeving of men and women as well as of their being baptized and that if there be any thing intended here to set forth the power and great successe of the Gospel it is projected rather by the mention of their beleeving Philip preaching the things of God and the name of Jesus Christ then by the mention of their baptism in as much as the Evangelist having frequent occasion elsewhere in this book to report the great successe of the Gospel still upon this account mentioneth onely the faith of those who were converted by it and not their baptism Besides Mr. A's supposal the ground of this vein of his discourse viz. that Luke speaks of the same generality of the people ver 12. of which he had spoken ver 10 11 where it was thus expressed To whom they all gave heed from the least to the greatest is not so authentique or clear For it is hardly credible that amongst the great numbers of the inhabitants of such a City as Samaria there should not be found so much as one unbeleever left upon the preaching of one Sermon onely Certain I am that there can be no instance produced from the Scripture of like nature or import Nor is it said v. 12. either that they beleeved Philip or were baptized from the greatest to the least Or if by this expression Mr. A. understandeth simply and absolutely the generality of the inhabitants of Samaria doth it not follow from his said supposition that as well children as men and women were here baptized unlesse he will either understand this expression from the least unto the greatest exclusively or else say that children are not to be numbred either amongst the least or the greatest nor yet amongst those that are between both But for a close of the point now in hand to give Mr. A. a brief account of his men and women with whom he hath had so much to do to so little purpose for his cause the reason why the Evangelist Luke having in the beginning of the verse mentioned the beleeving of the Samaritans without distinguishing the different sexes of those who beleeved in the latter part of the verse speaking of their baptizing distinguishing them into their respective sexes of men and women is to shew that though under the law the one sex onely that of men was capable of and admitted unto circumcision which was then the initiating Ordinance answering in that respect as in several others Baptism the successor of it under the Gospel yet now since the comming and suffering of Jesus Christ in the flesh both sexes as well women as men were made capable by God of being baptized This I beleeve is all the mystery that an intelligent Reader will find in the clause so much courted by Mr. A. to be friend him in his cause they were baptized hoth men and women Sect. 40. His third proof for his conceit of no Infant baptized in Mr. A. p. 6 7 Christs or the Apostles daies borrowed from Mar. 10. 13 14 15 16. wherein some are said to have brought young children to Christ p. 6 7. hath been already not onely answered but clearly argued and proved to make against him I presume a considering Reader will be of the same mind upon an attentive re-perusal of the 25th Section I shal here adde that the judgement and conscience of that learned and worthy Martyr Mr. John Philpot were so full of conviction and satisfaction touching the pregnant validity of this passage for Infant-baptism that in that Epistle of his formerly mentioned once and again upon the mention and recital of this clause Let the babes so he reads it come unto me he breaks forth with an holy indignation into this demand why then do not these rebellious Anabaptists obey the Commandement of the Lâ—rd For what do they now a daies else that bring their children to Baptism then that they did in times past which brought their children to the Lord and our Lord received them and putting his hands on them blessed them c. And if Christ judged little children capable subjects of imposition of handâ— which according to some of the most Seraphical Doctors themselves of the faith of Anabaptism is an Ordinance subsequent unto Baptism and not to be administred before it it roundly follows that these children brought to Christ had been baptized But either for Mr. F. the Mr. or for Mr. A. the Disciple to put us to prove by whom they were baptized is such a yoke as themselves are not able to bear no not in such cases where the demand of proof in that kind is much more reasonable For if we in arguing the controversie whether there can be no true Church of Christ and with which communion is lawfull without their baptism by dipping should put them upon proof by whom all and every the members of the 7 Churches of Asia were thus baptized or by whom those Christians mentioned Acts 5. 14. Acts 4. 4. and in many other places were after that manner baptized would they not cry out against such our demands as importune captious and unreasonable That Mr. Fisher Baby-Baptism p. 141. evasion of Mr. Fishers viz. that the imposition of hands here recorded to have been administred by Christ unto the children brought to him was another kind of imposition viz. that which was frequently used in order to cures or healings not that which pre-supposed baptism is magisterial enough as seventy times seven assertions more in the same book with it are but altogether proof-lesse The contrary hereunto is little lesse then clearly demonstrable upon these grounds 1. There is no intimation in the context that any of these children much lesse all of them were either sick or diseased Now there can I beleeve no instance be produced where any young or old either came or were brought to Christ to obtain any cure or healing from him whose infirmity or disease was not mentioned and named 2. Whereas all the miraculous cures wrought by Christ are either particularly as when he wrought but onely one or some few in the same place or else in the general as when he wrought many in places neer adjoyning recorded here is not the least or lightest mention in one kind or other of any cure wrought upon these children by him 3. Had the children been any waies sick or diseased it is at no hand credible that the Disciples would have rebuked those that brought them it would have argued want of common civility yea of humanity it self to have done it 4. The reason given by Christ unto his Disciples and in them unto others why they should rather countenance and further then restrain or hinder the accesse of little
especially fram'd by himself against his opinion and yet be never the more solid or substantial in his grounds by which he asserteth his opinion But his first argument being fallen let us see whether his fellow the second will help him up or supply that which we found lacking on the behalf thereof for the support of his cause Sect. 46. His second Argument he informeth us by the way shall be Mr. A's second Argument against Infant-baptism answered taken from the nature of Baptism and from the declared ends and usâ—s of it I wish he thoroughly understood the nature of Baptism for then I presume he would abhorre himself in dust and ashes from that un-Christian and needlesse disturbance which he hath made amongst the servants of God about it And for the declared ends and uses of Baptism of which he speaks it will appear by the management of his argument that he is at a losse in himself about them and uncertain what they be But the argument which he prefaceth as ye have heard riseth up before us in this form If that administration of Baptism which is made to professed Beleevers doth more conduce to and better answer the ends of Baptism then that doth which is made to Infants then Baptism ought not to be administred unto Infants but to professed belâ—evers But that Administration of Baptism which is made to professed Beleevers doth more conduce to and better answer the ends of Baptism then that which is made to Infants Ergo By the way this argument with that strength which it hath magnifieth it self every whit as much if not more against the councel and wisdome of God in Circumcision as against his Adversaries opinion and practice about Infant-Baptism For may it not altogether as rationally and with as much truth be pleaded and said that that administration of Circumcision which was made to professed Beleevers did more conduce to and better answer the ends of this Ordinance then that which was made to infants as it can be pretended that that administration of Baptism which he exalteth more conduceth to and better answers the ends and uses of Baptism then that other which he depresseth For assuredly Circumcision was in the ends and uses of it at least in the cheif and principal ends and uses of it altogether as mysterious as sacred and holy as Baptism yea and very little if at all in these differing from it Sect. 47. But let us partially weigh and consider both the propositions The major Proprosition answered now before us in their order To the major we answer that the consequence herein is void of strength and truth yea and hath scarce so much as a face of probability in it For the better or greater serviceablenesse or conducement of a thing to the ends intended by God in it in some particular cases is no argument at all to prove that therefore the use of this thing is in all other cases simply unlawfull Breast-milk given unto new born babes more conduceth to the end intended by God in this creature then when it is given unto healthfull and strong men yet this proveth not that therefore it is simply unlawfull to give this milk unto such men or for them to use it for food especially in some cases The Ordinance of marriage more conduceth unto and answâ—rs the ends and useâ— intended by God in it when it is imbraced by persons of competent years for the procreation of children c. then when it is entertained by men and women who have out-lived such a capacity yet this proveth not but that persons strucken in years beyond the procreation of children may lawfully marry The Ministery or preaching of the Apostle Paul did more conduce unto the ends of preaching as viz. the glorifying of God the saving of souls c. then the ministery or preaching of some other the Apostles or however then the ministry or preaching of ordinary Pastors and Teachers either in these or in former daies Yet this no wise proveth that the ministry or preaching of the other Apostles or of ordinary Pastors and Teachers is unlawfull The administration of Circumcision which was made to infants did more conduce unto and better answer the ends of it as appears by the standing law given by God himself for this administration Gen. 17. then the administration of it made unto men Yet it followeth not from hence that therefore the administration of it unto men was simply universally or in all cases unlawfull 2. When he saith that that administration of Baptism wherein he so inordinately pleaseth himself doth MORE condâ—ce to and BETTER answer the ends of it c. doth he not plainly grant or suppose that the other administration which is made to infants and which his soul so greatly abhorreth doth notwithstanding in some degree both conduce unto and answer the ends of Baptism also If so can it be simply and absolutely unlawfull Or if we suppose or say that Paul's ministery or preaching the Gospel did MORE conduce unto or BETTER answer the ends of preaching then the ministery of some other of the Apostles do we not in so saying suppose the ministry and preaching of these Apostles to be at least lawfull and in some degree conducing unto the ends of preaching More reverence is due to the Consciences of men especially of the Saints then to trouble or disturb them with such slight reasonings as these But Sect. 48. 3. Neither doth he expresse himself so handsomely when he saith that the administration of Baptism whether to the one subject or the other doth more or lesse either conduce to or answer the ends of Baptism Baptism is one thing and the administration of Baptism is another far differing from iâ— They differ more then toto genere the one from the other Now to say that one thing conduceth more or lesse to or more or lesse answereth the ends of another thing which is of quite another nature and consideration from it makes no pleasant harmony in the ears of any considering mans understanding But to overlook this oversight 4. How impertinently doth he argue the consequence in the proposition now under canvasse from these Scriptures p. 12. Cursed be the deceiver which having in his flock a male and voweth and sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing Mal. 1. 14. And again Seek to excell to the edifying of the Church 1 Cor. 14. 12. Doth it follow from these texts either divisim or conjunctim that If that administration of Baptism which is made to professed Beleevers doth more conduce unto and better answer the end of Baptism then that doth which is made to Infants then Baptism ought not to be administred unto Infants c. Or is that which conduceth to a good end though in an inferiour or lesse degree then haply some other means or thing may do necessarily a corrupt thing That Tree which bringeth forth GOOD Fruit is adjudged by our Saviour a good tree though it bringeth
goodnesse of it have been sufficiently vindicated in the premises As the Apostle in the case of marriage affirming that he that keepeth his virgin meaning unmarried doth BETTER granteth with all that he that giveth her in marriage doth WELL 1 Cor. 7. 36 38. So he that teacheth that any End of Baptism is BETTER answered one way undeniably granteth that this End may WELL and to a commendable degree be answered in another Sect. 67. 3. Whereas he supposeth that Baptism may be called the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins because God thereby signifies and SEALS the remission of sins upon Repentance c. he takes the boldnesse to lift up his pen against the great Apostle of his Faith in the doctrine of Antipedo-baptism Mr. Sam. Fisher whose avowed Doctrine it is that Baptism as it is not so much as signifying unto children a so is it no SEALING Ordinance Baby-Baptsm p. 154 c. unto any In which notion of his he laies the honour of the Ordinance of Baptism in the dust unto which notwithstanding otherwise he crieth Hosanna in the highest 4. Whereas he gives this for a reason why the End and Vse of Baptism of which he speaketh should be better answered by the baptizing of men then of children viz. Because men who have begun to repent are in a good capacitie to receive confirmation and establishment in their hope and confidence whereas Infants whilest such are uncapable of any such thing c. I answer 1. That which himself here onely doubtfully and with proviso call's one End and Use of Baptism viz. the signifying and sealing unto men the remission of their sins upon repentance one greater then He in the cause of Ana-Baptism as we lately heard denies to be either the one or the other Himself being doubtfull whether there be any such End or Use of Baptism as that here mentioned by him upon what sober account doth he trouble the world with telling them that in case there be such either End or Vse they are better answered by the baptism of men then of children Is that which may not be as well as be better answered by one means then another These are strange speculations 2. Supposing that one End and Vse of Baptism should be better answered by the baptizing of men then of children what follows from hence It neither follows in the first place that therefore every end and use thereof is better answered by such an administration nor in the second that Baptism therefore is not to be administred unto children One end of meats and drinks as for example the preservation of the health and strength of men and women come to their just statures and growth is better answered by the eating and drinking of men and women then of children but it followeth not from hence that therefore eating drinking are not to be allowed unto children One end and use of marriage is better answered by the marrying of persons in the strength and vigour of their youth but this proveth not that therefore it is unlawful for persons of more maturitie of years to marrie This very End and Use of Baptism here suggested was better answered by the Baptism of men who had sinned and repented then by the baptism of Christ himself who was uncapable of repentance and of remission of sins hereby yet this proveth not that therefore the baptism of Christ was unlawfull Therefore Mr. A's reasoning at this turn is to little purpose Sect. 68. 3. Whereas he attempteth to prove that the End and Use of Baptism now under consideration is better answered by the baptism of men then of children by this argument viz. because men WHO HAVE BEGUN TO REPENT are in a good capacitie to receive c. doth he not reason at as loose a tate as he that should go about to prove that men shall be saved because righteous men shall be saved or should infer that such and such things do belong to a subject simply considered because they belong to this subject so and so qualified 4. Though Abraham when he was circumcised was in a good capacity to receive confirmation and establishment in his hope and confidence both that God would give unto him in his posteritie the promised land of Canaan and likewise that he would justifie him thorow his beleeving whereas Isaac at the time of his circumcising was in no such capacitie of either yet was the circumcising of Isaac every whit as regular and lawfull as the circumcising of Abraham yea was of the two more agreeable to the standing Law for Circumcision In like manner though children be in no such capacity at the time of their baptizing to receive confirmation and establishment in their hope and confidence of obtaining remission of sins upon their repentance as repentant men are when they are baptized yet may their baptism be every whit as lawfull yea and more regular then the baptizing of such men Therefore Mr. A's discourse in the quarters we are now beating up is without sinews Sect. 69. 5. And lastly for this when he saith whereas Infants whilest such are ALTOGETHER uncapable of of any such thing in respect whereof this end is made frustrate when Baptism is given unto them he speaketh truth neither in the premises nor in the conclusion For 1. Infants whilst such are not ALTOGETHER uncapable of that whereof he speaketh For although as hath been formerly argued they be not in an actuall capacity of the thing I mean in such a capacity whereby they are inabled to receive the Confirmation and establishment he speaks of at the time of their baptizing or whilst thy are infants yet are they in some capacitie and this proper and direct though mediate and remote of receiving these accommodations in due time as they are in such a capacitie as soon as born of speaking thinking apprehending c. however this capacity is not ordinarily reduced into act till after severall years Secondly from hence it follows that neither is that End of Baptism of which he speaks made frustrate when Baptism is given unto children any whit more then the End of planting is made frustrate by the non-fructification of the tree planted immediately upon the planting of it or the end of sowing made frustrate by reason that the seed doth not yield an harvest-increase as soon as it is sown What I do thou knowest not now said the Lord Christ unto Peter and in him to the rest but thou shalt know hereafter Joh. 13. 7. Christs action here spoken of was not hereby made frustrate unto Peter because he understood not the meaning or import of it when it was acted And many of his sayings to his Disciples which they understood not when they were spoken were understood by them with advantage afterwards See Sect. 152. Sect. 70. Whereas he addeth that there is a greater APPEARANCE both of the wisdom and goodness of God in vouchsafing and applying such a means as Baptism is to
him over and over upon severall occasions in the Old Testament a Num. 3. 30. Deut. 17. 6. 19. 15. and again revived and confirmed by the Lord Christ himself and by his Apostles in the New Testament In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established b Mat. 18. 6. It is also written in your Law that the testimonie of two men is true c Joh. 8. 17. In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established d 2 Cor 13. 1. God himself having sanctified the mouth of two or three witnesses to establish i. to ratifie and confirm every matter of fact even those which concern the precious lives of men so that any thing which shall be attested by these shall be taken for true doth not Mr. A. presume to make that common which God hath thus sanctified by disparaging the testimonie of Christian Parents neighbours and others as insufficient to ascertain the Baptim of a person Baptized in their presence and sight 2. By another Law of God the child stands bound to honour his Parents how much more when they are Christian and holy Now whether it be consistent with this Law or with that honour which children owe by the tenour and authoritie of it unto their Parents to give them the lie yea or to suspect them of untruth and not to believe them when they shall affirm unto them that they have been Baptized let Mr. A. himself judge especially considering that there is no colour or pretence imaginable why Parents should lie unto their children in this kind 3. Men and women stand bound in conscience to believe some things and these of greater moment yea and to act according to this belief upon farre weaker testimonies and grounds then the reports of Parents and Neighbours the records of registers for their baptizing The reason or ground which children of any growth or years have to believe that such persons especially one of them who are commonly called and reputed their Parents are so indeed is nothing so authentique or full of proof as the foresaid testimonies and grounds of their baptizing Jealousies and suspicions about the legitimacie of many Children are we know rife in the mouths of men but I believe never did Mr. A. hear the Baptism of any person questioned which either was attested by the Parents or by any Parish Register or Record And yet persons stand bound by the Law of God to honour those as their Parents and to perform all other duties and respects unto them which are due from children unto Parents who are commonly called and reputed their Parents although they have no demonstrative proof of such a relation to them Therefore much more if persons be reported both by their Parents and others to have been baptized and are generally reputed so to have been they stand as well and as much bound to look upon themselves as baptized and to act and walk accordingly as if they knew with the greatest certaintie that they had been baptized 4. The Jews themselves circumcised in their infancie notwithstanding the sign of Circumcision in the flesh yet could have no other knowledge or certaintie that this sign was applied to them or received by them according to the mind of God or as the Ordinance of God but only from the testimonie of their Parents or others present at their Circumcision For how could Paul for example tell or say that he was circūcised on the eight day Phil. 3. 5. but by the testimony and report of his Parents unlesse we shall suppose that it was supernaturally revealed to him which I think is no supposition worthy a considering man Or however it is broadly ridiculous to suppose that every Jew who according to the precept of God was circumcised on the eight day had this supernaturally revealed unto him or came to the knowledge of it in any other way then by the testimony of his Parents c. Besides other Nations in the world using to circumcise their children besides the Jews with whom God made no such covenant as he made with Abraham and his posteritie by Jacob how could any Jew know that he was not circumcised in some or other of these idolatrous Nations and so contrary to the will of God but only by the affidavit of his Parents or others brought up with him Sect. 124. 5. Neither was Circumcision it self any such sign in the flesh but that it might be obliterated and defaced and so forgotten according to that of the Apostle Paul Is any man called being circumcised Let him not become uncircumcised 1 Cor. 7. 8. 6. Nor could any circumcised person amongst the Iews know but by the report of his Parents or others that he was so much as circumcised For the Scripture doth nor report or affirm that every particular person of the male Sex is born with a fore-skin upon his flesh I mean with such a superfluitie in this skin which was wont to be cut off by Circumcision or that every male who wants as much or more of this foreskin as any other not circumcised must needs therefore have been circumcised Yea I believe there are males or men in this Nation who though never circumcised yet have as little of that superfluitie on which only circumcision wrought as many of those who have been circumcised 7. Neither is the receiving of Baptism by men and women when come to years of discretion alwayes capable of improvement to Spirituall ends many years after it is received as if it had been newly acted and done before their eyes For why may not the senses of some baptized in these years be as well sodden into Trapezuntius his temper as the senses of one of Mr. Fishers Antagonists it seems were a See Mr. Fisher Baby-Baptism p. 367. This Trapezuntius was a learned Grammarian and great Scholar but thorow the violence of a sicknesse sustained the losse of memorie to such a degree that he quite forgat not only all his learning but even his own name 8. And lastly In case it should be supposed that a person who is born in hand by his Parents Neighbours or Parish Register that he hath been baptized should yet be deceived by all these and be made to believe that which was not what grand inconvenience danger or losse can reasonably be conceived that this person shall sustain or incurre hereby For whils◠the sence of his conscience bears upon him that he hath been really and truly baptized especially being otherwise really and truly willing to be baptized with the first what greater improvement can they make of the remembrance of their baptism who have indeed been baptized then he is capable of making by his apprehension and belief of his being baptized Yea as the Apostle while Circumcision was yet in some request speaks of a way or Method how men might make their un-circumcision turn to as good an account of benefit unto them as Circumcision
himself yea and gave such a Law unto his people one clause whereof observed should tend to blesse them another prejudice them or at best do them no service at all Now if the administration of Circumcision unto children was judged by God himself the most edifying administration of this Ordinance unto the Church of the Jews upon what substantiall account can men denie the administration of Baptism unto children to be the most edifying administration unto the Gentile Churches The differences pretended by Mr. A. towards the close of his second argument between the one administration and the other upon examination of them we found to be meer impertinences and shifts from Sect. 120. to the end of Sect. 134. where the Reader may please to peruse their respective examinations Sect. 160 2. The regular baptizing of children inricheth the Church totieâ— quoties with the solemn testimonie and profession of the Faith of those who have been like Mnason a Act. 21. 16 old Disciples and have had long experience of the waies of Christ in the Gospel For such Christiâ—n Parents or Friends who offer their children unto Baptism do hereby avouch the goodnesse and truth of the Gospel and of the Faith hereof it being every mans sence that no Parent is desirous to have his child baptized into such a Faith or Profession which he judgeth unsound erroneous or false Whereas the Baptizing of men and women at least if they were baptized as Mr. A. himself acknowledgeth they ought to be I mean upon their first believing accommodateth the Church with the testimonie and profession of young converts only and such who are as yet unexperienced in the word of righteousnesse and little other then strangers unto the Gospell In which respect their testimonie and profession cannot be of like authoritie weight or edification to the Church with theirs who have been in Christ many years before them and still continue stedfast in him 3. Infant-Baptism maketh more for the edification of the Church then after-Baptism upon this account also When Infants are baptized the whole Church may and this with conuenience and without breach upon their other occasions be present and so partake of all the fruits benefits and accommodations of the administration Whereas when men and women are baptized very few of the Church especially in many places can have the opportunitie of being present the place of the administration in this case being remote at least where Rivers or Pools of water convenient for the service are not neer at hand and the time likewise of the said administration can hardly be notified unto the generalitie of the Church In which respect this Baptismall administration cannot be much edifying to the Church nor comparable with that which may be and ought to be and in part is ofttimes made unto children 4. Infant-Baptism affords many more occasions and opportunities for the administration of the Ordinance and consequently for the edification of the Church then Beleever baptism doth For the children of Beleevers are many more in number then Beleevers themselves and many thousands live to a week or moneth who are prevented by death before they come to years of discretion and so much as to a capacitie of beleeving In which respect many baptismall opportunities are lost and cut off from the Church which might have been gained and enjoyed by the baptizing of these persons in their infancie Sect. 161. 5. Whereas the holy Ghost admonisheth the generality of mankid to Remember their Creatour in the dayes of their youth a Eccle. 12. 1 they must needs be accessarie to the sin of their children in case they do not thus remember him who deprive them of so great an engagement to this See M Rogers Treatise of Sacraments part 1. p. 80. timely remembrance of him as their having been early baptzied must needs be And they on the contrary wisely and graciously consult the obedience of their children to that heavenly exhortation who prevent them with and lay upon them a baptismal engagement hereunto in their Infancy 1. It cannot be denied but that baptism is an ingagement to that duty which Solomon expresseth by a mans remembring his Creatour 2. Neither can it be denied but that men and women in their youth and as soon as they are capable of the duty it self of remembring their Creatour are capable of the said ingagement also I mean of understanding and conceiving that their being baptized is and ought to be unto them a motive unto this dutie 3. Neither can it reasonably be denyed but that they who are actually capable of a motive or ingagement unto a duty or work may thorow want of this motive or ingagement lying on them neglect the performance of the duty which under an ingagement they would perform and not neglect 4. Every mans sence may teach him that when the two scales of a ballance are equally poised a very small weight cast into either will cast it 5. And lastly from these premises it roundly followeth that any mans children who know themselves unbaptized and so free from the ingagement of Baptism may from hence take occasion to neglect the dutie of remembring their Creatour in the dayes of their youth a duty which would lye with more weight and authoritie upon their consciences and so weas more likely to be performed did they look upon themselves as by Baptism ingaged unto it I am not positive in affirming that ever the Son or Daughter of any Parent did actually miscarrie upon the account we speak of but this I say with fulnesse of conviction in my judgment and conscience 1. that it may very possibly come to passe that a Child Son or Daughter unbaptized may be lesse thoughtfull and carefull to remember their Creatour in the dayes of their youth by understanding theÌ„selves free loose from a baptismall tie and engagement thereunto 2. That in case the child of any Parent shall stumble at that stone we now speak of and fall and be broken to pieces by it the parents of this child being accessary hereunto will be able to give but a sad account of the losse of their child unto God 3. And lastly that whatsoever the consequent or event of a non-baptizing a child in his infancie shall or may be evident it is that in this case the Parents or Vice-parents upon whose hand the Christian nurture of this child shall lie will want a very materiall and weighty argument whereby to work his judgment and conscience to the remembrance of his Creatour And doubtlesse the reason why God threatned the uncircumcised manchild amongst AbrahaÌ„s posteritie with a cutting off from his people a Gen. 17. 14 was not to signifie that this judgement should universally befall every man-child amongst them which possibly thorow the neglect of his Parents should be uncircumcised but to awaken the care and conscience of every Parent of such children amongst them to circumcise them lest the want of this Ordinance
Ministers of Baptism invests them with an immediate capacitie of the Ordinance But 3. Whereas he makes an opposition between Infants and persons in an immediate capacity of Baptism he broadly commits that errour in disputing which Logicians call Petitio Principiâ— a begging of the thing in Question For is not the Question between him and his Opponents whether Infants be in an immediate capacitie of Baptism or no And Mr. A. here takes it for granted that they are not 4. Neither is it so broad a truth as his measure seems to make it that that act of Grace of which infants partake is such as is vouchsafed them in the pardon of originall sin ONLY For the relation or prerogative of Son-ship and the pardon of Originall sin are not one and the same act of Grace nor yet one and the same benefit or priviledge And certain it is that God doth conferre as well the former as the latter upon Infants But Mr. A's discourse advanceth thus That that act or those acts of Grace unto which Baptism doth appropriately belong is the pardon of sin upon repentance and such other acts of grace as are concomitant Mr. A. p. 44 and consequentiall hereunto appears plainly by this viz. in that Baptism is called according to the nature of it and the intent of God in its institution the Baptism of repentance for the Remission of sins That is that Baptism which is to be received upon mens repentance for the remission of sins or that Baptism in and by which men professe that they expect remission of sins in the way of Repentance or because the reception of which Baptism proceeds from a principle of Repentance this clause is no good sence or else because God therein doth authentically assure men of the remission of their sins upon their Repentance Take it which way you will it proves this that Baptism is conversant about and subservient unto that act of Gods grace and love which is vouchsafed unto men in the pardon of their sins upon their repentance And if so then is it irrelative to the grace of God in the pardon of Infants sinne which is vouchsafed them without and before Repentance take place I answer Sect. 175. 1. The conclusion which Mr. A. works after in the fore-part of this parcell of discourse and which he draws up in the lasts words hereof now recited viz. that Baptism is irrelative to the grace of God in the pardon of Infants sin may be granted him with this explication that that which Baptism when administred unto Infants properly and immediately relateth unto is not the grace of God in the pardon of their sinne but the grace of God in investing them with the priviledge of Sons Which whether in order of nature it be antecedaneous or subsequentiall to the other the pardon of their sin may be argued to and fro I incline to the latter But if his meaning be that Baptism is simply universally and in every respect irrelative to the grace of God in the pardon of Infants sin this is a crow which remains to be pull'd But 2. How his second and fourth explication of these words The Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins in both which he suspends remission of sins upon repentance only making Baptism in the former a profession only of an expectation of this remission in the latter an assurance of it only will be able to reconcile themselves with his Confidentiall Doctrine formerly avouched as we heard in which he makes Baptism a sharer or partner with repentance it self in the procuring or obtaining this remission I am to seek and I fear he will hardly be able to find 3. Whereas he makes Baptism appropriately to belong not only to the pardon of sin upon repentance but unto other acts of grace also concomitant and consequentiall thereunto doth he not seem to lean either towards the Clinicall Baptists who were wont not to administer Baptism but unto persons on their sick beds and as the Papists their extream unction in the approach of death or else towards the Hemerobaptists who judged it necessary to be every day baptized and practised accordingly For if Baptism appropriatly belongs unto other acts of grace concomitant and consequentiall to Repentance as well as unto Repentance it self ought it not to be administred upon the vouchsafement or performance of these acts if not with as much frequencie as once a day amounteth unto yet at least in the end of a mans life when all such acts shall have been vouchsafed 4. If Baptism appropriatly belongs unto the pardon of sin upon repentance can it upon the same terms or after the same manner I mean appropriately belong unto Repentance Or is Repentance and pardon of sinne upon Repentance one and the same thing But Sect. 176. 5. And lastly To give Mr. A. an account why Baptism is thus held forth or described in the Scripture the Baptism of repentance for the remission of sins words I confesse which face his Anti-paedo-baptismall conceit more plausibly then any thing besides in all the Scriptures although they have nothing in heart for it it is to be considered that the Gospell being to be preached only unto persons of years who only are capable of understanding it and from whom only obedience is expected unto it is drawn up by the holy Ghost in the generall frame and carriage of it with speciall reference unto these notwithstanding many things in it relate unto Infants and children and their benefit by the grace of it Hence it is that many things are here required as simply absolutely and universally necessary unto salvation viz. because they are thus necessary in respect of those to whom the gospell is to be preached and that are capable of performing them as persons of years and understanding but Infants as such and whilst such and children are never the more subjected to this necessity As when the Gospel threatneth He that believeth not i. whosoever believeth not shall be damned the threatning is calculated for men womeÌ„ only nor is it any part of the intent or meaning of it that Infants not beleeving shall be damned So when the Apostle saith without holinesse or rather without the purchase of holinesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 none or no person shall see the Lord Heb. 12. 14. children are not hereby subjected to the condition specified to invest them with a capacitie of seeing the Lord but men and women only So again when John saith whosoever doth not righteousnesse is not of God Ioh. 3. 10. neither he that loveth not his Brother it cannot be from hence concluded that children are not of God or are not the children of God and upon this account his heâ—rs although they do not righteousnesse nor yet love their brother This method and strain of the Gospel might be exemplified in very many passages and instances more In like manner because the Doctrine of Baptism was and is to be taught
and preached unto men and women only these only being of capacitie to understand it therefore is Baptism described and set forth in the scripture as it relateth unto them and their conditions viz. as a sacred pledg from God to assure them of the high priviledg and blessing of remission of sins upon their repentance But this no more proveth that the administration of it belongeth not unto Infants because they do not repent then this saying He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved proveth that salvation belongeth not unto Infants because they do not believe Upon alike account because the Doctrine of Circumcision and of the counsell of God in it was to be declared and preached only unto persons of understanding therefore the scripture describeth it and frequently speaketh of it under that relation and concernment wherein it related unto men as where it is described to have been a seal of the righteousnesse of Faith See Sect. 61 64. even as Baptism is termed or described the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sinnes which two descriptions we formerly scanned and compared Sect. 61. so again where God saith to the Jews Circumcise your selves to the Lord and take away the foreskin of your hearts Jer. 4. 4. and again it shall be a token of the Covenant between me and you Gen. 17. 11. to omit other places These and severall other like passages and sayings notwithstanding which represent Circumcision upon no other terms nor in any other consideration then as appropriable and appliable unto men yet children we know were the more appropriate subject of the administration thereof In like manner though it should be granted that Baptism be described under such a consideratioÌ„ wherein it is only serviceable appropriable unto men and women who are capable of Repentance and of RemissioÌ„ of sins hereupon yet this no way proveth nor so much as lightly intimateth that therefore Infants are not the regular yea or not the more proper and convenient subject hereof ordinarily Sect. 177. And let me here adde this one thing further that men altogether as judicious and learned in the Scriptures and I believe as narrowly and throughly vers'd in the controversie as Mr. A. conceive the sence and mind of the holy Ghost in calling Baptism The Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins is as well to signifie and hold forth that remission of sins shall be obtained upon Repentance future as that it is obtained or injoyed by means of Repentance past or at present in being Calvin in answer to an Objection made of the very same notion of which Mr. A's answer now in examination is made viz. that Baptism is a Sacrament of Repentance and Faith and therefore is not competible to Infancie having first said that such darts as these are rather thrown against God then against him or other Infant-Baptists in processe of his answer saith For although Infants in that moment of time wherein they were circumcised did not comprehend the meaÌ„ing or intent of the sign yet were they truly circuÌ„cised for or unto the mortificatioÌ„ of their polluted corrupt natâ—re which being come to years of discretion they were to meditate and bethink themselves of And to conclude the Objection may receive a ready answer viz. that children are baptized in order to their FUTVRE REPENTANCE AND FAITH which although they be not as yet form'd in them yet by the secret work of the holy Ghost there is a seed of both lying hid in them a Subnectunt Baptismum poenitentiae ac fidei sacramentum esse Quare cum neutra in â—tenellam infantiam cadat cavendum ne si in Baptismi communionem admittatur inanis evanida reddatur significatio At enim haec tela in Deum magis quà m in nos diriguntur Siquidem circumcisionem fuisse poenitentiae signum multis Scripturae testimoniiâ— compertissimum est Et paulò post Nam etsi Infantes quo circumcidebantur momento quid sibi vellet signum illud intelligentiâ non comprehendebant verè tamen circumcidebantur in naturae suae corruptae ac contaminatae mortificationem quam adulti posteà meditarentur Denique nullo negotio solvi potest objectio haec baptizari in futuram poenitentiam fidem c. Calvin Institut l. 4. c. 16. Sect. 20. Baptism saith Musculus is the laver of regeneration but not so or in such a sence that only they who are already regenerate should be sealed with it but those also who are yet to be Regenerated b Baptismus est lavacrum regenerationis at non ita ut regenerati tantùm illo debeant obfignari sed etiam regenerandi Mus in Mat. 22. 41 42. c. The Scripture it self very much favours the judgement of these learned men now touched I indeed saith John to the people who came to be baptized and were accordingly baptized by him baptize you with water 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 towards or unto Repentance Mat. 3. 11. And accordingly Luk. 3. 7. he sharply reproveth them as persons at present not ingaged in any way of repentance but exhorteth them hereunto for the future Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him O generation of vipers who hath warned you to flee from the wrath that is to come Bring forth therefore fruits worthy Repentance and think not to say c. Luk. 3. 7 8. Had he judged them truly penitent at the present it is not like he would have stiled them a generation of vipers or admonished them as he doth See more to this point Sect. 35. Nor is it probable that the Apostle Peter did look upon those as having already truly repented whom he exhorted to Repent and be baptized Act. 2. 38. nor yet that because in the first place he exhorteth them to repent and in the second to be baptized he therefore diswaded them or took them off from being baptized untill they should have first repented For to repent being a farre greater duty then to be baptized it may well have the precedencie of mention in the same exhortation and yet this not necessarily imply that to be baptized was no duty to be performed by them until they had first repented When two duties are required in the same exhortation the obligation unto the latter is not necessarily suspended upon a mans obedience unto the former so that he shall be in conscience bound to forbear or not to practise the latter untill he hath first performed the other And though it should be granted that so many of the persons exhorted by Peter to repent and be baptized as were soon after baptized did indeed truly repent before they were baptized though neither is this sufficiently proved by their recceiving of his word gladly ver 41. See Mat. 13. 20. Mar. 6. 20. Joh. 5. 35. Eze. 33. 32. yet this proveth not that therefâ—re they should have sinned in case they had been baptized without this qualification However whether this
upon this account baptize him Therefore according to the tenor of your late reasoning neither did he baptize him upon the account of his being in favour with God or of his relation of Sonship unto God To this I answer that although John knew Christ to be the Son of God when he declined the baptizing him as well as afterwards when he baptized him yet it seems he did not at present so wel consider that he being the only begotten Son of God and so a person in dignity infinitely transcending other men it was meet for him being a weak and sinful man to baptize him until the Lord Christ himself admonished or informed him of the meetness of the thing the transcendent dignity of his person notwithstanding Suffer it to be so now for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness Mat. 3. 15. as if he should have said How true soever it be which thou alledgest against thy baptizing me as viz. that thou hast need to be baptized of me and not I of thee yet be content to do what at this time and upon the present occasion I desire of thee because it becometh me notwithstanding the peculiar dignity of my person yet in respect of my mediatory undertaking to condescend to every thing which is righteous or meet for other men to submit unto So then if it be righteous and meet for other persons who are the sons of God and because or as they stand in this relation unto him and not meerly as they are beleevers to be admitted unto Baptism then did Christ desire Baptism and was accordingly baptized as or because he was the Son of God although it be true that he was indeed the first born amongst many brethren as the Apostle speaks and so his relation of Sonship of an higher nature then other mens Sect. 188. Now that other persons are not regularly admittable unto Baptism nor ever were in the Apostles times admitted hereunto simply and meerly as or because Beleevers but as or because their faith thorough the profession of it did declare them to be the Sons of God and so iâ— special favour with him is beyond all controversie evident upon these grounds 1. If beleeving Jesus Christ to be the Son of God gives a regular capacity of Baptism as it is simply beleeving and not as it declares the Beleever to be the Son of God and in special favour with him then is the Devil himselfe or at least may be in a regular capacity of being baptized The reason of this consequence is evident because he beleeves Jesus Christ to be the Son of God or at least is a sufficient capacity to believe it The Apostle saith that he was mightily or with power declared to be the Son of God according to the spirit of holinesse by the resurrection from the dead Now the devil is very capable of any rational demonstration how much more of such which are pregnant and full of power to convince And though he be a lyar and the Father thereof yet being subtile and wise in his generation he is not like to lye to his own disadvantage which yet he must be supposed to have done when he said unto Christ I know thee who thou art the holy one of God Mark 1. 24. â—f he had lyed in so saying So that there is little question of the validity and truth of the consequence in the said major proposition Now that the Devil is or may be in a regular capacity of being baptized is I presume none of Mr. A's thoughts Therefore believing simply as beleeving doth not qualifie for baptisme but as it selfe being professed or declared declareth the Professour of it to be a child of God 2. If believing simply as believing inrights unto baptism then did Philip put the Eunuch upon harder and stricter termes to satisfie himselfe about his meetnesse to be baptized when upon this account he required of him or imposed on him a beleeving with the whole heart Act 8. 37. then his commission in that behalfe allowed him to do And indeed his admonishiâ—g or presting the Eunuch to believe with all his heart plainly intimated that it was such a Faith or beleeving which would render him capable of Baptisme to his own comfort by which he could approve himselfe to be a child of God If so then is it not the simple or absolute nature or act of beleeving but that relative or declarative nature oâ— property of it we speak of by vertue or meanes whereof it gives a capacity of baptisme unto men If so then it readily follows that it is the relation of Son-ship unto God which originally primarily and directly investeth with this capacity and that wheresoever and in whomsoever this may reasonably be presumed to be there is as rich as regular a capacity of baptisme as beleeving by means of the profession of it can give unto any man And that it is the property of Faith to give unto men the relation we speak of I mean of Son-ship unto God is the loud vote of the Scripture from place to place Joh. 1. 12. Gal. 3 26. and elsewhere And if Faith gives the relation of Son-ship the profession or declaration of Faith must needs give knowledge of this relation unto men Sect. 189. If it be here replyed true it is Faith professed declareth a person to be the Son of God but it followeth not from hence that therefore it qualifieth for baptisme in this consideration I answer if this be the noblest and highest consideration in Faith viz. that it gives the relation of Son-ship unto God makes a man or a woman to become a child of God which I suppose is no mans question then must it needs be the highest consideration also in the profession of it that it declares a man or woman to be the childe of God And if these things be so it undeniably followeth that either it is somwhat that it is meaner and lower in Faith and so in the profession of Faith which instates men in a capacity of Baptism or else that it is that relative declarative nature in it of which we speak which thus enstateth them Now then if Baptism be to be looked upon as a matter of favour or priviledge vouchsafed by God unto men or unto his children it is unreasonable to conceive or think that he should conferre it upon the account of that which is meaner and lesse considerable in them passing by that which is more excellent more considerable and worthy 3. If faith giveth not right unto Baptism in that declarative consideration mentioned then giveth it in some consideration relating to it as for example either as it is simply an act or as it is such or such a kind of act or as it relateth to such or such an object or the like But there is no other consideration in Faith by vertue whereof it can so much as tolerably be conceived that it should give a capacity of Baptism Therefore it