imposition of hands without Chrysm And further he speaks of the form which saith he they make to lie in these words Consigno te signo Crucis confirmo te Chrysmate salutis in nomine Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti I sign thee with the sign of the Cross and confirm thee with the Chrysm of Salvation in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost A meer humane invention and device saith Mr. Hanmer that has not the least shadow for it from the Scripture Also another exception he brings against the Popish way of Laying on of hands viz. in respect of the Subject they confirming Infants when according to the Apostolical Institution it belongs only to such as are Adult And it appears that Calvin from hence bore his witness against Confirmation viz. in respect of the abuse and corruption of it as appears in his Institut lib. 4. cap. 19. To which agrees the Testimony of Chemnitius Our Men saith he have often shewed that the Rite of Confirmation if the unprofitable superstitious Traditions and such as are repugnant to the Scripture were removed may piously be used to the edification of the Church according to the consent of the Scripture Exercitat upon Confirm pag. 65. That Calvin owned Confirmation or Laying on of hands to be a Divine Institution take his own words Nam neque satis pro sua utilitate commendari potest sanctum hoc Institutum nec Papistae satis exprobari tam flagitiosa Corruptela quod illud in pueriles vertendo Ineptias non modo sustulerunt è medio sed eo quoque ad impurae impiae Superstitionis praetextum turpiter sunt abusi For neither can this holy Institution saith he be enough commended for its Vtility nor the Papists be sufficiently upbraided with their so flagitious corruption of it that by turning of it into childish Fopperies they have not only taken it away but have also so far shamefully abused it for a colour of an impure and impious Superstition And further he saith Adulterinam enim illam Confirmationem quam in ejus locum surrogarunt instar Meretricis magno Ceremoniarum splendore multisque pomparum fucis sine modo ornant For they do beyond measure deck that Adulterous Confirmation which they have substituted in its room like a Harlot with great splendor of Ceremonies If therefore saith that worthy Author in his said Excercitat p. 51. Confirmation shall be drained from these mixtures of humane Inventions that have for a long time so defaced and deformed it viz. not called it a Sacrament if their Popish matter both remota and proxima of anointing with consecrated Chrysm the forehead of the Confirmed in the form of a Cross be removed if neither Infants nor Children who are not yet arrived to years of discretion be admitted but such as are Adult who are able to give an account of their Faith and the work of Grace upon their hearts finally if those feigned Effects mentioned by them as the end and use of it together with those idle Additions that have betided it in the declining times of the Church be rejected and cast off and if done only with Prayer and Laying on of hands for the admission of Persons as full Members to the enjoyment of all Church-Privileges as most agreeable to that of the Apostolical and primitive times it will saith he I conceive be found to be exceeding useful and advantageous as a thing requisite if not necessary to a right Reformation and the reducing of the Churches of Christ to their native beauty and primitive purest state and constitution c. And that it might appear it was not only his own Judgment together with Calvin and Chemnitius he produceth several other eminent Lights of the Reformed Churches viz. Peter Martyr the Divines of Leyden Pareus Rivet Peter du Moulin Didoclavius as all witnessing to Laying on of hands upon the Baptized as such as an Apostolical Institution and that which ought to be practised by the Churches of Christ being refined from all Popish Corruptions and Additions as the best Expedient and readiest way to a happy Reformation according to the primitive Pattern To which I might add Mr. Caryl Mr. Baxter Mr. Ralph Venning and Mr. G. Hughes who all speak the same things concerning Confirmation as may be seen in their Epistles to the forementioned Book of Mr. Hanmers in commendation and approbation thereof and indeed to see how clear they be in their understandings concerning this Ordinance of Laying on of hands and how learnedly and judiciously they have laboured to recover it from those Popish Mixtures and cursed Pollutions of the Romish Church hath been of a refreshing nature unto me tho I can't but admire in the mean while they should still remain so blind and dark concerning Baptism not perceiving how that also hath been as vilely corrupted and changed from the Apostolical Institution in respect of the Subject and Manner of Administration as well as in regard of those idle and ridiculous Forgeries and Additions of Chrysms Consignations Albes Salt Spittle Sureties c. which they witness against Now were but their eyes so opened as to recover and drain Baptism from Popish Corruptions or Alterations upon this account also how would it add to the beauty and perfection of their Confirmation and Reformation provided according to their Light they would also get into the practice of both and what glorious Churches might they soon come to be yea excel many of the baptized Congregations in respect of the plain Form Order and Constitution of the House of God according to the primitive Pattern But to proceed there are few or none as I can gather do oppose this Ordinance save some of the Baptists of which Mr. Danvers may be reckoned the chief for besides these modern Writers already mentioned who speak so fully concerning Laying on of hands with prayer to God for more of his Holy Spirit of Promise and as an orderly admission unto Church-Communion the perswasion or judgment of the Assembly of Divines concerning this Ordinance I might also produce how clearly they agree with the forementioned Presbyterian and Independent Ministers herein as you may see in their Annotations on Heb. 6. But no more of this at present lest we too far digress from the matter in hand what we have here said is in answer to Mr. Danvers in respect of the Rite it self or thing called Confirmation and how to be rejected as we have a cloud of Witnesses agreeing with us herein and how to be maintained owned and practised by the Churches of Christ I shall now return to Mr. Danvers pag. 32. he having in pag. 31. shewed us how blasphemous and abominable a thing the Rite of Confirmation is as asserted by the Antients and Decrees of General Councils and practised by corrupt Churches in the next place he comes to enquire what Credit or Authority the Fathers or Doctors are of that witness to
as much corrupted changed and polluted as this Nay what Ordinance has not Our work is to discover and remove all Popish Additions and Pollutions which in the days of darkness crept in that so we may see every Institution shining forth in its primitive purity and splendor and not reject any Ordinance of Christ because polluted by Antichrist What tho as he said those Popes Councils and Fathers that enjoined and imposed Infants Baptism for an Ordinance of Christ enjoined that of Confirming Infants Reply If it was as early corrupted altered and changed as Baptism ought we not since God has given us the Light of his Word and Spirit to recover it from those Corruptions as well as Baptism Infants Baptism we all say is a Popish Tradition or humane Innovation yet is Baptism Christ's Ordinance so in like manner we say is laying on of hands upon Infants or such as have only been baptized in Infancy a meer Popish Rite and Innovation yet Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers as such is an Ordinance of Christ as divers worthy Men have clearly proved from God's Word And tho the Antient Fathers and Councils he speaks of together with those of the Church of Rome and England do wholly fly unto Tradition to prove their practice of Laying on of hands upon Children this will no more weaken our practice of Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers than their flying to Tradition and Usage of the Church to prove their Infants Baptism weakens our practice of baptizing Believers Moreover those of the false Church who wholly make use of Tradition to prove their Pedobaptism might without doubt had God been pleased to open their eyes seen that Baptism was a Divine Institution practised by the Apostles even so might they also have easily seen that that Laying on of hands practised by the Apostles next after Baptism was Christ's holy Appointment tho they could not find their ridiculous Rite and Popish Ceremony of Confirming Children so to be there being not the least Word of God for it But from what our Opponents say of Authors I observe that in the Antichristian Church ever since the Apostacy from the good old way of the Gospel there has been somewhat practised and kept up in the room and imitation of that Laying on of hands instituted by Christ and practised by the Apostles upon baptized Believers as such and as necessary to Church-Communion as well as they have kept up something they call Baptism in imitation of the true Baptism And 't is evident that as the Romish Church has abominably corrupted the Ordinance of Baptism as to the Subject and Manner of Administration and added many ridiculous and superstitious Fopperies to it even so they have done by Laying on of hands The Silver is become dross and the Wine mixed with Water Isa 1.22 He shall saith Daniel think to change Times and Laws speaking of the little Horn and they shall be given into his hand c. Chap. 7.25 But to proceed do our Brethren utterly detect all those impious Forgeries and Ceremonies used in Baptism and contended for by those Fathers Councils and corrupt Churches they speak of and so clearly witness against them for changing the Subject and Manner of Baptizing and yet all the while hold for Baptism it self and faithfully contend for it yea and conclude too notwithstanding those Abuses and Corruptions by the Antients and in the false Church Baptism all along was maintained this I say rather confirms and proves the thing it self to be an Ordinance of Jesus Christ than otherwise tho not as they perform and practise it why cannot they do the like concerning that Rite of Popish Confirmation We do detect and abominate all those superstitious Ceremonies used by them and witness against them for changing of the Subject viz. from baptized Believers to sprinkled Infants or such as were rantised in their Infancy and yet contend for the thing it self as practised in the Apostles time and little reason they have to blame us herein since the work of Reformation or to labour to reduce Ordinances to their primitive Purity and Lustre is by all accounted a glorious Work yea and it is a full and compleat Reformation we all long for not only for one Ordinance to be restored and refined from the dross and abominable filth of Popish Traditions but every Appointment and Ordinance of Christ Mr. Danvers p. 30. having given us an account how Laying on of hands or Confirmation has been asserted and practised By the Antients By Councils By the Church of Rome By the Church of England By some of the Independent and Presbyterian Perswasion And Lastly By some of the Baptized Churches He comes to examine upon what ground such a great Ordinance has been and is enjoined Reply Doubtless it concerns us all to see what ground or Scripture-warrant we have for whatever we do or is done in the Worship and Service of God and as to Confirmation or Laying on of hands as asserted and practised by some he speaks of I marvel not that they leave the Scripture and fly to Tradition For first as to that which the Popish Church calls an Ordinance of Jesus Christ 't is so blasphemous and ridiculous as he well observes that the very naming of the particulars thereof may fully detect the folly and impiety of it whether respecting the Name which is called Chrysm Vnction Perfection c. or the Nature which is done by putting the sign of the Cross with the Bishop's finger in the forehead of the Confirmed with these words I sign thee with the sign of the Cross and with the Chrysm of Salvation in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit the Party being in a white Garment his Head bound with Linen his Hair cut and attended with Gossips or Sureties this is saith Mr. Danvers what several Popes and Councils have by their Canons and Decrees determined and enjoined as the great Sacrament of Confirmation pag. 3. Reply Well might Hommius tell us that it is not only contrary to the Scriptures but Blasphemous and Idolatrous and the vain Invention of superstitious Men. And well might Tilenus call it an Excrement of Antichrist And Amesius say the reasons given for the same by the Papists are both empty and vain and Mr. Calvin cry out against it as is minded by Mr. Danvers To which I might add a passage out of a Treatise of Mr. Hanmer a Presbyterian who tho very clear as touching Laying on of hands upon Adult Persons Baptized before they are admitted to the Lord's Table yet cries down the Papists practice herein in respect of manner and form they use saith he anointing with Chrysm a compound of Oil and Balsam consecrated by the Bishop which as it was never instituted by Christ nor his Apostles so saith he as some affirm it had its original from Calixtus Bishop of Rome Anno 218 who ordained Confirmation to be performed with Chrysm which before was done with
that this abundantly testifies that the Original of this Ceremony flowed from the Apostles Before I proceed I might cite a passage full to the same purpose as the Judgment of the Learned Assembly of Divines which take as follows out of their Annotations on Heb. 6.2 Laying on of hands say they is usually called Confirmation which stood first in examining those that had been baptized what progress they had made in Christianity Secondly In praying for them that God would continue them in the Faith and give them more Grace strengthning them by his Holy Spirit they laid their hands upon them whence the Apostolical Constitution was called Laying on of Hands Moreover What Mr. Baxter speaks upon this account I can't well omit Confirmat p. 124 125. If the Vniversal Church of Christ saith he have used Prayer and Laying on of hands as a practice received from the Apostles and no other beginning of it can be found then we have no reason to think this Ceremony ceased or to interpret the foresaid Scripture contrary to this practice of the Vniversal Church But the Antecedent is true ergo And if any say Anointing and Crossing were antient I answer saith he First That they were as antient in the Popish use as the matter of a Sacrament or necessary Signs is not true nor proved but frequently disproved by our Writers against Popish Confirmation Secondly Nor can it be proved that they were as antient as indifferent things Thirdly We prove the contrary because they were not in Scripture-times there being no mention of them Fourthly So that we bring Antiquity but to prove the continuance of a Scripture-practice and so to clear the practice of it But the Papists plead Fathers for that which the Scripture is a stranger unto I shall close this with Reverend Mr. Hooker The antient Custom of the Church saith he Eccles Polit. p. 351. was after they had baptized to add thereto Imposition of hands with effectual Prayer for the illumination of God's most Holy Spirit to confirm and perfect that which the Grace of the said Spirit had already begun in Baptism for the means to obtain the Graces which God doth bestow are our Prayers and our Prayers to that intent are available as well for others as for our selves But to pass by this I intreat the Reader to consider that tho we have urged the Testimony of several Authors who are one with us in the main concerning our Practice herein yet we build not upon Men or Tradition but on the Word of God neither do we suppose any necessity for us to take up new weapons to defend so plain a Truth since our Adversaries have been so sufficiently worsted and put to flight by the Sword of the Spirit as used by several eminent Saints in times past What we have mentioned of Authors we have been in part forced to by what Mr. Danvers and others have said of them And that leads me to what he speaks pag. 40. of the Scripture-grounds on which the Baptists have asserted this Rite as he calls it and founded this Practice of Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers as necessary to Church-Communion as before especially held forth Heb. 6.1 2. tho not affirmed with that sobriety and modesty as the other from Probability but rather Infallibility denying fellowship to any that do not receive it c. CHAP. V. Shewing how and upon what ground the Baptized Churches do assert Laying on of hands HOW those learned Persons he speaks of have writ and asserted Laying on of hands from that Text I shall leave to the judicious Reader by considering the Instances forecited and that they hold it also as necessary to Church-Communion might I presume be made manifest but that is not our present work but rather to make the thing it self appear to be an Ordinance of Jesus Christ and in order to this those two Particulars or Principles Mr. Danvers lays down we will consider viz. First That to every Ordinance of Christ there must be some plain positive word of Institution to confirm it and not only human Tradition or far-fetcht Consequences and Inferences such as the many Volumes written of Circumcision and federal Holiness to assert Infants Baptism to be an Ordinance of Christ which no ordinary Capacity can reach and only Men of Parts and Abilities can trace and follow in their Meanders Secondly That to practise any thing in the Worship of God for an Ordinance of his without an Institution is Will-worship and Superstition c. Answ The great Text urged for this Institution he says is Heb. 6.1 2. Therefore leaving the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ let us go on to perfection not laying again the foundation of Repentance from dead Works and of Faith towards God of the Doctrine of Baptisms Laying on of hands c. This is the Text affirmed saith he to be the great Charter of the Church for this point of Faith and Practice but how to find the least warrant for the same there he says we see not If it was indeed said let all baptized Believers have hands laid upon them with as much plainness as let all Believers be baptized Mat. 28.29 Acts 10.43 or let all baptized Believers eat the Lord's Supper 1 Cor. 11.24 Acts 2.41 it was something to the purpose Answ First we grant that to every Ordinance of Christ there must be some word of Institution and that such far-fetch Consequence as he minds will not do or be sufficient but that every Institution must be laid down in such plain positive Words as he seems to affirm viz. Let all baptized Believers have Hands laid upon them I deny it being none of our Principle I judg nor theirs neither since they practise such things as Institutions of Christ which are no where in so many plain positive words commanded as may hereafter be shewed But as to the other thing he minds we do agree with him in that matter and say Whatsoever is done in the Worship and Service of God without an Institution is Will-worship and you shall see that our Principles agree and comport with all those honest Protestant Principles concerning what we have to say further about Laying on of hands c. But to reply to what he says concerning Heb. 6. it matters not whether it be Heb. 5.12 or Heb. 6.1 2. or Acts 8.16 17. or Acts 19.6 or any other Scripture that is the chief Text urged to prove Laying on of hands an Ordinance and Institution of Jesus Christ provided that the Scripture urged on this account will prove it so to be But whereas he says he finds not the least warrant for the same I somewhat marvel at it considering what has been formerly written and proved from that Text by several worthy and able Men whose Books he nor none else have ever yet answered But it seems he would have it said in so many plain words Let all baptized Believers have hands laid upon them or else all
was not admitted to the Eucharist Doubtless if the Church of Judea first planted in the order of the Gospel is to be followed or if that which was the practice of some of the Churches was also of every Church then both these Ordinances as well as the other beginning Principles must precede or are prerequisite to Church-Communion and Fellowship Object But doth not this straiten and narrow the Interest of Jesus Christ Answ Mr. Danvers's Reply to Mr. Wills about Baptism is a very good answer viz. This saith he is no other than Reformation in all Ages since the Antichristian defection hath been charged with and particularly that Reformation that has been endeavoured in that other Ordinance of the Lord's Supper therefore the Presbyterians cry out against the Independents for sinful Schism Fomentèrs of Faction and narrowing of Christ's Interest in their respective Separations and Church-Communions The same do the Prelats say to the Presbyterians and the very same do the Papists say to the Episcoparians If Mr. D. in the work of Reformation excels or has more light than such he speaks of in respect of Church-Constitution and Communion and resolves to pursue his work tho he is reproach'd on this account why should he blame us who according to our light labour after a pure and perfect Reformation or doth he judg he has got to such a degree of knowledg that he is perfect and needs no more light nor instruction and that the last Stone of Reformation and Restoration here is laid because Baptism shines forth in its primitive purity Remember him who said such was his Humility What I know not teach thou me and Apollos tho mighty in the Scriptures could stoop to the Counsel and Instruction of Aquila and Priscilla tho much inferior to him who taught him the way of God more perfectly Act. 18.26 6. Ought not we to stand fast and hold the Traditions we have been taught and is not this worthy of Commendation what saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 11.2 Now I praise you Brethren that you remember me in all things and keep the Ordinances as they were delivered unto you And are we not commanded to withdraw from every Brother that walks disorderly and not after the Traditions we have received Besides can we comfortably have Communion with such as oppose a Command of God nay that make it but a Tradition of Men and an Antichristian Innovation And as in all Fundamentals of Salvation so in those of Church-Constitution we ought to be agreed before we can orderly sit down together 7. But to say no more I would caution all our Brethren to take heed what they affirm on this account I mean concerning us and this sacred Institution since they seem so cloudy in their understanding about those Scriptures urged as the great Warranty for our Practice If God has hid for reasons best known to himself this Truth of Imposition of hands from their eyes as he hath the holy Ordinance of Baptism from the Independents c. it will be their wisdom to forbear Reflections let them not be angry lest it be found to be a Truth of God and they consequently prove offended at Christ himself who left this as well as Baptism amongst the beginning-principles of his Doctrine Why should they be offended at us for having an equal love to all the Commandments of Christ I would hope they have reason to judg 't is from hence we so earnestly contend with them on this account 8. I cannot but marvel that our Brethren should call Laying on of hands a Doctrine or Tradition of Men and render those who plead for it guilty of adding to the Word of God and yet receive such into Communion at the Lord's Table as are in the practice of it What uncharitable thoughts do they retain of their Brethren and what guilt on this Consideration do they bring on their own Souls But let me close with one Caution more since they know 't is as sinful every way to diminish from God's Word as to alter or add to it let them take heed lest they be found guilty therein We have now traced Mr. D. quite through and have little more to do In page 53. he labours to remove an Objection brought against him from Antiquity and since he has fairly stated it take it in his own words As to the point of Antiquity tho 't is granted the Antients and their Followers ever since have erred not only in the Subject but in divers Circumstances about this Rite of Imposition of hands yet in-as-much as there has been all along such a witness born to the thing it self it makes for its Apostolicalness and confirms our Practice therein Now take his Answer to it It doth not appear saith he that such a Witness hath been born all along thereto for Mr. Baxter ingenuously acknowledges that Justin Martyr Ireneus and others in those times are silent about it c. And those Authorities that are pretended to assert the same in the first Centuries have been proved to be spurious and supposititious 2ly That pretence of antient Prescription without the Word of God to warrant it can never justify the Divine Authority of any Practice Answ 1. We fully agree with him viz. whatever is found in antient Prescriptions concerning this or any Practice signifies nothing if God's Word doth not witness to it But having such evident proof from God's Word to warrant this Precept we never judged it worth while to search into Authors concerning it neither should we have cited any now had we not been forc'd by our Opposers And as to what he says concerning Mr. Baxter's ingenuous Confession that Justin Martyr and Ireneus are both silent about it it signifies very little for first we have nothing but Mr. Baxter's say-so for it who may be has overlook'd some places of these Authors or probably not met with all their Works But 2. Since their Silence only is pretended it carries no great force with it must we of necessity produce all the Antients expresly witnessing thereto or else is all nothing that is brought from Antiquity in the Case We have mentioned several antient Witnesses and some of the 2d and 3d Centuries which are neither spurious supposititious suborn'd Witnesses nor Knights of the Post tho Mr. D. is pleased so to call them And now to conclude we must say again against what is mention'd p. 54. that there is a clearer Precept for Imposition of hands on baptized Believers as such than can be urged for that on Church-Officers or the observation of the first Day of the Week c. I have ground to conclude Mr. D. thinks it his duty to keep holy the first Day of the Week as the Christian Sabbath We gave Mr. D. no ground to say that which he did of us viz. Reproach the Wisdom of Christ and slight the Authority of the Holy Scriptures as tho we had not a sufficient Direction therein in all parts of God's Worship