Infant Baptiſm Conſidered, and the true Grounds thereof laid down, Opened, and Maintained, &c.
THe Apoſtle adviſing, Rom. 14.5. That every one [〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] be fully carried, or perſwaded in his mind in the things that he acts toward the Lord (as all we do we are to do in his Name, Col. 3.17. ) and I having been exerciſed with doubts and ſcruples in my mind (the rather by occaſion of oppoſition ſometimes met with) about Infant-Baptiſm, it put me upon a more diligent Search of Scripture, together with other means of ſatisfaction thereabout. In which ſearch, what I have found, I have here ſet down, as well for the helpfulneſs of others that may be exerciſed with like doubts, as alſo that it being tryed what is found light therein, may be diſcovered, and others hereby occaſioned to hold forth clearer light.
And firſt I ſhall propound what I find in Scripture more generally concerning Baptiſm, (the want of right underſtanding therein adminiſtring much occaſion of the doubts and miſtakes thereabout) and then deſcend more particularly to what may thence be deduced for Infant-Baptiſm.
1. Firſt then, I find for the kinds or ways of Baptizing, a three-fold kind or way, all tending to make up and effect that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, one Baptiſm ſpoken of, Epheſ. 4.4. the waſhing, cleanſing, and fitting a man for Gods everlaſting Kingdom. Some call them Flaminis, Fluminis, Sanguinis, to which ſome adde a fourth Sermonis. The Scripture thus,
1. A Baptiſm of, or with the Spirit, as Matth. 3.11. Acts 1.5. He ſhall baptize you with the Holy Ghoſt, which is the pouring2 out of the Spirit upon men, on ſome more plenteouſly, on others in leſs meaſure, according to his good pleaſure, to teach, ſanctifie, and fit them for the inheritance and ſervice they are called to, & to ſeal them up to the day of redemption, 1 Cor. 6.11. Joh. 16.13, 14, 15. Eph. 1.13, 14. & 4.30. The ſpeaking with tongues in the firſt pouring out of the Spirit, was neither common to them all, 1 Cor. 12, 30. nor for continuance in all Ages, 1 Cor. 13.8. being but a more miraculous & evident demonſtratiō, that he was indeed poured out upon them, and ſo of the faithfulneſs of Chriſt therein for clearer ſatisfaction to others, Acts 10.45, 46. & 11.15, 16, 17, 18. & for preſent uſefulneſs to them that ſpake with them, for being fited to carry forth the Goſpel to peoples of divers languages, Acts 1.4.8. 1 Cor. 14.21. and alſo for ſignes to unbelievers that did not credit that Doctrine, nor receive the Authority of the Scriptures, 1 Cor. 14.22. But the other operations of the Spirit are of more general uſefulneſs & continuance, & therfore this Baptiſm in that regard is moſt neceſſary; But of this is not our buſineſs herein.
2. A Baptiſm of Fire, or with Afflictions, Matth. 3.11. & 20.22, 23, Luke 12.50 ▪ called a Baptiſm becauſe through the death and reſurrection of Jeſus Chriſt for us, they are not for deſtruction but correction, they are ordered to us (and by him ſanctified) for our cleanſing and purging, which being effected according to his gracious mind, we come out of them again, Iſai. 27.9. Heb. 12 8, 9, 10. Job. 33.29. Hab. 1.12. of which though all partake not alike, ſome are more deeply plunged into them, ſome more lightly ſprinkled with them, yet all in ſome meaſure partake that will live godly in Chriſt, and are Gods children, 2 Tim. 3.12. Heb. 12.6 ▪ 7. Rev. 3.19.
3. Baptiſm with water, Matth. 3.11. Acts 10 47. I indeed baptize you with water. To theſe three, ſome, as I ſaid above add;
A Fourth, Of the Word, becauſe the word Baptiſm ſometimes comprehends alſo the Doctrine baptized into, as in Matth. 21.25, 26. Acts 10.37. And indeed the word is compared to water frequently, and therewith God doth beſprinkle and waſh the ſouls of men, and makes them clean, as John 15.3. yet I think this rather accompanies the ſeveral ways of Baptiſm before mentioned, as being that that the Baptiſm of water obliges to, and ſeals, that which the Spirit properly baptizes with, and by, and that which afflictions are ordered to ſeal home, and bore the ear of the ſoul unto, then that the Scripture calleth it by it ſelf a Baptiſm,3 however this is not it that our enquiry is particularly about, but about that of, or with water. Concerning which,
2. Secondly, I find the Grounds thereof in Scripture, are either,
1. More general and fundamental, viz. The grace of God towards poor loſt man teſtified in the gift of his Son to be the Saviour of the world by ſuffering for its ſin, removing its curſe, and procuring life, and bleſſing for it into himſelf, John 3.16, 17. & 6.51. according to that to Abraham, In thy ſeed ſhall all the Nations and Families of the Earth be bleſſed. This indeed is the main foundation and ground of all Gods gracious dealings with, and diſpenſations to the ſons of men, and of all his Ordinances both before, and ſince his coming; only with this difference that thoſe before his coming were grounded on, and to mind and lead us to him, as one to come; thoſe ſince, are grounded upon his being actually come in the fleſh, and upon his being perfected through his ſufferings, for bringing bleſſing to all families of men, and ſaving to the utmoſt all that obey him; that this word of the beginning of Chriſt is the foundation of Baptiſings, in all its ways, is clear, Heb. 6.1, 2. For indeed otherwiſe no Goſpel nor Baptiſm into it, no Diſpenſation of Spirit to us; Afflictions had been deſtructions, not corrections; and ſo in particular its the Foundation of this Baptiſm we ſpeak of.
2. More immediately, and particularly; The Commiſſion given for baptizing, which I find was two-fold.
1. One to John called then the Baptiſt, Luke 3.2, 3. called the Baptiſm of repentance, becauſe joyned with a Doctrine detecting the falſe confidences, and erring ways of the Jews, from Chriſt the Seed of Abraham, and the free-grace of God in him, and ca•ling them to repent of them, and turn in again to him, Mat. 3.2. John 1.15.29.
2. The other, to the Diſciples and Apoſtles of Chriſt, Mat. 28.19, 20. and between theſe two I find no difference preſcribed as to the form of acting, only in theſe two things. 1. John's was to be practiſed upon the Jews only, and ſo ſuch as were before members of the Church of God. The Diſciples upon the Gentiles alſo for diſcipling them. 2. John's was unto Chriſt to be revealed to them, and for revealing him while he was but yet about his work for us on the earth: The Diſciples was chiefly after his Aſcenſion into the Name of Chriſt, as more fully and clearly revealed, and ſo into the Name, and to the worſhip of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoſt, more diſtinctly opened in their Doctrine.
3. For the Ends of this Baptiſm, I find it is,
41. Negatively, Not to diſtinguiſh between chaff & wheat, the ſpiritual, and carnal ſeed, that's Chriſts own work, not his ſervants, Mat. 3.12 & 22.10, 11, 12. nor to approve the ſtate of every ſuch perſon as is baptized, & ſeal to them an undoubted enjoyment of Eternal life, or that they are really, and in Spirit one with God & Chriſt, or the like.
2. But Affirmatively. 1. On Gods, and the Adminiſtrators part, miniſtring in the Name of God, and of Jeſus Chriſt, 2 Cor. 5.19, 20.
1. To hold forth, ratifie, and confirm the truth of the Contents of the Goſpel, and ſo to witneſs to the grace of God in Jeſus Chriſt brought unto men, ſo John not as a man barely, but as a Preacher and Baptiſer witneſſed to Chriſt, and ſo were the Apoſtles to witneſs to him in all their Miniſtration as God himſelf doth by them; John 1.7.15.29. & 15.26, 27. 1 John 5.10, 11. yea, as all the Ordinances of God both before, and ſince his coming, ſtand upon him as the gift of Gods love to man, ſo as the Cherubims of old to the Mercy-ſeat, they all look and witneſs to him, Rom. 3.21. Heb. 10.1. And ſo in Baptiſm particularly, God, and the Adminiſter as from God, holds forth intimately the uncleanneſs that is in men one or other, by their natural birth, or humane actings, the emptineſs of all their own righteouſneſs though after the Law; And that in Jeſus Chriſt by his death and reſurrection for them there is forgiveneſs and redemption for them, and bleſſing, even righteouſneſs and life brought unto them, which in ſubmitting to him, and his Government, they ſhall certainly receive from him, and that he will by his Word and Spirit, ſo waſh, cleanſe, and ſanctifie them, as to make them meet for fellowſhip with God, Epheſ. 5.25, 26.
2. To teſtifie and declare, that neither God nor they (in caſe they be guilful in the receit of this Ordinance, and grace tendered there with) do hold them bound under the guilt of former, either natural, or actual pollution, ſo as to hold them out from his Church, or Kingdom, but do remit all paſt, ſo as not to refuſe to admit them to fellowſhip with themſelves in his Church, its ordinances, and bleſſings, as they be capable thereof. So I look upon that in Acts 22.16. Waſh away thy ſins, with Acts 10.28. Mat. 18.18. 2 Cor. 5.19.
2. On the Baptized's part it is, 1. That he might have the promiſes held forth, ſealed, and ratified to him. 2. To diſciple him to Jeſus Chriſt, and ſo ſubject them to his Regiment, teaching a way of worſhip appointed and taught by him, Matth. 28.19, 20. Diſciple all the Nations, or Gentiles, baptizing them,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, unto the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoſt; that is, unto5 the receit, belief, and acknowledgement of the Doctrine of God, as ſo diſtinctly made known, and into the worſhip of him, the only true God, the Father by, through, and as made known by, and in the Son, his Mediation and Doctrine, declared and opened by the Holy Ghoſt in the Goſpel, and in his power working there-through in the heart, teaching them to obſerve all things that I command you, &c. Even as the people of Iſrael in being baptized in the cloud and ſea, were obliged to believe and obey Moſes, and the Lord as ordering them by him, 1 Cor. 10.12. and ſo alſo by being circumciſed, Gal. 5.2.3. And herein they that are baptized, are baptized into the death of Chriſt, to expect all their life there-through, and follow him therein, and do in this ſence put on Chriſt, Gal. 3.26, 27. that is, An Engagement an Obligation to liſten to, and believe on him, as they have him declared, and are capable of liſtening to, and believing on him, and ſo a profeſſed ſubjection to his order, and to worſhip God by him, and take content in the grace in him, even as being further baptized by his Spirit in the opening the truth to their hearts, and ſhedding his love abroad therein, they more really and ſpiritually put him on by way of actual confidence, and faith in him, as their righteouſneſs, rejoycing, and compleat redemption and ſalvation, and his vertues by being conformed to him; and the more yet by being alſo baptized with trials and afflictions, Rom. 13.14. Epheſ. 4.21, 22. Rev. 7.13, 14, 15. 3. To admit the baptized into the Church, and Kingdom of God, and ſo to have the Name of God and of Chriſt put upon them. So Matth. 28.19, may alſo be underſtood, Baptizing them into the Name of the Father, &c. So as that they may have the Name of the true God upon them, be, and be called the people, or Church of God, Chriſtians; as of old the Name of God was by Circumciſion put upon Iſrael; and ſo alſo to bring them under the protection, help, and bleſſing of that Name. For where Gods Name is put upon, and own'd by any people, God hath reſpect unto them for his Names ſake, and for that cauſe often ſpares, helps, and bleſſes them, that he might glorifie his Name upon them, and make other people know, that it is better to be his people, worſhippers, and callers upon him, and under his protection, then any other Gods, or powers whatſoever: To this purpoſe are theſe Scriptures, Pſal. 124.8. Ezek. 20.9, 14. &c. Jer. 14.7. Iſai. 48.9. Pſal. 115.8, 9. 4. And ſo to diſtinguiſh them from all other peoples that are not baptized into the Name of Chriſt, and receive not his Goſpel, as Acts 11.26. Iſai. 63.18, 19. And to oblige them to6 unity in judgement and affection amongſt themſelvs, as 1 Cor. 1.10.13 I beſeech you, Brethren, by the Name of our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, (which is but one, and is upon you all) that ye all ſpeak the ſame thing, and that there be no diviſions among you, but that ye be perfectly joyned together in the ſame mind, and in the ſame judgement. Not to ſay, I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, I am of Luther, I am of Calvin, I am of Arminius; to make and maintain Parties, Sects, and Factions, in the Church; but every one to own truth from, or by any one, and ſingly follow after it, and all own themſelves only obliged to Chriſt, and his Name, and to every one to each other for that Name ſake; whence it follows, were ye baptized into the Name of Paul, that ye ſhould only cleave to him, and neglect, and ſlight all other the ſervants of Chriſt for Pauls ſake, and only follow and cry him up. Which might be applyed to our diviſions, were we baptized into the Name of Luther, or Calvin, or the like, and ſo to diviſions nearer home. The being all baptized into the Name of Chriſt, ſhould make us all adhere to Chriſt, and to receive his truth by any one he ſpeaks it by, and love one another for his ſake, according to that alſo, Epheſ. 4.3, 4, 5.
4. Concerning the Subject of Baptiſm, the thing principally inquired after in this Diſcourſe. 1. I find not any Scripture in ſo many words ſay, That Infants are to be baptized, or inſtancing that the Apoſtles did baptize Infants. 2. I find not any Scripture expreſly or intimately prohibit the Baptiſm of Infants, or denying that they were baptized. For, 3. I find not any Scripture ſay, That only believers may be, or were baptized, or none but ſuch as have repented, do confeſs their ſins, profeſs faith, &c. 4. I find indeed, that in the firſt practiſe of Baptiſm, it being preacht to men of age and underſtanding, with the doctrine it baptized into, they being perſwaded to receive that doctrine, and be baptized into it, did ſome of them confeſs their ſins,Mat. 3 6. Acts 8.38, 39. others, profeſs their faith, And ſuch were baptized, having not ever before they, or their Fore-fathers been inſtructed into that doctrine, or been baptized thereinto. But, 5. I find not that either John, or Chriſts Diſciples ever turned away any that came to be baptized of them. That Poſition of the Antipedobaptiſts, That John Matth. 3. turned away the Phariſees and Sadduces, is without proof. It's true, that divers (yea, prabably moſt) of the Phariſees contemned his Baptiſm, and rejected the counſel of God againſt themſelves, Luke 7.30. but neither John, nor any other ſervant of Chriſt, is ever ſaid to have rejected them there-from. John in7 that Matth. 3. indeed takes them up more roughly then he did ſome other, as more needing it, (and yet Luke tells us, he ſaid the ſame to the multitude, Luke 3.7. ) but withall ſays, he baptized them. For ſo are the words, I indeed baptize you, Mat. 3.11.6. Thence I find too, That the Subject of this Baptiſm was not a truly ſpiritual ſeed of Abraham, born of the Spirit, either as adminiſtred by John, or Chriſts Diſciples; for Iohn calls them he baptized, a generation of vipers, an Epithite too harſh for perſons truly regenerate,Luke 3.7 and ſays, he baptized them not upon their repentance, or that had repented, but〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, unto repentance, that they might, or inſtructing them, that they ſhould repent, Matth. 3.11. And ſo not upon faith, but ſaying,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, That they ſhould believe in him that is to come, Acts 19.3, 4. Thence alſo it's ſaid to be〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not upon, or after uſually, but for, or unto the remiſſion of ſins: Yea, John plainly intimates, that he admitted chaff as well as wheat into the floor, and ſuch as ſhould be burnt in unquenchable ſire, Matth. 3.12. he baptizing ſuch as ſtill received the Name of Publicans; yea, all the people, the generality doubtleſs of them, Luke 7.29. & 3.21. And for Chriſts Diſciples, they baptized and diſcipled ſuch as our Saviour that well knew them, tells us, did not believe, John 6.64. yea, ſuch as were in the gall of bitterneſs, and bond of iniquity after their baptiſm, Acts 8.23. yea, they brought into the houſe all they found, good and bad, Mat. 22.9, 10, 11, 12. & 13.47, 48. 7. I find indeed, that once the Gift of the Holy Ghoſt preceded Baptiſm, viz. in Cornelius, and his friends, Acts 10.44 48. They being uncircumciſed Gentiles in the fleſh; and therefore God to demonſtrate that they were thenceforth amongſt the Gentiles to be admitted into the Church by Baptiſm without Circumciſion, (the want whereof was no impediment to him for having fellowſhip with them, and to take away ſcruple from the believing Jews, that they might alſo admit them to their fellowſhip without it) poured forth his Spirit firſt on them, whence Peter ſays, Can any forbid water, that theſe ſhould not be baptized that have received the Holy Ghoſt? But 8. I find that uſually perſons were baptized before ſuch receit of the Holy Ghoſt, as Mat. 3.11. Acts 2.38, 39. & 8.12, 13, 16. Yea, 9. I find that divers being converted had their whole families baptized with them, as Acts 16.31, 33. & 1 Cor. 1.16. And ſome the faith of whoſe family before Baptiſm there is not the leaſt mention of, as Acts 16.14, 15. But now happily it will be ſaid, That here is enough ſaid againſt Infant-baptiſm, becauſe it's granted that no Scripture expreſly ſays, that Infants were, or ought8 to be baptized; which is indeed the great pillar upon which Antipedobaptiſm leaneth, nor matter they that no Scripture ſayes, they were not, or ought not. For what is not written, ſay they, is not to be believed, or practiſed. Concerning which, I propound to further conſideration. 1. Whether that Maxime ſtrikes not down one main pillar of theirs. For if what is not written, is not to be believed, then its not to be believed that all that were baptized were capable of faith, or (rather) actually profeſſed it before Baptiſm. For its not written, that either all in the Jaylours houſe, or that any in Lydia's houſe beſide her ſelf profeſt it before Baptiſm, Acts 16.15.33. the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, believed in, ver. 34. is of the ſingular Number, and agrees with the Jaylor, & ſo is the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, rejoyced, and word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (houſe wholly) is ſuch, as concludes not all in the houſe actually either in believing, or rejoycing, it may ſignifie as well in, or concerning all his houſe, as with them all as companions in thoſe actings. The Prophet calls the women with their ſucking Infants to aſſemble ſolemnly, & to humble themſelves before the Lord, Joel 2.12. 14, 15. And Nineveh men & beaſts are ſaid, to cry to God, and put on ſackcloth; and yet its certain that neither the beaſts nor Infants were active in thoſe repentings, & ſolemn humiliations. And as for Lydia's houſe, not a word of any of them hearing the word, or believing before Baptiſm. And the like we might ſay of the houſhold of Stephanas, 1 Cor. 1.16. Therefore if nothing is to be believed that the word is ſilent in, why preſs they upon men to believe that all that were baptized did profeſs faith, and repentance firſt, ſeeing it's more then can be proved? 2. It's to be examined, whether it be true and right or not, that we are to believe, or do nothing but what we have ſome expreſs Command of Chriſt, or example of the Apoſtles in terminis, to warrant us in. I ſuppoſe its not every way currant: for by that rule its not lawful for a man that is a Chriſtian to take upon him the Office of a Magiſtrate, or Civil government over Chriſtian people; For neither hath Chriſt, not any of his Apoſtles in expreſs terms commanded it, nor did any of the Apoſtles practiſe it. The like we might ſay for keeping the firſt day of the week, or any one ſet day for a Sabbath, for tranſlating the Scriptures into our Engliſh tongue, and for womens partaking of the Supper, though a thing generally allowed of, even by the Antipedobaptiſts. If a man of a contentious ſpirit lifted, he might make as great ſtirs about it to the diſturbance of the Church, as is made about Infant-baptiſm, for there is neither expreſs Command of Chriſt, or practiſe of the Apoſtles, or9 Churches in their times in which there is expreſs mention of womens participation of it in all the Scriptures, no more then for Infant Baptiſm. The inſtitution of the Supper was at the Paſſover (whereof neither is there any where expreſs mention that any woman ever did eat) with the twelve Apoſtles or Diſciples who are numbred up and named, Mat. 10. and its evident enough they were all men, and it was to them that he ſayd, Take eat &c. and drink ye all of this; and do ye this as oft as ye eat it, &c. in remembrance of me. If any ſhall ſay that that all was a repreſentative of the whol Church, he may happily ſay true but more then by any expreſs Scripture he can prove. I know no one expreſſion in Scripture that ſays either let women participate of it, or that women did; and thats as much as is mainly urged againſt Infant Baptiſm there were its true three Thouſand converted in one day, and then they continued in breaking of bread, Acts. 2. but that any of them were women is no more expreſt, then that when its ſaid all the people were bapeized, there were ſome Infants amongſt them, in the fourth of the Acts. verſ. 4. where the number of the men is ſaid to be five Thouſand (which is conceived to be the number of them in general that were converted, and not only of thoſe that were converted at Peters ſecond Sermon there mentioned) the word is〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, males, men of the Maſculine ſex. We find again, Acts. 20.5.6. that the Diſciples came together to break bread, but that there were any women amongſt them is not expreſt, the word is〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of the Maſculine gender too, whereas the word for a woman Diſciple is〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Acts. 9.36. and though its true that we have a Rule, that the leſs worthy gender is comprehended in the more worthy, yet that neither proves that where ever the Maſculine is uſed the Feminine too is comprehended (for thats evidently falſe, as might be by hundred of places ſhewed) now that its ſo there, unleſs it were firſt prooved that there were ſome of that leſs worthy gender at that meeting. I know again that the Apoſtle bids that a man ſhould examin himſelf and ſo eate and drink in that Supper, and the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉is utriuſque ſexus, may be applied and often is to men and women both, yet there is no expreſs mention of women, and foraſmuch as its often uſed of men only without incluſion of women (as in John. 3.1. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉10〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. There was a man named Nicodemus, 1 Tim. 2.5. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the man Chriſt Jeſus. So in Mat. 19.5. Mar. 10, 7. and Epheſ. 5.31. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉a man ſhall leave father and mother, and ſhall be joyned to his own wife. So Ioh. 7.22. On the Sabath day ye circumciſe〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a man; ſurely women were neither circumciſed, nor had wives. See the like in Heb. 5.1. every high Preiſt is taken〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉from amongſt men. Heb. 7, 8. there they that are〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, men, take tithes, and ver. 28. The law made〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, men prieſts. In all which places, it is evident that men ſignifies men of the male kind only (now ſeeing it is ſo I ſay) any man that would ſtand as ſtifly againſt this, as ſome do againſt Infant baptiſm, might puzzle his Antagoniſt to prove that it is there to be taken for men and women both, eſpecially too, ſeeing he bids them or affirms of them, whom upon examination he admits unto that ordinance, that they do〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉annunciare, declare or ſhew forth the Lords death, when they participate, and its expreſly forbidden women in the ſame Epiſtle, Chap. 14.34, 35. to ſpeak in the Church, or Congregation. And whereas it may be ſaid again, that the Epiſtle was writ to all the Saints in Corinth, and all that call upon the Name of the Lord Jeſus, it might eaſily be replyed (and truly too) that all things in the Epiſtle are not therefore applicable to every one of them its writ to, as that in chap. 1.8. That they were inriched with every thing in Chriſt in all utterance and knowledge and came behind in no gift, ſeeing he ſays in chap. 8. All have not this knowledge: and chap. 15. Some of them had not the knowledge of God. Yea its plain, that ſome things•n it concern women and not men, as about ſilence in the Churches, and covering their heads, cap. 11. & 14. And other things men and not women, as in the ſame Chapters, however its evident that here is no expreſs commandement nor practiſe of the Churches related, in which there is expreſs mention of womens partaking of the Supper, and I think all Churches agree about it, that its lawfull and good that they partake of it. So that the bare want of expreſs command in ſo many words or of the like expreſs mentioning a thing as practiſed by the Apoſtles, is no ſufficient ground to conclude a practiſe ſinfull, they that make that their rule in approving or condemning practiſes might make as great11 diſturbances in other things that are warrantable enough as well as in Infant Baptiſm. For,
3. Its to be conſidered further, that Chriſt is not ſo circumſtantiall in his precepts or injunctions of outward meer poſitive Ordinances as Moſes was: Moſes, or rather God to and by Moſes, ſets down to every pin and peg in the Tabernacle, how it muſt be made, and delivers more circumſtantially the commands of Circumciſion and Paſſover as the age and time in which they were to be done, how often and in what form, but ſo doth not Chriſt, he hath not by himſelf or by his Apoſtles ſet down at what certain age a man ſhould be Baptized, or eate the Supper, nor in what Form, whether all the body or ſome part of it muſt be dipt, or waſhed in Baptiſm, how often and upon what times of the year the Supper is to be taken, nor in what geſture. He hath not bounded the Church thus in the circumſtances of his Ordinances. Nay he hath not as we noted before, ſaid any where, ye may, or ye may not (in terminis) Baptiſe Infants, or ye muſt not Baptiſe men till they have firſt beleeved.
Now whereas its commonly objected,Object. that this is to make Chriſt a leſs perfect and faithfull mediator and diſpenſer of the things of God then Moſes; in my minde its ignorantly ſpoken, and they that ſo object conſider not in what the faithfulneſs and perfection of Chriſts miniſtration above Moſes ſtandeth. For,
1. Sure his faithfulneſs ſtands in this,Sol. That he diſcharge al that Office that his Father hath impoſed upon him, be it what it will. Now if his Father no where injoyned him to ſuch circumſtantiateneſs in his Ordinances, he is not chargeable with unfaithfulneſs if he do not ſo circumſtantiate them.
2. Moſes was a ſervant and amongſt ſervants, and his Law was a miniſtration of ſervitude, and though to ſons alſo, yet to ſons under age, and nothing different from ſervants in reſpect of tutelage, even the moſt beleeving of them:Gal. 4.1, 2. Heb. 3.2, 5. But Chriſt is the Son in his houſe, in which are ſons alſo not under that or the like tutelage, yea his people are to him in the capacity of a wife or Spouſe. Now whether is greater perfection to lead to, and leave at, more liberty in externall matters not morrall, or to bind up to more ſervitude and with more charges. Servants and Schollers may have every part of their work ſet them with more formality or exact mention of every punctilio, eſpecially while under none age, but12 a wife or ſon more grown, may be left more to liberty and their diſcretion, and not ſo bound and tyed up with outward formall precepts. Nor follows it thence, that then we have greater liberty to ſin;Rom. 4.15. for, where no Law is, there is no tranſgreſſion: there is no ſin in thoſe things but whyt ſtands in croſſing a poſitive Law, or binding upon men, that as a Law, that he hath left at liberty and not bound us to; theſe things being applyed onely to things of externall Form and Ordinance, not to the things of the inſide and Spirit, and what flows from thence of morall practiſe, ſuch as the love of God and man with the branches of it, which are due from us, though God ſhould not expreſly by word injoyn them to us, there being a Law of Nature and Grace too, to injoyn us thereunto.
3. But to come more up to the buſineſs: In the Law was a leſs diſcovery of love, and more of ſervice in carnal things, ſhadowing out thoſe ſpiritual things in which the love of God was more brightly to be evidenced: In the Goſpel is more diſcovery of Love, and therefore more ſpirit, and leſs carnal ſervice. As the Sun growing higher, the ſhadows ſhorten; So the Goſpel being now more clear, the ſhadows of external Ceremonies or Documents are leſs inſiſted on.
4. The time of the Law being as the time of Infancy, and leſs growth in underſtanding, and the time of the Goſpel as the time of riper years; as men grown can take hints of things, and perceive the Speakers mind in them, when little children need to be told plainly every circumſtance: So then, the Miniſtration fitted to thoſe times needed to be more circumſtantial; whereas now having the light and help of thoſe former Documents, ſome hints in Scripture may declare the Will of Chriſt to our underſtanding, where there are no ſuch exact expreſs mentionings of it. So that that Objection vaniſhes. It's ſo far from being Antichriſtianiſm, and a denying of Chriſt come in the fleſh (as ſome would have it) to ſay, that Chriſt is leſs exact in the matters of external Forms, rhat it's rather Antichriſtianiſm, and a tacit denyal of him come in the fleſh, to make him ſo exact in Forms. And yet ſomething of Form he hath left us too, we being not yet come to full age, to perfection in knowledg and fulneſs of Spirit, but much carnal yet. And I acknowledg and beleeve, that what Ordinances he left us we are not proudly to deſpiſe, ſlight, alter and change, as if needleſs13 to us, or matters to be ordered meerly by our wills; but it becomes us to wait upon him in them, not ſetting up our Poſts by his Poſts, nor yet being more holy then God and Chriſt,Ezeck 43.8. and more ſtrict and circumſtantial then he hath been in preſcribing them to us.
4. Yea I propound to Conſideration that paſſage, Rev. 11.1, 2. where it's ſaid, A Reed like a Rod was given to John, and the Angel ſaid to him, Riſe and meaſure the Temple of God, and the Altar, and them that worſhip therein; but the Court that is without the Temple caſt out, and meaſure it not, for it's given to the Gentiles. By the Temple of God, is plainly in the Scriptures meant the Church in union and fellowſhip with Chriſt by Faith and Spirit, as he is the Altar and Sacrifice, and they that worſhip in it are the particular Saints worſhipping and adoring God in the Mediation and Sacrifice of Chriſt, and in the unity of Spirit with Chriſt and one another; that's the Temple worſhipping: Theſe are to be meaſured with a Reed like a Rod or Scepter; theſe are to be cared for peculiarly, and the proportion of them diligently to be taken, both Temple and Worſhippers; God will not have an inch of them loſt, nor will he have any defect or redundancy in this ſpiritual Worſhip; according to this men are to be reckoned of, accounted and eſteemed the Sion of God. By the Court without the Temple, is meant that into which all the people come, (for it's an evident alluſion to the Temple of old,) the external outward profeſſion with the things of it, the worſhip of external Services or Forms; this is not to be meaſured, with ſuch exactneſs to be inſiſted on and proportioned to the true Worſhippers, as if they were to be known, or men to be reckoned ſuch by that, but to be left out as given to the Gentiles, the prophane Heathen in hearts; it's given to them to come in thither, to have the Name of Chriſt, and of the outward Court, whence (as thoſe things that were done in the outward Court were ſaid to be done**2 Chro. 6.24. Pſal. 12 2. with Luke 1.10. in the Temple)††2 Theſ. 2.4. Antichrist is ſaid to ſit in the Temple of God; namely, in the outward Court of external Profeſſion, yea in every various Form, trampling under feet the Sion and Jeruſalem of God. And it's conſiderable to me, whether all the ſtir and hurly-burly about external Forms and outward Ordinances, is not mens endeavoring to meaſure the outward Court, and to take it from the Gentiles (that worſhip not at the Altar and in the Temple) to whom yet14 it's given: and if that be not, what it is I would be willingly informed.
5. I conſider, that things not plainly expreſt in the Scriptures by way of Precept or Example, may yet be couched therein; and the truth and lawfulneſs of things may be rightly deduced from places that plainly in words affirm them not. As for inſtance; Chriſt proves out of the Books of Moſes to the Sadduces (who are ſaid to have accounted no part of the Scripture Canonical but them) that the dead ſhall riſe again; whereas in all thoſe Books there is not one expreſſion of the dead riſing: He proves it as contained in the bowels of that ſaying of God to Moſes, I am the God of Abraham,Mat. 22.32. and the God of Iſaac, and the God of Jacob. And ſo the Apoſtle proved from the Scriptures the needleſſneſs of Circumciſion to the beleeving Gentiles, though there is not an expreſſion openly ſaying it through all the Prophetical Writings; but he ſhews it by conſidering the ground and end of Circumciſion, and ſome other truths of Scripture whence he deduces it. The like may be ſaid of womens partaking of the Supper, and a Chriſtian man being a Magiſtrate. Yea the very Denyers of Infant Baptiſm take, or pretend to take, this courſe in what they ſay againſt it. For there is not (as we ſaid before) one expreſs ſaying, that Infants ſhould not be baptized, or that none but Beleevers actually, or ſuch as profeſs Faith and Repentance ſhould be baptized; or that all rhat were baptized, did ſo beleeve or profeſs: only they ſpeak of ſome Inſtances of former practiſe of the Apoſtles baptizing ſuch, from whence they draw thoſe deductions, and with which they make a great noiſe, and eaſily take ſilly women and ſimple people that cannot ſee into the Scripture depths, nor well underſtand reaſon according to Scripture: Though they may exclaim againſt deductions in others, yet they are full of them themſelves. It's not ſaid (in terminis) Baptize Infants, or that the Apoſtles did ſo, therefore they may not be baptized; which is but like that, It's not expreſt that women received the Supper in the Apoſtles times, or that Chriſt inſtituted it for them alſo, therefore they ought not to eat of it: Or that of the Sadduces; Moſes no where mentions the Reſurrection of the dead in all his Writings, therefore from his doctrine it cannot be proved.
6. Things couched in Scripture grounds, and thence deduceable, are no leſs truths or warrantable then truths plainly expreſſed. As15 it's as very a truth couched in Moſes his Writings, that Abraham, and ſo the dead, ſhall ariſe, as it is in the Apoſtle's plain ſaying it, though not ſo eaſily by every one perceived. And ſo, that Jeſus is the Chriſt, is a truth as really couched in the Prophetical Writings, as if it had been in ſo many words expreſt, though there is no ſuch plain expreſſion in all the Prophets. The like may be ſaid for Juſtification by Faith without the Works of the Law, as Paul hath thence gathered and proved ſubſtantially, though ſuch an expreſs ſaying is in none of them Scriptures to be found. It's true, by the Apoſtle they are made evident to be truths, but not made truths by his evidencing them; they were there couched and contained before his ſearching them and bringing them out, nay they could not rightly have been deduced thence, if they had not formerly been there couched. Now they that ſee not the truths couched in ſayings, nor pierce to any truth but what is plain in the ſaying, they cry out that ſuch things are falſhoods that they cannot there ſee; not becauſe they are ſo, but becauſe they ſee them not as they lie there couched. As the Sadduces clamored againſt the Phariſees, that their doctrine of the Reſurrection of the dead was an Error, not delivered to them from God by Moſes their Lawgiver, becauſe they could not ſee it in his Writings, though there it was, and there Chriſt found it: and as the falſe Apoſtles clamored againſt Paul, about the doctrine of Juſtification by Faith without the Works of the Law and Circumciſion, upon the like grounds, and with as little reaſon. And this Conſideration might at leaſt ſtop the clamorouſneſs of men, that, with the fool,Prov. 14.16. rage and are confident upon this ground, meerly that the Scripture hath no ſuch open and manifeſt expreſſion, leſt by their raſhneſs they deny truth contained more hiddenly in the Scriptures, and trouble the Churches of God needleſly, as the Sadduces did. I grant, it's true, that there is no truth couched in Scripture, and thence to be deduced, that doth contradict or evacuate any plain expreſs truth of Scripture: any collection from Scripture contradicting the open ſaying of Scripture, is to be rejected as not rightly deduced; for the Scriptures, though in ſome places they may ſeem, yet in no place doth deny or contradict it ſelf in other places: But many truths are couched in Scripture, that are not ſo openly expreſt in plain ſayings as ſome others be, as we before inſtanced. I conceive if thoſe called Anabaptiſts did ſeriouſly conſider this (and yet this is16 as plain and undenyable a Truth as any can be pleaded for) it would make them more ſober towards others in this point of Infant Baptiſm, and not ſo vainly to vapor, and ſo proudly to inſult, as ſome of them do in their own conceptions of the undenyableneſs of this ground for denying it, viz. that it's not plainly expreſt in any Scripture Inſtance or Precept.
And now let us in the next place ſee if any ground for it may be found couched in the Scriptures: and therein firſt of all let us view the Commiſſion given by Chriſt to his Apoſtles for Gentile-Baptiſm.
1. That Commiſſion we find in Mat. 28.19, 20. All Power in Heaven and Earth is given unto me, go ye therefore diſciple ye all the Gentiles, baptizing them into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoſt; teaching them to obſerve all things whatſoever I have commanded you, &c. Where, firſt, we have to be noted, the ground of this Commiſſion, in Verſ. 18. All Power is given to me in Heaven and Earth; that is, Though as the eternal Word I had all Power over all Creatures before, they being all made by me, Joh. 1.2, 3 Col. 1.16. yet could I not with conſiſtence with my Truth or Holineſs order all of them, or any of loſt mankind, as now upon the account of my Death and Reſurrection I am in the nature of man impowered to do: had I not dyed and riſen for men, I muſt have deſtroyed them all for ever; but as virtually upon this account before, ſo actually now and in the nature of man am I inveſted with Power and Authority, as of Lordſhip over all Creatures, to order and diſpoſe them as I pleaſe agreeable to my Fathers Will; ſo over Mankind, to help and ſave them, and make all things ſubſervient to my deſigns about them: Therefore alſo have I Power to make new Orders, and grant out new Commiſſions what and to whom I pleaſe, as alſo to protect and defend them that I employ in the execution of my ſaid Orders and Commiſſions: Therefore I command, require and commiſſionate you to be my Servants and Meſſengers in the Work that I pleaſe to enjoyn you; Go ye therefore. And further, For as much as by virtue of my Death and Reſurrection for all men, I have ranſomed all men, even all the Nations of the world out from under the power of the ſentence to death and condemnation, to which the Covenant, broken by Adam as ſoon as made with him almoſt, did bind them over; ſo as that now, that Sin and Law notwithſtanding,17 you and what ever Death by occaſion thereof falling upon them, I can ſave any of them in looking up to me; and for ſo much as that is the way to their life and happineſs, the only way to it, that they be obedient and ſubject to my Government, and beleeve on me; * God having given all Nations to me for mine inheritance,Pſal. 28 8. Iſai. 49.7. Acts 4.12. 1 Cor. 1.21. & Joh. 1.4.5.9. and the utmoſt ends of the Earth for my poſſeſſion, and me to be his Salvation to the ends of the Earth, No other Name given under Heaven by which they can or may be ſaved: and for as much alſo as the light of the knowledg of God by me as the eternal Word, in the fulneſs of time to be made fleſh ſuffer and dye, held forth to them formerly in the Wiſdom of God, they by wiſdom knew not, but the light ſhining in darkneſs they do not comprehend: It's therefore my pleaſure to ſend a plain Declaration of my Mind unto them, and not only to reſerve that priviledg to the people of Iſrael, as formerly, (the partition wall between them and all other Nations being broken down by my ſufferings.) Epheſ. 2.15.Therefore, Go ye, my choſen ſervants, and Embaſſadours, Diſciple all the Gentiles, baptizing them into the Name, &c.
Here then ſecondly, we have the Commiſſion it ſelf, wherein baptiſm was firſt by our Saviour appointed to the Gentiles, as a medium of their being diſcipled to him. I confeſs baptiſm was practiſed before, and that too upon all the people,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Luke 3.21. people of every ſort at leaſt, a word large enough to include infants too, Deut. 31.12. Luke 9.13. with Matth. 14.21. Jude 5. but to our purpoſe this commiſſion is more pertinent, becauſe it was given for the baptizing of the Gentiles, and diſcipling them, and ſo its rather to be read, All the Gentiles, (as the ſame phraſe,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is tranſlated in other places, as Acts 15.17. Rom. 15.11. 2 Tim. 4.17. and the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Gentiles, commonly) they having ſufficient warrant before for diſcipling and baptizing the Jews in the former practiſing of baptiſm by John, and themſelves upon them, and the commiſſion given them, Matth. 10. when the Gentiles were expreſly excluded. No other being to be baptized, but ſuch as were of the viſible Church of God before, Children of the Kingdom, upon whom the name of God was called, and ſo baptiſm was not to them the way of taking into the Church and Kingdom of God, but for further inſtructing, and taking in further them that were ſomewhat inſtructed in it before: for that's clear that the people of the Jews18 were already in the viſible Church, the Vineyard of God, and Children of the Kingdom, as in Matth. 8.12. & 21.42, 43. The hedg was yet about them, and the clouds rained upon them, &c.
But now unto the Gentiles, (not fore-proſelited and circumciſed) baptiſm was the way of taking them in, and declaring and owning them to pertain to the Church: nor do we read of any Gentile, or Heathen, coming into the viſible Body and Company of the Church, to be accounted of them by any other way or medium of outward inſtitution after Chriſt's reſurrection, circumciſion being not practiſed upon them and theirs in their admiſſion, as was formerly uſed in proſeliting them. Indeed that the falſe Apoſtles ſtood for, and would have had the way of their entrance and admiſſion ſtill: in which two it is obſervable, that they make no mention of circumciſing their infants, but that they, the Diſciples, ought to be circumciſed, as was the manner of Moſes; and Paul ſpeaking to the Galathians, ſays, They conſtrain you, and would have you to be circumciſed, Gal. 6.12, 13. not mentioning infants, and yet it is certain that it was the manner of Moſes to circumciſe the infant male of all that came in, and ſo by that rule they are included under the words You, and Diſciples alſo; they were reckoned as parts of them in the external profeſſion. A man might as colourably wrangle and plead that the falſe Apoſtles deſired only the circumciſion of the actual believers of their Gentiles, and not of their infants, becauſe they never mention their infants, and becauſe Paul ſays, But they deſire to have you circumciſed; as that they baptized ſuch only, and not infants, becauſe there infants are not expreſt in the mention making of their baptiſm. If the Apoſtle include their infants in the word [you] ſpeaking of the way of admiſſion into the Church which the falſe Apoſtles pleaded for, then I ſee no reaſon or colourable ground to exclude them, when they ſpeak of the way in which the true Apoſtles did admit them. Nor find I any ſuch argument uſed by the Apoſtle againſt the Gentiles circumciſion (which yet were it as the Antipedobaptiſts ſay, would have been a good one) as this, viz. that in caſe we admit circumciſion according to the cuſtom of Moſes, then we muſt bring in infants too into the Church again, which are as uncapable of being members of the Church now, as dogs or ſwine, (as ſome of the Antipedobaptiſts19 are ready over raſhly to ſay,) this would preſently have ſtruck the nail on the head; for they that were according to the will of God circumciſed, were taken thereby into the Church of God, the Kingdom of Heaven, according to the outward viſible Court. Had this been a known principle or maxime amongſt the profeſſours of Chriſt, and had Chriſt and his Apoſtles taught them ſuch doctrine, as that children are to be no part of the Church inſtituted by him, there had been no ground for the falſe Apoſtles to have ſtood upon circumciſion after the manner of Moſes. And no doubt but the Apoſtles would have made uſe of ſuch an argument againſt them, had there been ſuch a Maxime, ſeeing it would eaſily and evidently have confuted them, and ſerved to ſettle the Church in peace in that hot contention. The excluſion of children from admiſſion into the viſible Church, would have broken in pieces the ordinance of circumciſion, that appointing all the male children to be circumciſed, and ſo to be admitted into the viſible Church with their parents. The general ſilence of this argument againſt them in ſo hot a conteſt, and when the Apoſtles writ ſo much to the believers to ſettle their minds againſt circumciſion, and its doctrine, as alſo of the Jews, and falſe Apoſtles, taxing the Apoſtles with caſting out, and rejecting children, is to me as good or better an argument to prove that there was no ſuch Maxime, as the excluſion of infants from the viſible Church, then the general ſilence of infants baptized is to prove that there was no infants admitted by baptiſm. But to return to the Commiſſion for diſcipling the Gentiles, Go, diſciple all the Gentiles, &c.
The Anti-pedobaptiſts find two Arguments here to exclude children.
1. That our Saviour ſays, they are firſt to be diſcipled before they be baptized, and that children cannot be.
2. That the word them, [〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] agrees not with [〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉] Nations, or Gentiles, it being neuter, but the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, maſculine; but it rather agrees with the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, included in the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, them, Diſciples. Of theſe two things I confeſs they make a great noiſe, but when they are examined there appears no cauſe for it. For,
1. To the firſt it may be ſaid, not only, 1. The order of words is not always the order of actions therein ſpoken, for if ſo, then John20 baptized before he preached (which they will in no wiſe admit:) For it is ſaid, Mark 1.4. That John was in the wilderneſs baptizing and preaching the baptiſm of repentance. If the order of words ſhew the order of actions, then John baptizing before he preached the doctrine of baptiſm, baptized ſome that did not believe that doctrine; for how ſhould they believe it before it was preached, and ſo by that way of arguing they get nothing, and yet this they often make uſe of, as again in that of Mar. 16.16. He that believeth and is baptized, ſhall be ſaved. See, ſay they, believing is before baptizing, no man muſt be baptized till he have firſt believed, not conſidering that by the ſame way of arguing, men muſt firſt confeſs with their mouth to ſalvation that Chriſt is the Lord, before they heartily believe to righteouſneſs that God hath raiſed him from the dead; becauſe ſuch is the order of words, Rom. 10.9. If thou confeſs with thy mouth that Jeſus is the Lord, and believe in thy heart that God hath raiſed him from the dead, thou ſhalt be ſaved. And yet who ſees not that that ſhould be a vain confeſſion of his Lordſhip, and not to ſalvation, as ver. 10. that proceeds from a heart, not firſt believing that Lord. And by the like way of reaſoning, when our Saviour ſays, Joh. 10.16. Other ſheep I have that are not of this fold, them muſt I alſo bring, and they ſhal hear my voice; becauſe he firſt mentions bringing them, before their hearing his voice: it ſhould follow that they muſt firſt be brought by him, (namely, to that fold, as follows, and there ſhall be one fold, &c.) before they hear his voice. Well then, let us ſo take it, but by what manner of action muſt they then be brought by him to the fold, that is, to his Church, whereof his Diſciples were the members: if not by cauſing them to hear his voice, for that follows after their being brought, (though uſually to that he himſelf goes out to them with his ſervants, to call and bring them in, Prov. 9.3, 4. with Luke 14.21. ) then ſure it is by his ſervants baptizing them in their infancy, before they be capable of hearing him, for by what other action men ſhould be brought to his fold before hearing him, I cannot tell, and if that be the action to go before, let it paſs for an impertinent place to our buſineſs, but ſo we ſhall get much more by the bargain, if not, let them ſhew us how elſe he brings them before they hear him, or elſe quit this manner of reaſoning from the order of words. But I ſay not only this may be replied to it: but alſo,
212. It's not true, that Chriſt bids them make them Diſciples firſt, and then afterward baptize them. For the words are not going Diſciple and baptize, but going Diſciple, baptizing, &c. And it is uſual in ſuch manner of ſpeaking, for the Participle to declare the manner of or ſome mediate act unto the thing ſpoken of in the precedent Verb: as to give ſome inſtances. The Apoſtle, Tit. 1.11. ſayes of the Circumciſion, That they ſubvert whole houſes, teaching things that they ought not, &c. was not teaching things they ought not the way by which they ſubverted whole houſes? not that they firſt ſubverted them, and then taught things they ought not; but firſt taught things they ought not, and then, yea thereby, ſubverted them: ſo in the ſame Chapter, deſcribing a Biſhop, he ſays, He muſt be blameleſs as the Steward of God, not ſelf-willed, &c. a lover of good men, ſober, juſt, holy, temperate, holding faſt the words of life. Will any rational man ſay, that he muſt firſt be all thoſe things before he hold faſt the word, or rather, that this is the way to be all that, holy, blamleſs, juſt, &c. So Heb. 12.1, 2. Let us run with patience the race ſet before us, looking unto Jeſus. Muſt men firſt run with patience before they look to Chriſt, or rather is not this looking the way and means to that patient running. Running with patience 2 ſprings from that looking to Jeſus,The like may be ſeen in Matth. 14.25. and 15.9 30. and 20.8. and 21.22. & 22.12.29. &c. not e contra, So 2 Tim. 3.13. Wiked men, & deceivers ſhal wax worſe & worſe, deceiving & being deceived. Deceiving & being deceived, is that in which, & by which they wax worſe & worſe. The like is in the Commiſſion formerly given them for preaching to the Jews, Mat. 10.7. Going,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Preach, ſaying, the Kingdom of God is at hand, and ver. 5. He ſent them away charging, or having charged them, ſaying, Into the way of the Gentiles, enter not. I might multiply like ſpeeches to this purpoſe, Epheſ. 5.15, 16.26. and 6.14.15.16. &c. but I ſhall only adde one or two of their own urging, viz. Matth. 3.6. The people were baptized of John in Jordan confeſſing their ſins. Do they gather thence, that becauſe confeſſing their ſins, follows theſe words, they were baptized, that therefore they did not confeſs their ſins, till after they were baptized, or that men ought not ſo to do till then, or rather, do they not ſay, that they firſt confeſſed their ſins, and upon that were baptized; and ſo that the Participle following the Verb, holds forth an act done before the act ſpoken of in the Verb. So when its ſaid,22 Luke 7.29. The Publicans juſtified God, being baptized with the baptiſm of John, ſay they, not thence that the being baptized was the way in which they juſtified God. I might mention alſo, Acts 8.3. Saul made havock of the Church, entring into every houſe, haling out men and women, and committing them to priſon. Could we not have underſtood ſuch a ſpeech as this, Go, proſelite the Gentiles, circumciſing them, teaching them to obſerve all the Law of Moſes: And can we not in like manner underſtand this, Go, diſciple all the Gentiles, baptizing them, and teaching them to obſerve all things, that I have commanded you. Diſciple them in this way, viz. Baptizing them into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoſt, and teaching them to obſerve what I have commanded you. So that its evident, that the phraſe diſciple, Baptizing, holds forth, for infers at leaſt no ſuch underſtanding of what is ſaid, as that they ought firſt firſt to be diſcipled, by teaching and brought to actual believing that were to be baptized with water by them.
To the ſecond, that the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉not agreeing in Gender, with the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but rather with〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, inſtructs us, that only Diſciples, ſuch as profeſs faith and repentance ought to be baptized, its very weak. For the Scripture uſually puts the following Adjective, or Relative to〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉in the Maſculine Gender, as having more reſpect to the nature of the thing ſignified, viz. mankind, or Gentiles,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, then to the word ſignifying, as in Acts 13.48. it hath for its following Adjectives,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉and〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, both of the Maſculine Gender. In Acts 15.17. we find,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉and in Chap. 21. 25. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In Chap. 26.17. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In Chap. 28.28. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In Epheſ. 4.18. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Rev. 2.26. and 19.15. and 20.8. in all thoſe places its relative following it is〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and thoſe are all the places ſave one or two in which the Relative to that word is p•r•picuouſly diſcernable in its Gender: ſo that unleſs we will ſay, that the Gentiles which Paul was ſent to, and that had their underſtandings darkened, and that Chriſt ſhall rule over with an iron rod, and that Satan ſhall deceive, and gather together to battel againſt the Saints, are all people fore-diſcipled, believers, or profeſſors of faith and repentance, that obſervation of the change of Gender will do nothing.
Now theſe two main Fortreſſes of the Antipedobaptiſts being23 ſmitten down, the Commiſſion will not prove their aſſertion, nor hinder the taking in of Infants unto Baptiſm. For now it appears, that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, all the Gentiles were to be diſcipled by baptiſm and inſtruction. So that this word is as large as〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to include women to the Supper, to include children to this diſcipling, and baptiſm; for there is no doubt but there were children too of the Gentiles and Heathen; and of them there is no exception or excluſion. They were to bring into the houſe all that they found, as in Matth. 22.9.10. And it may be minded, that neither here nor elſewhere its ſaid, He that believes ſhall be baptized, and till a man believes let him not be baptized, but going diſciple all the Gentiles, baptizing them, &c. So that we may note, that the Apoſtles had authority and commiſſion for diſcipling any Gentile, baptizing him into the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoſt, &c. Their Doctrine and Baptiſm concerned all, and were free for all, and ought to have been ſubmitted unto by all without exception of any one or other, and to diſciple all thus to the utmoſt of their power given them they were to endeavour. And this agrees with, and is confirmed by, yea, and in part is grounded upon that truth delivered by the Apoſtle in 2 Cor. 5.19 where the Apoſtle writes the Commiſſion given to them of God, with the reaſon and end of it. God (ſaith he) was in Chriſt, reconciling the world to himſelf, not imputing their treſpaſſes to them, and hath put in us the word of reconciliation. Now we therefore as Embaſſadors for Chriſt, as if God did beſeech you by us we pray you in Chriſts ſtead be ye reconciled unto God. In which we are to mind, whom God was reconciling, and to whom he ſent his ſervants to bring them in, and that is the world, which compared with Rom. 11.12, 15. appears to be Gentiles, the reſidue of the world beyond and beſide his people the Jews. 2. Its to be minded wherein their enmity ſtood, and what there reconciling is there ſpoken of, now their enmity lay both on their parts, eſpecially in that they knew not, nor regarded God, nor obſerved his Law, and wayes given to his people, nor came in to be one with them: and then on his part in this, that he admitted them not to fellowſhip with him in the Commonwealth of Iſrael, and priviledges of his people, and the reconciling them ſtood in this, That 1. He in Chriſt brake down the partition wall, the Law of Ordinances that ſtood againſt them in their uncircumciſed condition,24 & kept them from the priviledges of his Church, and he imputed not their treſpaſſes ſo againſt them, to them, as to exclude them any longer, but opened his Kingdom to them alſo equally as to the Jews, that were naturally as by diſcent from Abraham, and by Circumciſion therein, yea ſent out his ſervants to invite them to come in to his houſe, and feaſt therein prepared, and to be one of thoſe that refuſed not their own mercy out of fullenneſs amongſt the Jews already therein. Matth. 22.9.Now whom did the partition wall the enmity from the Commandements in the Law of Ordinances debar from the Commonwealth of Iſrael, and ſo from fellowſhip with God therein? were they not all the Gentiles, one and other, all the uncircumciſion in the fleſh? And whom did Chriſt break it down for? was it not the World, the whole Body of the Gentiles? Was not, and is not the Law of Ordinances taken from them all, ſo as that the paſſage into his Houſe and Commonwealth is free and open for them all: And whom then was God in Chriſt reconciling to himſelf, not imputing their treſpaſſes,Mark. 6.15. was it not the world, all the Gentiles? Did he not ſend his ſervants with the Word of his Kingdom to them all? to hold it forth to all, to every creature, to all Nations, without limitation and reſtriction, and to reconcile miniſterially them, that God in Chriſt (as in him the partition wall is broken down, and the enmity ſlain) was reconciling: which Miniſtry of Reconciliation is executed in diſcipling them, baptizing them, &c. And ſhall we now ſet up a partition wall between the Church of God, and any Gentiles that ſhut not out themſelves by their wilful rejection? Or ſhall we ſay, That Infants are not Gentiles, or are not of the World when God was in Chriſt reconciling, and to whom his ſervants were ſent: Did Chriſt leave a partition wall yet ſtanding between the Church of God, and them, that they ſhould not take them in into unity and fellowſhip with them? If the ſervants of Chriſt ſhould keep them out of, and at a diſtance from the Church, ſure they ſhould be far from putting in execution their Commiſſion for reconciling, diſcipling and baptizing them. Conſider this ſeriouſly, and ſo if the Antipedobaptiſts deny not Chriſt come in the fleſh, and to have broken down the partition wall, or at leaſt that God was in Chriſt reconciling the world to himſelf, and bringing them to himſelf in his Church, and Kingdom.
25But then its objected, that then the practiſe of the Spaniards forcing Droves of Indians to Baptiſm is warrantable,Object. 1Mr. Tom.and that the Diſciples needed to have done nothing elſe in obſervance of that Command of diſcipling, but to baptize, which would ſerve for a good plea for non-officiating and non-preaching Prieſts.
But neither of theſe follow thence. Not the firſt,Anſw. 1for though they had Commiſſion to diſciple all the Gentiles, baptizing them, &c. yet had they no warrant to force any to it, nor did God furniſh them with power thereunto, nor had they in times paſt to proſelite by force any the Inhabitants of the Nations, they were inſtructed into that before. For when Chriſt firſt ſent them out, he bid them tender their peace to men, and if a houſe was worthy, that is, if there was a Son of peace there, one that peace prevailed with, their peace ſhould reſt upon him: yea, if the Houſholder did accept their meſſage, and ſubmit unto it, their peace was to reſt upon him, and his houſe; as appears by comparing Matth. 10.12, 13. with Luke 10.5, 6. and 19.9. but in caſe any houſe or City received them not, then were they to depart from it, and ſhake off the duſt of their feet againſt it, for a teſtimony againſt them, that they came to diſciple them, and bring them into ſubjection to the faith of Jeſus Chriſt, but they refuſed it: which direction alſo we find that they practiſed, Acts 13. 51. and 16.14, 15.32, 33. &c. ſo that here is no room for allowing that forcing: we muſt diſtinguiſh between the perſons whom they had authority to diſciple, baptizing, and the courſe they were to take for excerciſe and execution of that authority, and then that Objection vaniſhes.
Nor 2. Follows it, that then the Apoſtles then, or the Goſpel-preachers now, had nothing elſe to do for putting that Commiſſion in practiſe, but outwardly to baptize; for they had ſomthing to do to bring them that were not of themſelves acquainted with this, and that were naturally averſe to it, to be willing to yeild up themſelves, and their children to walk in this way, and follow after this Name unto which they were to baptize them: They muſt uſe perſwaſions perhaps to Kings and Rulers, not to uſe their power to reſiſt their diſcipling of their Subjects to this Name, and to ſubject themſelves, and all their government to it, and ſo to Maſters of Families, and Parents, to yeild up themſelves unto this26 Name to be baptized unto it, and to obſerve the things of it, and yeild up their little ones alſo to be brought up therein; for that's plain they were to take none away by force from under any of their parents, but as they yeilded up themſelves, or was yeilded up to the inſtitution and nurture of the Lord by them: yea, in that it's ſaid, Diſciple, baptizing them into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoſt; it's plain enough, that they were to declare and unfold that Name to men that they might know whereto they baptized them, and theirs, and to what they were to inſtruct and bring up their children, which to men grown muſt be before baptizing them with water, as was the conſtant practiſe of the Diſciples formerly, and of our Saviour himſelf, Joh. 4.1. yea, and of the Phariſees too in proſeliting men to their religion, though they proſelited their children alſo with them. But this Objection implies, that the framers of it thought there was none but Infants in the world, and ſo none that could or would oppoſe their endeavours to diſciple them, when Chriſt gave out this Commiſſion; or that this Baptiſm was not for diſcipling them to the Name of Chriſt, and ſo to be done as a means to bring the parties baptized to be ſubject to his Government, externally at the leaſt, and to profeſs his Doctrine; nor minded they what follows in the Commiſſion, that they are to teach them too to obſerve Chriſt's Commands, as of old the Proſelites, even after Circumciſion, were to be taught thoſe of Moſes. But for ſeeing better into this, let us conſider a little the force of the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉is of〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and that of〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, diſco: we tranſlate it to teach, but not ſo properly, as all that well have minded the force of the word confeſs. Its to diſciple, to make ſchollers, or to bring to learn, ſo that they may become Diſciples, and ſo the Apoſtles were to endeavour to bring all Nations, or all the Gentiles to that, any of them they might bring to it, and all of them ought ſo far to have become ſubject to their Miniſtration. We find that word twice more uſed in the active voice, but in neither place is it evident how far it was effectual in the perſons acted upon. Its uſed Acts 14.21. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Diſcipling a good pretty company. They preached the Goſpel there, and this was the effect of it, that a good many were diſcipled, but what, or who, or how far it had effect upon them, is not expreſt. Its27 probable there were divers thereby convinced, and perſwaded to joyn themſelves, and poſſibly their families too, as well as in other places to the Church. Its uſed again, Matth. 27.57. of Joſeph of Arimathea, of whom its ſaid,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; We tranſlate it, He was a Diſciple to Jeſus, and that's a truth confirmed by John, Chap. 19.38. But whether that be all the truth, I queſtion, ſeeing the word is never otherwhere uſed in that Neuter ſence, I propound it to conſideration whether we might not as well tranſlate it, He alſo (though ſecretly) diſcipled to Jeſus: that is, was ſuch a Diſciple as that he alſo drew in others with himſelf to him: but which way ſoever we read it, its neither any thing for or againſt the buſineſs we have in hand, only I thought good to note it. Once we meet with the paſſive word, viz. Matth. 13.52〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Every Scribe diſcipled, brings out of his treaſure things new, and old. Where certainly the word Diſcipled ſignifies well inſtructed, made a good Scholler, as it were. For this is a word that hath reference to School affairs, teaching, and learning, and is comprehenſive of many acts; as he that puts, or by perſwaſion prevails with another to put his ſon to ſchool, though but for the preſent to be kept in order, yet with intention and deſign to have him learn as he grows up, doth〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, diſciple, make him a Scholer, as we uſe to ſay, and he that inſtructs ſuch a one ſo ſubjected to him, doth alſo〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, diſciple, though it be but in the firſt Rudiments or Elements of learning; and he that doth lead up ſuch a one as in ſome continuance hath learned the firſt Elements, and brings him to be proficient, and Maſter of the Science he inſtructs him in, doth〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉ſtill, diſciple in a higher and further act; and ſuch a one is called〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and ſo certainly is that to be taken in Matth. 13.52. as our Tranſlators alſo imply in rendring it, Every Scribe inſtructed unto the Kingdom. So that I conceive〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to diſciple, contains all the acts from the firſt to the higheſt, from the bringing to be ſubjected to one for learning, to his bringing up to perfect underſtanding of the things taught, and ſo it ſeems to me that in this of Matth. 20.19. its in that capacity to be taken; and that our Saviour expreſſes this diſcipling in all that follows, baptizing them, and teaching them to obſerve all that he commanded: though all this could not be done in ſo little time as they uſually took before Baptiſm,See Act. 16 34. nor28 in their baptizing them, though that was one act in the performance of it. The very bringing them into the Church, and therein ſubjecting them to its nurture and inſtructions, is a diſcipling them, as appears by Luke 14.21. where this Commiſſion is ſpoken of in other terms, and for〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉here, there it is〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, bring them in hither; and the opening the leſſons and myſteries therein to be taught, is ſtill a diſcipling, or making further Diſciples; though that be done by many ſteps and degrees, as they are able to receive it, till they come to be perfect men in growth and underſtanding: and even then they are but〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, diſcipled ones too, as we before noted. Whence it appears, that the Apoſtles and Goſpel-Preachers now have more work then the objection ſuppoſes: but yet in our uſual ſpeaking, the ſubjecting people to the School of Chriſt, or to the Church-ſtate, Nurture and Government, is a diſcipling of them; as we call the bringing a child to ſchool, and to the care, government, and nurture of it, the making him a Scholer: And ſo in that Acts 14.21. its applyed to the firſt ſubjecting men to the way of Chriſt, as it muſt of neceſſity have that in it too in this Matth. 28. Now the Apoſtles were about this work of diſcipling in all their preaching, and whole imployment; they were endeavouring to diſciple, though yet in their teaching, and holding forth the Goſpel only; they are not ſaid to have diſcipled thoſe that rejected it, though they held it forth to them: But its called diſcipling, as with reference to, ſo when accompanied with this effect of bringing men into the Church of Chriſt, and ſo putting upon them the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoſt: and upon ſuch their Commiſſion was actually, and more or leſs effectually put in execution and practiſe: and ſuch were denominated uſually Diſciples, a word too of a large latitude in its ſignification, as the word Scholer is, for we uſe to call him a Scholer that is put to ſchool, and him that hath begun to learn, though primarily it ſignifies ſuch a one as hath received, underſtood, and hath attained to ripe knowledg of the things that have been taught him. So in Scripture they that profeſſed the Doctrine of Chriſt, and ſubmitted to be his followers, and to learn of him, are called his Diſciples, though yet very rude and raw; yea, we read of ſome that have that Name given them, who yet know not the Alphabet of Chriſtian29 Religion, Acts 19.3. knew not what they were baptized into, viz. to believe on him that came after John, nor had ſo much as heard (by their own confeſſion) whether there was a Holy Ghoſt, or no. And ſome that turned back from him, when they came at an hard leſſon are called Diſciples till then, John 6.64. Though yet a Diſciple indeed, is one that continues in Chriſts word, John 8.31, 32. and denies himſelf, to that purpoſe, in the exerciſe of, or leaning to his own reaſon, where it croſſes Chriſts inſtructions, and the following his own deſigns, affections and will, where it hinders the practiſe of his teachings, Matth. 16.24.
Now whether that Name ever include Infants, may be a queſtion. In Acts 11.26. its ſaid, The Diſciples were in Antioch firſt of all called Chriſtians. Its very probable, that they called all brought up in the nurture of the Lord, and who thereby were diſtinguiſhed from the reſt of the world, Chriſtians, as the followers of the Phariſees were from their very youth,So the Infants of Proteſtants are included in the name Proteſtants, the chidren, or infants of Papiſts, are called papiſts to•. and at beginning called Phariſees, as Paul ſaith of himſelf, being the Son of a Phariſee, Acts 23.6. from his youth, and from the beginning he lived a Phariſee, Acts 26.5. And the Phariſees diſcipled others to themſelves, whom they called alſo Proſelites, Matth. 23.15. And yet it was their manner to proſelite little Babes too with their Parents. Now that Chriſtians alſo were, and are to bring up their children indefinitely, in the way and nurture of Chriſt, is plain in Epheſ. 6.4, 5. Again in Acts 15.10. Peter under the name of Diſciples, upon whoſe neck the falſe Apoſtles would have put the yoke of Circumciſion, comprehends their Infants; for its a known thing that they would have had their children circumciſed in Infancy too, for that was the manner of Moſes. Why tempt ye God, (ſaith he) in putting a yoke upon the Diſciples necks, which neither we, nor our Fathers were able to bear? Nor matters it whether the falſe Apoſtles preſſed Circumciſion upon others, then Diſciples, perhaps they might endeavour too to circumciſe the unconverted and unbrought in Gentiles; yet that's more then is mentioned. Its to the purpoſe, that Peter pleads only the Churches cauſe, that were therein to be yoked, and that yoke was inevitably to fall upon the children of the Believers with them, who now ſhould have been brought up in the nurture of Moſes, and to the obſervation of his Law; whereas otherwiſe, they were only to be under the yoke and nurture of30 Chriſt; and he calls all thoſe in the Churches thus to be yoked Diſciples: Nor is that valid, that ſome ſay, that the act of circumciſing was not the yoke, but the opinion of its neceſſity; for neither is that true, that the opinion of its neceſſity, was the yoke put upon their necks, that was rather put into them, then upon them, and made way for their taking the yoke. The yoke was the ſubjection to circumciſion, and the obſervation of the Law thereupon, as ſo urged, Gal. 5.3. and this they were to put upon Infants, circumciſing them with that intention, and to that end, that they might be ſubjected to the Law in their after training up. Its true, they felt not the weight of the yoke put upon them, till they being come to underſtanding, ſaw the greatneſs and ſtrictneſs of it, and began to carry it, but upon them it was put even in their Infancy, and as they grew up, they alſo felt it. Again, in Acts 20.30. its ſaid, ſome would〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, By ſpeaking perverſe things, ſeek to draw away Diſciples after them. Draw them away, to wit, from the Church, whoſe before they were. Now compare this with Tit. 1.11. and there the Apoſtle tells us how far that extends often, They draw away even〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, whole houſes, or families. Now that they ſhould always happen upon ſuch as have no children, in them is very abſurd, and fooliſh to conceive, and contrary to all experience: yea, that this eſpecially lights upon the little children who knows not: For as for children or ſervants fore-principled and inſtructed, there they often fail, (though often they prevail with ſuch alſo) but for the little ones in the tuition of their Parents, and as yet but raſae tabulae, empty leaves, fit to have any form of inſtruction imprinted upon them, they are more ſure to be ſubverted and overturned from the right way, (in which they were deſtined to be inſtructed) in the ſubverſion of their Parents from ſound Doctrine; and eſpecially this was true of that Sect of the Circumciſion there in particular ſpecified, They ſubverted children too from the Chriſtian inſtitution to the Jewiſh. Again in John 9.28. We find the Jews affirming themſelves to be the Diſciples of Moſes, (though yet they miſtook him, as much as many Chriſtians miſtake Chriſt, who yet pretend to be zealous Diſciples to him.) Now how were they made ſo, but in Infancy, by circumciſion, and thereby ſubjection to his Law and inſtitution, from their youth, in that ſtrict way of the obſervation of his precepts,31 as underſtood by them. Surely the very Infants of the Jews, and Phariſees, were diſcipled, gradatim, into Moſes, and ſo they were ſaid of old to be baptized unto him in the cloud and ſea: ſo that at leaſt this word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Diſcipling, will reach to Infants alſo, they are as capable of being baptized to Chriſt from the beginning, as the Jewiſh children were of diſcipling unto Moſes, and to be educated in that way, in which it pleaſed God then to adminiſter the knowledg of himſelf: yea, they are fitter alſo to be doctrinated, and apter to receive inſtruction, as they grow up to years of diſcretion, then men of years that have been otherwiſe principled, and have much to ſay againſt ſuch Doctrine: Thence our Saviour makes them the patterns to which others of age are to be in that reſpect conformed. Except ye be converted,Math. 18 3. and become humble as a little child, ye cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. And again, He that receiveth not the Kingdom of Heaven as a little child, (viz.) as a little child receives it; for ſuch is the force of ſuch ſpeeches, (as I ſhall ſhew anon) cannot enter thereinto. Little children, as they have not thoſe great capacities that men of years have, ſo neither are their judgments ſo foreſtalled, or their affections ſo fore-byaſſed, with, or to other doctrines, or principles, then thoſe of the Goſpel, that men of riper years before the Doctrine of Chriſt be propounded to them have; nor have they thoſe ſtrong conceits of themſelves, and their knowledge otherwiſe, and therefore more hope of them, then of thoſe grown up, that conceive themſelves wiſe, and yet are not rightly principled; according to that,Prov. 27.12. Seeſt thou a man wiſe in his own eyes, there is more hope of a fool, (one that as yet knows nothing at all) then of him. Unleſs ſuch a one fall back to his firſt child-like humility, and docibleneſs, to receive the things of the Kingdom, he cannot enter it: Remarkable is that of Iſaiah to this purpoſe, Iſa. 28.9. To whom ſhall he teach knowledg, and whom ſhall he cauſe to underſtand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, them that are drawn from the breaſts. Beſides what principles they then ſuck in, they are apt to hold faſt, according to that, Quo ſemel eſt imbuta recens ſervabit odorem — Teſta diu. And that Teach a child (〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉an Infant) in the way that he ſhould go, and he will not depart from it when he is old. The Goſpel-Preachers had much ado to perſwade grown men to come into the Chriſtian32 School, wherein Chriſt is the great Teacher, to be his Diſciples, (as ſuch are hardly yet perſwaded to learn any leſſon of his contrary to what they have formerly apprehended.) A great (if not the greateſt) part of the difficulty of the Apoſtles work ſtood in that, becauſe they knew not the Name they would have them ſtoop to; and the doctrine they would have them learn, was novel to them, they had much to ſay againſt it, as that their wiſemen, Fore-fathers, and Rulers, neither knew, nor approved it, and the reſt of the world would hate them for it, &c. thence they were not, nor would be baptized unto Chriſt, till they had firſt aſſented to the Doctrine. It was their being convicted of the truth, that made them willing to leave the world, and its doctrines, and become Scholers or Diſciples unto Chriſt, and to be initiated under his Government and Teaching. But now its not ſo with children born to them that are diſcipled, their Chriſtian Parents are bound to bring them up in the nurture of the Lord, and they to receive it as they are capable, which alſo uſually they are apt to do, at leaſt ſo far as to the external profeſſion, and acknowledgment of Chriſt and his Name, if it be carefully, as is required, put to them; and that profeſſion and acknowledgment with orderly walking, is as much, or more then divers of them had, whom John and the Apoſtles baptized, Matth. 3.7.11. Acts 8.13. Chap. 19.3, 4.
Therefore alſo it ſeems to me a great abſurdity, to require that before-hand of them for their matriculating, diſcipling, or receiving in that is urged upon thoſe that have been otherwiſe principled, and have much to oppoſe which they have not; and to bring an heap of proofs, inſtancing what ſuch ſo fore-principled did, to be a rule for thoſe that are not ſo. It is as inept as if they ſhould alleadg the Jews proceedings in requiring confeſſions, and acknowledgments of them that came unto them from the Gentiles, to ſhew that the like was requirable of their Infants before their Circumciſion; or like as if a man ſhould ſay, that becauſe God requires of grown men actual repentance, faith, and invocation of him to ſalvation; therefore he requires them of Infants too, and ſo that they dying before may not be ſaved: If God diſpenſe with their non-acting thoſe things through incapacity, and yet ſaves them, why ſhould it ſeem irrational that he diſpenſe with the want of ſuch acknowledgments, or with the want of33 thoſe things themſelves, to admit them into the outward Court of his Kingdom: If he diſpenſe with them for the greater, why ſhould we not for the leſs; eſpecially when we know he did actually diſpenſe with the want of thoſe things in them for admiſſion into the Jewiſh Church, which yet were there required for their admiſſion into it, that were men of years; and we find no one title of his, that he would have them excluded his Church or Kingdom amongſt the Gentiles; Nay, his Commiſſion inſiſted on is in ſuch large terms, as do abundantly include them. The Jews never had ſo large a Commiſſion for circumciſing Infants as this is for baptizing them, though there be not ſuch expreſs mention of them herein: for all the Gentiles comprehends all Infants, male and female too, whereas the Jews were limited to males only; and whereas they were tyed to the eighth day at ſooneſt, that ſo they might have a Sabbath paſs upon them for their cleanſing; now they are clean at any time, thoſe uncleanneſſes and ways of cleanſing being done away in Chriſt, the Commiſſion gives power to do it to all in diſcipling them, though through the wickedneſs of the world rejecting the counſel of God, and refuſing to ſubmit to Chriſt themſelves, or to ſubject theirs to him, they cannot do it to all that their liberty and power extends to; but ſuch ſurely are guilty of reſiſting the Meſſengers of Chriſt, as either hinder them from diſcipling themſelves, or withhold and forbid their children.
From what hath been ſaid, then it appears, that there is no need of ſearching after particular expreſs mention of Infants to warrant their baptizing; for when a man hath a general Commiſſion, what needs the particularizing the ſeveral branches in it to warrant a mans acting upon them? If, Let a man (〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) examine himſelf, and ſo let him eat, &c. be warrant enough for womens eating the Supper, becauſe the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉is in it ſelf comprehenſive enough of the female Sex, why then ſhould not, Diſciple all the Gentiles, or all Nations here, be warrant ſufficient to diſciple Infants, baptizing them, &c. ſeeing that word is every whit as comprehenſive of Infants? If a man ſhould ſcruple to baptize an Engliſh man, or a Scotch man, becauſe he finds not thoſe Nations expreſt in all the Scripture, would not any man laugh at him, ſeeing the Commiſſion is to all the Gentiles, whereof they are part? Or when its ſaid, Chriſt died for all, would34 it not be a fond ſcruple to ſay, It's doubtful whether he died for Infants that dye in their infancy, or not? The like is, this to ſay, What warrant have we to baptize Infants now, when the Commiſſion is, Diſciple all the Gentiles, baptizing them? If a King ſhould ſay, Go into ſuch a Countrey, and ſubject all the Inhabitants in it to my Government, and protection, putting them into my Subjects faſhions, and way of living, it would be a vain thing to ſay, What ſhould little children be ſubject to him too, and brought up after the manner of his Subjects? Sure, in bringing all the Inhabitants in, their Infants muſt needs be included, and be taken for ſubjects with them, and be brought up after his ſubjects faſhion. And now I hope, I ſhall not need to ſay much by way of anſwer to that Objection, that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is of〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to learn, but Infants can learn nothing till they begin to be grown up. For ſo a Proſelite,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is denominated〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, from coming and joyning himſelf to the Jewiſh Church, which Infants could not properly be ſaid to do till grown up, and yet they were alſo with their Parents proſelited. So a Subject is he that voluntarily is ſubject to, and obedient to his Prince, which Infants cannot properly be, and yet they are in the number of Subjects too. But beſides this, we have ſhewed that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is rather in its firſt act to bring into, and ſubject to the Government of the School, that they might learn, then to make to have learned, (though in its further acts it will reach to that too) and that may be done to Infants now as well as in the times of the Jews. Why may we not rather ſay, that〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉ſignifies that that all are capable of, (that w•lfully refuſe it not) ſeeing our Saviour commiſſionates them to do it to all? Would he bid them do that to all the Gentiles, that they were not capable of having done to them? Nay, we find that little children (〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉pueri, pueruli, Infants) are comprehended under the ſame word,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, here uſed in a buſineſs, where more action is ſignified, then the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or Diſciple, neceſſarily implies to be required of them, as in Rom. 15.11. with Pſal. 117.1. Praiſe the Lord all ye Gentiles,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and laud him all ye people. Sure one would think children much more uncapable of being ſharers in this action, then of being diſcipled, a word more paſſive, and yet ſee how the Holy Ghoſt teaches us to take them in too in that expreſſion, ſee it Pſa. 148.6.12,35 13. Both young men, and maidens, old men, and [〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉pu•ruli, infants,] children, let them praiſe the Name of the Lord. Yea, that we may be ſure the leaſt Infant is there included, that hath life, See Pſal. 150.6. Let〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉every thing, or one that hath breath, praiſe the Lord, or every ſoul praiſe the Lord. Reaſon might object, and ſay, How can little Infants praiſe the Lord? much rather then, how can they be diſcipled to the Lord? the way of diſcipling being alſo added by being baptized, a more paſſive buſineſs, and of which they are capable not only as its an outward act upon them, but alſo as it puts an obligation upon the baptized to believe and ſubmit to the Doctrine and Name of God and Chriſt, as we ſhall anon more clearly ſhew; therefore I ſhall ſay no more to that here, but paſs to another Conſideration.
2. Let us in the next place view the practiſe of the Apoſtles upon this Commiſſion: viz. in their baptizing the Gentiles, wherein I ſhall not have to ſpeak of their baptizing the Jews, and Proſelites, (ſuch as thoſe in Acts 2. & 8. for the Samaritans and Eunuch were ſuch, elſe would they have ſcrupled eating and drinking with them, as afterward they did Peters with Cornelius) but of the unproſelited Gentiles, ſuch as were not fore-brought into the limits of the Church viſible, which as yet the Jewiſh Church was accounted, Baptiſm being as yet not the firſt admiſſion into the Church, as then reputed, but into the acknowledgment of Chriſt the Lord of it already come; for as yet the Jews were not unchurched, as yet the Apoſtles frequented the Temple, and Chriſts Diſciples joyned with them in obſervations of the Law, Acts 3.1. and 21.20.22, 23. &c. nor as yet did the Diſciples underſtand the extent of their own Commiſſion, but thought that it extended only to Proſelites of all Nations, till God opened the matter in a viſion to Peter, Acts 10. and let him ſee that all were as clean for his converſing with, and admitting, as the Proſelites of the Circumciſion. They might go and preach to any man, converſe with any, and upon their accepting the ſalvation of God, it was to come upon them, and their houſes, as before upon the Jews, Matth. 10. God taught him to call〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, no one (of what Countrey, Nation, Age, Sex ſoever) common or unclean: He might kill and eat any of the four-footed beaſts, for they were all let down to him. Till this, I ſay, they ſee not the extent of36 their Commiſſion. But after the relation of this the reſt of the brethren were convinced that God had given alſo to the Gentiles repentance unto life, & now they began to put in practiſe their foregoing Commiſſion; for now ſoon after this Paul and Barnabas were choſen, and ſent forth to the Gentiles, and they endeavour upon the Jews rejecting to diſciple them: but upon their diſcipling according to their Commiſſion, ſome falſe Apoſtles, or Believers of the Sect of the Phariſees began to ſtir up a contention, and to trouble the Churches, preſſing upon them that they ought to circumciſe thoſe they diſcipled, Put a yoke (as Peter calls it) upon their necks, even the yoke of Moſes Law. About this queſtion then (Paul and Barnabas having begun, and made ſome progreſs in their Gentile-diſcipling) the Brethren ſent them to Jeruſalem to diſcuſs this buſineſs with the Apoſtles, and the Church there, that there might be unity amongſt them, where it was determined by letters that they needed not circumciſion to diſciple them, or upon their being diſcipled. After which we firſt read of Paul and Silas baptizing, and the firſt inſtance we have of their baptizing after that Revelation to Peter of the extent of their Commiſſion, and after the deciſſion of that queſtion about Circumciſion, was Lidia, concerning whom the Holy Ghoſt gives an account of Baptiſm ſutable to the Commiſſion; for its ſaid, That ſhe hearing Paul, God opened her heart that ſhe attended unto the things ſpoken by him, and ſhe and her houſe and family were baptized: without the leaſt mention made of any of their hearing and believing, but ſhe only. After which ſhe ſays to them, If ye have judged me faithful (not if ye judg us) come into my houſe. Whereas if the reſt of the houſe were men of age, they might have as well queſtioned their faithfulneſs as hers, as being able, if unfaithful, to betray them to evil men as well as ſhe: but not a word of their believing or profeſſing faith; and I am ſure there is a word ſufficient to include Infants, or little children, except they can be proved not to be of the houſhold. Again, a little after, we find the Apoſtle preaching thus to the Jaylour, Believe thou in the Lord Ieſus Chriſt, and thou ſhalt be ſaved, and thy houſe: viz. as the Iſraelites were out of Egypt, Jude 5. from the wrath of God that he feared upon himſelf and his, upon the Earthquake, and from the refuſing Gentiles condition under darkneſs, and Gods diſpleaſure againſt them. However37 God might judg the reſt of the world, them and theirs that rejected Chriſt, yet he believing ſalvation ſhould come to his houſe, they ſ