PRIMS Full-text transcription (HTML)

OF BAPTISME. The heads and order of ſuch things as are eſpecially inſiſted on, you will find in the table of chapters.

Printed in the Yeare 1646.

THE PREFACE.

THE Authour of theſe follovving thoughts pro­feſſeth, that hee vvas ne­ceſsitated to them, partly in duty to himſelf, that he might diſ­cover vvhat vvas the good thing of that ordinance, vvhich the Scripture magnifyes ſo greatly, and himſelf un­derstood ſo little; but particularly by reaſon of a controverſall ſcruple, vvhich a providence of God put him to conflict vvith, and all the preſent light hee had, could not manadge to ſatis­faction; to vvhich alſo may be added as another juſt reaſon, that the deſires of a fevv friends, vvho have a reall interest in him, ingaged his indea­vours alſo in their reſpect, and con­tributed to the production of theſe meditations, vvhich last reaſon vvas neceſſary to be knovvne, in regard that they, vvhoſe deſires vvere acceſſary to the dravving forth of this diſcourſe, have bene principall in the publiſhing of it, and have offered a kind of vio­lence, partly by importunityes, and partly by venturing upon the com­munity and liberty of friendſhip, to make it publike vvithout any order obtain'd from the Author to that purpoſe, vvho needs no fuller vvitneſſe then God & his ovvne conſcience, and a fevv friends, vvith vvhom hee hath more particularly converſ'd, hovv little hee hath delighted to ingage his thoughts in the controverſall parts of truths, and hovv in a conſtant tenour, his meditations have form'd other­vviſe. But ſince it is done, & certain­ly vvith no ill vvill to the publike. The Authour findes good to accompany theſe papers vvith theſe good vviſhes, That they may by no meanes be the oc­caſion to any of angry or quarrelſome diſputes; that blood, vvhich vvas ſhed for us, and vvhich this ordinance ex­hibites as a fountayne to bath in, ſhould qualify our heates, and correct that Chagrin & distemper, vvhich often manifests it ſelf in the agita­ting of things diverſly apprehended; Particularly, that they may eſcape the unhappineſſe of the cenſures of idle men, vvho becauſe they ſay no­thing publike enough for an anſvver, thinke they may ſay any thing, and having found an eaſie vvay to reli­gion, to vvit, the ſuffrage of learned men, and the practiſe of the most, judge them vayne and impertinent that take a greater boute.

To vvhich hee adds alſo this vviſh, that they may be delivered from ſuch vvho triumph in diſcovering ſome leſ­ſer mistakes, and place a great part of their abilityes in critiſizing upon a vvord or phraſe, not ſo vvell plac'd, or pertinently expreſt; ſuch, not to men­tion their charity, as their talent is commonly very little, ſo that vvhich is, ſeemes fitted not ſo much for ar­gueing as vvrangling (vvith vvhich he vvould have nothing to doe) and is leviſſimus fructus ingenij, vvhich you may engliſh, The froth or ſcumme of witt. And lastly hee deſires that any vvho ſhall examine them more ſeriouſly and particular­ly, and ſhall not in every thing be of the ſame minde (for light is not ad­miniſtred to all by the ſame meaſure) vvould be content that men ſhould injoy their judgement (ſince nothing is more our ovvne) till cauſe be given to alter them, & vvould in the meane time be ſo friendly to him, vvho pro­feſſes to be greatly a friend to truth, in order to the truth Ieſus Chriſt, that in the difference of opinions, there might be a just ſimphathy and unanimity of the Opiners.

Theſe eſcapes the Reader is deſired to correct, before he read the enſueing diſcourſe.

PageLyneErrorCorrect
114usas
3014offenſeoffence
313terrifiecan terrifie
334blot out;after the word death
 17diſcargediſcharge
5014obligingobligeinge
5614orour
5814proceedingpreceading
879oras
8817whichwith
9812hnithint
10114oppoſiteappoſite
11319ChriſtChriſt's
12813put out That 
1338chaineclayme
13511fornerformer
14415recteuna
15613hoſthaſt
17116anquietnesan acuteneſſe
17715totwo
18118rationallnationall
18514infaithfullneſſeunfaithfullneſſe
18616oatheach
 19rationallitynationallity
1879blot out the;at ſinne
1891yookeyoake
19511a beginningour beginning
1983gavehave
2103antientnesancientnes
 12we workerscoeworkers
2244comecame
2266IohnIohn 1.
2405typiſingtypifieing
27420polepale
29317wowoe
3246••iteint
32810differringdeferring
32910differringdeferring
34816provookeprovoake
3693bewtifullbeautifull

The table of chapters the Reader will find at the end of the booke.

1

OF BAPTISME.

CHAP. I. Wherein, of the first and great end of that or­dinance, the ſealing up of our union with Christ, and more particularly, of the moſt illustrious tipe of Baptiſmeall ſealing, in the Baptiſme of Chriſt.

THE Scripture holds forth no point with more glory and cer­tainty, then the one­nes which we have with Ieſus Chriſt, which union is the riſe2 and ground of all that is good and happy in us: this therefore is the firſt and great thing that is made ours by Baptiſme, wee are baptized into the name of Chriſt; for wee, though wee be baptized into the name of the Father and Holy Ghoſt like­wiſe, and have an union with them, yet the Fathers love is made good to us through Chriſt, and the Spirits efficacy is derived through and for Chriſt, who is the Mediatour, the middle perſon, the bond, betweene God and us, ſo Rom. 6.3. Ye are baptized into Ieſus Chriſt. And Gal. 3.27. For as ma­ny of us as have beene baptized into Chriſt. This therefore is the3 great ordinance, aſſuring and ſealing up; If God had kept his minde to himſelf touching our eternall eſtate, there had beene a ſureneſſe in it, but there had not beene a ſealing to us; but when he tells us his heart, and his minde, and bids us beleeve it, doubting nothing, & when hee ſhall yet ſpeake more ſen­ſible to us, to our ſight and to our touch, and ingage almoſt all our ſences, when hee ſhall marke us with ſenſible ſignes and ſeales, and ſpeake viſible words alſo, this muſt needs aſ­ſure; and of all aſſurances there is none ſo great as this firſt peece of our union, to have this ſealed and ſigned, to be4 baptized into Chriſt, to be in­grafted into, and made one with him, how great a matter is it: Now God is not wanting to our faith, in the truth of the repreſentation, betweene the ſigne and the thing ſigned, be­tweene the ſeale and the thing ſealed, & therefore Abraham in his beleeving, received the ſigne of circumciſion, a ſeale of the righteouſnes of his faith, Rom. 4.11. that is, the righteouſnes which he had by faith, the ac­ceptation hee had, was ſealed up to him by the ſigne of Cir­cumciſiō, by that marke; now what Abraham had by cir­cumciſion, that the Saints have by Baptiſme; for ſo the Apoſtle5 intimates in Coloſſ. 2.11.12. (which place wee ſhall have occaſion to open hereafter) where hee ſhewes the uſe of Circumciſion, which was a fi­gure of things to come; ſo when Cornelius and his com­panie were baptized, the holy Ghoſt fell upon them, as that to which the ſeale immediate­ly was to be ſet, Act. 10.47.48. But the moſt illuſtrious ſealing of all others was, as it became it to be, in our head Ieſus Chriſt, when he was baptized, Matth. 3.16.17. And Ieſus vvhen hee vvas baptized, vvent up ſtraight­vvay out of the vvater: and lo, the heavens vvere opened unto him, and he ſavv the Spirit of God deſcending6 like a dove, and lighting upon him; and lo, a voyce from heaven, ſaying, This is my beloved Son, in vvhom I am vvell pleaſed. There the whole Trinity appeared, to make the Triumph and ratify that affaire; never any ordi­nance was graced, with ſuch a preſence. And as Baptiſme is a viſible ſeale to our faith, ſo here the Trinity, in whoſe name wee are baptized, made themſelves viſible together; the Father by a voyce, the Son in his body, the Holy Ghoſt like a birde. Firſt there was the Heavens opened, but to him, ſo are the words Marke 10. its ſaid, hee ſavv the heavens opened or cloven or rent; that is, hee ſaw a clea­ving7 or rending, ſome great Hiatus; now this was for Chriſt himſelf, for it was as Luke ſaies, as he vvas praying, Luke 3.21. which was, that ſo the voyce & the ſpirit might be knowne to come from heaven, it being a great evidence of the pre­ſence of God there. Then hee ſaw the ſpirit like a dove, lighting upon him; as the multitude in the Acts, ſaw the ſpirit as it were in cloven tongues like ſire, the ſpirit tooke upon him the ſhape of a dove, and reſted and abode on him; that ſealing ſpirit, that ſeales us all, ſealed Chriſt and abode with him, for ſo ſayes Iohn, Vpon vvhom thou ſeeſt the ſpi­rit deſcending and abiding, that is8 hee. And then there came a voyce, and that admirable and conſi­derable; this repreſented God the Father to his eare, as the dove repreſented the ſpirit to his eye, ſo while the ſpirit ſate upō his head, the Father ſpake from heaven, the great ſealing word, This is my vvellbeloved Sonne, in vvhom I am vvell pleaſed: This, that is, this man Ieſus whom I ſhew and point out, by my ſpi­rits abiding upon him, Is, this is hee whom I have promiſed, now ye have him, or, thou art, (ſpeaking to Chriſt) my Sonne, wee cannot be ſealed to ſuch a Sonneſhip in all reſpects; wee are adopted children, hee was the naturall and proper Sonne,9 the only begottē〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that beloved, many are beloved, but hee was onely beloved, as one­ly begotten; we are ſonnes, be­cauſe wee are beloved, but hee was loved, becauſe hee was a Sonne, In vvhom, not in any other who ever he be unles by this One; I am vvell pleaſed; In whom I am cōtented, in whom my minde reſts, that is, who onely and ſingularly pleaſeth me, and in whom there is no­thing that diſpleaſeth mee; therefore I delight wholly in him, and reſt in him ſo as eve­ry thing will be acceptable to me that hee doth, by whom I ſhall be pleaſed with others, & by whom others may pleaſe10 me; for the Father here inti­mates, that his love ſo reſts in Chriſt, as it deffuſeth it ſelf to others, ſo as beholding him, he puts of all offence, and anger towards others, whom hee be­holds in him, oppoſing him to every thing.

All theſe things were to his perſon, but reſpected alſo his office, which was unſeparable from his perſon. Therefore firſt, to him the heavens opened, whoſe office it was to opē hea­ven, and to make an entry for us thither, againe to open hea­ven, and to draw downe the great miſteries of it to us, the doctrine of the Trinitie was here declared, and truth came11 by him alſo, what he had ſeene of the Father, that he revealed.

Secondly the ſpirit came in the ſhape of a dove, as to ſeale us before, ſo to ſhew that hee ſhould converſe here up and downe in a dovelike manner; ſhould have neither weapons without nor gaule within, to offend withall, although his condition was not greatly to pleaſe, therefore ſuch paſſages as theſe, fell ſometimes from him, Learne of me that I am meeke and lovvly; Yee knovv not of vvhat ſpirit you are. This abiding and this uſe of the ſpirit, is that pro­phecied of him Eſay. 61.1, 2. The ſpirit of the Lord God is upon me, becauſe the Lord hath anoynted12 me, to preach good tidings unto the meeke; hee hath ſent me to bind up the broaken hearted, to proclaime li­berty to the captives, and the opening of the priſon to them that are bound: To proclaime the acceptable yeare of the Lord, and to comfort all that mourne; and hee was to be filled with the ſpirit, that it might deſcend upon us his members, and that we might be baptized with the holy Ghoſt.

Thirdly for the voyce, This is my beloved Sonne, in vvhom I am vvell pleaſed; it was then the of­fice of Chriſt to execute and manifeſt the wellpleaſing of God in himſelf, to the redeem­ing, reconciling and renewing of the world that ſhould be­leeve13 in him, and the reſtoring of all things. This is that ex­preſſion that is to be oppoſed to that other Gen. 6.7. It repents me that I have made man; God can never repent him more that he hath made man, when hee is ſo well pleaſed in the man Chriſt Ieſus, ſo aboundantly ſatisfied & contented, and in him with all his. This Baptiſme of our Saviour was the Epoche or terme, whence they reckoned Acts 1.22. &c. Beginning from the Baptiſme of Iohn, unto that ſame day that he vvas taken up from us.

I have beene the larger in opening this illuſtrious tipe of Baptiſmall ſealing, that the na­ture and way of it may be ſeene14 in the higheſt patterne.

Wee ſhall be ſealed alſo, with our difference of younger bro­thers; the heavens in Baptiſme opens upon us; and the Father, the Sonne & Holy Ghoſt, who are viſibly preſent here, are preſent alſo to our ſealing, and ready to give us the ſame wit­neſſe, but with its diſtinction as before, this is my beloved Sonne, in vvhom I am vvell pleaſed; and as wee are then viſibly united to Chriſt, who ſanctifies this or­dinance for us; ſo the ſpirit is ready to ſeale us up; and God by the ſpirit, to witnes every good thing to us, let us there­fore put a valew and a price up­on this ordinance, more then15 wee have done; and after being once baptized into Chriſt, let us know and be aſſured, that we have a right to what hee hath, and to what he had, & to what he is; for what ever he was or is, as Mediator, hee is for us: with the great difference of elder brother, and having that in his owne right, which wee have in his; and therefore the ſealing of his Baptiſme, belongeth alſo to our baptiſme, as his dying and riſing againe, doth to us, who dye and riſe againe with him in Baptiſme.

To add a word or two of the ſeale, Paul hath two words〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉and〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Signum & Si­gillum; a ſtatue, a repreſentation16 may be a ſigne, but it cannot be a ſeale; we ſeale thoſe things which wee would keepe with the greateſt ſecurity, and have remayne untoucht, therefore letters and evidences are ſea­led, that no man might doubt of the truth and authentique­nes of them.

Againe, two conſiderations more there is in a ſeale; firſt things ſealed, and marked, are kept for their maſters uſe, My beloved is a fountayne ſealed up, Cant. 4.12. kept onely for the uſe of the ſpouſe; ſo their wells and ſprings were ſhut up in Iſ­rael, they were not for every body: Amongſt the Perſians they had fountaines of which17 onely the King and his eldeſt ſonne drunke, under capitall puniſhment to all others; in Spayne they have alſo one of the ſame ſort; ſo as we are markt and ſealed for Chriſts uſe our husband, wee muſt not make our ſelves common therefore to the world, & lye expoſed to every luſt, to every love, ſince God hath impropriated us.

Secondly, we ſeale or marke things precious, as coyne, gold or ſuch things, as we ſet a price and vallew upon; God by his ſealing lets us know, what a vallew he puts upon us, how he ſeparates us from refuſe & baſe things, therefore we ſhould not defile our ſelves.

18

CHAP. II. Wherein of the ſecond great uſe and end of Baptiſme, aſſuring us of our Iustification in the remiſsion of all our ſinnes, together with certain corollaries and inforcements.

HAving told you that Bap­tiſme is the great ordi­nance of Chriſt, to confirme & ſeale up to us our union with himſelfe, whom having, wee have all things, that wee may further ſee how conſiderable an ordinance this is, wee will beate it out, as far as the Scrip­ture gives light, in the point of Communion, and ſo wee ſhall find, that as it ſeales and con­firmes our union with him; ſo it alſo ſeales and confirmes to us, the moſt deſireable thing in the world, which is the pardon19 of all our ſinnes. It is ſafe gi­ving ordinances that notion the Scripture gives them, which while you doe, you will get the true juyce they afford, and you ſhallbe ſure not to erre from the true nature of them: This you have Acts 2.38. Re­pent and be baptized every one of you for the remiſsion of ſinnes. As if he ſhould ſay, you are now prick­ed at the heart, & you ſee your ſelves in a loſt condition, and therefore cry out what to doe, as men amazed and at aſtand, ſaith hee there is hope for you, God hath made an ordinance to relieve you in this ſtraight, Repent and be baptized for the re­miſsion of ſinnes; This Ieſus whom20 I preach, and whom God hath made Lord and Chriſt, can re­mit ſinnes (for that is it which gaules you when light comes in) now for this God hath for­med an ordinance on purpoſe to confirme and ratify unto us the remiſſion of ſinnes, and that is Baptiſme, therefore be not amazed, but repent and be bapti­zed: So Acts 22.16. when Paul was in an ill condition, being humbled with a witneſſe (it is the greateſt repreſentation of the humiliation of a ſinner that wee have,) and Ananias was ſent to raiſe him; ſaith he, VVhy tarrieſt thou, ariſe and be baptized, and vvaſh avvay thy ſinnes; what can be ſaid more comfortably21 to a diſtreſſed ſoule, then this, that God hath ſet and inſtitu­ted an ordinance on purpoſe, that thou maiſt be acquitted of every ſinne, to witneſſe and ſeale up what is done by faith: Therefore doe not languiſh in this condition, why tarrieſt thou? ariſe & be baptized, and waſh away thy ſinnes; ſo 1. Pet. 3.21. The like figure vvhereto Bap­tiſme doth novv ſave us, not the put­ting avvay the filth of the fleſh, but the anſvver of a good conſcence; We know that ſalvation lyes, eſpe­cially in juſtification and diſ­charging all our ſinnes; Bap­tiſme doth this, it doth novv ſave us, that is, this ſignes and ſeales your ſalvation to you, which22 lyes in juſtification and diſ­charge of ſmne; but you muſt not thinke that it is onely the vvaſhing avvay of the filth of the fleſh, not a carnall ceremony onely, but the anſvver of a good conſcience; that is, it is that confi­dence and aſſurance which we have before God of his recon­ciliation to us; which this ordi­nance outwardly doth ſeale & exhibit: it is the ſtipulation of a good conſcience, when a conſcience appeaſed and paci­fied with the diſcharge of ſin, can cry Abba Father, with a holy ſecurity, can ſpeake to God himſelf; now, ſaith hee, this ſtipulation of a good con­ſcience, this is that which is the23 effect of Baptiſme, and which Baptiſme ſeales up to you; for what Baptiſme findes it ſeales, although it doth alſo exhibit more of the ſame kind; Bap­tiſme and ſo all the ordinances of Chriſt, thoſe we call Sacra­ments, ſeale up what is already, elſe how could it be a ſeale, but doth alſo conveigh more of the ſame.

This ſtipulation of a good conſcience Beza ſaith; clearly refers to the anſwer of the Ca­techiſts of which there is a pat­tron 8. Acts 37. when Philip told the Eunuch the condition of Baptiſme, which was to be­leeve with all his heart, and he gave the anſwer of a good con­ſcience,24 that hee did beleeve; that which hee deſired bap­tiſme ſhould ſeale up to him, here was a plaine ſtipulation, for ſo the word ſignifies; now that ſuppoſeth one aſking or demanding, & another anſwer­ing and making the bargaine, or contract; as when one aſkes do you do this? cā you beleeve with all your heart; and a con­ſcience voyde of fraude, ſpeaks clearly and evidently what it can doe and doth, then comes Baptiſme.

This they were uſed to doe in the primitive Churches, & in the ſame manner wee find, ſome doe in this age, to infants, who underſtand them not,25 which is not very wiſely done, for ſurely what ever they can doe, they cannot give the ſti­pulation of a good conſcience: If they intend the infants which they ſay ſpeake by o­thers, they may well retaine the old forme, but not with any good underſtanding. It is the ſame Baptiſme that ſaves us, that did then, that acquits and diſchargeth us, as the ordi­nance of God appointed for that end, though it ſuppoſeth eſpecially the inward workes, He that beleeves & is baptized ſhall be ſaved; beleefe muſt goe be­fore, this is that which on Gods part ſeales us, and ingrafts us into Chriſt, & conveyes Chriſt26 to us; and on our part it is the ſtipulatiō of a good conſcience anſwering clearly and boldly to the intent of the ordinance: Thus you have another great uſe of this ordinance, it ſeales the remiſſion of ſins, & it ſeales to us the remiſſion of the ſins of our whole life, for it ingrafts us into Chriſt, and ſeales him up to us for the remiſſion of ſins; and therefore it muſt ever be conſidered for that purpoſe, & when it is ſo conſidered, wee muſt looke upon it, as the diſ­charging and acquitting ordi­nance, which ſeales up, not onely ſinnes paſt, but all ſinnes, paſt, and to come; which ſome not underſtanding, and find­ing27 that thoſe places for remiſ­ſion of ſinnes were great and comfortable, have refuſed to be baptized till death, as is af­firmed of Conſtantine and o­thers, mis-taking the true uſe of it, which is to ſeale up the pardon of ſinnes, and reſpects all ſinnes, in all times.

You ſee what the nature of Baptiſme,coroll. 1what the intention of it is in this particular; Conſi­der therefore the greatnes of this ordinance, to which, as to the ſigne and ſeale, remiſſion of ſinnes and reconciliation with God is annexed: What ſay you, I beſeech you? you that are ſen­ſible of the guilt of ſinne, that know the vvages of ſinne is death,28 would you not be glad of ſomething to diſcharge you & eaſe you; would you not be glad of all meanes that ſhould aſſure you, that iniquity ſhould not be your ruine? would you not be glad, to be baptized for the re­miſsion of ſinnes, to have your ſinnes vvaſht avvay by baptiſme; to be ſa­ved by baptiſme in the ſtipulation of a good conſcience, anſwering the ſigne and ſeale. This I thinke is no queſtion to them that are ſtung with ſinne, and pricked in their hearts; then bleſſe God for this ordinance, value it much, let it not be an empty ordinance to you, ſince there is fullnes in it, let it not ſleepe & be a dead thing to you, ſince29 there is life in it, it being the ground of all our life & good; but improve it to its advantage, get the marrow and ſweete of it, for there is much in it.

Secondly, let us underſtand by this that hath bene ſaid, and by the nature of this ordināce, Gods heart, and mind, for the remiſſion of ſinnes; hee who is Lord of all, and able onely to give all, hee is ſo free of nothing as of pardon, becauſe that is the firſt ſteppe to good & hap­pines; if hee will us any good, if hee would have us in any pro­portion happy, the firſt ſteppe is by pardon of ſinne, & there­fore hee is ſo free of nothing as that; when the law condemnes30 a man, and when a mans con­ſcience condemnes him, hee needs no word to carry him to hell, hee hath that within him, will doe that faſt enough, guilt makes us runne from God, as Adam did, and when we runne from God, wee runne to death; God therefore in goodnes and mercy, hath made the way to pardon ſo open and expoſed, as nothing more. The very name of pardon and remiſſion of ſins, ordinarily implyes offenſe a­gainſt ſome lawgiver, ſome ſtate, ſome great perſon, & im­plyes guilt which needes that pardon: Now guilt abaſeth & greatnes terrifieth; what can there be more therefore to ſet31 us at a mighty diſtance from God, then guilt, which layes ſo low, and what greatnes terrify us more then his; But God hath provided that wee may come boldly, and he hath done it by two things; firſt by ſetting up a throne of grace, inſteed of a throne of majeſty and juſtice. Secondly he helpes us, by gi­ving us a tender and ſenſible high Prieſt, who ſhall uſher us in, and pleade our cauſe at this barre and diſpatch the buſines with his Father, that wee may obtaine mercy, 4. Heb. 15.16. And to ſhew his heart the more in this worke, hee hath not onely a throne of grace, & a high Prieſt to manadge this32 affaire; but hee hath invented this ordinance of Baptiſme, that wee might have an abun­dant entrance; In this you may ſee Gods heart for the pardon of ſinne, for as Baptiſme doth it, ſo it is by Gods appointment; Therefore know the mind of God, and labour not anxiouſly about ſinnes, and the pardon of them, which is a great impe­diment to the comfort & holi­nes of our life. Now, that Bap­tiſme doth this, you have heard from ſeverall places, ſo as it is a great end of that ordinance, to remit and pardon ſinnes, and aſſure that to us.

But if you aſke how it doeth it? Anſwer, by your being bap­tized33 into Ieſus Chriſt; by being baptized into his death, by being viſibly ingrafted in­to his death; & condition, that as hee did conflict with the wrath of God, it brought him to the croſſe, carried him to the grave, kept him there, and layed him low, but at laſt hee get out, we being intereſted in what hee did, as in a common perſon, who did all for us, and in our names might by the helpe of this ordinance (which viſibly and ſenſibly repreſents our communion with him, in that which gaines the diſcarge of our ſinnes, which is his death, into which wee are bap­tized) have full aſſurance that34 nothing remaynes us of the guilt of ſinne; nothing remayns us, undiſcharged, ſince Chriſt, who was as wee were, that is, made guilty of ſinne, that wee might be as hee is, that is, diſ­charged from ſinne, hath bro­ken the cords of death, having made a full ſatisfaction, death having no more dominiō over him, becauſe there is no more guilt upon him; ſo that bap­tiſme doth it this way, and as many as are baptized into Ie­ſus Chriſt, into his death, are put into that condition, that he was after his death, and riſing againe; and this muſt of neceſ­ſity be, becauſe hee was as a common perſon, wholy in his35 death and reſurrection; there­fore they that makes them­ſelves of that community, for whom hee acts and trades, and by this viſible ſigne and inſti­tutiō of his, ſubmit themſelves to that way of ſalvation, they put themſelves into that ſtate and condition that hee is in af­ter his death and riſing againe. If any aſke, why did Chriſt dye? hee dyed for our ſinnes, ſaith the Apoſtle; and why did hee riſe? for our juſtification, we being baptized into his death, par­take of the end of it, which is the diſcharge of our ſinnes, & our juſtification; it is certain therefore, our ſinnes made him dye, and it is as certain, that his36 righteouſnes made us juſt and righteous. Therefore what ſhould keepe any man under the power of death and ſubject to bondage, ſince if Chriſt be any thing to him, the great thing, & which the firſt Chri­ſtian inſtitutiō, Baptiſme, holds out, is, that hee is pardon to him, and that hee hath dyed & riſen with Chriſt, and therefore may goe boldly with Chriſt unto the throne of grace; and it is well called a throne of grace, becauſe it is not we, that have done this for our ſelves, but it is Chriſt that hath wrought all this good for us, ſo as it is grace to us, even the grace of Chriſt, who perſonally ſuffered what37 we doe miſtically, and by way of communion.

Secondly it is a throne of grace, becauſe it was not wee that did or could make the termes but God, for hee might have required from us, the per­ſonall payment of our owne debt: Now that God would make this the termes, to take that at Chriſts hand, which lay upō us, as a perſonall debt, it makes it a throne of grace to which wee may goe with all boldnes and liberty of ſpeech, and with the ſame aſſurance, that Chriſt himſelf did, be­cauſe by vertue of his owne contract ſealed to us by his owne ordinance; wee are what38 he is, and have done what hee did.

CHAP. III. Wherein of a third great uſe and end of Bap­tiſme, whereby is ſealed our communion with Chriſt in his holines, to wit, a death unto ſinne, and a riſing to newneſſe of life.

WEe come now to another great uſe and end of Bap­tiſme, which is holines of life, conſiſting of two parts, dying to ſinne, and riſing to holines, and this is eſpecially held out Rom. 6. I ſhall therefore breef­ly open & analiſe theſe words, not intending a large diſcours, but ſo much as ſuites with the nature of this ordinance.

Firſt therefore in anſwer to that unſavoury objection verſ. 391. Shall vvee ſinne that grace may abounde? The Apoſtle reaſon­eth verſ. 2. Hovv ſhall vve that are dead to ſinne, live any longer therein; as if he had ſaid, thoſe that are dead to ſinne, ſhould not live in ſinne, but you are dead to ſinne, therefore you ſhould not live in ſinne; contraries deſtroy their cōtraries, death deſtroyes life, as the privation doth the habit; a man cannot live & dye together.

But now it reſts to be prooved that wee are dead to ſinne, v. 3. Knovv yee not that ſo many of us as vvere baptized into Ieſus Chriſt, vvere baptized into his death? This hee prooves from our Baptiſme, which is the ſeale and expreſ­ſion40 of our faith: If Chriſt be dead to ſinne, then thoſe that are baptized, are dead to ſinne; But Chriſt is dead to ſin, there­fore thoſe that are baptized, are dead to ſinne.

That Chriſt is dead to ſinne, and how, you ſhall heare v. 10. For in that hee dyed, hee dyed unto ſinne once. But the propoſition that thoſe that are baptized, are dead to ſin, becauſe Chriſt is dead to ſinne, he ſhewes you from the end of baptiſme, which is to witnes & confirme to you your union and commu­nion with Chriſt: And firſt of all with his death, which both diſcharges you from the guilt of ſinne, and deſtroyes and kills41 ſinne in you.

Now that this is the particu­lar end, he ſhewes you from the generall, verſ. 3. Knovv ye not that ſo many of us as vvere baptized into Ieſus Chriſt, vvere baptized into his death; yee are baptized into Chriſt, therefore into his death; hence verſ. 4. VVee are buried vvith him by baptiſme into death; yee are ſo ſurely dead with Chriſt, that ye are buried alſo, to be ſure he is dead that is bu­ried. In this verſe hee prooves further this communion in ho­lines, by the contrarie to death, namely our riſing againe, that like as Chriſt vvas raiſed up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even ſo vve alſo ſhould vvalke in nevvnes of42 life. For as Baptiſme witneſſes to you that you are dead with Chriſt, ſo the ſame Baptiſme witneſſes that ye are riſen with him, ſo that as wee are dead to ſinne by vertue of the death of Chriſt, ſo wee are alive to holi­nes by vertue of the riſing of Chriſt, that as Chriſt was rai­ſed from the dead to a new glorious and heavenly life, ſo wee are raiſed to a life, new and holy: Now the reaſon of this witneſſe ariſeth from the ana­logie and proportion that the ſigne hath, with the thing ſig­nified, that Baptiſme hath with the thing witneſſed: Thoſe that are baptized, they are drowned and buried, and43 brought againe alive out of the water; ſo by our union with Chriſt, wee have the commu­nion of being crucified & bu­ried with him, and of riſing a­gaine to a new life. Verſ. 5. If vve have bene planted together in the likenes of his death, vvee ſhall be alſo in the likenes of his reſurrection. This word planting ſhewes the reality of theſe ſignes & ſeales, this ordinance witneſſes our planting and grafting into Chriſt, who is the ſtock with whom wee live and dye; as wee feele death with him, ſo life alſo, this is the great ſtay, the great comfort, wee are planted into Chriſt the true vyne, by God the Father, and now wee ſhall44 runne his fortune in life or death, as the plant & ſtock dye and live together. ver. 6. Knovv­ing this that our old man is crucified vvith him, that the body of ſin might be deſtroyed, that henceforth vvee ſhould not ſerve ſinne: Here he in­ſiſts in the former argument, namely our communion in the death of Chriſt, which death hee declares by the kind of it, namely crucifixion, & ſhewes that as Chriſt for our ſinnes dyed, ſo the body of ſinne in us by the death of Chriſt is cru­cified, the power and force is abated, that wee ſhould not ſerve ſinne, and live to ſinne.

Verſ. 7. For hee that is dead, is freed from ſinne. Hee that is free45 from ſinne, is no longer obli­ged to ſinne, but beleevers bap­tized, are freed from ſinne, be­cauſe they are dead to ſinne; dead with Chriſt therefore we are free from ſinne.

Verſ. 8. Novv if vve be dead vvith Chriſt, vvee beleeve that vve ſhall alſo live vvith him. This is to ſhew the communion ſtill, and to uſher in the next verſe of our com­munion with the life of Chriſt.

Verſ. 9. Knovving that Chriſt being rayſed from the dead, dieth no more, death hath no more dominion over him. Here he illuſtrates the life of Chriſt, from the perpe­tuity of it, that from thence hee might gather, the condition of the Saints, in their perſuance of46 holines, which ſhould be ever­more.

Verſ. 10. For in that he dyed, he dyed unto ſinne once; that is, to blot out ſinne, but in that hee lives, hee lives to God; a glorious life and to the glory of God the Father.

Verſ. 11. Likevviſe reckon yee alſo your ſelves to be dead indeed un­to ſinne, but alive unto God, through Ieſus Chriſt our Lord.

There is the concluſion of all that went before, reaſon your ſealnes, therefore to be dead to ſin once, when Chriſt died to deſtroy the power of it, therefore ſinne hath nothing to doe with you. On the con­trary, you are as Chriſt, alive to God, to that glorious and new47 life, & all this through Chriſt, whoſe union and communion is notified to you in Baptiſme.

This is for holines, which conſiſts in mortification and newnes of life, which Baptiſme both ſignifies and ſeales to us. It ſignifies it, by the analogie & proportion, which is betweene the ſigne and the thing ſigni­fied, and in that it ſignifies a thing paſt, it ſeales it to us, for when God will give you a ſigne and reſemblance of a thing, it is but to confirme it to you, and aſſure you of it.

48

CHAP. IV. Wherein is ſhewed the report which the cere­mony of Baptiſme hath, to the forementio­ned ends and uſes of that ordinance; alſo ſome Corollaries.

HAving ſpoken of the uſe & ends of Baptiſme, it will not be unmeete in the next place to diſcourſe ſomething of the Ceremony, that we may ſhew the report which the ſigne & ceremony hath to the thing ſignified and repreſen­ted.

Now the ſignification is moſt apt; for the externall forme or Ceremony of Baptiſme lyes properly in three things, Im­merſion, or Drowning, or Bu­rying, by putting under the water; ſome ſtay under it, and49 emerſion, or riſing out of it.

Firſt the element which is uſed, is water, extreamely fit & proper to repreſent our clean­ſing, both from the guilt and ſtayne of ſinne. Ariſe and be bap­tized, and vvaſh avvay thy ſinnes, ſayes Ananias to Paul Acts 22.16. So Chriſt gave himſelf for his Church, that hee might ſanctifie and cleanſe it vvith the vvaſhing of vva­ter by the vvord, Eph. 5.26. So Tit. 3.5. According to his mercy hee ſa­ved us by the vvaſhing of regenera­tion. So as this waſhing of water repreſents our cleanſing, that is our juſtification and ſanctifi­cation. The Iewes had many ſprinklings with blood, fit for their groſſe capacities, but50 which indeed rather ſerve to make ſpots, then to cleanſe them.

Firſt therefore the dipping or drowning in the water, ſigni­fies the great depth of divine juſtice, with which Chriſt for our ſakes was ſwallowed up; & ſo we are dead and buried with him, reaping in a ceremony the fruit of that which he ſuffe­red indeed, pertaking of his death for ſinne, and thereby obliging our ſelves to death to ſinne.

Secondly the ſtay under the water, though never ſo little, repreſents unto us, Chriſts deſ­cending to hell, that is, the lo­weſt degree of his abaſement,51 when hee was ſeald up and watcht in the grave, and was as it were cut of from amongſt men; of this abaſement wee reape the fruit by Baptiſme, & are hereby ſecured againſt that abaſement, and everlaſting deſtru­ction from the preſence of the Lord; to which ſinne would have brought us; & therefore ſinne as it is deſtroyed in us in re­ſpect of the guilt, and cut of by this abaſement of Chriſt, ſo it ſhould be apprehended by us for our juſtification, and it ſhould be utterly dead & mor­tified to us, in reſpect of its power and vigour; dead and bu­ried to ſinne.

Thirdly the Emerſion, or ri­ſing52 out of the water, is a repre­ſentation to us of that victory, which Chriſt being dead and buried, got over death, and in his riſing, triumphed over it, with whom alſo we riſe trium­phing over ſinne & death, and all evill whatſoever, clearly a­bove the guilt of all ſinne, and ſecure againſt the evill of ſin, riſing up to holines & newnes of life. And thus there is a ſweete and excellent propor­tion, betweene the ceremony and the ſubſtance, the ſigne, & the thing ſignified, and wee are confirmed to be of the union and communion with Chriſt in every thing that is for our good and comfort.

53

Now having ſhewed the ſe­verall ends of Baptiſme, & how the ceremony makes them all good to us, I ſhall gather ſome Corollaries from the mayne notiō of this ordinance, which is our being dead with Chriſt, and riſing againe, according to the forementioned place of Rom. 6.11. Reckon your ſelves to be dead to ſinne, but alive to God through Ieſus Chriſt our Lord. Rec­kon, that is, build upon this; this is a thing exceeding ſure.

Firſt if wee be dead to ſinne,Coroll. 1. and ſealed up to this death by Baptiſme into the death of Chriſt, then let us be in the world as dead men in that re­ſpect; let us not underſtand the54 reaſonings of ſinne, nor hear­ken to the perſuaſions of ſinne, nor looke upon the baites of ſinne; the Apoſtle made this an argument in a better thing, If you be dead vvith Chriſt from the ru­diments of the vvorld, vvhy as though living in the vvorld, are ye ſubject to ordinances, touch not, taſt not, handle not, Col. 2.20. Theſe things had once a good being, but were become old, but ſinne was never of any worth or ac­count. Barzillai 2. Samuel 19. thought it reaſon to refuſe the Kings table, becauſe his appe­tite and ſences were decayed, hee was eighty yeares old; but our ſences are not decaying, but dead, and ſinne is not old,55 but dead; it is dead in a miſte­ry, it is dead in Chriſt, and wee have the Sacrament upon it; therefore if luſts tempt, turne not onely a deaf, but a dead eare to them; perſuaſiōs ſhould not worke on a dead man, ob­jects ſhould not take or affect a dead man.

Secondly if we be riſen and alive with Chriſt, & Baptiſme ſeale that alſo; then act not one­ly as a living man, but as a riſen man, moove and walke, & rea­ſon, & conclude, as a man rai­ſed from the dead, have your ſences and your reaſonings as quick to God, as taking of ſpi­rituall things, as they are dull and ſhut up to things below;56 breath in the ayer of another life, haſten after the full and reall poſſeſſion of another life; let God and Chriſt & heaven­ly things be great unto you, though they be little to the world, and what ever is great to the world, let it be little to you, proportionating your ob­ject to your life; love thoſe or­dinances, thoſe times that feed your life.

Thirdly the worke of this ordinance or dying and riſing, is advanced much by holy rea­ſonings, both in the time of communicating & afterwards, for wee are apt to forget our ſelves and our conditions, as he that would have forgot that he57 was an Emperour, if he had not bene remembred of it by o­thers. Thinke therefore much on theſe things, what you have done in this ordinance, what are the conſequences & reſults of it, which wil be a mighty not onely help, but ingagement to faith & holines, it is a ſeale on both ſides, wee ſeale to God as well as he to us, it is in our owne choyce no more, wee are inga­ged by our owne act; wee have ſubſcribed and can recall no more, and certainely this as it ingages much, ſo it helpes much: to act an act of faith in thought is much, but to ſpeake it is more, but to ſigne & ſeale it in an ordinance, by profeſſing58 ſubjection, by going downe in­to the water, by ſuffering your ſelves there to be drowned, or buried, by riſing or coming out againe, all as a ceremony or ordinance for ſuch an end, is both a great ingagement and a great help to us in beleeving.

CHAP. V. In which the proper ceremony of Baptiſme is vindicated by the force of the word, Scrip­ture practiſe, the ſuffrage of learned men, and the uſe of ancient times.

IN the proceeding diſcours wee have taken it for graun­ted, that the antient and uſuall forme of Baptiſme, hath bene by dipping or plonging the whole body under the water, according to which notion we59 have found what great propor­tion the ceremony hath to the ſubſtance, and the ſigne to the thing ſignified: But becauſe the poſſeſſion which the Churches have had of a long time of ſprinkling, is become a ſtrong argument in the thoughts of many for that ceremony, it will be neceſſary to ſpeake ſomething more particularly to this point, and to ſhow that as the ceremony of dipping, ſutes with the ends and uſe of Baptiſme, ſo it agrees perfectly with the force of the word, the Scripture practiſe, and the uſe of antient times.

Firſt therefore the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉ſignifies properly mergo,60 ſeu immergo, that is, to drowne, or ſinke in the water, to dip, to overwhelme, to plunge, ſo mer­gere aliquem ſub aequore, or in undis, to drowne them; ſo Chamier ſayes that immerſion expreſſes the force〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: it ſignifies alſo tingo, to dye, or coulour, quod fit immergendo: which is done by dipping into the coulour, over­whelming and drowning in it. So Walleus, a learned Profeſ­ſour of theſe partes, ſayes that the antient Latines expreſſed the word〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉per tinctionem & inundationem; inundatio is an overflowing. This therefore is the proper and naturall force of the word, wee will ſee in the next place what aſpect the61 Scripture beares in ſeverall paſſages to the acceptance of the word in this ſence.

Firſt in the ſtory of Chriſts baptiſme, the greateſt and fay­reſt example of the kind, as ye read it Mat. 3.13. Then cometh Ieſus from Galilee to Iordan unto Iohn to be baptized of him; yee ſee he went to Iohn, who baptized in the river Iordan, a place pro­per for immerſion & dipping, where at laſt hee was baptized, that is, dipt or plundged in the vva­ter, for ſo ye have it verſ. 16. He vvent up ſtraightvvay out of the vva­ter: that is, as the word is tranſ­lated generally, hee aſcended out of the vvater. Novv if any one, ſaith Maldonat, aſke vvhy the Euange­liſts62 uſe the vvord rather of aſcen­ding, then goeing out, they ſeeme to be ignorant that the earth is higher then the rivers; ſo as Chriſt aſcended or went up out of the water, in the which he had bene dipt or drown'd. Lucas Brugenſis, upon the place, ſayes this, Chriſt aſcen­ded upon the land, for he had diſcen­ded into the river (after the manner of others that vvere baptized) as deepe as his thighes, or his navell, for the reſt of his body (ſayes he) vvas dipt by Iohn, not ſprinkled onely vvith vvater. Others have thought that it was the cuſtome of Iohn to hold the people up to the neck in water, till they confeſt their ſinnes.

The learned Cajetan upon the63 place, ſayes, Chriſt aſcended out of the vvater, therefore Chriſt vvas bap­tized by Iohn, not by ſprinkling, nor by povvring vvater upon him, but by immerſion, that is, by dipping or plunging in the vvater. Beſides the evidence of the thing, many more teſtimonies might be brought to this purpoſe, of men that for the preſent content themſelves with ſprinkling for their infant baptiſme, but theſe ſhall ſuffice.

The next place we ſhall con­ſider, ſhall be that of Iohn 3.23. And Iohn vvas baptizing in Aenon neere to Salim, becauſe there vvas much vvater there. The reaſon why he pitcht upon this place is given, becauſe there vvas much64 vvater there, which was not ever found in that country, & much water was needfull to his Bap­tiſme. Piſcator upon the place ſayes,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ſignifies many rivers, as〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉in the ſingular num­ber ſignified the river Iordan, this, ſayes he, is mentioned to ſignifie the Ceremony of Baptiſme vvhich Iohn uſed; immergens ſcil. totum corpus hominis in fluvio ſtantis; dipping, or plundging the vvhole body of the man ſtanding in the river, vvhence, ſaith he, Chriſt baptized of Iohn in Iordan, is ſaid to aſcend out of the vvater, Mat. 3. the ſame manner Philip ob­ſerved Acts 8.38. And in his ob­ſervations upō the place, ſayes, that the antient manner of Baptiſme vvas, that the vvhole body vvas plund­ged65 into the vvater, & thence dravvn out againe; the one ſignifying the mortification of the old man, and the other the vivification of the nevv, as Rom. 6.3.4. thus Piſcator. Corne­lius a Lapide, upon the place, From hence (ſaith he) you may ga­ther that Iohn ſo baptized, as hee vvaſht not onely the head in vvater, for a little vvater vvould have ſerved for that, but the vvhole body. Many Authors might be quoted for this purpoſe, but the place ſpeaks ſo clearly for it ſelf, that I ſhall adde to what I have ſaid already onely the judgement of Calvin upon theſe words: From this place, ſaith he, you may gather that Iohn & Chriſt adminiſtred bap­tiſme by plundging the vvhole body66 into the vvater, although he adds alſo his opinion; Yee need not be much carefull, ſaith he, of the out­vvard Ceremony, ſo it agree vvith the ſpirituall truth, and the ordinance and rule of our Lord; and ſo ſay I alſo.

You ſee what light this place affoords to the clearing of the primitive practiſe for dipping or plundging in baptiſme.

The third place we will exa­mine ſhall be that of Acts 8.36.37. &c. where you have the ſtory of the baptizing of the Eunuch by Philip; As they vvent on their vvay, they came unto a certain vvater, & the Eunuch ſaid, See here is vvater,〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, as Piſcator interprets it, fluvium, vel amnem,67 vel ſtagnum ſome river, or a poole, or ponde; after this diſcovery of a fit place for Baptiſme, the Eunuch deſires it, and Philip having ta­ken an account of his faith, which was to give him his qualificatiō for that ordinance, it is ſaid in the 38. verſe, that they vvent both dovvne into the vvater. So Beza tranſlates it, Deſcenderunt ambo in aquam, they deſcended both into the vvater: So the French, Deſcendirent enl'eau, as Deodat. and the baptiſme being done, verſ. 39. they came up out of the vvater, in the which they had bene before. So Beza, Quum au­tem aſcendiſſent ex aqua, vvhen they had aſcended out of the vvater; the French, Quand ils furent remontez68 hors de l'eau; vvhen they vvere re­mounted or aſcended out of the vva­ter; all which expreſſe not a going to the water onely, as ſome would have it, but a go­ing downe into the water for Baptiſme, and a coming out of it againe. Lorinus upon the words, quotes Carthuſianus, ſay­ing, Eunuchus magnam familiam habuit, nec tamencoram illis ſe nu­dare ac lavari erubuit, dum coram Deo de proprijs verecundabatur peccatis: The Eunuch had a great fa­mily, and yet hee bluſht not before them to make himſelf naked, and to be vvaſht, vvhilſt he vvas aſhamed of his ſinnes before God. By which, ſaith Lorinus, they are confounded, that reverence and feare the preſence69 of men more then God: And adds alſo, That this diſcent, going dovvne, ſignified by all meanes immerſion, that is, plundging, or dipping, and it is probable, that by vvhat meanes it moſt conveniently could, & vvas moſt expreſly vvaſhing, the Eu­nuch vvas baptized.

There will not need to be ſaid more to this place, I ſhall onely conclude it with the words of Calvin, as I did the o­ther, which I am inforced to give you in his french, becauſe his latine edition is not by me. Nous voyons icy qu'elle faconles an­ciens avoyent d'adminiſtrer le Bap­teſme; car ils plongeoyent tout le corps dedans l'eau: L'uſage eſt maintenant que le Miniſtre jette quelques gouttes70 d'eau ſeulement ſur le corps, ou ſur le teſte: VVe ſee here, ſayes Calvin upon the place, vvhat faſhion the antients had to adminiſter Baptiſme, for they plundged the vvhole body in the vvater; the uſe is novv, ſayes he, that the Miniſter caſts a fevv dropps of vvater onely upon the body, or upon the head. Whereby you ſee both what his opinion was for the practiſe of the moſt antient and primitive times in generall, & how cleare hee was that the Baptiſme adminiſtred here to the Eunuch, was by dipping, or plundging.

The fourth and laſt place I ſhall conſider to this purpoſe ſhall be that of the 6. Rom. and the beginning, where the Apo­ſtle71 elegantly alludes to the ce­remony of Baptiſme in our death, and reſurrection with Chriſt, but having handled this before largely, and by it ſelf, I ſhall onely give you the ſence of expoſiters about it for our preſent end.

The learned Cajetan upon the 4. verſe (vvee are buried vvith him by baptiſme into death) ſaith; By our burying he declares our death, from the Ceremony of Baptiſme, quia, ſcil. qui baptizatur ſub aqua ponitur; be­cauſe he vvho is baptized is put under the vvater, and by this carryes a ſimi­litude of him that is buried, vvho is put under the earth: Novv becauſe none are buryed, but dead men, from this very thing that vve are buryed72 in Baptiſme, vve are aſsimulated to Chriſt buried, or vvhen he vvas buri­ed. Thus Cajetan.

Eſtius upon the place, having ſaid out of Auſten, that vvhat ever vvas done in the croſſe of Chriſt in his burying and reſurrection, &c. vvas ſo done, that to thoſe vvords and actions, the life of a Chriſtian ſhould be conformed; Ads, the like miſtery the Apoſtle puts in the Ceremony of Baptiſme, for the immerſion (that is dipping) of Chriſt, repreſents to us burying, and ſo alſo death; for the ſe­pulcher is the Symbole of death, and the emerſion (or riſing out againe) vvhich follovves that dipping, hath the ſimilitude of the reſurrection; therefore in Baptiſme vvee are con­formed, not onely to the death of73 Chriſt, but alſo to his ſepulcher and reſurrection. Where you ſee hee clearly places the ceremony of Baptiſme, both of Chriſts, and ours, in immerſion, or putting under the water, & emerſion or riſing up againe, exactly conformable to what is to be ſignified to us by it, namely our dying and riſing againe with Chriſt. So Cornelius Alapid. upon the place 4. 〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in mortem, id eſt, in ſimilitudinem mortis Chriſti baptizati ſumus; qui enim baptizantur & aquis immer­guntur Chriſtum mortuum, & ſepul­tum repreſentant allegoricè, &c. Into his death, that is, vvee are baptized into the ſimilitude of the death of Chriſt; for they vvho are put under74 the vvater, repreſent Chriſt dead & buried allegorically.

I ſhall add but one or two quotations more in a thing ſo evident, Deodati in his annota­tions upon the place verſ. 4. hath theſe words, Ce qu'au Bap­teſme nous ſommes plongez dedans l'eau (ſelon l'ancienne ceremonie) nous eſt un ſigne ſacré qu'il faut que le peché ſoit eſtouffe en nous par l'E­ſprit de Dieu, comme c'eſt un ſeau du lavement de nos ames devant Dieu. That in Baptiſme vvee are plundged into the vvater (according to the an­tient ceremony) it is a holy ſigne to us, that ſinne ſhould be ſtiffled in us by the Spirit of God, as it is a ſeale of the vvaſhing of our ſoules before God.

I ſhall conclud with the judge­ment75 of Piſcator upon the place verſ. 4. Sepulti igitur ſumus, vide­tur (inquit) reſpicere ad veterem ritum, quum toto corpore in aquam mergebantur, atque it a quaſi ſepelie­bantur, ac mox rurſus extraheban­tur, tanquam è ſepulchro. The Apo­ſtle (ſayes he) ſeemes here to have reſpect to the antient ceremony, vvhen as the vvhole body vvas dipt into the vvater, and vvas by and by againe dravvne out, as out of a grave. So Piſcator.

Having thus farre carried on this notion for dipping, or plundging in the ceremony of Baptiſme, which wee have found to have its riſe from the naturall & proper force of the word, & to have accorded ful­ly76 with Scripture practiſe and example, which is the coppy to which we muſt conforme, I ſhall conſider a little to diſ­charge my ſelf more abun­dantly to this point, what hath bene the practiſe of the times wee commonly call primitive, that is, thoſe after the times of Chriſt and his Apoſtles, and what the judgement of the Fa­thers and antient writers have bene to this purpoſe.

And firſt the Apoſtolicall con­ſtitutions, which are of great an­tiquity, being attributed to Cle­ment the 4. from Peter in the order of Biſhops, according to the Roman account, they in­joyne the office of Diaconniſ­ſes,77 or ſhee-Deacons, to be to aſſiſt for the unclothing of wo­men at Baptiſme; the words are〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. To miniſter to the Preſbyters vvhilſt the vvomen vvere baptized, for comelines ſake. Conſt. Apoſt. lib. 8. cap. 32. this I find quoted by Chamier lib. de Baptiſt. cap. 2. p. 240. who brings it to proove, that from the beginning, as hee ſayes, it vvas the cuſtome to dip the vvhole body, vvhich expreſſes (ſayes he) the force of the vvord〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, vvhence it vvas (ſayes he) that Iohn baptized in a river, and hee affirmes that it is uncertain, vvhen or vvhy the change began, to baptize by ſprinkling, ſaving that he addes that78 it vvould ſeeme that 3000 could hardly be baptized in one day, by ſo fevv Apoſtles, if they vvere all dipt, or that the Iaylor had not perhaps a veſſell at hand, big enough for dip­ping the vvhole body. But firſt you ſee that his opinion is cleare, that Baptiſme in the beginning was by dipping or plundging the whole body, to proove which hee brings the force of the word, the example of Iohn, and after the Apoſtolicall con­ſtitutions: onely he knowes not how ſo well to accommodate theſe two inſtances, but that ſprinkling alſo might be uſed: I ſhall take therefore this occa­ſion, to anſwer once for all to theſe conſiderations. Firſt that79 when wee have a clearnes of Scripture practiſe, agreable as is confeſt to the force of the word of inſtitution, and expreſ­ſing it, which alſo accords, as wee have already ſhowne a­boundantly, with the uſe and end of the ordinance, which is the ſcope and intent of it, and apparently conformable to the moſt evident antient practiſe, it were a boldneſſe (to ſay no more) to leave or deſert that practiſe, which upon the for­mer grounds, wee know to be ſafe and warrantable, for ano­ther, which we have little rea­ſon to beleeve was uſed, but be­cauſe wee ſee not how in ſome inſtanced particular circum­ſtances80 it could be well other­wayes; And as it is ever dange­rous, to depart from knowne & approoved Scripture practiſe in the matter of ordinances, upon our owne ſurmiſes, ſo it can be no where of worſe con­ſequence then in ſuch ordinan­ces (of which Baptiſme & the Lords Supper are) the being, and good of which lyes much in the right adminiſtration of a ceremony.

It would be ſafe to follow the cleare & aſſured way, and for the other, unleſſe they im­plyed a ſimple impoſſibility, (which the practiſes inſtanced in will by no meanes be found to doe) not to be much trou­bled81 about them.

But truly I am jealous that thoſe who find ſprinkling moſt commodious for infants, and are not willing to depart from the notions of infant Baptiſme, trouble themſelves more with the objectiōs mentioned, then they would find cauſe to doe, if they did not find it needfull to raiſe objections from theſe places for the patroniſing of baptizing by ſprinkling, which as was ſaid before is ſo proper for their infant Baptiſme: For the thing it ſelf, to inſtance, firſt in that of the Iaylor, how eaſily may it be conceaved, that in thoſe eaſterne and hot­ter countryes (this being at82 Philippy in Macedonia, Acts 16.12. where bathing was of great and continuall uſe) this keeper of the priſon might be provided with ſome veſſell fit for bathing and waſhing the whole body, which might ſerve for the uſe of Baptiſme, as the Chriſtiās afterwards, when they came to injoy fixt places of meetings for worſhip, had their veſſells affixt to their tem­ples, which veſſell they called〈…〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Bucan. p. 666. being of a great continent fild with water for the uſe of Baptiſme, which the Latine calls piſcina, or lavacrum, a veſſell proper to bath in, or font, from whence the cuſtome of our little dimi­nitive83 fonts in Churches hath come, ſince ſprinkling (more proper for children as Chamier affirmes) hath bene the cere­mony uſed in Baptiſme, with excluſion to dipping or plund­ging the whole body: I ſay it is eaſy to ſuppoſe that the Iaylor might be thus provided for his Baptiſme, and ſafe to ſuppoſe this or any other way that doth not imply a contradiction, then to thinke that the Apoſtles al­tered the uſuall ceremony for Baptizing uſed to Chriſt and by Chriſt and his Apoſtles, as (appeares evidently & cleare­ly) and which ſo much ac­cordes with the intent & ſcope of the ordinance in that which84 the Ceremony ſignifyes and exhibits to us, namely our being buried with Chriſt, and riſing againe, as wee ſhow'd al­ready.

As for the other objection, that it would ſeeme difficult for three thouſands to be bap­tized in one day by ſo few Apo­ſtles, if dipping the whole bo­dy, not ſprinkling were the ce­remony uſed; I anſwer it will not appeare much leſſe diffi­cult if ſprinkling were the ce­remony, and it is the objection that Bellarmine & the Papiſts bring againſt our Divines, to proove that in certain caſes the Laycks may baptize; This Cha­mier anſwers by Salmeron the Ie­ſuite,85 one of their owne, tract. 15. in Acta, who ſayes it is no way impoſſible, and brings for proofe one Franciſcus Xavier, who baptized in one day a­mongſt the Indians 15000, now if one man could baptize fifteene thouſand, twelve Apo­ſtles could baptize three thou­ſand, beſides if they want Mi­niſters, and will not admit of the aſſiſtance of Brethren out of office (whoſe miniſtry to ſome will not ſeeme ſo impro­per for aſſiſtance in certain ca­ſes of publike affaires by pu­blike authority) wee can fur­niſh them with more helpe, na­mely the ſeaventy Diſciples, whom our Divines will by no86 meanes admit at that time to be Laycks, ſince Chriſt had called them before to the mi­niſtry of the Goſpell, and had conſtituted them as publike workemen in his harveſt, and had ſent them with a publike and particular commiſſion, ſay­ing, Thoſe that heare you, heare me, Luke 10. ſo that according to this account, the number of re­gular & lawfull Baptizers, will be 82, namely 12 Apoſtles & 70 Diſciples. Thus farre wee are helpt by our Proteſtant Di­vines in their oppoſitiō againſt Lay-Baptiſme. Now if you di­ſtribute the baptizing of 3000 to the worke of 82 perſons, there will fall under 40 to the87 ſhare of every one, as might be eaſily reckoned, ſo as the bap­tizing of that number either way, by dipping or ſprinkling, might be accompliſhed in one day, though the Baptizers were not indued with the dexterity of Franciſcus Xavier, and why not as well by dipping or ſprink­ling (for all that can be ſaid to the contrary, by the number of thoſe, who were baptized) ſince wee ſuppoſe thoſe that were baptized, to offer themſelves willingly to come into the wa­ter, and preſent themſelves rea­dy, and the ceremony of dip­ping requiring very little time more by him that adminiſters it, then that of ſprinkling, and88 which by ſo many hands might eaſily be diſpatcht.

It was neceſſary to ſpeake ſomething to this, ſince it is all which I have met with (and that all you ſee how little it is) which might give the ſhew of a reaſon from Scripture pra­ctiſe, for baptizing by ſprink­ling, and that onely too by way of objection, which you ſee ac­commodated.

Thus you have a cleare proofe brought by Chamier, for the antient manner of Bapti­zing, by dipping, from the Apo­ſtolicall conſtitutions, which that alſo conſidered as an ob­jection, why at any time it might ſeeme to be varyed, and89 you ſee, that as the objection to the generall rule was but conjecturall, ſo the ſolution is very eaſy, and the other pra­ctiſe, to wit, by dipping, moſt cleare and evident.

In the ſecond place, VValleus de Baptiz. p. 84. (a reverent Au­thor, whom we have formerly mentioned) ſhewing that the antients Baptized by an im­merſion of the whole body, ſayes, That antiently the dayes of Baptiſme (for they uſed ſome ſo­lemne dayes, as vvee ſhevv in another peece of this tract) had their name, from the ceremony, therefore it vvas called Dominica in albis, the Domi­nicall or the Lords day in vvhites, be­cauſe being unclothed for their Bap­tiſme,90 vvhich vvas as before by dip­ping or plundging, they put on vvhite or linnen garments, vvith vvhich they vvent into the Baptiſterion, a veſſell as we have formerly ſaid, fitted for that ceremony of immer­ſion: and therefore the Papiſts at this day, who retaine every thing of antient ceremony, though they corrupt the uſe of it, give a white garment to the baptized child in one part of their ceremony, which Bellar­mine ſayes they are to vveare a Sab­bato ſancto uſque ad Dominicam in albis, from the holy Sabaoth, to the Dominicall in vvhites, Tom. 3. p. 83. That is that Dominicall, which VValleus mentions, when thoſe who were baptized for come­lines91 ſake, clothed themſelves with white linnen garments, whence the ſame Author ſaies, That thoſe vvho vvere to be baptized, vvere called Candidati Chriſtianiſ­mi, Candidates of Chriſtianity, with alluſiō to the clothing in white, with which they were accom­modated for Baptiſme by im­merſion.

In the third place I find the opinion of Bonaventure, quoted by a late and learned writer, vvho though hee allovves ſprinkling, yet more commends immerſion, or dip­ping, either of the vvhole body, vvhen there is vvater enough, or if there be but a little vvater, of the head and breſt, or of the head alone, or of the face onely, becauſe there are all the92 ſences, and there doth eſpecially flou­riſh the operation of the ſoule, and vvee take the image or picture of a man eſpecially from his face; which ſeverall reaſons he gives to that purpoſe, ſo as if you will ſprinkle, ye muſt fall upon a new queſtion, which may for ought I know be much diſpu­ted, and that is, what part is to be ſprinkled; or if you will ſprinkle the whole man, which cannot be done exactly, to be ſure not eaſily, it were better to follow the ceremony of im­merſion; but by what reaſon, aſperſion, or ſprinkling, came into uſe in the world, inſtead of immerſion, or dipping, ye ſhall find faſtned upon two conſide­rations;93 of charity to ſicke and weake perſons, and charity to tender children, although as the ſame Author affirmes, mer­ſion was more uſuall even for children, to the dayes of Grego­ry (who was Biſhop of Rome Anno 590) and Iſiodor. For Gre­gory giving an account of the threefold dipping, hath theſe words, Ʋt dum tertiò infans ab aquis educitur, reſurrectio triduani temporis exprimatur; vvhilſt the child is dravvne out of the vvater three times, the reſurrection after three dayes buriall may be ſignified. Epiſt. Greg. lib. 1. Epiſt. 41. An ac­count of this charity for ſicke perſons, ye have expreſt in an epiſtle of Cyprian to Magnus lib. 1. 94Epiſt. 6. In the times of Cyprian there was a queſtion mooved concerning Baptiſme, by aſper­ſion or perfuſion, that is, powe­ring water, to wit, hovv they vvere baptized, vvho in reſpect of infirmity, or ſicknes could not be dipt, vvhether ſuch ſprinkling vvere to be accounted for true baptiſme; by which de­maund you may perceave, that in Cyprians time, immerſion or dipping was ſo much the uſuall and received forme for Bap­tiſme, as it was made a great queſtion, whether they were rightly baptized, who deſired Baptiſme, and yet by reaſon of infirmity, could not receive it, but by ſprinkling or aſperſion: Cyprian anſwers modeſtly and95 ſayes, Hee vvould not have his opi­nion be a prejudice to any other mans either opinion or practiſe, but his cha­rity extends rather to thinke, that in ſuch caſes, Baptiſme may be received by ſprinkling; it were to long to quote his expreſſions wherein he is large.

But to conclude all, you ſee by a current of authority from Scripture eſpecially, and after by Authors antient and mo­derne, that dipping, or immer­ſion hath bene the old way of Baptizing, even for children in the dayes of Gregory, a reaſon of the alteration I have in part ſhewed you, from the quota­tion out of Cyprian. A more par­ticular account Iacobus Pamelius96 ſhall give you, as you may read in his annotations upon the 76 Epiſt. of Cyprian, his words are theſe pa. 215. Quum propter aegri­tudinem immergi ſive intingi (quod propriè Baptizari eſt) aegri non poſ­ſent, aqua ſalutari perfundebantur, ſive aſpergebantur; eademratione ab Eccleſia occidentali primum obſer­vari caepiſſe conſuetudinem adſper­tionis, qua nunc utimur, exiſtimo, ob teneritudinem nempè infantium, quum jam rariſsimus eſſet adulto­rum baptiſmus: VVhen in reſpect of vveakeneſſe thoſe vvho vvere ſicke, could not be dipt, or plundged (vvhich is properly to be baptized) they had vvater povvred upon them, or vvere ſprinkled vvith it; from the ſame rea­ſon I ſuppoſe the cuſtome of ſprink­ling,97 vvhich vve novv uſe, to have bene firſt obſerved by the vveſterne church, to vvit, for the tenderneſſe of infants, vvhen as novv the baptiſme of thoſe of age vvas very rare; then he goes one, Olim certè tum in occidentali, tum in orientali Eccleſia immergi ſo­lere veteres ſuis ſcriptis manifeſtum faciunt, & Romae id adhuc uſitatum aetate Gregorij manifeſtum ſit ex ip­ſius Sacramentorum libro: idque apud Anglos etiamnum obſervari ad marginem adnotavit Eraſmus. Cer­tainly, that of old time, in the eaſterne and vveſterne church, they vvere uſed to dipp, the antient make manifeſt by their vvritings; and that it vvas uſed at Rome, in the time of Gregory, is manifeſt, from his booke of the Sacra­ments, and that it vvas yet uſed98 amongſt the Engliſh, Eraſmus hath noted in the margent. So Pamel.

I have bene large in this ſub­ject, but I hope it will be of uſe to us, both for the aſſuring of our practiſe in this particular, & the anſwering of ſuch, whoſe peremptory perſuaſion the o­ther way (for ſome there are ſo perſuaded) give themſelves, and their friends trouble.

I ſhall take a knit from this, to obſerve (with which I ſhall conclude) what a tyrant cu­ſtome is, that dares ſtand up & contradict a thing ſo evident in it ſelf, ſo agreable to the reaſon of the ordinance, to the cleare phraſe and expreſſion of Scrip­ture, to the practiſe of antient99 times, in ſo much that in Cy­prians time, it was a queſtion mooved in the Church, whe­ther thoſe that in reſpect of in­firmity, could not receive bap­tiſme, the antient and uſuall way, and yet earneſtly deſired it, might be rightly baptized, by ſprinkling; vvhether ſuch (as Cyprians vvords are to Magnus) might be accounted lavvfull Chri­ſtians, that is, whether their Baptiſme ſo adminiſtred, were right, or a nullity; I ſay, you ſee here the tyranny & boldneſſe of cuſtome, that having ſhaped (as it is apt to doe) our mindes to one way, dares now pretend for that alone, with the exclu­ſion of others, and would per­ſuade100 us, that nothing ſhould be, but what wee have ſeene to be, and counts every thing er­ror, that hath not fallen under our ſence or experience: In things civill and indifferent, I can be content that cuſtome ſhall be my guide, & ſhall take that for good coyne, that the world ſtampes, but in matter of ordinances, and things ſa­cred, the rule of which lies in inſtitution, and not in our li­berty, or choiſe, and the bleſ­ſing of which lyes in conform­ing to the rule, and inſtitution: I beſeech you let us be wairy to judge with righteous judge­ment, and not by that appea­rance, which the cuſtomes of101 this world, upon their worldly and carnall, though ſeeming wiſe conſiderations, hold forth to us.

CHAP. VI. Wherein is ſhewed the agreements and diffe­rences that the word preached hath with the Sacraments, together wïth certain Co­rollaries giving light to the preſent contro­verſy.

HAving out of the Scripture conſidered the uſe & ends of Baptiſme, to which the cere­mony appeares to be extrea­mely proper and oppoſite, wee will now to bring further light to this ordinance, and in order to a diſcours of the proper ſub­ject of Baptiſme, and of the controverſy thereabout conſi­der102 the agreements that are common to it, with the admi­niſtration of the word, and that wherein theſe two ordinances ſeeme to differ.

They agree firſt in the effi­cient cauſe: Baptiſme and the other Sacrament, have the ſame author and inſtitutor that the word hath; ſcil. the King, Prieſt, and Prophet of his church; and as the ſame effi­cient, ſo the ſame adminiſtring cauſes, thoſe that were to teach had order to baptize, Mat. 28.19. Goe therefore and teach all na­tions, baptizing them in the name of the Father, &c. And 1. Cor. 4.1. Let a man ſo account of us as of the Miniſters of Chriſt, and ſtevvards of103 the myſteries of God.

Secondly they are both in­ſtruments in the hands of the Holy Spirit for edification and ſalvation, the word is a dead letter without the Spirit, and ſo alſo is Baptiſme, it ſpeakes no more then it is bid; the bleſſed Angels that are ſo farre above ſinne and corruption, have no quickning vertue in them­ſelves, the fleſh of Chriſt hath no vertu but from his God­head: Now if there be no ver­tue in the fleſh of Chriſt, but by the perſonall union, how ſhall bodily actions about bodily elements confer grace, but by the mediation of the Spirit.

Thirdly they agree in the104 principall matter, for the ſame Chriſt with all his benefits is offered and confirmed to us in the word and Sacraments, the ſame union, the ſame commu­nion in the death & the reſur­rection of Chriſt, and they which looke for more in the Sacraments, then the word promiſes and holds out, makes an Idoll of them.

Fourthly they agree in the end, for God by them builds up and edifies his Church till it come to be perfect.

Fifthly they agree in the in­ſtrument, which renders both profitable to us, both word and Sacrament are ineffectuall without faith, 3. Iohn 36. Hee105 that beleeveth on the Sonne, hath everlaſting life.

Sixthly they agree in the ef­fects, They are the ſavour of life un­to life, or the ſavour of death unto death, &c. So, He that beleeveth & is baptized, ſhall be ſaved.

From the firſt you learne,coroll. 1not to depart from the inſtitution, but as to preach the Goſpel ac­cording to the analogie of faith, ſo to adminiſter the Sa­craments according to Goſpel inſtitutions, for it is alike ſinne to tranſgreſſe in the admini­ſtratiō of the one, as in the prea­ching of the other, ſince they both hold of the ſame Lord & inſtitutor; and as hee which in preaching the Goſpel ſhall add106 workes to faith, in the point of juſtification, perverts the word and preaches another Goſpel, and therefore is accurſed, Gal. 1.1. So he that ſhall alter in the adminiſtration of the Sacra­ments, but in a ceremony, ſince the ordinance lyes in a cere­mony, and ſhall be bold to in­large the ſubject of this ordi­nance, or contract it, will be found a breaker of Gods boūds, & be found guilty of the curſſe that is the portion of ſuch as add or detract, ſo as what wee doe herein is of great moment and conſideration.

coroll. 2From the ſecond to exſpect ſucceſſe from the Spirit, to be in the Spirit, that you may re­ceive107 it: Secondly the Sacra­ments worke not Phiſically.

From the third,coroll. 3to be lead by all adminiſtrations into the knowledge of Chriſt, to judge them beſt that hold out moſt of Chriſt, and moſt purely. Se­condly to magnify Chriſt the head and end of all inſtitu­tions.

coroll. 4From the fourth to be com­forted and confirmed in this way of ſalvation, wherein wee are, for wee have enough till wee come to God, and need no more.

coroll. 5From the fifth not to reſt in the worke done, to thinke it enough when you have heard or communicated, if it be not108 mingled with faith, it profits not, vvithout faith it is impoſsible to pleaſe God.

coroll. 6From the ſixth then play not with theſe tooles, it is a great matter you have in hand, when you meddle with the ordinan­ces of Chriſt, and when you are under them, it cannot be without much good or hurt to you, it is a bleſſing or a curſſe to the perſons upon whom it fal­leth, even the greateſt: light & meanes are the greateſt agra­vations of ſinnes, Heb. 2.1.2.3.

Wee come now to the diffe­rence of theſe ordinances, which will contribute more of light to what wee have propo­ſed.

109

They differ firſt in the man­ner of the adminiſtratiō of the ſame Goſpel. The one is an au­dible word, the other is a vi­ſible word, the word ſignifies according to ſuch expreſſions as men have given a vallue un­to, to ſignify thinges by, but the Sacraments repreſents by ſuch ſimilitudes and proportions as the ſignes have with the things ſignified; therefore we read the word and heare the word, but we ſee & feele the Sacraments: In a word they are Hierogli­phicks; it was the cuſtome of the Egyptians to teach by viſible repreſentations, which ſignify ſuch and ſuch things, theſe are of that nature, that whereas the110 word ſtrikes the eare onely, which is the uſuall and ordina­ry ſence of diſcipline, thoſe ſignes and viſible elements af­fect the ſences outward and in­ward, the ſences conveigh the object to the underſtanding, there the Holy Ghoſt takes them, and brings us into the preſent enjoyment of things, as if we ſaw Chriſt with our eyes, toucht him with our hands, felt him by our taſt, and injoyed him with our whole man: all this in a rationall and diſcour­ſive way, rayſing an analogy & proportion betweene the ſigne and the thing ſignified.

Secondly they differ in the meaſure of their ſignification,111 the word eſpecially teacheth, the Sacraments eſpecially ſeale and confirme: the word indeed ſignifies and applyes ſpirituall things, but the Sacraments more efficatiouſly repreſent & apply.

Thirdly the word is ſimply neceſſary to actuall beleevers, and ſo to the ſalvation of be­leevers, and ſufficient, as in Cor­nelius; for faith is by hearing, and hearing by the vvord of God; but the Sacraments are not abſolutely neceſſary to all, nor without the word are they ſufficient to ſalvation, for to what purpoſe are ſeales without the writing.

Fourthly (for I will not trouble you with many) the112 word belongs to all mankind, the Sacraments belong onely to beleevers; therefore for prea­ching, ye have, preach the Goſpell to every creature under heaven; But for the Sacraments, teach them, ſaith Chriſt, that is, diſciple them, and hee that beleeves and is baptized, ſhall be ſaved; ſo for the other Sacrament, let a man exa­mine himſelf, and ſo let him eate and drinke; and the people vvere baptized in Iordan, confeſsing their ſinnes, of vvhich they repented; and after the Eunuch was taught, there was faith required before hee was baptized; if thou beleeveſt vvith all thy heart, thou mayeſt; and no Baptiſme or Sacrament find we adminiſtred otherwayes in the113 new Teſtament, the reaſon is evident, becauſe the word be­gets faith, the Sacraments con­firmes it, the word is the writ­ing, the Sacraments is the ſeale, for it carries this with it, and ſpeakes this language; as certainly as thou uſeſt this ce­remony, and eates this bread, ſo aſſuredly Chriſt dwells in thee, and as thou entreſt this water, and art therein buried, ſo aſſuredly thou art made one with Chriſt, planted into his death, & thou art buried with Chriſt, and thou riſeſt with Chriſt, as thou riſeſt out of the water; every thing ſpeakes this, thou art Chriſt, and Chriſt is thine, and therefore ſuppoſes114 faith, which is the tye and the union on our part, and you ſee how curious Paul is Rom. 4. to proove, that Abraham vvas juſti­fied by faith, before hee received the ſigne of circumciſion, which was to him a ſeale of his faith, & his righteouſnes thereby, . 10.11. Hovv vvas it reckoned vvhen hee vvas in circumciſion, or in uncircumciſion? Not in circumciſion, but in uncir­cumciſion, and he received the ſigne of circumciſion a ſeale of the righteouſ­nes of the faith, vvhich hee had yet being uncircumciſed, &c.

We come now to deduct Co­rollaries from theſe differēces.

From the firſt,coroll. 1Then to the participation and uſe of the Sa­craments, the uſe of reaſon is115 neceſſary; our reaſon muſt be moſt buſy & active whilſt our ſences are ingaged, the hearing of the tone or ſound of the word ſpoken doth no good, there­fore wee preach it not to chil­dren or fooles, ſo the ſeeing of the coullors of things, to feele the water cold or hot, the touch or taſt is not the thing, but what the elements and ce­remonyes about it teach us, which muſt be diſcerned by the uſe of reaſon, in comparing the thing ſignified according to the Scripture application, & the proportion it holds, ſo as here is a knowledge of things already layd in, and reaſon in the act required. So the teach­ing116 by ſimilitudes or reſem­blances, doth not require leſſe reaſon, or leſſe the uſe of rea­ſon, but the advātage it brings, is, that by the mediation of ſe­verall ſenſes, it ſtrykes our rea­ſon differently & more ſtrong­ly; and God deſcends to that way of teaching, that he might more forcibly worke upon our reaſon, & ſpeake to it all man­ner of wayes.

From the ſecond,coroll. 2it is ſuppo­ſed the word ſhould go before, for that is the way of teaching by thinges of leſſer repreſenta­tion to things of fuller; when Iacob heard of Ioſephs meſ­ſage, he was mooved, but when he ſaw the Chariots, that affe­cted117 him exceedingly, that ſpoke a clearer language; it was fit the meſſage ſhould goe be­fore the chariots, ſo the word before the Sacraments.

From the third,coroll. 3ſee one pre­rogative the word hath, men may be ſaved by hearing with­out the Sacraments, to comfort thoſe that want them, but ſlight them not: Secondly ſee the order, firſt the word muſt be, as firſt the writing, for the Sacraments are but the appen­dix.

From the fourth,coroll. 4Then the word hath much a larger com­paſſe of motion then the Sacra­ments, and as the word may be where the Sacraments are not,118 ſo the Sacraments cannot be but where the word hath bene; for the word ſuppoſeth no­thing, but comes at aventure to every creature under heaven, but the Sacraments ſuppoſeth faith wrought already by the word; to make this playner, we muſt know that men are by nature children of wrath, by the diſobedience of Adam all vvere made ſinners, Rom. 5.19. And the Lord lookt dovvne from heaven, and ſavv that all vvere gone out of the vvay, vvee neither perceive nor knovv the thinges of God, 1. Cor. 2.14. And though the light ſhine in darknes, the darknes comprehends it not, and our carnall mind is emnity againſt God; our vvhole ſoule is filled vvith all un­righteouſnes,119 Rom. 8.7. and 1.29. Now while men are in their infancy, they lye onely expo­ſed to Gods inward and ſecret workes, if they belong to the election of grace, hee knowes how to deale with them, and worke wonderfully in wayes wee know not, nor can con­ceive of; ſo long wee cannot cōmunicate our ſelves to their ſoules at all, nor can reatch them any otherwayes then by our prayers, for all things are here ſecret, if there be a change wrought, it is more then wee know, or can conceive the manner of it. But when they come to yeares of underſtan­ding, and to be capable of ordi­nances,120 the firſt thing wee doe to them, is to bring them under the ordinance of the word, and to leade them into a right knowledge of themſelves, to convince them of their natu­rall eſtate, to preach to them converſion, repentance & faith in Ieſus Chriſt, that they may have life; when wee find this operate, and that by their pro­feſſion and by their workes, which is the onely way of evi­dencing their faith to others, they make it appeare they be­leeve, then we gladly goe one, and leade them into further ordinances, give them the Sa­craments to confirme them: & thus wee make things runne121 parralel as they muſt doe: There is an outward preach­ing of the word, there is a con­verſion and change of heart, made viſible by workes, and ſo a faith evidenced, and the vi­ſible and outward ſeales and markes are given them, to ſeale them up to themſelves and to others. Thus you ſee a natural­nes, a coherency, and a come­lines in things thus layd and ſtated, by which alſo as by a right rule, you may be help'd in diſcerning errours.

CHAP. VII. In which is layd downe the relative and per­ſonall qualifications by which infants are uſually intituled to Baptiſme, by our most conſiderable Proteſtant Divines.

122

BY what hath bene ſaid, wee have fully ſhewed the na­ture of Baptiſme, what is the proper and adequate ſubject of this ordinance, namely a be­leever, one qualified by the uſe of faith and reaſon, for the con­firmation & ſealing up to him by this great ordinance, his in­grafting into Chriſt and union with him by faith; ſecondly as an immediate fruit thereof, his juſtificatiō, of which we large­ly ſpoke, and alſo his adoption, by being conſecrated to the Father, Sonne and holy Ghoſt, and baptized in their names. Thirdly his ſanctificatiō, con­ſiſting in the death of ſinne, & the life of holynes, & as a fruit123 of that, and which cannot be ſeparated from it, his glorifica­tion, Rom. 6.8. Novv if vvee be dead vvith Chriſt, vvee beleeve vvee ſhall alſo live vvith him: To which on the other ſide, the party baptized puts his ſeale, and makes his ſponſion, to be to God and Chriſt in all thoſe re­lations.

But now becauſe it hath for a long time, and almoſt gene­rally obtained, that children ſhould be baptized, wee muſt conſider how they can pretend to theſe qualifications, what right they have, or by what title they hold it.

The right which the world gives them to it, is a right im­putative,124 a right derivative from Father to Sonne, a right of ſucceſſion, a birthright, this is that which they call a foede­rall holynes. Nor doe children onely clayme by this deriva­tive imputative title, but alſo thoſe who are adopted by Chri­ſtian parents, for as by adop­tion in Chriſt wee are rendred the children of God; ſo by the adoption of Chriſtian parents, ſuch are to be accounted for their children, as ſome argue. Ger. p. 582. Alſo thoſe who by lawfull meanes, as juſt warre, bargaine, gifte, fall into the hands and governement of be­leevers, and whom Chriſtians will anſwer for, that they ſhall125 for the future be inſtructed in the Chriſtian faith, and this appeares by divine inſtitution, they ſay from the parallell of circumciſion, ſince not onely Abrahams children, but his ſervants, & thoſe bought with his money, were circumciſed, Gen. 17.12. And hee that is eight dayes old, ſhall be circumciſed among you, every man-child in your genera­tions, hee that is borne in the houſe, or bought vvith money of any ſtranger vvhich is not of thy ſeede. This alſo ſome illuſtrate, & apply more particularly from that place Acts 2.39. For the promiſe is unto you and to your children, and to all that are afarre of, even as many as the Lord our God ſhall call; where126 they ſay Peter witneſſeth that the divine promiſe belongs to thoſe, which by reaſon of their birth are farre of; but by the wonderfull providēce of God, are called to that ordinance by lawfull meanes, ſuch as theſe before named, and Chamier, the great protectour of our reli­gion againſt Bellarmine (not to trouble you with what the Pa­piſts ſay) affirmes, that if our ſer­vants vvere truely ſervants, ſuch as Abrahams vvere, they then drevv a right from their maſters for Bap­tiſme; for vve read, ſayes he, that A­braham circumciſed all his ſervants, but ſuch ſervants as for the moſt part vve have novv a dayes; becauſe indeed they are free men, hee thinkes ſhould127 not be ſo handled; in the ſame capa­city hee thinkes to be alſo ſuch as by the right of vvarre are ſubjected to Princes, for ſuch kind of ſubjects alſo remaine free; which if it be true, and that that exception onely lyes againſt their Baptiſme, with all the great things it ſeals and conveighes to us, I ſhould much bewayle the loſſe of ſla­very to the Chriſtian world, ſince one good man by that te­nure might have made a hun­dred and a hundred infidels, by being ſubjected to one man, might have bene Chriſtians in a moment. Thus you ſee how farre they make the covenant extend, & indeed the parallell of circumciſion, carryes it128 ſtrongly, and for one as well as another; you ſee therefore that which qualifies for infant Bap­tiſme, is ſome good and perti­nent relation to a beleever; but if you aſke me now what deno­minates this beleever, and qua­lifies him for communicating this Chriſtian qualification. Chamier ſayeth, vvee allovv not all infants to be baptized, but thoſe onely of beleevers, that is of baptized per­ſons; So that as the Baptiſme in the parent qualifyes for bap­tiſme in the infant, Tom. 4. p. 270. Not to inlarge in this, the charity of the world is very great, and if Mr. Davenport mis­tooke not in his complaint in his writing to the Claſſis of129 Amſterdam, hee ſaith that there was required of him an unlimited baptizing of all in­fants, which were preſented in the church, of what nation or ſect ſoever, although that ei­ther of the parents were Chri­ſtians, were not otherwayes manifeſt, then by anſwering, Yea, at the reading of the litur­gie of Baptiſme publikely, or by nodding their head, or ſome other geſture, they ſeemed to be willing; Booke of com­plaints 1.2.

And that you may ſee this further cleare in the authority of a learned man, who ſpeakes not onely his owne judgement, but the judgement of other or­thodoxe130 with him; VValleus a reverend Profeſſor of Leyden, in his treatiſe De Baptiſ. infant. p. 494. ſaith thus: Quaeritur ergo de infantibus eorum quorum paren­tes ſunt impij, etſi nomine Chriſtia­ni, &c. It is demaunded concer­ning the children of them, whoſe parents are wicked, al­though Chriſtians in name, or whoſe parents are excommu­nicated, or whoſe parents are hereticks, or Idolaters, as the infants of Papiſts, Anabap­tiſts, &c. By way of anſwer hee allowes all ſuch children to be baptized; VVe thinke (ſaith he) that Baptiſme is not to be denyed to thoſe, qui ex ſtirpe ſunt Chriſtiana, which are of a Chriſtian ſtock,131 and which without an inter­ruption of a publike Apoſta­ſy from the faith, may referre their kindred to the faithfull, ſuch as in Chriſtian common­wealthes are thoſe procreated of Chriſtian and baptized pa­rents; onely he would not have them baptized againſt their parents conſent, becauſe they be their goods and poſſeſſion, and hee would have their pa­rēts, or thoſe which offer them to baptiſme, anſwer that they will bring them up in the Chri­ſtian profeſſion; vvhich if they doe, vve judge, ſayes he, that all infants, vvhich come from a Chriſtian ſtock, ſhould be baptized, if they be offered to baptiſme, according to the order of132 the Church, although their next pa­rents ſhould labour vvith unholines of life, or hereſy, or the crime of ido­latry. And this hee goes on to proove ſtrenuouſly (as well he may) from the manifeſt & per­petuall practiſe of the whole Church of Iſrael, in the admi­niſtration of circumciſion, which as in a maine propor­tion it helpes to the baptizing of infants, ſo it will help alſo to ſeverall ſuch conſequences as thoſe are; from this opinion ſo ſtated of the learned, and or­thodoxe, you may ſee that it is no ſuch great honour to be able to intitle infants to bap­tiſme, which is common to you with unholy perſons, with ex­communicate,133 and with Idola­ters: And ſecondly that it is an effect of great charity, to intitle the children of ſuch a paren­tage to regeneration, and the Holy Ghoſt: For to proceed;

Though now in the deriva­tive title for the chayne of Bap­tiſme, they all agree, that what ever title the child hath, comes by vertue of the fathers cove­nant, yet the immediate quali­fication is inherent in the in­fant; for they affirme that Chriſtian infants have repen­tance, faith and regeneration: The Lutherans are ſo much of this opinion, if you will beleeve Bellarmine Tom. 2. p. 294. f. that they beleeve that infants, vvhilſt they134 are baptized, uſe reaſon, heare the vvord of God, beleeve, love, vvhich as hee affirmes, vvas publikely determi­ned in the Synode of VVittenbergh An. 1536. Which as hee ſaith doth ſo openly repugne to the truth, as it doth injury to hu­mane ſence; for how is it cre­dible (ſaith he) that an infant, which cryes, and reſiſts what he can when hee is waſhed, or ſprinkled, ſhould underſtand what he doeth.

The Calviniſts and more or­thodoxe Divines receive it ge­nerally and aſſuredly, that in­fants bring to baptiſme, as their immediate qualification, rege­neration, faith, repentance, &c. though not actuall, or by way135 of declaration to others; they argue thus, If infants naturally are ſome way capable of A­dams ſinne, & ſo of unbeleefe, diſobedience, & tranſgreſſion, then Chriſtian infants ſuper­naturally and by grace, are ſomeway capable of Chriſts righteouſnes, and ſo of faith, obedience, and ſanctification; but the forner is true, therefore the latter: The conſequence they proove hence, that elſe they would not ſee the king­dome of God, Iohn 3.5.6. Ie­ſus anſvvered and ſayd unto him, Ve­rily, verily I ſay unto thee, except a man be borne of vvater and of the ſpirit, hee cannot enter into the king­dome of God; that vvhich is borne of136 the fleſh is fleſh, and that vvhich is borne of the ſpirit is ſpirit; but Chriſtian infants dying in in­fancy, ſhall ſee the kingdome of God, and not be damned; therefore they are borne a­gaine of the ſpirit, and ſo muſt needs in ſome meaſure have re­pentance, faith and holynes.

Againe they ſay, that if wee cannot object Gods worke in nature, but doe beleeve that our infants are reaſonable creatures, and are borne not bruit beaſts, but men, though actually they can manifeſt no reaſon nor underſtanding more then beaſts; then neither can we juſtly object Gods worke in grace, but are to beleeve that137 our infants are ſanctified crea­tures, and are borne beleevers, not infidels, though outwardly they can manifeſt no faith or ſanctification to us; Ainſworth pag. 49.50. whom I quote, as being by all acknowledged a learned man, & in this opinion wherein hee concurres as wee ſhall ſee with the ſtreame of our Divines, not to be ſuſpected.

The like to this ſaith Walleus de Bapt. Infant. p. 493. Infants are to be reckoned amongſt beleevers, becauſe the ſeede or ſpirit of faith is in them, vvhich ſome call a habit, others an inclination; from vvhence by degrees, through the hearing of the vvord, actuall faith is formed, ſometimes ſooner, ſometimes later. 138This in the next pag. 494. hee prooves, Becauſe elſe they vvould not be ſaved, Rom. 8.9. If any have not the ſpirit of God, he is none of his. And Iohn 3.5. No uncleane thing ſhall enter into the kingdome of hea­ven; but infants by nature are uncleane, & are purged by the blood of Chriſt, the kingdome of heaven belongs to them, & they pleaſe God, &c.

This is layd for a ground a­mongſt the Calviniſts concer­ning Baptiſme: That Baptiſme is onely a ſigne and ſeale of re­generation already wrought; Oecolamp. de verb. Dom. cap. 3. Aqua myſtica in Baptiſmo non regenerat, nec efficit filios Dei, ſed declarat; the myſticall vvater in Bap­tiſme139 doth not regenerate, nor make men ſonnes of God, but declares.

So Zwinglius, Baptiſmus non aliter Eccleſiae Chriſti ſignum eſt quam exercitus aliquis ſignatur, non quod ſignum hoc conjungit Eccleſiae, ſed qui jam conjunctus eſt, publicam teſſeram accipit. Baptiſme is the ſigne of the Church, as the enſigne of an army, it doth not joyne you to the Church, but it declares you joyned.

So Beza, Nihil obſignatur, niſi quod jam habetur; nothing is ſeald, but vvhat is there already; of this opinion is Calvin fully, as it were eaſy to quote him, ſaving that in anſwering the Anabaptiſts, he ſayth; This objection is anſvvered in a vvord, by ſaying that children are baptized into faith and repen­tance140 to come; actuall he meanes (for he addes according to the firſt opinion quoted) of vvhich though vvee ſee not the appearance, nevertheleſſe the ſeede is planted there by the ſecret operation of the holy Spirit; ſo as hee would have faith and repentance there in the habit, that God may not ſeale to a blanck, nor give a lying ſigne: The like ſaith Pemble, a late and able Divine, That vvhich is ſignified in our bap­tiſme, is our juſtification by the blood of Chriſt, and our ſanctification by the Spirit of Chriſt; Baptiſme is the ſeale of both unto us, and infants may be partakers of both, being vvaſht from the guilt of ſinne by the blood of Chriſt, in vvhom they are reconciled to God,141 and actually juſtified before him, and alſo purified in part from the un­cleanneſſe of ſinne, by the infuſion of grace from the Holy Ghoſt; vvhat then ſhould hinder, vvhy thoſe infants ſhould not be vvaſhed vvith the vva­ter of the Sacrament. So alſo Da­venant in his comment upon the 2. chapt. of the Coloſſians to quote no more, where confli­cting with the Anabaptiſts, he ſaith, As for infants becauſe they are not ſinners by their ovvne act, but by an hereditary habit, they have the mortification of ſinne, and faith, not putting forth it ſelf, but included in an habituall principle of grace: Novv that the Spirit of Chriſt can and doth ordinarily vvorke in them an habi­tuall principle of grace, no vviſe man142 vvill deny. From all thoſe teſti­monies wee may obſerve, that the cleare reaſon of the thing inforces men to allow as neceſ­ſary to Baptiſme in generall, the qualification of regenera­tion, faith, &c. how this now will fit infants Baptiſme, wee ſhall conſider hereafter; for the preſent wee joyne iſſue with them in theſe three things.

Firſt that a perſonall holynes, not derivative, or imputed one­ly, muſt be the ground of Sa­craments.

2 That this holynes muſt be regeneration.

3 That the habits of faith and repentance, are to be eſtee­med ſuch, I proove not theſe143 things, becauſe they are cleare in themſelves, and taken for graunted by thoſe already quo­ted, onely in theſe things wee joyne with them, and ſo farre agree together.

CHAP. VIII. In which are contained ſeverall queries and conſiderations, raiſed from the premiſſes, declaring what little ground there will ap­peare from their owne principles and con­ceſsions to conclude for Infant Baptiſme.

THeſe things thus ſuppoſed, I make theſe doubts about the baptizing of the infants of beleevers.

Firſt I would aſke whether all infants of beleevers have neceſſarily and aſſuredly thoſe habits, which muſt of neceſſity144 be concluded, ſince it is their perſonall qualificatiō for Bap­tiſme, and therefore you muſt have good grounds to judge that they have it, one as well as another. Firſt of all Peter Mar­tyr ſayes, that, I vvill be the God of thee, and of thy ſeede, is not an uni­verſall promiſe, but hath place onely in the predeſtinate; and therefore upon 1. Cor. 7.14. elſe vvere your children uncleane, but novv are they holy, he ſaith, Promiſsio non eſt ge­neralis de omni ſemine, ſed tantum de illo in quo rectè conſentit electio, alio­quin poſteritas Iſraelis, & Eſau fue­runt ex Abraham. And therefore affirmes, that the children of the ſaints are borne holy, vvhen they are predeſtinate; and this agreeth145 with reaſon, for if you make that holynes, as before, the in­fuſion of gratious habits, yee muſt ſuppoſe election without which ſuch gratious habits are never infuſed, unleſſe to make good this opinion, you will al­low falling from grace, which I am ſure our ſelves, and thoſe we deſire to ſatisfy, will not do.

This being ſaid, I would aſke upon what ground the Saints can ſuppoſe all their children to be elected, or why they ſhould deny any infants bap­tiſme, ſince experience tells us, that the children of many un­beleevers (if we will judge by the fruites and effects, which is the ſureſt judgement) are ele­cted,146 and many children of be­leevers reprobated; eſpecially now ſince the ſluce is taken up, & the Goſpel preached to eve­ry creature under heaven.

Againe conſider how cold a ground this is for infants bap­tiſme, your children are holy by being borne of you, that is, regenerated, and ſo qualified for ordinances, if at leaſt they be elected, and I ſeale to them their holynes & the kingdome of heaven, if they be elected; as if a King ſhould ſay, I confirme this towne to you and yours, if at leaſt it hath pleaſed me, or ſhall pleaſe me, to give it you.

But if you ſay, wee have rea­ſon to hope well of them, ac­cording147 to that, elſe vvere your children unholy, but novv are they ho­ly, for ſo ſaith Peter Martyr up­on that place, Bene ſperantes quod ut ſunt ſecundum carnem ſemen ſanctorum, ita etiam ſunt electionis divinae participes, & Spiritum San­ctum, & gratiam Chriſti habeant; Hoping vvell, that as they are accor­ding to the fleſh, the ſeed of the Saints, ſo they are alſo partakers of Divine election, and have the Holy Spirit, and the grace of Chriſt.

I anſwer, that if you will hope of them, you neede diſpaire of none, eſpecially where the ſound of the Goſpel is, and it is but ſtretching the line of your hope and charity a little far­ther, and you may baptize all.

148

Secondly it is not a hope you muſt goe upon for the gi­ving of ordinances, holy ſeales, but a judgement. Paul called the ſaints poſitvely faithfull and elect, and ſaid it vvas meete for him to judge and thinke ſo of them all; and when we come to admit mem­bers, if they give but onely ground of hopes, wee let them ſtay for their owne profit, and the diſcharge of our duty, till they can give us ground of a judgement.

Thirdly the Apoſtle ſayes poſitively they are holy, and therefore what ever holynes it is, it is no longer the ſubject of your hopes, but your judge­ment; yee ought to judge them149 ſo, & to aſſure your ſelves they are ſo.

If therefore by a generall conſent the infuſion of holy ha­bits depends upon election, we muſt conſider upon what ele­ction depends, before wee can make up a judgement; for the infuſion of habits, if that de­pends upon the holynes of the parents, you ſay ſome thing, but ſurely every honeſt heart will graunt, that as holy pa­rents themſelves, are both lo­ved & elected for Chriſts ſake, ſo God loves and elects their infant children, not for their ſakes, but both them and their children for Chriſt alone: and to make God conſider (as the150 object of childrens election) the faith of their parents, is worſe then the opinion of the Arminians, who make faith & workes foreſeene the object of every particular mans electiō; ſo as if election muſt precede the infuſion of holy habites, which muſt qualify for infant baptiſme; & experience ſhewes ordinarily (by the rules which Chriſt hath left us to judge by, the fruites and effects) that the children of godly parents proove not ever holy, and that the election of God for the child, depends not upon the holynes or faith of the parent, but upon his owne free grace in Chriſt: Then the judgement151 will ſeeme to riſe up very cold­ly and lamely for the Baptiſme of infants of holy parēts, which muſt, as themſelves confeſſe, be firſt qualified with the infu­ſion of holy habits.

But ſecondly, I would know of theſe men, why for the ma­king good of their infant Bap­tiſme, they ſhould determine God, ordinarily to an extraor­dinary way of working & con­verting (which is the infuſion of gratious habits in that age) for faith in the ordinary way comes by hearing; but this way of being borne Chriſtians, that is, charged and qualified with holy habits, is not by hearing, but by an immediate revela­tion,152 and in a way ſo extraordi­nary and ſtrange to us, that though we find cauſe to aſſent that it is ſometimes done, yet how it is done is a mighty mi­ſtery, & altogether unknowne to us.

And if you object that though this may be extraordinarie to men of age, yet it is a way of converting, ordinary to chil­dren, who are not capable of the other way.

Anſw. I am ſure that all men of age were children once, and wee find by the effect it is not ordinary to ſuch, for wee find them ſo farre from being borne againe, though borne of Chri­ſtian parents and baptized, that153 a great part of their life is often ſpēt in an unregenerate eſtate, and their converſion prooves very viſible & evident to them­ſelves and others, ſo as it ap­peares not to be the ordinary way of converſion, but at the beſt the extraordinary and par­ticular way to ſuch infants, as fall under election, and come not to that uſe of reaſon and underſtanding by which they might receive faith, by hea­ring: now certainly an extra­ordinary way of working, muſt never proove to be the ground or qualification of an ordinary adminiſtration. But then third­ly, I would aſke why this holi­nes, that is, this faith and con­verſion154 in infants, being wrought (if it be at all) in a hid­den ſecret and inviſible way, we ſhould ſeale it and confirme it to them, and conveigh alſo more of the ſame, by a ſenſible & intelligible ordinance; That it is ſo, wee are forc't to reaſon our ſelves into it, becauſe no uncleane thing ſhall enter into the kingdome of heaven, and therefore how it can be clean­ſed, and ſanctified, though wee know it not, yet wee ſuppoſe it is, if it be ſaved: Now it ſeemes ſtrange that that faith which we know not how to goe about to worke, or to beginne, yet we know how to ſeale, and how to confirme; we uſe to ſay thinges155 are preſerved and nouriſht as they are made, the way ſuppo­ſed to convert, is immediately from God, the way uſed to ſeale and confirme, this is mediate by an ordinance; the way of converſion is inviſible, myſti­call, ſecret; the way to ſeale it is evident, viſible and teaching; for the Sacraments conveigh to us, more concionis, after the manner of a ſermon. Now the underſtanding cannot be mo­ved, but by underſtanding, nor the eye but by ſeeing, nor the eare but by hearing; to ſay therefore that faith is ſealed, or faith is increaſed, by an out­ward teaching ordināce, which ſhall neither ſtryke our ſence156 nor our underſtanding, is very hard to receive; a man muſt have his underſtanding & his eares paved to heare ſuch a ſaying, and muſt of neceſſity have accuſtomed himſelf to diſgeſt many incongruites and contradictions, before hee can beare ſo notable and viſible an one.

Fourthly I would aſke what needeth this leaping over hed­ges, what needs all this hoſt; why cannot this child ſuppo­ſed to be elected, and conver­ted in a ſecret inviſible way (for without that you will not pre­tend to baptize him) reſt quiet­ly in that ſtate, in the armes of God, who onely can, and onely157 hath adminiſtred unto him, till hee ſhall come in a due ſeaſon, and to his beſt advantage, to have that ſealed to him, which ſhall be diſcovered to be in him; how long doe thoſe who are of age and are qualified for them, ſtay often without Sacra­ments, becauſe they would miſſe nothing of the order, ei­ther for want of a church ſtate, or a lawfull miniſter? Wee all know aſſuredly our children have reaſon, becauſe the ratio­nall ſoule is the forme of a man, (I would we could be as aſſured of their grace) and wee all pre­tend ſo much love to them, as to improove this principle, and inſtruct them timely in things158 for their good, for the uſe of this life and a better, and yet we ſhould account him a fond father that would lye lowing in his childrens eares, and looſe his ſweete words before the time of the uſe of reaſon come; I beſeech you cōſider whether it be not the ſame thing: If therefore we could be aſſured, that all childrē had that grace ſo timouſly infuſed, which wee can ſcarce hope for, yet how much better were it for the or­dinance ſake, which ſeemes otherwayes to be profaned (as much as if you ſhould preach a ſermon to a child) and for my childs ſake, to ſtay till hee un­derſtand what hee doth, and159 what he receives, that that or­dinance which ought to be ad­miniſtred but once, and is of ſo great an uſe and influence, may be received to his beſt advan­tage, whilſt in the interim, hee is in the hands of God fit, and expoſed to receive the preſer­vation of his ſpirituall being in the ſame way, in which it was wrought, and by thoſe unalte­rable bonds of election, & con­verſion, ſafe enough till he ſhal be capable of ſetting his ſeale and receiving Gods viſibly, to that, which in a ſecret and un­knowne way was wrought in him.

160

CHAP. IX. In which entrance is made into the conſidera­tion of the great argument for Infant Bap­tiſme, drawne from the circumciſion of In­fants, by way of anſwer whereunto five particulars are handled, the firſt whereof is treated on in this Chapter, namely what circumciſion was to the Iewes, and whether the qualification requiſite to it was regene­ration, or the infuſion of gratious habits.

HAving thus layd downe the ſtate of Baptiſme, and cōſidered ſeverall things about it, ſufficient for my owne ſatis­faction, and clearely alſo de­ſign'd the right ſubject of that ordinance, I come now (in or­der to a more full diſcharge of my ſelf to this controverſy, & for a more generall ſatisfactiō) to conſider the particular rea­ſons, by which the patrons of161 Infant Baptiſme would inforce it: The firſt whereof (& which ſeemes to be a great one) is that the ſeede of Abraham, with whom and whoſe ſeede God was in covenant, received or­dinances, and particularly cir­cumciſion, by vertue of their birth, and that wee being in­grafted into that ſtock, have power to derive a capacity of ordinances to our children, elſe the priviledges of Chriſtians, & the New Teſtament would be leſſe then thoſe of the Iewes & of the old Teſtament; which is not to be imagined; I take this to be the ſumme of that ar­gument, which ſeemes to carry the greateſt weight, & to ſpeake162 lowdeſt for Infant Baptiſme of any other.

Here divers things by way of anſwer are to be conſidered, firſt what circumciſion was to the Iewes, & whether the qua­lification required to it was re­generation, or the infuſion of gratious habits; for if not, then there will be found to be this great and eſſentiall difference, namely the qualification of the ſubject.

Secondly, what ever that ſhould proove; how far the or­dinances of the old Teſtament ſhould regulate & determine, by way of rule and inſtitution thoſe of the New; if not, then the parallel of circumciſion is163 not fit to beare the weight of an inſtitution.

Thirdly how we are ingrafted into Abrahams covenant, and by what tittle wee are called Abrahams children; for we are not to clayme the ſame things by different tenures.

Fourthly how far the Iewes, by vertue of their being Abra­hams ſeede, could pretend to New Teſtament ordinances, and if they by their birthright could not, then neither can we by any ſuch birthright, or car­nall generation.

Fifthly whether though In­fant Baptiſme, ſhould not be; the priviledges of Chriſtians & their churches might juſtly be164 ſaid to be as great or greater, then the priviledges of the Iewes and their Churches and ſtate.

For the firſt, I muſt profeſſe I am not Iew enough to under­ſtand the full drift of that ordi­nance, and although men are bold in commenting and in­terpreting all types and cere­monies of the old covenant, af­ter their owne apprehenſions, yet it is ſafe to be ſober, and to advance no further then the Scripture guides. This I am perſuaded of, that as they were formed particularly to that ſtate of the Iewiſh church, ſo they had meanes to underſtand them, for their comfort & edi­fication,165 to better advantage then we have, but it would not be hard to tell you, what ſome have thought, and perhaps to as much purpoſe as thoſe who are of a different opinion, for this notion received that the parallel of circumciſion muſt be the pillar of infant Bap­tiſme, hath (I am afraid) to much determined & ſtreight­ned the interpretation of that ordinance, & the places which ſpeake concerning it; Ambroſe upon the 4. of the Rom. ſaith, Circumciſio aliquid habet dignitatis, ſed ſignum eſt tantum, quod ſignum ideo accipiebant filij Abraham, ut ſcirentur ejus filij eſſe, qui credens Deo, hoc ſignum acciperet, ut aemuli166 eſſent paternae fidei. Circumciſion hath ſomething of dignity, but it is a ſigne onely, vvhich ſigne the children of Abraham did therefore receive, that they might be knovvne to be his ſeede, vvho beleeving in God, received this ſigne, that they might be emula­tors of their fathers faith.

Ierome upon the 3. of the Gal. ſaith, Becauſe Chriſt vvas to ſpring from the ſeede of Abraham, and many ages vvere to paſſe from Abraham to Chriſt; the vviſe God, leaſt the ſeede of beloved Abraham ſhould be mingled vvith other na­tions, and ſhould by degrees be joyned more familiarly, diſtinguiſht the flock of Iſrael by a certain marke, or circumciſion; then for 40. yeares to­gether in the vvilderneſſe none vvere167 circumciſed, becauſe they vvere out of the daunger of ſuch mixtures, being alone; but aſſoone as they vvere paſt the banks of Iordan, circumciſion prevented the error of mingling vvith others, vvhereas it is vvritten that they vvere circumciſed that ſecond time by Ioſhua, it ſignifies that cir­cumciſion ceaſed in the vvilderneſſe, vvhich vvas rationally uſed in Egypt.

The Apoſtle Rom. 4. doth not call circumciſion a ſeale of the covenant or promiſe, but of the righteouſnes of faith, which ſayes Origen upon this place, vvas to ſeale ſhut up, the righteouſnes of faith, vvhich in its time vvas to be revealed; that is, under the figure and types of that carnall cir­cumciſion was ſecretly ſigni­fied168 and vayled, the circumci­ſion of the heart, which is the true juſtification that Chriſt was to bring, or as Chryſoſtome, Theophilact and others, it vvas cal­led a ſeale of the righteouſnes of faith, becauſe it vvas given to Abra­ham as a ſeale and teſtimony of that righteouſnes, vvhich hee had acqui­red by faith; Novv this ſeemes to be the priviledge of Abraham alone, & not to be transferd to others, as if cir­cumciſion, in vvhom ever it vvas, vvere a teſtimony of divine righteouſnes: for as it vvas the priviledge of Abra­ham, that hee ſhould be the father of all the faithfull, as vvell circumciſed as uncircumciſed, and being already the father of all uncircumciſed, ha­ving faith in uncircumciſion, hee re­ceived169 firſt the ſigne of circumciſion, that hee might be the father of the circumciſed; novv becauſe he had this priviledge in reſpect of the righteouſ­nes vvhich he had acquired by faith, therefore the ſigne of circumciſion vvas to him a ſeale of the righteouſ­nes of faith, but to the reſt of the Ievves, it vvas a ſigne they vvere A­brahams ſeede, but not a ſeale of the righteouſnes of faith, as all the Ievves alſo vvere not the fathers of many nations. This appeares firſt, be­cauſe Paul joynes theſe two to­gether, he received the ſigne of cir­cumciſion, a ſeale of the righteouſnes of faith, that he might be the father of all that beleeve, vvhether circum­ciſed or uncircumciſed, ver. 11.12. Therefore all circumciſed170 have not the ſeale of the righ­teouſnes of faith, as they are not the father of all that be­leeve.

Secondly, this the Apoſtle may ſeeme to intimate, by di­ſtinguiſhing betweene a ſigne, and a ſeale, to ſhew that circum­ciſion was to all a ſigne, but to Abraham alone a ſeale of the righteouſnes of faith.

Thirdly though the Scrip­ture ſpeake often of circumci­ſion, yet it never calls it a ſeale, but here where it ſpeakes of A­braham, which intimates that it was onely a ſeale to him, elſe when Paul aſkes, vvhat advan­tage hath the Ievv, and vvhat proffit is there of circumciſion, and ſayes,171 much every vvay, Rom. 3.1.2. He ſhould (one would thinke) have mentioned this great advan­tage, that it ſhould be the ſeale of the divine promiſe, but this he mentions not at all; nor will it anſwer this (though that be the beſt I know given) that A­quinas ſeemes here to find a double queſtion, one, what ad­vantage hath the Iew, which is handled in this Chapter; the other, what proffit is there of circumciſion, which is han­dled in the 4. chapter; this hath to great an quietnes, rather as Muſculus ſayes upō that place, It is no daunger to vvhich member yee apply the anſvver, for the ſame thing is aſkt in both, for by circumciſion he172 comprehends in generall all Iuda­iſme, for aſmuch as the inauguration into Iudaiſme lay in circumciſion; So as what ever force there is in this probable reaſon (for it is no more) may ſtand good not­withſtanding this exception.

Fourthly, if circumciſion had bene the ſeale of the righteouſ­nes of faith to Infants, then an account of the righteouſnes of faith ſhould have bene requi­red in thoſe of yeares; to whom it was adminiſtred, but that ſuch faith was required or foūd in all, wee reade not; Abraham the ſame day circumciſed all, whether borne in his houſe, or bought with his money with­out any ſuch declaration, or173 demaund that wee read of; and Iſhmael, who was thirteene yeares old, & judged not with­in the covenant of grace, was alſo circumciſed; Of the Se­chemites alſo there was requi­red no profeſſion of faith to their circumciſion, which as a forme at leaſt would have bene required, if it hath bene judged neceſſary to that ſeale, and uſed by converted Proſe­lites, though Symeon and Le­vi, brethren in iniquity, were the miniſters of it.

To illuſtrate this conſidera­tion, let us ſee the great diffe­rence in the inſtitution of Bap­tiſme and Circumciſion, when Chriſt inſtituted Baptiſme, Goe174 teach, ſayes hee, and baptize, make Diſciples and baptize; and in the adminiſtration of the ordi­nance, they confeſſed and vvere bap­tized, they beleeved and vvere bapti­zed; but not a word of infants, who were not capable of this beleeving and confeſſion: But when the precept of Circum­ciſion was given, not a word of teaching, or faith, nor in the example find you any ſuch thing; but of infants you find the command moſt expreſly, for the time, for the age, for the ſexe.

To conclude, whereas ho­lines is required to Sacraments, the houſehold of Abraham, whether naturall, or adopted,175 were holy, but not ſo as to in­clude regeneration, or cleanes of heart, which is our holynes; but there was of uſe among them an Eccleſiaſticall, Levi­ticall, and typicall holynes, which amongſt us obtains no­thing; of creatures for food ſome were cleane & ſome un­cleane, and the land was holy and ſo was the fruit, the trees therefore were holy and to be circumciſed, Levit. 19.23. in ſuch a time and ſtate of the church, when things & actions tooke their denomination of ſinfull or holy, from ſuch out­ward and typicall conſidera­tions, when circumciſion was predicated of trees, as well as176 men; no wonder though in­fants were circumciſed.

The ſumme of all is this, that it is not eaſie for us to deter­mine diſtinctly of the nature and ſcope of the ordinances of the other covenant, that ſome have judged circumciſion one­ly a ſigne of the Iewes, diſt in­guiſhing and admoniſhing to good, but a ſeale to Abraham onely, who had righteouſnes of faith (as the Scripture calls it) to be ſealed, and who was of capacity to receive it. Though there be them, who have doub­ted, whether it ſealed any thing to Abraham, but his fa­therhood of the faithfull.

And then againe, it is won­dred,177 that the profeſſion of this faith ſhould never have bene required of thoſe of yeares, if it had qualified for this ordi­nance, and laſtly it is ſhewed, that there was another kind of holynes then of uſe & eſteeme in the church of God, namely, typicall, eccleſiaſticall and Le­viticall, which gave right and tittle to ordinances, which a­mongſt us hath no place, and therefore there will be found to be this great difference be­tweene theſe to ordinances the qualification of the ſubjects, which will farther appeare, in handling the third particular in this anſwer; to all which I ſhall add onely this one thing178 more, that if that be true which I have formerly diſcourſed a­bout Infant Baptiſme, that it cannot be neceſſarily conclu­ded that they have Baptiſmall qualifications, namely regene­ration, and that if they had, yet there were no juſt haſt for the ordinance of Baptiſme, but the contrary, then much leſſe can any ſuch qualifying regenera­tion and converſion be predi­cated of the infants of the Iews in the old covenant; and there­fore if that be the onely way, as it is, to pretend to Baptiſme, & our infants cannot pretend that way, then the Iewes infants muſt needs have ſome other qualification for circumciſion,179 then regeneration, and there­fore the ſubject of theſe ordi­nances differ greatly, namely in that which reſpectively qua­lifies them to be capable of thoſe adminiſtrations.

CHAP. X. In which is handled the ſecond particular, pro­poſed in anſwer to the argument drawne from Circumciſion, to wit, how farre the or­dinances of the old Teſtament ſhould reg­late and determine by way of rule and in­stitution thoſe of the New.

QVeſt. the ſecond, what ever ſhould become of the firſt queſtion, the next is, how farre the ordinances of the old Te­ſtament ſhould regulate & de­termine by way of rule and in­ſtitution thoſe of the New.

I anſwer nothing at all, eſpe­cially180 in the eſſentialls of it, a­mongſt which the ſubject of ordinances in the mayne qua­lification of it, muſt needes be accounted: Becauſe things be­come ordinances to us by ver­tue of a word of inſtitution, for­aſmuch as the efficacy & ener­gy of ordinances, hangs upon the will of God, not the reaſon of them.

There are certain neceſſary circumſtances about ordinan­ces that common reaſon will ſuggeſt, though the inſtitution ſhould not, as time and place, but by the ſame common rea­ſon, to add other circumſtan­ces, which in themſelves are not ſimply neceſſary, or by181 conſequences drawne from the ordinances of another co­venant, is to ſet our poſts by Gods poſts, & to be wiſe above what is written, and to be guil­ty of adding to the will of God, in that which is moſt purely his will, the ordinances of inſtitu­tion; And I beſeech you conſi­der whither this way of wor­king hath not brought in, if not all, yet as great & conſiderable errors into Popery as any: That a church is a foundation ordi­nance of the new covenant, we all grant, but ſayes the Pope as that of the old Teſtament was rationall, and but one in all the world, the truthes of God being then confined to a nar­rower182 compaſſe, ſo now ſince the Goſpel is preacht to every creature under heaven, by juſt conſequence the Church of God ſhould be univerſall and Catholike; and as then though there were many ſubordinate Prieſts and Levites, yet there was one high Prieſt, who ſate in power and place above all the reſt; ſo by juſt conſequence there ſhould be now a Summus Pontifex, a high Prieſt, a Biſhop of biſhops, who ſhould be the laſt object of appeales upon earth, and the great moderator under Chriſt, who both then was, and ſtill is, the inviſible head of the church. And if you ſhall object now that the New183 Teſtament gives no ſuch ex­tenſion to the Church, nor power to an univerſall Biſhop, that thoſe things were typicall and proper to that Teſtament or covenant (which is the ſame that is ſaid by thoſe who op­poſe the Baptiſme of Infants) they will not fayle as well as the patrons of Infant Baptiſme, to tell you, that beſides ſome little footeſteps they finde in the new Teſtament, this is par ratio, a like reaſon, a due conſe­quence, and good reaſon may be ſhewed that it is for the ho­nour and ſafety of the Church, that things ſhould be ſo admi­niſtred; Hence comes the orna­ments and veſtures of Prieſts,184 the holynes of Temples, and for ought I know the baptizing of bells from the circumciſion of trees, or what ever elſe a bold and preſumptuous heart may, under the title of juſt conſe­quence, intrude into the wor­ſhip of God; I confeſſe there are ſome things of common equi­ty, the rule of life was the ſame then that now, and the ſame Chriſt that now is, was the ſal­vation of the elect, ſuch things therefore as are of ſuch a com­mon nature, may be illuſtrated and inferred from one Teſta­ment to another, eſpecially a­mongſt thoſe that doubt of the new Teſtament, and the light of it, as the Iewes did, with185 whom our Saviour and the A­poſtles had to do.

But in inſtituted ordinances, the reaſon of which lyes in no­thing elſe, but a particular will of the inſtitutor, it is bold and unſafe to inſtitute above what is written in the new covenant, at leaſt in any eſſentiall thing, concerning either the parts of the ordinance, the manner of adminiſtration, and the ſub­ject of them, and it is further to imply an infaithfullnes, and an unclearenes in the new Teſta­ment, in things eſſentiall and neceſſary to the worſhip of it.

The ſumme is, that it is un­ſafe arguing from one inſtitu­tion to another, becauſe the in­ferrences186 and conſequences cannot be drawne from our reaſon, as not falling under the judicature of common light, or ſpirituall reaſon in the gene­rall, but of a particular diſtinct & independant will in Chriſt, from whence, not from the rea­ſon of the thing they draw all their vertue and efficacy, the reaſon that makes it good to us, being onely the impreſſion of his will upon it; but eſpe­cially this will take place in or­dinances of differing covenāts, for the ordinances of oath co­venant are fitted to the meri­dian of that covenant.

The rationallity of that church, the typicallnes of that187 which was called holynes and uncleanes amongſt them, the generality of the ſubjects, which were not onely men, women & children, but beaſts, birds and trees, their very gar­ments, their very land, to what alone is called holynes and ſin; now with the ſubject of it, ſhewes a great boldnes & pre­ſumption to force inſtitutions in the ſubject or any of the parts of them by a par ratio, or conſequence from this old, worſt, firſt, vaniſhing covenant, as the Apoſtle ſtyles it Hebr. 8. to this new, better, ſecond co­venant, as hee ſtyles that under which wee live, in the ſame place.

188

Now that circumciſion (though of uſe before the law, as Baptiſme was alſo before Chriſt) was the great ordināce of the Moſaicall law, as I could bring many places, if any doubt of it, ſo I will content my ſelf with one or two, Acts 21.21. They are informed of thee, that thou teacheſt all the Ievves vvhich are among the Gentils, to forſake Moſes, ſaying, that they ought not to circum­ciſe their children, neither to vvalke after the cuſtomes; where the prime inſtance of forſaking Moſes, was not to be circumci­ſed; that place more ſhall ſuf­fice Gal. 5.3. For I teſtify againe to every man that is circumciſed, that hee is a debtour to doe the vvhole lavv:189 The yooke of circumciſion they could beare, not the debt to which it obliged them, therefore that was the leading ordinance of another covenāt, namely the law; Now to make this mayne ordinance of the law, inſtitutive to us, as touch­ing a great eſſentiall in our Chriſtian Baptiſme, namely, the ſubject of it, is to make not onely one ordinance inſtitu­tive to another, of which no good accoūt can be given, but infinite and viſible inconve­niencyes follow, as wee have ſeene; but to ſend us to ſchoole to the old covenant, in that which was the leading, maine & diſtinguiſhing ordinance of190 it, which no good Chriſtian, I hope, will conſideringly admit of, eſpecially ſince we are ſo aſ­ſured of the ſufficiency and ſaithfullnes of our Law-giver Chriſt Ieſus, by whom we have grace and truth and vvho is the vvay the truth and the life to us, as well in the matter of his ordinan­ces, as in any other thing that concernes our duty, as that we need not turne aſide to other guides and teachers.

CHAP. XI. Wherein is diſcuſſed the third particular in anſwer to the argument drawne fom cir­cumciſion; ſ••. Hw we are ingrafted into Abrahams covenant, and by what title wee are call'd Abrahams children.

A Third conſideration is, how wee are ingrafted into191 Abrahams covenant, and by what title we are called Abra­hams children.

In the 4. Rom. 16. you have this affirmed, that Abraham is the father of us all; That place ſeemes to be underſtood of all beleevers, and therefore when hee ſaith in the ſame verſe, the promiſe is of faith, to the end that it might be ſure to all the ſeede; hee makes a diſtribution, Not to that onely vvhich is of lavv but to that al­ſo vvhich is of the faith of Abra­ham; as if hee ſhould ſay, this whole ſeede, to whom the pro­miſe is ſure, is either the belee­ving Iewes, or the beleeving Gentiles, which have no other pretence or clayme to the pro­miſe,192 but by a like faith, even as the Iewes alſo pretend to this fatherhood, no other way but by their faith; for ſo verſe 12. And the father of circumciſion to them vvho are not of the circumciſion onely, but alſo vvalke in the ſteps of that faith of our father Abraham, vvhich he had yet being uncircumci­ſed. It is not enough to be of the Circumciſion, but they muſt walke in the ſteps of the faith of Abraham, that is, beleeve as hee did, if they would pretend to the ſonneſhip wee ſpeake of, ſo as in this 16. verſe, the oppo­ſition is onely betweene the faithfull under the Law, & the faithfull under the Goſpel, ſo as the law and faith are not op­poſed193 here ſimply, but as cir­cumciſion was an adjunct, or no adjunct to faith, that is, as true beleevers were either of the Iewes or Gentiles, and ſo theſe words are not to be taken as the 14. verſ. If they vvhich are of the lavv be heires, faith is made voide, and the promiſe made of none effect. Here you ſee one father­hood, Abraham is the father of all beleevers, whether Iewes or Gentiles; So in another con­ſideration you have Sarah ſaid to be the mother of all good & obedient women, who are cal­led her children, 1. Pet. 3.6.

But beſides this, Abraham may be conſidered under the notion of another fatherhood,194 of which the Iewes were apt enough to bragge, namely a carnall generation, that they had Abraham to their father, as appeares by the reproofe that Iohn gave them, Mat. 3.9. Thinke not to ſay vvithin your ſelves vvee have Abraham to our father. Now in oppoſition to this fa­therhood, conſidered alone, is that added verſe 17. of 4. Rom. where the Apoſtle quoting the promiſe Gen. 17.5. I vvill make thee a father of many nations, adds this, before him vvhom hee belee­ved, even God, vvho quickeneth the dead, &c. As if he ſhould ſay, Abraham is the father of us all, not in reſpect of his carnall paternity, but of his ſpirituall,195 which is before God, vvhom hee be­leeved; it is ſaid to be before God, becauſe founded in faith, by which wee are commended to God.

He adds alſo, VVho quickneth the dead, and calleth thoſe things vvhich are not, as though they vvere; by which wee have all a pat­terne or glaſſe of our vocation, by which is propoſed a begin­ning or entry, not into our firſt birth, but into our hope of life to come, to wit, that when wee are called by God, wee goe out of nothing, as not having the leaſt ſparke or ſeede of good in us, which may render us ca­pable of the kingdome of God; but on the contrary muſt dye196 to our ſelves, that wee may be proper for Gods call, whoſe call is ſo effectuall, as a ſimple will of his or ſigne thereof, produ­ceth the greateſt and higheſt exiſtencies.

The like diſtinction of a double paternity & ſonneſhip, to wit, after the fleſh, and after the ſpirit, that is, by carnall ge­neration & by faith, yee have Rom. 9.6.7.8. Not as though the vvord of God hath taken none effect, for they are not all Iſrael, vvhich are of Iſrael, neither becauſe they are the ſeede of Abraham, are they all chil­dren; but in Iſaac ſhall thy ſeede be called, that is they vvhich are the children of the fleſh, theſe are not the children of God, but the children of197 the promiſe are counted for the ſeed. Where the Apoſtles intention is to make it appeare, that not­withſtanding the great defe­ctiō of the Iewes, yet the truth of the divine promiſe is not di­miniſhed, For they are not all Iſ­rael, ſayes hee, vvhich are of Iſrael, becauſe they are not the chil­dren of the promiſe, but of the fleſh, and can pretend title one­ly to Iſrael their father by a carnall generation, verſ. 7. Nei­ther becauſe they are the ſeede of A­braham are they children, that is, the like may be ſaid alſo of A­braham; It is not their carnall generation (of which they are apt to boaſt) that gives them a true notion of ſonneſhip, in re­ſpect198 of the ſpirituall promiſes made to Abraham (for ſo one­ly by faith they gave the title of Abrahams ſeede as before;) But in Iſaac ſhall thy ſeede be called; this he explaines verſ. 8. that is they vvhich are the children of the fleſh, thoſe are not the children of God, but the children of the promiſe are counted for the ſeede.

The ſence is, That promiſe of God made to Abraham, by which hee made ſo great a dif­ference amongſt his children, that, Iſhmael laid aſide and re­jected, onely the poſterity of Iſaac ſhould be called his ſeed; ſaying in Iſaac ſhall thy ſeede be called; teacheth us thus much, that neither they all, nor onely,199 are to be reputed for the true ſeede of Abraham, which ac­cording to the fleſh are iſſued from Abraham, but thoſe which are the ſonnes of the promiſe, that is, which are re­generated according to the ſpi­rit by faith, according to that promiſe, In thy ſeede ſhall all the nations of the earth be bleſſed.

Here you have a diſtinction as it were of two Abrahams, a begetting Abraham, and a be­leeving Abraham, and alſo of two ſeedes, the children of the fleſh, that is by carnall genera­tion onely, and the children of the promiſe.

This allegory hath its foun­dation in that which the Apo­ſtle200 ſaith Gal. 4.22.23. For it is vvritten, Abraham had tvvo ſonnes, the one by a bond mayd, the other by a free vvoman; but hee vvho vvas of the bond-vvoman, vvas borne after the fleſh; but he of the free vvoman vvas by promiſe; where hee affirmes that Iſhmael was borne accor­ding to the fleſh, but Iſaac ac­cording to the ſpirit; that is, he onely by a naturall power of generation, but Iſaac not ſo much according to the fleſh, but miraculouſly as it were, by the reſtoring of a generative vertue to Abraham, for the ma­king good of the promiſe.

Now, ſaith hee, thoſe one­ly, which according to that of which Iſaac was a type, are201 borne by promiſe, thoſe and thoſe onely are counted for the ſeede, Rom. 9.8. They vvhich are the children of the fleſh, theſe are not the children of God, but the children of the promiſe are counted for the ſeede. According to which is that which is affirmed Gal. 3.7.9. Knovv yee therefore that they vvhich are of faith, the ſame are the children of Abraham; and verſ. 9. So then they vvhich be of faith, are bleſſed vvith faithfull Abraham.

In the firſt of thoſe verſes, out of the former reaſonings, he bids them conclude & take it for granted, that not thoſe which are of workes, which hold by that tenure, but thoſe which are of faith, the ſame are202 the children of Abraham.

Againe hee perſtringeth the Iewes, who gloried in their car­nall generation, that they were Abrahams ſonnes according to the fleſh; the 9. verſe is a rea­ſon of the 8. where hee ſayes, that the Scripture (that is, the ſpi­rit that writ the Scripture) fore­ſeeing that God vvould juſtify the heathen through faith, preached be­fore the Goſpel unto Abraham, ſay­ing, In thee ſhall all nations be bleſ­ſed; that is, either in thy ſeede which is Chriſt, who onely is apprehended & made ours by faith, or (as many of the an­tients expound this place, and Calvine is of the ſame judge­ment) In thee, that is, according203 to the imitation and after the ſimilitude of thee: hee being, as Calvin ſayes, in this the pat­terne & rule of us all, and there­fore is called our father, as being the primitive patterne made by God; and this inter­pretation the words of the 9. verſe ſeeme to imply, So then they vvhich be of faith, are bleſſed vvith faithfull Abraham; which is an illation or inference of the foregoing reaſon: in this verſe the principall Emphaſis lyes in the word faithfull, where the former mentioned diſtin­ction is againe intimated, there is a begetting Abraham, and a be­leeving Abraham, it is with the beleeving Abraham, the faithfull204 Abraham, that all nations are bleſſed by being as hee was of faith; the word bleſſing how­ever diverſly taken in the Scrip­ture, yet here it is taken as Cal­vin expounds it for our adop­tion into the inheritance of life eternall.

Having therefore at large opened thoſe places, which give light to this cōſideration, & made good out of the Scrip­ture, that double fatherhood of Abraham, the one carnall by his begetting, the other ſpiri­tuall by his beleeving, there re­mayneth nothing to add, but this in a word, that we can pre­tend nothing of ſonneſhip to Abraham, by the firſt tenure,205 ſcil. of begetting, by which te­nure the Iewes partooke of cir­cumciſion, but by the other of beleeving, that is, after the example and imitation of A­braham, who, for that he ſo an­tiently and ſo eminently belee­ved in God, carryes the title of the father of all beleevers, who do the like, as Sarah his wife doth of the mother of good women; and this faith, not car­nall generation, is that that in­titles us to Chriſtian ordinan­ces.

And to make this laſt which is the ſumme of all, a little plai­ner, I ſhall add this, that by ver­tue of the parallel of circumci­ſion, that onely qualifies for or­dināces206 that is derivable from parents to their children by generatiō; for neither was Iſaac circumciſed, becauſe hee was borne after the ſpirit, nor Iſh­mael debard from it, becauſe as a type he was borne after the fleſh, but both the one and the other had it by vertue of their naturall and carnall genera­tion, by which they were made of the houſhold and family of Abraham: Now wee pretend­ing to be Abrahams children by faith, not by carnall genera­tion, cannot pretend to ordi­nances by carnall generation as the others did.

And ſecondly, foraſmuch as by carnall generation, wee our207 ſelves cānot derive faith, which is that which qualifies for our ordinances, therefore no fa­therhood of ours can derive a right for ordinances, unles wee underſtand ſuch a fatherhood as Paul pretended to, when hee calls Oneſimus his ſon, ſaying, Hee had begotten him in his bonds, Phile. 10. Or when he tells the Corinthians 1. Corinth. 4.15. Though yee have ten thouſand inſtru­ctors in Chriſt, yet have yee not many fathers, for in Ieſus Chriſt I have be­gotten you through the Goſpel; and ſo we may be the father as well of other mens children as of our owne: Now then if we can­not pretend to be Abrahams children, and ſo conſequently208 to partake of ordinances, by the way which the Iewes did, which was carnall generation, but by a way quite of another kind, namely a way of perſo­nall beleeving.

And ſecondly, if wee cannot pretend to a fatherhood to o­thers in deriving by carnall generation, the qualification of ordinances, which is faith, it muſt then of neceſſity remaine, that the Iewes partaking of cir­cumciſion by vertue of having Abraham to their father, and deriving that title to their po­ſterity, by the ſame way of car­nall generation, is no preſident or patterne to us, of either being Abrahams children, &209 ſo qualified for baptiſme, in ſuch a way, or of our deriving to our poſterity any ſuch quali­fication, either for that or any other ordinance by the like way of carnall generation.

And indeed in the Goſpell notion we all are children, and there is no father but Abra­ham; for to gayne the title of father, there muſt be either a generative power, which re­maynes onely in the ſpirit, of whom as Chriſtians wee are borne, Not of fleſh, nor of blood, nor the vvill of man. Or there muſt be the eminency of an example or coppy, and ſo wee uſe to ſay the firſt in every kind is the rule of the reſt. Now it hath210 pleaſed God to give this ho­nour to Abraham, who for the eminency and antientnes of his faith, is ſtyled by God, and will carry that title to the worlds end, of the father of us all.

Let us be content therefore to be children, and glory in that, and let Abraham injoy his priviledge; or if wee will needs be fathers alſo, let us imi­tate Paul, and be vve vvorkers vvith God, and labour in Ieſus Chriſt to be­get men through the Goſpel.

CHAP. XII. Wherein is handled the fourth Question, pro­poſed to anſwer the argument drawne from Circumciſion, to wit, How farre the Iewes by vertue of their being the ſonnes of Abra­ham, could pretend to new Teſtament Ordi­nances, wherein alſo, beſides ſeverall others, that much agitated place is opened & con­ſidered of, Acts 2.38.39.

211

FOurth Queſtion: How farre the Iewes, by vertue of their being the ſonnes of Abraham, could pretend to new Teſta­ment ordinances; and if they by any ſuch birthright could not, then nor wee, by any ſuch birthright or carnall genera­tion.

Firſt we will ſhew how farre they might pretend.

Secondly where the ſtop lay, and where they went equall with others. They had this great honour & advantage, that the Goſpel was firſt offered to them; the Iewes were brought neerer God then others, and therefore the advantage of the Ievv and circumciſion vvas much every212 vvay, becauſe to them vvere commit­ted the oracles of God, Rom. 3.1.2. And this kind of diſpenſation God pleaſed to continue in the promulgation of the Goſpel, & therefore Chriſtin his firſt miſ­ſion charged the Apoſtles, Not to goe into the vvay of the gentiles, nor into any city of the Samaritanes (which were as gentiles to them) but to the loſt ſheepe of the houſe of Iſrael, and preach the Goſpel to them, Matth. 10.5.6.7. This priority and advantage Paul mentions Rom. 2.10. Glory, ho­nour and peace to every man that vvorketh good, to the Ievv firſt, and alſo to the Gentile; and after the aſcenſion of Chriſt in Peters effectuall ſermon, which was213 crowned with the converſion of 3000 ſoules, he keepes this method Acts 2.38.39. Then Pe­ter ſaid unto them, Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Ieſus Chriſt, for the remiſsion of ſinnes, and ye ſhall receive the gift of the holy Ghoſt, for the promiſe is to you and to your children, and to all that are afarre of, even as many as the Lord our God ſhall call: In the way hee tooke to raiſe thoſe which were caſt downe, hee bids them, Repent and be bapti­zed, that was the thing to be done on their parts, for their reſtoring and raiſing, of which hee tells them the effects; firſt the great and mayne one, that they ſhould receive remiſſion214 of ſinnes, and as a conſequence and earneſt as it were of this, proper for thoſe firſt times, they ſhould alſo receive the gift of the holy Ghoſt, that is, whereas they were amazed and wonde­red to ſee this befall the Apo­ſtles, why, ſaith hee, it is not to us alone, but to you alſo, that the prophecy and promiſe of Ioel foremētioned . 16.17.18. is to be accommodated, yea to all who ever God ſhall call; but with this difference & by theſe degrees, that it is firſt to you which are Iewes, which are night, & then though you may wonder at it, to the gentiles al­ſo which are afarre of; and that you ſee in the event prooved a215 wonder, for it is ſaid Acts 10.45. that they of the circumciſion vvhich beleeved vvere aſtoniſhed as many as came vvith Peter, becauſe that on the Gentiles alſo vvere povv­red out the giftes of the holy Ghoſt. Now theſe gentiles are called afarre of, ſuitable to the expreſ­ſion of Epheſ. 2.13. Yee, that is, the gentiles, vvho ſometimes vvere farre of, are made night by the blood of Chriſt; where the ſame expreſ­ſions of nigh & farre of, are uſed that are here; now hee makes mention particularly of their children, (under which alſo he intends the childrē of the gen­tiles, when by calling they ſhould be made nigh) to ac­commodate to them more ful­ly216 the mentioned place of Ioel; as if he ſhould ſay, thoſe are the laſt dayes, when this promiſe verſ. 16.17.18. is to be fullfil­led, both to Iew and gentile, as a conſequence of their faith in the Meſſiah, that they ſhall re­ceive that eminent gift of the holy Ghoſt, as a badge of their profeſſion, & the glory of God, by which they ſhall be able to doe ſuch thinges as wee have done, but with this difference, that according to what is fore­told, the ſpirit will accommo­date and vent it ſelf proportio­nable to their ſtates and capa­city; ſome things are proper to old mē, they ſhall dreame dreames, others to young men, they ſhall217 ſee viſions, and according to the manner of their revelatiō, ſhall their gift be, and the venting of it by prophecy. But all, you and your childrē ſhall receive gifts of the holy Ghoſt, and ſo be made partakers of that illu­ſtrious promiſe: here therefore ye have that which might firſt and eſpecially comfort them, the remiſſion of their ſinnes, ſo as no man can object againſt Peter, for comforting them onely with giftes.

Secondly as a conſequence of this, and as Chriſt elſewhere ſaith, a ſigne of them that beleeve, they ſhall have the ſame gift of the holy Ghoſt, both Iewes & Gentiles (in their order) that218 the Apoſtles had, & this ſhould be juſt accommodated accor­ding to the prophecy of Ioel to fathers and children, to young men & old, according to their proportions and capacities for prophecy.

Now that by the gift of the holy Ghoſt, and ſo conſequent­ly the promiſe of Ioel, is meant abillity of ſpeaking tongues & prophecies, as it is cleare by the context in it ſelf, ſo accor­ding to the judgement of Cal­vin, who ſayes clearly, that this ought not to be underſtood of the grace of ſanctification, but of thoſe primi­tive gifts, vvhich though vve novv re­ceive not, yet vve have ſomething ana­logicall and proportionable to them.

219

Now as the gift was not the grace of ſanctification, ſo nei­ther the promiſe by which it is made ours, for all gifts are ours by promiſe, this is the generall judgement of expoſiters, Pro­teſtant and others, and is moſt cleare by Acts 10.45.46. where ſayes hee, they of the circumciſion vvhich beleeved, vvere aſtoniſhed, be­cauſe that on the gentiles alſo vvas povvred out the gift of the holy Ghoſt, for they heard them ſpeake vvith ton­gues &c. where the gift of the holy Ghoſt (the ſame words uſed that is here) is diſcribed by ſpeaking with tongues. Pe­ter therefore calleth them that were pricked at their hearts, & were weary and heavy laden to220 repentance, and Baptiſme in the name of the Lord Ieſus, that they might receive and have ſealed up to them the remiſſion of ſinnes, which was the great thing they deſired, as a ſym­bole and ſigne of which they ſhould partake alſo of the effect of that illuſtrious promiſe made in Ioel, and mentioned formerly, that they ſhould re­ceive the gifts of the Holy Ghoſt; ſo as nothing could be ſpoken more to the harts of di­ſtreſſed men then this, nor no­thing could more incourage them to repentance and Bap­tiſme, then the remiſſion of ſins ſealed to them in that ordi­nance, and yet more & further221 ſignified and ſealed by that fa­mous promiſe of extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghoſt, which for that time, Chriſt himſelf made a ſigne and effect of be­leeving to them that were nigh and farre of, that is, both to Iewes and Gentiles, and ſo you ſee the Iewes incouraged to re­pentance and Baptiſme, upon great, and noble, and moſt con­ſiderable grounds, with this di­ſtinction & difference, that the offer of all thoſe great things according to the way of God and the Goſpel, comes firſt to them, and after to them which are afarre of, that is, to the gen­tiles, who indeed were afarre of, being aliens and in the eſti­mation222 of Peter, ſo farre, that God was forced to give him a particular viſion, as you ſhall heare Acts 10. to perſuade him to looke upon them as thoſe nigh.

And thus wee have what the Iew as a naturall ſonne of Abra­ham may pretend to Baptiſme, and new Teſtament ordinan­ces, to wit, a priority in reſpect of the offer, whereby the way wee have taken occaſion to cleare that place that ſome have indeavored to bring to prove infant Baptiſme by, then which truely nothing ſeemes to be leſſe properly raiſed out of it.

The next conſiderable thing223 is, where the ſtop lyes, & where the Iewes goe equall with o­thers. Now for that wee will conſider that place of Matt. 3. chap. ſ. 7.8.9. VVhen hee ſavv many of the Phariſees and Sadduces come to his baptiſme, hee ſayd unto them, O generation of vipers, vvho hath vvarned you to flee from the vvrath to come? Bring forth there­fore fruites meete for repentance. And thinke not to ſay vvithin your ſelves vve have Abraham to our fa­ther, for I ſay unto you, that God is able of theſe ſtones to raiſe up chil­dren unto Abraham. The Phari­ſees and Sadduces, men (eſpe­cially the Phariſees) ſtrict in their religion, come many of them to Iohns Baptiſme, upon224 this pretence and clayme, that they were deſcended from A­braham and were his children; that they come in this confi­dence and pretence, was mani­feſt by what Iohn ſaid unto them: Luke hath it Luk. 3.8. Begin not to ſay vvithin your ſelves, that is, doe not take this ſubter­fuge, to oppoſe to repentance, & change of heart, which one­ly qualifies for Baptiſme, that you have Abraham to your father, Matthew ſayes, thinke not to ſay vvithin your ſelves, which notes a perſuaſion of a prerogative of carnall generation, that you have Abraham to your father; ſuch carnall and birth prero­gatives ſtand you in no ſteed in225 this covenant, for of theſe ſtones God can raiſe up children to Abra­ham; that as when Iſaack was borne, who was the ſonne of promiſe, Abrahams body and Saraas wombe were dead as a ſtone; ſo thoſe which are now to be accounted the ſonnes of Abraham, God can raiſe from nothing, evē from ſtones, from the gentiles, which you deſpiſe, and for their hardnes, and di­ſtance, not in place, but in the knowledge of God, are as ſtones; of ſuch can God raiſe children to Abraham; for the ordinances I pretend to are not bottomed upon carnall ge­neration, or priviledges, but thinges of another nature, na­mely226 true holynes, which is ſeene and manifeſted by the fruit it brings forth; Bring forth therefore fruit meete for repentance.

The next place conſiderable to this purpoſe is that Iohn, where hee ſhewes that this ex­cellēt perſon the ſonne of God, that came to bring life & light, was rejected by the world, and after by his owne, not onely the vvorld vvhich hee had made, and in which he had ſhewed great & ſufficient evidences of himſelf, knevv him not, (by which the mi­ſerable blindnes of corrupt na­ture appeares, they can doe no­thing ſpirituall, but by a light of another kind then theirs is, to wit, ſpirituall and divine) But227 vvhen he came to his ovvne they recei­ved him not. The people of the Iewes were his peculiar; hee vvas in the vvorld, but hee came to them, that is, firſt hee preſented him­ſelf to them, they received him not, that is, though he were offered and ſhewed, they tooke him not to them, which ſhewes a great deale of mallice joyned to blindneſſe, by which they reſi­ſted the holy Spirit, offering to inlighten them by words and miracles; But leaſt Chriſt ſhould ſuffer as a perſon gene­rally neglected and ſlighted, he tells you Chriſt came not in vayne, there were thoſe that re­ceived him, and made much of him, As many as received him; for228 now the hedge was pulled up, the partition wall brokē down; thoſe he magnifies wonderful­ly, they had this povver, that is, this dignity, this priviledge, as in the margent, given them to become the ſonnes of God; that is, though they were ſtrangers, and afarre of naturally, yet the honour of adoption was given them, to be made, & be the ſonnes of God. If you aſke now, but what was this receiving, or how came this about? Hee tells you this was effected by faith, by belee­ving in his name.

But now whereas the faſhion of this world in adopting chil­dren, is to reſpect either the greatnes of their birth, or the229 excellency of their parts, or ſome glory of their actions, he tells you, nothing of all this mooved God, but his meere grace and will; which provo­ked him to doe this great good to the vyldeſt and unworthieſt, for ſayes hee, thoſe vvere borne not of bloods.

The Iewes pretended the dignity of their race, that they were the ſeede of Abraham, & becauſe they drew their origi­nall from Abraham, by a ſeries of many ſucceſſions, & ſo they were more noble by their anti­quity, therefore he ſayes, bloods; this blood (ſaith he) did them no good, and by conſequence the carnall generation from230 godly and juſt parents, will doe no good (ſimply conſidered) to intitle us to become the ſonnes of God, or conſequently to the ordināces, which ſeale up that ſonneſhip; therefore they vvere borne not of bloods, nor of the vvill of fleſh, nor of man, that is, no free­will, no reſolutions, no mo­rall indeavours, though they ſhould ingage never ſo much, can effect this birth; Nor the vvill of man, no heroïcall workes, no excellency or dignity can ef­fect this adoption, this title, but onely God; this proceeds onely from the will of God, Iames 1.18. Of his ovvne vvill bégate he us, by the vvord of truth, which (by the way) ſhould cauſe us to love231 God, who finding nothing in us, hath ſo freely loved us.

Here you ſee in the ſecond place, that in reſpect of adop­tion and ſonneſhip to God, of which baptiſme is eſpecially & in the firſt place a ſeale, the birth of bloods, the deſcending of ſuch parents, whether Iewes or gen­tiles (ſaving for the order of the offer as before) doth no good, but wee all in that matter lye open & expoſed to the free will and grace of God, ſo as whē a Iew comes to baptiſme, he muſt come even as wee, and bring other characters with them, then of having Abraham to his father, if hee will pretend to this, or any new Teſtament ordinance.

232

The equality in this reſpect will appeare by that place alſo of Acts 10.34.35. Then Peter ope­ned his mouth and ſaid, Of a truth I perceive that God is no reſpecter of perſons: But in every nation hee that feareth him, and vvorketh righteouſ­neſſe, is accepted vvith him. God ſee­med formerly to have bene a reſpecter of perſons; ſome men, as ſome meates, were borne cleane, inſomuch as circumci­ſion & other ordinances were their due as a birth-right, thoſe which were Iewes by nature were holy, and thoſe that were gentiles, that is by birth, were accounted ſinners; now this acception of perſons, was not a vice in God, contrary to di­ſtributive233 juſtice, becauſe God was not obliged to diſpenſe his ordinances as in any certain manner, ſo nor to any certain men, or to all in generall, be­cauſe no man had right to them, or could merit them at his hands; but hee is free, as a rich man at a doale to give to whom he will, or a King to his ſubjects, ſo as the acceptance of perſons in this ſence was once juſt and according to the will and pleaſure of God; But now Peter was taught by God, by the meanes of the viſion hee had ſeene, to admit men to or­dinances upon other conſide­rations, then legall denomina­tions of cleane, or uncleane, na­mely,234 upon fearing of God, and vvor­king righteouſnes, and no other, which is a thing not generated and conveighed by birth, but by the new birth, and the ſpi­rit of the living God: Now this Peter expreſſes, I perceive of a truth, the word ſignifies, to ga­ther or collect by reaſōs, ſignes and conjectures, as Calvin ex­pounds it, to wit, the ſignes hee ſaw before, viz. that of the veſ­ſell verſ. 11. Now then you ſee new qualifications to denomi­nate a man accepted of God, & qualified for ordinances, & this in this covenant and way of worſhip was common to both, without any difference, for ſo you have it Acts 15.9. And put235 no difference betvveene us and them, purifying their harts by faith; the purity is not by birth as for­merly. Thus you ſee the Iewes come to Baptiſme, and be cal­led the ſonnes of God, not by their pretention to Abraham for their father, nor for the ho­nour and advantage of their deſcent and blood; And the Gentiles they were admitted without any conſideration of perſons, or perſonall preroga­tives in reſpect of their birth, but upon their fearing God, & working righteouſnes, and ha­ving their hearts purified by faith; therefore the old way & advantage of birthright, and in that reſpect of accepting of236 perſons, is ceaſed long agoe on both ſides alike.

To conclude in a word, all birth priviledge is by the title of Abrahams covenāt, if there­fore the naturall ſeede of Abra­ham could not at all pretend to new Teſtament ordinances a right by that title, much leſſe the adopted ſeede by any ſuch way of naturall generation; but if you ſpeake of the ſpirituall ſeede and heires according to promiſe, then they and we pre­tend both alike in new Teſta­ment ordinances, with this dif­ference onely, to the Iew firſt and then to the Gentiles.

237

CHAP. XIII.

Wherein is handled the fifth and laſt queſtion in anſwer to the argument drawn from cir­cumciſion, ſcil. whether Infants not prooving the ſubject of Baptiſme, the priviledges of Christians and their ſtate, may not juſtly be ſaid to be as great as the priviledges of the Iewes and their ſtate.

QVeſtion 5. Though infants ſhould not proove to be the ſubject of Baptiſme, yet whe­ther the priviledges of Chri­ſtians and their ſtate, may not juſtly be ſaid to be as great and greater then the priviledges of the Iewes and their ſtate.

No man is willing to looſe by change, and our children are ſo great a peece of us, as that what they looſe, wee feele.

It muſt firſt be affirmed that the Iewes had this peculiar ho­nour238 proper both to their per­ſons, and the land of their ha­bitation and dwelling, their Temple alſo & other ordinan­ces, that they were types of thinges to come, and in that re­ſpect were many thinges per­formed by them, and many thinges predicated of them, which elſe would not have beene, as the land was holy but typically, and the Temple holy but typically, and all the inha­bitants of all ages and degrees, unleſſe under a particular defi­lement and uncleanneſſe, were denominated holy, but typi­cally alſo.

Now what ever was a type in that wherein it was a type,239 whether perſons or ordinan­ces, &c. of all ſuch things as types, it may be affirmed.

Firſt that they are inferiour to their antitypes, that is, to the thing figured, or ſhewed by them.

Secondly that they are not true in themſelves, being a ſha­dow of thinges to come, but in the body or truth, which they figure or type out.

Thirdly that when the anti­type, or truth is fullfilled, or performed, the type ceaſeth; now it ſeemes to be agreed by all hands, that not onely places and perſons, ceremonies and events, were types, but the Sa­craments of the Iewes and for­mer240 times, were types and ſha­dowes of our Sacraments, not to inſtance in any but in cir­cumciſion, as relating to & ty­piſing out Baptiſme, which is agreed on all ſides to be a type of our baptiſme, yea, ſo far ſome urge it as a type, that they would therefore have infants baptized, becauſe infants were circumciſed, the antitype being to anſwer the type; but upō how great a mis-take they ſo urge it, we ſhall ſhew hereaf­ter, when wee ſhall make that manifeſt, that a great reaſon of the difference and not bapti­zing infants of beleevers, ari­ſeth from the conſideration of the typicalnes of circumciſion:241 for the preſent though it be ge­nerally graunted, yet wee fur­ther make it manifeſt to be a type of Baptiſme by exami­ning that place Coll. 2.11.12. In vvhom alſo yee are circumciſed vvith the circumciſion made vvithout hands, in putting of the body of the ſinnes of the fleſh, by the circumciſion of Chriſt, buried vvith him in bap­tiſme, vvherein alſo you are riſen vvith him through the faith of the operation of God, vvho hath rayſed him from the dead. In this ſecond chapt. Paul ſeemes to contend with divers impugners of Chri­ſtian religion, vſ. 1. For I vvould that you knovv vvhat great conflict I have for you; and firſt verſ. 4. hee contends againſt oratory and242 inticing words, by which their hearts might be led away and ſeduced; And this I ſay, leaſt any man ſhould beguile you vvith inticing vvords, &c. then verſ. 8. hee ar­gues againſt Philoſophers, as a vayne deceit; who would judge of the thinges of Chriſt by the elements or rudiments of the world, for none of thoſe things extend themſelves to the my­ſteries of Chriſt, which wee hold by faith, and therefore Philoſophicall demonſtrations any farther then they are pro­portionable to the analogie of faith, are extreamely deceit­full, and to be bewar'de of.

In the third place hee con­tends againſt thoſe who labou­red243 to retaine Iewiſh ceremo­nies and types, verſ. 10.11.12. And yee are compleat in him vvhich is the head of all principalities and povver, in vvhom alſo yee are circum­ciſed vvith the circumciſion made vvithout hands, in putting of the body of the ſinnes of the fleſh by the cir­cumciſion of Chriſt, buried vvith him in baptiſme, vvherein alſo you are ri­ſen vvith him, &c. For here hee ſhewes that circumciſiō, which was the profeſſion of the whole Law, was fullfilled as a type or figure to Chriſtians by Chriſt in Baptiſme, and therefore that was to vaniſh away, as types ought to doe, when they were fullfilled; therefore hee ſhewes how wee are circumciſed in244 Chriſt, which is ſealed and ef­fected by Baptiſme; firſt it is without hands, which the le­gall circumciſion was not, as Baptiſme in ſome ſence may be ſaid alſo to be, God being the great Baptizer.

Secondly this circumciſion doth not deprive you onely of a little ſkin of the fleſh, which was typicall, but of the whole body of ſinne.

Thirdly this is not the cir­cumciſion of Moſes, or of the fathers, but of Chriſt, for onely Chriſt can effect this.

Laſtly all this is ſealed to us and made ours by Baptiſme, by Baptiſme is effected this cir­cumciſion, in which we are aſ­ſimulated245 to Chriſt, buried & riſen againe, and are ſealed one with him in our death to ſinne and life to holynes, ſo as Bap­tiſme is Chriſtian circumci­ſion, and then we are ſaid to be circumciſed with the circum­ciſion of Chriſt, when wee are rightly baptized.

Now therefore if circumci­ſion be a type of Baptiſme, as it is acknowledged and prooved, then examine it by the former properties of a type.

And firſt if circumciſion be a type of Baptiſme, then it is in­ferior to Baptiſme, as types are to their antitypes, of which they are ſhadowes and figures; But if Baptiſme be to be admi­niſtred246 for a ſeale and ſigne in infancy, as circumciſion was to teach and inſtruct hereafter, then on the other hand their priviledge was far above ours, who carryed a marke in the fleſh, viſible and ſenſible, by which they knew aſſuredly they were circumciſed, where­as that any of us have bene ſprinkled or dipt in infancy, we muſt receive by a humane faith, having never our ſelves ſeene it, nor no markes to ſhew it us, or convince us of it; and it may well fall out, that no bo­dy may be able to aſſure us of it neither; ſo as that ceremony may well not worke upon us with any power, of which wee247 have ſo little aſſurance, whe­ther it have bene adminiſtred to us or no.

Beſides that a man had a Iew to his father, was the aſſured qualification for circumciſion, which a man might know as well as his owne father; but for Baptiſme I muſt beleeve my parents was godly, if I will be aſſured of my qualification, which ariſeth from the faith (as they ſay) of one parent, (for it will not now goe downe ſo ea­ſily as it hath done, that a pro­feſſion of Chriſtianity onely at large will qualify for deriving right to Baptiſme) now this is a thing which poſſibly may be very hard for me to aſcertain248 from my owne knowledge, or the knowledge of any others, but perhaps I muſt be put to diſpute as well my right to bap­tiſme, as the matter of fact that I had it, which yet according to the right notion of that ordi­nance, is to be the riſe of much comfort and inſtruction to me.

After all this conſider how weakely will the operation of ſuch a ceremony or ſigne fall upon me, where in there will be need of faith to beleeve that I had right to it, or that I had it at all. Now then if the type be inferior to the antitype, wee muſt never allow it great and eſſentiall ſuperiorities, as it would certainly have, if infants249 were to be baptized, as former­ly they were circumciſed; this therefore according to what hath bene ſaid, not being poſſi­bly to be avoyded, that if in­fants be to be baptized, they will fall below in ſuch Bap­tiſme the priviledges and ad­vantages of circumciſiō, which is contrary to the nature of a type, it muſt then follow that therefore they are not to be baptized, and therefore bap­tiſme was never intēded them; this being moſt aſſured, that it farre excells that of the Iewes, as the antitype doth that which typifies it, and figures it out.

Secondly it is affirmed of250 types that they were not true in themſelves, being a ſhadow of thinges to come, but in the body or truth which they fi­gure or type out, ſo the ſcape goate, the Paſcall lambe, &c. apply this from circumciſion of infants the type to the anti­type baptiſme, with its ſub­ject; the infants generally of the Iews no more then the land were not truely and properly holy and ſaintes, but types of ſuch, the adminiſtring it to males of ſuch an age, and to males onely, ſhewes as much, when as it might have bene adminiſtred to women, as Pe­ter Martyr affirmes out of Am­broſe, the Egyptians doe, and251 the Iacobites, a certain ſect of Chriſtians inhabiting Cyprus, Syria, &c. in great numbers, & others doe to this day; Now had it not bene for the types ſake, what probable reaſon can be given, why women, who muſt be acknowledged within the covenant as well as men, ſhould not be circumciſed, which they were capable of, as appeares by what is recorded of fact, for what is done by whole nations & people, might have bene done by Gods com­mand, or the Lord could have pitcht upon another ceremo­ny, which would have fitted women in the adminiſtration of it, if that would not; But as it252 is acknowledged that circum­ciſion typified Baptiſme, ſo the ſubject of the one the ſubject of the other, to wit, a male a be­leever, or one who is in Chriſt the ſonne of God: Therefore baptiſme is better thē circum­ciſion, and our ſtate better then theirs, though infants have it not; nay the betterneſſe lyes in this, that by baptizing belee­vers, ſo knowne and received, we have the ſubſtance of what they had but in the ſhadow & type, to wit, a male infant, the ſubject of that ordinance, we a beleever the ſubject of ours.

The third thing predicated of types is, that when the anti­type or truth is fullfilled and253 performed, the type ceaſeth: Apply this to the caſe of cir­cumciſion and baptiſme: The Lord now making up his chur­ches of ſaints really ſo and no other (as farre as we can judge by the rules he gives us to judge by) thoſe who by vertue of their typeſhip were accounted holy, and the ſubject of ordi­nances, to wit, a certain gene­ration of men and their infants are now no more to be eſteem­ed ſo, nor is any thing to ſuc­ceed, or come in place of ſuch an adminiſtration, but that which is the truth & ſubſtance of it, to wit, beleevers, and ſuch as in whom Chriſt is formed, which the other ſeemed to ty­pify254 and ſhadow; and to doe otherwayes, were to bring your ſelves to the beggarly admini­ſtrations of types and ſhadows, when you have the ſubſtance and antitype, out of a deſire to goe equall with the Iewes in priviledges, whereas in this way propounded, ye are infi­nitely above them.

To conclude out of what hath bene ſaid, their ſtate had the honour of the type, ours of the antitype, they of the ſhadow or figure, but we of the body; our childrē no more then our land or temples, hold out ſhadowes of things to come: In the meane time wee have Chriſt amongſt us, and are his temple; wee have255 the body, Coloſſ. 2.17. others were a ſhadovv of thinges to come, but the body is of Chriſt. And Heb. 10.1. The lavv had a ſhadovv of good thinges to come, and not ſo much as the image of them. And our con­dition being not to hold out types and figures, our infants have no ſuch adminiſtration uſed to them, as formerly the Iewes had in an age whē it can proffit them noe otherwiſe, but in making them types. And if this be an unhappynes, ye may as well count it an unhappynes that our land is not typicall, or our temples or dayes of wor­ſhip: But wee have Chriſt a­mongſt us for our ſeede, as well as for our ſelves. And conſider256 this that by all that is ſayd, wee reject no promiſes made to the children in conſideration of Gods love, or affection to their parents; but we imbrace them, and expect, & pray for the full­filling of them, onely wee doe not by precipitating the admi­niſtration of an ordinance to our children, beyond the inſti­tution and before the time of it, render that which is inten­ded for ſo much comfort and uſe, both unproffitable & un­comfortable to them, and aſſi­mulate them to the pedagogy and ſimilitude of types.

And laſtly that we may looke upon this in the glaſſe of other thinges, no man holds the con­dition257 and ſtate of our Mini­ſters leſſe bleſſed, then that of the Iewiſh church, yet the Prieſts & Levits then had this peculiar, that their ſtate was ſucceſſive, and derived from father to ſonne, which ours we know is not. And not onely ſo, but their church ſtate alſo was ſucceſſive, a man was borne a member of the Iewiſh church, & by his birthright had a title to all church ordinances, as his age made him capable of them, but the children of Chri­ſtians however they are bapti­zed at aventure, yet not onely many churches we take notice of now a dayes, as pretending to a more ſtrict reformation,258 require alſo a perſonall & par­ticular admiſſion, for the inſta­ting them into the Church as members, but others alſo (and thoſe particularly of the uni­ted Provinces) doe the like, not onely in relatiō to the children of Chriſtians, ſtrāgers to them, but to thoſe borne of their own members; Since therefore nei­ther our miniſtry, nor our church ſtate ſuffers, in wanting the power of deriving mini­ſters or members, by way of ſucceſſion, it ſhould leſſe ſtick with any that they cannot de­rive a right to Baptiſme to their children that way; on the other ſide, wee ſhould glory in our priviledges, and thinke our259 ſelves more then recompen­ſed, that in ſteed of the honour of types, which is a thing com­mon to men, with beaſts and countries, we have the body & ſubſtance of that, of which in old time they had but the ſha­dow, and not ſo much as the image, Heb. 10.1.

CHAP. XIV. In which is conſidered that famous and much urged place of 1. Cor. 7.14. Elſe were your children uncleane, but now are they holy.

HAving thus largely vindi­cated this great Goſpel or­dinance, from thoſe objections that the parallell of Circumci­ſion ſeeme to make againſt it, in the adminiſtration of it to an actuall beleever onely, and by260 the way cleared divers places that uſe to be debated in this argument, & particularly that of 2. of the Acts 38.39. Reaſon & good manners require, that that famous and much urged place of 1. Corint. 7.14. ſhould have its turne for cōſideration, to it therefore we now addreſſe our diſcourſe, the words are theſe, For the unbeleeving huſband is ſanctified by the vvife, and the un­beleeving vvife is ſanctified by the huſband, elſe vvere your children un­cleane, but novv are they holy.

The great drift of this place ſeemes to be to exhort belee­vers to abide in that calling or condition, wherein religion finds them, & to informe them,261 that that laide no law or neceſ­ſity upon them, of a change, verſ. 20. Let every man abide in the ſame calling vvherein hee vvas called; art thou called being a ſervant, care not for it, &c. In which verſes he gives an account and ſatisfa­ction to ſervants, which he had done before to maried perſons, concerning the communion of man and woman for the uſe of the bed; there were two thinges which ſeemed eſpecially to render it uncleane and unho­ly, both in reſpect of the parties themſelves, and of the iſſue of their bodies, one was the pol­luting of the marriage bed by adultery; therefore God made one man and woman, that there262 might be a holy ſeede, when he had abundance of the ſpirit, and could have made more, that the converſe might be holy, that is, within thoſe bounds & limits, and their ſeed holy, that is, not ſpurious and baſtardly, Mal. 2.15.

The other was the being un­equally yoaked with unbelee­vers and Idolaters, which a­mongſt the Iewes rendred the mariage and the fruit of the wombe ſo uncleane and unho­ly, that there was to be a ſepa­ration and devorce betweene the huſband and the wife, and the children alſo of ſuch births were to be put away as unholy, as appeares Ezra 10.2.3.

263

And that the courſe of the Apoſtles doctrine was againſt this unequall yoaking with un­beleevers, appeares by what he ſayes 2. Cor. 6.14. Be ye not un­equally yoaked vvith unbeleevers, which intends particularly though perhaps not principally mariage, as ſome would have it; it was but therefore needfull to inlighten & cleare this great objection, which would lye as a barre in their way, to the comfortable enjoyment of that relatiō, in regard of their yoake­fellowes and children; to thoſe people therefore that ſeeme to fall under ſuch a capacity and condition, the Apoſtle ſpeakes verſ. 12. to the reſt ſpeake I, &c.264 that is, to theſe which are of a different religion and worſhip (having conſidered others be­fore) & what ſayes he to them? hee relieves them againſt a great evill, that they might feare would fall upon them, which is that they muſt part with their wives, or huſbands, that are unbeleevers, and by conſequence alſo with the births of ſuch a bed: Hee tells them there is no neceſſity of ſuch a parting, but that they may abide in the condition wherein they were called, ſ. 20.21. Religion breaks no bonds, no civill contracts, tyes or ſubordinations, which in themſelves are not ſimply, and265 by the law of nature unlaw­full. Adultery were a ſtate out of which religion would call you, as being ſimply unlawfull, and againſt the law of nature; but the ſtate of mariage, which is honorable amongſt all men, and holy in it ſelf, is not diſſol­ved, or rendred unholy, by the converſion of any party, but on the other ſide, it ſtill remaynes a holy and ſanctified ſtate, to the beleever (for to the pure all things are pure, that are not na­turally and by themſelves ſin­full or impure) as on the con­trary, even lawfull mariages, and the moſt juſtifiable things, are impure to the unbeleevers, to whom nothing is pure, their266 minds and conſciences being defiled, therefore ſayes he, the unbeleeving huſband is ſanctified in the vvife, or to the vvife: Sanctifica­tiō being here oppoſed to that which is impure & uncleane, that is, contrary to the law of God; ſo that the whole mariage converſe, is by the faith of the beleever rendred pure and cleane, as alſo are their chil­dren, though borne of an unbe­leever on one ſide, which if the mariage converſe were un­cleane, would be unholy or un­ſanctified, they alſo are holy, for ſo it followes, Elſe vvere your children uncleane, but novv are they holy.

Here ſeemes to be two argu­ments,267 though very much alike and neere of kinne, why there ſhould not be a putting away of the mans ſide, or a leaving on the womans, if either of them be a beleever, the one is from the holynes of the unbe­leeving yoake-fellow, the other from the holynes of the births of ſuch a bed, which are both rendred ſo, that is ſanctified or holy to their uſe, by the faith of one party: where marke that the queſtion is not here of in­fants onely, but of children in generall, though of age, which are as capable of being ſancti­fied by the beleevers faith, and to the beleever, though them­ſelves were unbeleevers, as the268 unbeleeving wife, or the unbe­leeving huſband is; And as the word children, extends it ſelf be­yond infants to all children, ſo the word holy (which is of the ſame kinde with that which in this verſe is attributed to the huſband or wife) is as apply­able to a child of yeares, & not beleeving as to an unbeleeving huſband or wife; And of ſuch a holy child there will be no great cauſe to boaſt, as of a fit ſubject for Baptiſme.

This I take to be the genuine interpretation of this place, which ſeemes to exhort as much as may be, to an abiding in the condition, wherein reli­gion finds them, as appeares by269 the 17.18.19.20. verſes, and anſwers the great objection, which might ariſe from une­quall matches in reſpect of their yoake-fellowes and their children.

Another interpretation there is, which you may conſider al­ſo, which ſeemes to take its riſe from the words before, And ſhee be pleaſed to dvvell vvith him, ſ. 12. And hee be pleaſed to dvvell vvith her, ſ. 13. So as the reaſon why the beleever ſanctifies the unbeleever not ſimply, but in reſpect of mariage, is from the pleaſure and willingnes of the unbeleever to co-habite with the beleeving huſband or wife; for the Apoſtle would ſeeme to270 intimate, that ſuch a kinde of conſent to co-habite, by which the unbeleever ſeemes not to abhorre the faith of Chriſt, and a ſpirituall life in the belee­ving wife or huſband, will cauſe or effect, that he ſhall not abominate alſo the Chriſtian education of their children, ſo as in this reſpect the unbelee­vinge huſband or wife, and the children alſo though themſel­ves for the preſent unbelee­vers, by reaſon of the willing­nes of the one to cohabite, and the ſubjection of the other to Chriſtian education, may in that ſence be ſaid to be ſancti­fied, or made holy, being as it were deputed to it, and in the271 way of preparation for it, ſo as the unbeleeving parent & the childrē of that mixt birth, may be called as Tertullian ſayes, Candidati timoris; and as after­ward by others, Candidati fidei, Probationers or compettitors, for feare and faith; the words following verſ. 16. ſeemes to fa­vour ſuch an interpretation, For vvhat knovveſt thou O vvife, vvhether thou ſhalt ſave thy huſband, or hovv knovveſt thou O man, vvhether thou ſhalt ſave thy vvife; there being already wrought a good plea­ſure, or willingnes to abide and cohabite on the unbeleevers part, huſband or wife, and the children in that reſpect being ſubjected to Chriſtian educa­tion,272 and to the beholding of holy examples, true cōverſion and faith, which brings them into eſtate of ſalvation, may be in time accompliſht in them, to which they ſeeme in ſome ſort deſtin'd by the providence of God, in ſuch a yoake-fellow, or ſuch parents. So ſanctifica­tion is predicated of thoſe who are deſtined, or prepared to ſuch an end; ſo God ſayes of the Medes and Perſians Eſay. 13.3. I have commanded my ſanctified ones, that is, ſuch as I have prepared, for ſo Calvin upon that place ſayes, that ſometimes ſanctifi­cation is referred to regenera­tion, which is peculiar to the elect of God; ſometimes it ſig­nifies273 to prepare or deſtine to a certain end; ſo thoſe unbelee­ving parents by their willing­nes to abide with beleevers, & their children in regard of the opportunity of a holy educa­tion, ſeeme to be as it were de­ſtined or prepared for regene­ration, and for that ſtate which accompanies ſalvation; and in that reſpect as in a large ſence, may be called ſanctified or ho­ly. Which conſideration, if it may give them a greater ac­ceſſe to ordinances proper for them, or ſtirre up others to lay out themſelves in a more pecu­liar and particular manner for their converſion, I ſhall not hinder it; but on the contrary274 thinke that ſuch providences ſpeake much, and that as they give grounds of hope, and ſo of endeavour, ſo there may be much of duty towards them, in regard of the opportunity that families and churches, that pa­rents, maſters & miniſters have to doe good to ſuch, who though ſtrictly they may not be called church members, no more then ſtrictly ſanctified, that is, regenerated by the ho­ly Spirit, yet ſo farre as in the reſpects before mentioned, they may be tearmed ſancti­fied, that is, by a providence deſtin'd as it were and prepa­red for God, ſo farre the church within whoſe pole they275 ſeeme by a providence to live, and to be caſt, ought to have a more eſpeciall eye after them, and care of them, by vertue at leaſt of that generall injun­ction, As you have opportunity doe good to all men, eſpecially to the houſ­hold of faith; under the ſhadow of which theſe are come.

But whether you take either of theſe ſences, or both, for they may both ſtand in ſeverall re­ſpects, and regarding the text with a different aſpect, you will ſurely find nothing to ingraft Baptiſme upon.

For whether the children are ſanctified to the beleeving pa­rents uſe, as all other things are (not unholy in themſelves)276 which to the unbeleever are not, or whether in the ſecond ſence they are ſanctified, that is, as it were deſtined for holy­nes, of which by vertue of a great providence, in reſpect of their education, they are made Candidati, that is, probationers or competitors, as when men ſtand for a place or office, and as the Catechumini of old were called, yet can they by no meanes in either of theſe re­ſpects be qualified for, or made the ſubject of Baptiſme, which preſuppoſeth, as hath formerly bene ſhewed, another kind of holynes proper to, and inhe­rent in the party, namely regene­ration and nevvnes of life; not ſuch277 an one as is competible to an unbeleever, either parents, or children.

It was but neceſſary to ſpeake ſomething to this place, which beares amongſt many the weight of ſo great a building as infant Baptiſme, though if I could find here ſuch a holynes for infants, as wee all wiſh to ours, namely juſtifying faith & regeneration, yet I ſhould no more judge it meete to baptize them, then to preach to them, or to adminiſter the Lords ſup­per to them, they being as ca­pable of the word as baptiſme, and of one myſterious ceremo­ny as well as another; which hath bene a reaſon, I doubt278 not, why many formerly, and many at this day doe admini­ſter the Lords ſupper to infants, by vertue of a parallell ordi­nance to Baptiſme: Nor doe I know the reaſon why the one ſhould be refuſed, where the other is deem'd a due. But e­nough I hope for this, which truely the conteſts of others, rather then any ſcruple, which hath fallen upon my ſpirit from theſe words, hath made me ſay ſo much of.

CHAP. XV. In which the authority of the Fathers, and the practiſe of antiquity, touching the ſubject of Baptiſme, is conſidered.

THe authority of the Fa­thers, and the practiſe of279 ancient times, is to many a great argument for the Bapti­zing of infants; to me that looke upon ſuch argumentations, as not of the firſt magnitude, col­laterall, and ſuch as may truely and as often be brought, for the patroniſing of errors as truth, they are of no great conſidera­tion, yet to ſatisfy others more then my ſelf, there muſt be ſomething ſpoken to this head.

In which I ſhall conſider eſpecially theſe two things, firſt whether by the witneſſe of ſto­ry, Infant Baptiſme have injoy­ed a quiet and peaceable poſ­ſeſſion in the church, from the Apoſtles times downeward, till of late it was interrupted by280 ſome few evill ſpirits in the times of Luther, as ſome men would give us to beleeve.

Secondly upon what grounds thoſe Fathers, which are al­leadged for the chief patrons of Infants Baptiſme went; for if they have erred in the reaſon of the foundation, it will be eaſi­lyer beleeved, that they did al­ſo in the building.

We will conſider firſt of this latter.

I will give you their grounds, either as I have reade them my ſelf, or as I find them quoted by Bellarmine Tom. 3. lib. cap. 8. whoſe quotatiōs I ſhall take for truth, till I find the contrary, for here hee hath to doe with the Ana­baptiſts,281 enemies in this point alike common to him, with moſt of thoſe that are tearmed Proteſtants.

Firſt hee quotes the teſtimo­ny Dioniſij Areop. qui lib. Eccleſ. Hier. c. ult. part ult. ab Apoſtolis traditum affirmat, ut infantes bapti­zentur. Iuſti. five quicunque eſt au­ctor earum quaeſt. qu. 56. parvulos baptizatos ſalvari alios non item; That infants baptized are ſaved, o­thers not.

Orig. lib. 5. in cap. 6. ad Rom. Ec­cleſia inquit ab Apoſtolis traditionem accepit, etiam parvulis dare Baptiſ­mum. The Church ſayes hee received a tradition from the Apoſtles, to give Baptiſme to infants. Cypr. lib. 3. Ep. 8. ad Fidum ſcribit, Non ſolum ſibi,282 ſed etiam integro conſilio viſum eſſe parvulos baptizaripoſſe: That it ſee­med good, not onely to himſelf, but to a vvhole councell that infants might be baptized, even before the 8. day. In other places the ſame author affirmes, Baptiſme ſimply neceſſary to ſalvation, & that it vvaſhes avvay originall ſinne, ſo as it is never more to be imputed. page 470. a.

Hierom. lib. contr. Pelag. Infantes baptizari dicit, & tum ommpeccato carere: That infants are to be bapti­zed, and then they are vvithout all ſinne.

Auſt. lib. 10. de Gen. cap. 23. Con­ſuetudo inquit matris Eccleſiae Bap­tizandis parvulis, nequaquam ſpar­nenda eſt, nec illo modo ſuperflua de­putanda, nec omnino credenda, niſi283 Apoſtolica eſſet traditio. The cuſtome of our mother the church in Bapti­zing little children, is not to be deſpi­ſed, nor to be judged ſuperfluous, nor to be beleeved at all, unles it vvere an Apoſtolicall tradition.

The ſame Auſtin, As for the authority of infant Baptiſme, he flyes to tradition, ſo for the reaſon of it hee bottomes it upon this, that they nei­ther have faith to ſave them, nor a Sacrament inſtead of faith vvithout Baptiſme, and therefore judges them to eternall death, unles they be taken out of the vvorld by martyrdome, as the learned Forbes hath obſerved in his 10. booke Inſtruct. Hiſtor. in Theol. cap. 5. lib. 7. onely Auſtin ſayes, they ſhall be in damnatione omnium mitiſsima multum autem284 fallere & falli, qui eos in damnatio­ne praedicat non futuros; They ſhall be in the eaſieſt damnation of all others, but hee much deceaves himſelf and others that teaches they ſhall not be condemned, lib. 1. de peccat. meri­tis & remiſsione cap. 16. & lib. 5. contra Iulian cap. 8. but as gentle or as eaſy as damnation is, it is ſuch as the vvrath of God remaines upon them, lib. 3. de peccatorum me­ritis & remiſsione cap. 20. They goe into the ſecond death, lib. de bono per­ſeverantiae cap. 12. And they are children of vvrath, lib. 6. contra Iu­lian cap. 3.

Bernard alſo was of this ſame minde Epiſt. 77. Sanè, inquit, omnes infantes qui hanc prohibente aetate non poſſunt habere fidem, hoc285 eſt, cordis ad Deum converſionem, con­ſequentè nec ſalutem, ſi abſque bap­tiſmis perceptione moriuntur. Cer­tainly, ſaith hee, all infants, vvho their age hindring them, cannot have this faith, that is, the converſion of their hearts to God, neither conſe­quently can they have ſalvation, if they dye vvithout the partaking of Baptiſme.

More of this and of the ſame kind might be alleadged, but theſe ſhall ſuffice.

Before wee goe any farther, we muſt conſider here, what is meant by traditions, which in the former quotatiōs you heare ſo often mentioned.

The name of Tradition in it ſelf is generall, and ſignifies all286 doctrines, either written, or not written, as 2. Theſſ. 2.15. Hold the traditions vvhich you have bene taught, vvhether by vvord, or our epiſtle.

But the name Tradition is accommodated by Divines, to ſignify onely a doctrine not written, ſo Irenaeus is quoted lib. 3. cap. 2. Evenit, inquit, neque Scripturis, neque traditioni conſenti­re eos. They vvould neither conſent to Scripture, nor tradition.

So Tertull. lib. de corona militis, Si legem poſtules Scripturam nullam invenies, traditio tibi praetenditur auctrix: If you looke for a lavv, yee ſhall find no Scripture, but tradition is pretended, as that vvhich autho­riſeth.

287

Novv that is called a doctrine not vvritten (ſaith Bellarmine) not vvhich is no vvhere vvritten, but vvhich is not vvritten by the firſt au­thor, and hee gives the inſtance of in­fant Baptiſme: It is called an Apo­ſtolicall tradition not vvritten, be­cauſe it is not found vvritten in any Apoſtolicall booke, although it be vvritten (as hee affirmes) in the bookes of allmoſt all the ancient Fa­thers. Tom. 1. lib. 4. cap. 2. b.

And by the way, why Bel­larmine could not find Bap­tiſme written in the Apoſtles writings, if there it were, as well as other men, I know not; for hee wants no accutenes in his ſight, but when he is corrupted by his ends, and it ſuites with288 his end abundantly to proove infant Baptiſme as ſtrongly as hee can, becauſe none judge it ſo neceſſary to the world as he, and thoſe of his religion doe.

You ſee therefore by tradi­tions here, meant thinges not found written in the Scripture, yet for their antiquity ſuppo­ſed to be Apoſtolicall, which if they were allowed & received, what a miſerable confuſion ſhould wee be brought into in matters of religion, and how under the notion of ancient tra­ditions ſhould we vvorſhip God in vayne, teaching for doctrines the commandements of men, Matt. 15.9. Matth. 16.6. Chriſt bids us take heed of the leaven of the Phariſes,289 which was their unwritten tra­ditions, and vve are commanded to obey God not men, Acts 5.29. And if any man bring us any other do­ctrine, he is to be accurſed, Gal. 1.9. This hath bene the opinion of holy men in all ages. Luther on the firſt of the Galat. There ought no other doctrine to be delive­red, or heard in the church, beſides the pure vvord of God, that is, the holy Scriptures; let other teachers and hearers vvith their doctrine be ac­curſed. So Calv. lib. 4. Inſt. cap. 8. ſ. 8. Let this be a firme axiom, no­thing is to be accounted for the vvord of God, to vvhich place ſhould be gi­ven in the church, but that vvhich is firſt contained in the Lavv and the Prophets, and after in Apoſtolicall vvritings.

290

But becauſe we are in a way of quotatiō, it will not be amiſſe to give you the judgement of ſome more ancient concerning this matter; and wee will give them as they are given by Chemnit. in his exam. of the counſcell of Trent, and quoted alſo by Bellarmine in order to his confutation of them, I ſhall give but a few. One is of Ori­gen in cap. 3. ad Rom. &c. Ne­ceſſe nobis eſt, inquit, Scripturas ſanctas in teſtimonium vocare, ſen­ſus quippe noſtri & enarrationes, ſine his teſtibus non habent fidem. It is ne­ceſſary for us to call the holy Scrip­tures to vvitnes, becauſe our ſenſes and narrations vvithout thoſe vvit­neſſes, have no credit.

291

So Conſtantin the Empe­rour, who in the Counſcell of Nice, as Theodoret witneſſes lib. 1. cap. 17. ſaith thus, Euange­lici & Apoſtolici libri & antiquo­rum Prophetarum oracula plane in­ſtruunt nos, quid de rebus divinis ſen­tiendum ſit; Proinde hoſtili poſita diſ­cordia in verbis divinitus inſpiratis ſumamus quaeſtionum explicationes. The Euangelicall and Apoſtolicall bookes, and the oracles of the ancient Prophets, playnely inſtruct us vvhat vvee ſhould thinke of divine thinges; Therefore all hoſtile diſcord layde a­ſide, let us take the explication of que­ſtions from vvords divinely inſpired.

Then Athanaſius lib. con­tragent. Sufficiunt divinae, & divi­nitùs inſpiratae Scripturae ad omnem292 inſtructionem veritatis; The holy & divinely inſpired Scriptures, ſuffice to all inſtructions of truth.

Then Baſil. in ſerm. de fidei confeſſ. Infidelitatis argumentum fuerit, & ſignum ſuperbiae certiſsi­mum, ſi quis eorum quae ſcripta ſunt, aliquid velit rejicere aut eorum quae non ſcripta introducere. It vvould be an argument of infidelity, and a moſt certain ſigne of pride, if any man ſhould reject things vvritten, or ſhould introduce things not vvritten.

Alſo Cyril. lib. de recta fide. Neceſſarium nobis eſt divinas ſequi literas, & in nullo ab eorum prae­ſcripto diſcedere. It is neceſſary for us to follovv the divine letters, and in nothing to depart from their pre­ſcript.

293

So Theoph. lib. 2. Paſchali. Diabolici ſpiritus eſt, aliquid extra Scripturarum ſacrarum auctorita­tem putare divinum. It is the part of a diabolicall ſpirit, to thinke any thing divine vvithout the authority of holy Scriptures.

So Tertull. lib. contra Her­mogenum, Adoro Scripturae ple­nitudinem, ſcriptum eſſe doceat Her­mogenis officina, ſi non ſcriptum eſt, timeat vae illud adjicientibus, vel detrahentibus deſtinatum. I adore the fullnes of the Scripture, let Her­mogenes ſhevv that it is vvritten; if it be not vvritten, let him feare the vvo deſtin'd to thoſe vvhich adde or detract.

The end of all that hath bene ſaid amounts to this, that thoſe294 Fathers, or Churches, that tooke up and practized Bap­tiſme as an Apoſtolicall tradi­tiō, that is, a thing not written, nor found in the word, but for the antiquity ſake call'd Apo­ſtolicall (as thoſe forequoted did, and moſt will be found to have done, that being their beſt plea) are juſtly to be repu­ted ours, and of our ſide, for they judge it not from Scrip­ture, and therefore are forced to fetch the riſe of it from tra­dition; which traditiō, becauſe it will not beare the weight of an inſtitution, as you have heard, therefore the whole building is to fall, which is falſely bottomed, and their au­thority295 upon that ground is no­thing, ſaving that by flying for a bottome, and refuge to tradi­tion, they doe with us affirme, that there is no better ground for infant Baptiſme then hu­mane traditiō, which is indeed none at all. So as you find how all theſe teſtimonies & autho­rities, and many of the ſame kind become ours. And here by the way I am not ignorant, that ſome of ours, whofeele themſelves preſt by the Pa­piſts, as if they admitted of a tradition in this ordinance of Baptiſme, which they refuſe in others, and being loath to looſe the authority of the Fathers in this point, who put it upon tra­dition,296 as upon its proper baſis, would fayne wreſt their necke out of this nooſe, and therefore ſhew you alſo how the Fathers faſtned it upon ſome Scripture ground, ſo Chemnit. in his an­ſwer of Lindan. Exam. Concil. Tridentin. de Trad. p. 69. To which I anſwer according to truth, that the forequoted Fa­thers faſtned Baptiſme upon tradition, as upon its owne ground and baſis, being no more able then other men to find a word of inſtitution for that which had none, and for the credit of the tradition, cal­ling that Apoſtolicall, which they found ancient, which as the ſame Chemnitius acknow­ledgeth297 was an ordinary pra­ctiſe in other things, but with­all ſome of them give ſome ground of Scripture of their owne framing for the colour of ſuch a tradition; ſo Origen, Iraeneus, Cyprian and thoſe o­thers, quoted by Chemnitius to this purpoſe, which reatch not to any word of inſtitution, but to the reaſon of it, as Ori­gen ſayes, That the Apoſtles knevv that there vvere in all the ſtayne of ſinne, vvhich ought to be vvaſht by vvater and by the ſpirit. So Cy­prian, VVhen the Lord ſaith in the Goſpel, hee came not to deſtroy the ſoules of men, but to ſave, vvee alſo ſhould prevent as much as may be, that no ſoule be loſt. For God as he ac­cepts298 not the perſon, ſo nor the age. I ſhall give you no more, this onely for a taſt. Now thoſe I ſaid are no words of inſtitution, but ſome generall reaſon as they conceave, and doth not at all hinder, but that Apoſtoli­call tradition, as they call it, beares the weight of the inſti­tution; I deny not but that there hath bene ſuch a thing as the tradition of Chriſt, and Apoſto­licall tradition, which are of the higheſt and greateſt autho­rity, but they were ſuch things as afterwards were committed to writing by the Euangeliſts and Apoſtles, as Chemnitius well obſerves p. 61. and other traditions of Chriſt & his Apo­ſtles,299 wee avow none, but eſteeme them all Apocryphal.

Againe for thoſe Fathers and ancient writers, together with the Papiſts & Lutherans, that judged Baptiſme ſimply neceſ­ſary to ſalvation, and ſome of them condemning infants to eternall damnation without it, as Auſtin, Bernard &c. (unleſſe they were happily reſcued by martyrdome) you ſee what ne­ceſſity lay upon them to def­fend infant Baptiſme, but upon a moſt falſe ground, namely the neceſſity of it to ſalvation, which fayling as wee know it doth, wee may ſee both how they might be tempted & ne­ceſſitated to ſuch an opinion, &300 what good reaſon there is, why their foundation and building ſhould fall together. And if any man ſhall here object as before in the caſe of traditions, that this peremptory neceſſity to ſalvatiō, was indeed a falſe hy­potheſis, or ſuppoſition, not fit to beare the weight of infant Baptiſme; but that the Fathers alſo might poſſibly have other mediums, by which to proove this, as thoſe before inſtanc'd in. I anſwer, that the weakneſſe of thoſe mediums or any other I have mett withall in this par­ticular, as alleadged by them, declare plainly that there was ſome other great thing, which inforced them to it, namely the301 neceſſity of it to ſalvation, as whē we ſee wiſe men contend earneſtly for that, for which they give no good viſible or ap­parent reaſon; it may well be conceived, that there is ſome­thing of intereſt, which ſup­plies to them the want of rea­ſon, and this intereſt of the ſal­vation of our children ſitts ſo neere us, as it may beare the weight of many reaſons, and cauſe us to admit concluſions, though of great moment and concernement upon very eaſy conſiderations. So as wee have fully examined this head, na­mely upon what grounds the Fathers, which are alledged for the chief patrons of infant bap­tiſme,302 went & have found that ſo many as build it upon tradi­tion, as generally all doe, are of our ſide, for, avouching that, for their beſt authority they acknowledge there is no bet­ter, to wit, the Scripture; and ſo conclude with us, that Bap­tiſme of infants is not an inſti­tution of God, which hath the Scripture for its foundation.

And thoſe which give it to infants, becauſe it is ſimply ne­ceſſary to ſalvation, will be of no authority againſt us, nor of no credit to their cauſe, becauſe the building muſt be level'd according to the foundation, & that being falſe, they are ne­ceſſitated to the miſtake of their building.

303

To conclude, if there were any force left in theſe authori­ties for infant Baptiſme, as I conceave there is not, why ſhould it not regulate our pra­ctife in the other Sacrament, to give that to infants, which was ancient, and of uſe in many churches, as well as the other, as it remaynes alſo in ſome to this day, and it is like would in more, had not Popiſh ſuperſti­tion given the ſupper the ſtart of Baptiſme, to ſuch a degree as to make it not ſo much the ſigne and repreſentation of Chriſt, as Chriſt himſelf, and the very Proteſtants themſel­ves, are ſo reſpective to this Sa­crament of the Supper above304 the other, as to give it as a rea­ſon, vvhy it ſhould not be admini­ſtred to infants, leaſt it ſhould fall in contempt. Hoſp. Hiſt. Sacram. p. 60.

Wee ſhall produce ſome te­ſtimonies that the Supper was adminiſtred to infants as well as Baptiſme, as neceſſary to ſal­vation, & if antiquity be to be eſteemed a great argument for the adminiſtring of one Sacra­ment, why not of the other.

For this Hoſpinian in his ſe­cond booke Hiſto. Sacram. pa. 59. quotes Cyprian Se. 5. de lapſis, and affirmes alſo that Ie­rome, Auſt. and other Fathers witnes, that thoſe vvhich vvere bap­tized not onely of age, but alſo infants305 vvithout any delay received the holy myſteries under both ſignes.

So Ierome againſt the Luci­ferians, Non poteſt, inquit, Bapti­ma tradere ſine Euchariſtia. Bap­tiſme muſt not be given vvithout the Euchariſt.

And Auſt. lib. de Dogm. Ec­cleſ. cap. 52. Siparvuli ſunt (ait) vel hebetes qui doctrinam non ca­piant, reſpondeant pro illis qui eos of­ferunt, juxta morem baptizandi, & ſic manus impoſitione at Chriſmate communiti, Euchariſtiae myſteriis admittantur. If they be little (ſayes he) or dull, vvhich are not capable of doctrine, let thoſe anſvver for them, vvhich offer them according to the cuſtome of baptizing, and ſo being fortified by Chriſme, and impoſition of306 hands, let them be admitted to the myſtery of the Euchariſte.

Alſo Epiſt. 107. hee ſpeakes thus, Infantes ſi in illa parva aetate moriuntur, utique ſecundum ea quae per corpus geſſerunt, id eſt, tempore quo in corpore fuerunt, quando per corda, & ora geſtantium credide­runt, vel non quando baptizati, vel non baptizati ſunt, quando carnem Chriſti manducaverunt, vel non manducaverunt, quandò & ſangui­nem biberunt, vel non biberunt, ſe­cundum haec ergo quae per corpus geſ­ſerunt, non ſecundum ea quae ſi diu hic viverent geſturi fuerant judi­cantur. Infants if they dye in that young age, are judged according to that vvhich they have done by the bo­dy, that is, in the time in the vvhich307 they vvere in the body, vvhen by the heartes and mouthes of thoſe that carried them, they beleeved or not be­leeved, vvhen they vvere baptized, or not baptized, vvhen they did eat the fleſh of Chriſt, or not eat it, vvhen they drunke his blood, or not drunke it; according therefore to thoſe things vvhich they did by the body, they are to be judged not according to thoſe, vvhich if they had lived long, they vvould have done. So lib. 5. Hypo­gnoſticôn cont. Pelag. Quomo­do, inquit, vita regni caelorum par­vulis promittitur, non renatis ex a­qua & Spirituſancto, non cibatis carne, atque non potatis ſanguine Chriſti, qui in remiſsionem peccato­rum fuſus eſt? Hovv (ſaith he) is the kingdome of heaven promiſed to308 children, not renevved by vvater and the holy Ghoſt, not fed vvith the fleſh, and made to drinke of the blood of Chriſt, vvhich is ſhed for the remiſ­ſion of ſinnes.

This cuſtome received of old, ſo farre prevayled after­wards, eſpecially in the time of Charles the Great, that not onely the Euchariſt was com­municated to infants, in the publike aſſembly of the church after Baptiſme, or at other times, when they were wont to come together for the Lords Supper, but alſo the bread of the Supper was kept to be com­municated and given to ſick children, as well as to thoſe of yeares: for this Hoſpinnian309 quotes Canonem Carolinum lib. 1. de legib. Francorum in theſe words, Preſbyter Euchari­ſtiam ſemper habeat paratam, ut quando quis infirmatus fuerit, aut parvulus infirmus fuerit, ſtatim eum communicet, ne ſine communione mo­riatur: Let the Preſbyter have the Euchariſt ever ready, that vvhen any is vveake, or vvhen a little child ſhall be vveake or ſicke, hee may preſently communicate him, leaſt he ſhould dye vvithout communion.

Amongſt the Aethiopians as Oſorius witneſſeth in his 9. booke de geſtis Emmanuelis, Infants in the ſame day that they are initiated to holy thinges, take the Euchariſt in a bitt of bread: Hoſpi­nian alſo affirmes, that not many310 yeares agoe, there vvere reliques of this cuſtome in Lorrayne, and the pla­ces adjoyning; for vvhen an infant vvas to be baptized, the Prieſt, vvho baptized him, brought a little boxe in vvhich vvas the Sacrament to the Alter, and ſhevved one Hoſt, as they call it, to the people; then he put it in the boxe againe, and reatches forth his tvvo fingers, vvith vvhich hee had tucht it, to be vvaſht vvith vvine by the Clarke or Church-vvarden, and diſtills of that vvine into the mouth of the baptized Infant, ſaying, The blood of our Lord Ieſus Chriſt proffit thee unto eternall life.

Alſo at this day, as Brerewood in his learned inquiries, touch­ing the diverſity of Religion, affirmes, The Supper is admnini­ſtred311 to Infants immediately after their Baptiſme in both kindes by the Iacobits, a people called by that name, vvhich are in great numbers in Sy­ria, Cyprus, Meſopotamia, Babylon and Paleſtine; for the Patriarch of Ieruſalem, who keepeth his reſidence ſtill in Ieruſalem, in which City there ſtill remaine ten or more churches of Chri­ſtians, is alſo a Iacobite. Alſo the Cophty (which are the Chriſtians in Aegypt, for it is a name of their nation, rather then of their religion) doe the ſame, namely give the Sacra­ment of the Euchariſt to in­fants preſently after Baptiſme.

The like doe the Chriſtians tearmed Habaſſines, which are312 the midland Aethiopians.

As alſo the Armenians, Chriſtians diſperſed for trade through the Turkiſh Empire, but inhabiting eſpecially Ar­menia the greater, and the leſ­ſer, and Cylicia.

More might be quoted and are by Brerewood in thoſe his collections.

Now the reaſon why the Pa­piſts have quitted this practiſe (out of whoſe rubbiſh we drew our reformation, as being once involved in that lumpe & con­fuſion) ſeemes to me to appeare out of their Tridentine conſti­tutions, Trid. Concil. ſec. 5. where it is affirmed; Parvulos uſu rationis carentes nulla obligari313 neceſsitate ad Sacramentalem Eu­chariſtiae communionem, ſi quidem per Baptiſmi lavacrum regenerati, & Chriſto incorporati, adeptam ſuam Filiorum Dei gratiam, in illa aetate amittere non poſſunt. That children, vvhich vvant the uſe of reaſon, are by no neceſsity obliged to the Sacramen­tall communion of the Euchariſt; for as much as being regenerate by the laver of Baptiſme, and incorporated into Chriſt, in that age, they cannot looſe that ſtate of ſonneſhip already obtayned; ſo that grace being ne­ceſſarily conferr'd to them, ac­cording to their opiniō by bap­tiſme, which they cannot looſe if they would in that age, they thinke they need not the other till they come to be capable of314 ſinning and falling away. Be­ſides the high & tranſcendent notion they have put upon the Lords Supper, by making it to be the very body and blood of Chriſt, may juſtly apologize for them that they make it not childrens play.

And even that differencing of thoſe two Sacraments by way of preferrence, ſtickes cloſe ſtill to our fingers, of which there are undoubted characters in the greateſt part of reformed Churches.

All this hath bene to ſhew, that if you will take primitive practiſe, and antiquity for your guide, that will lead you as well into the adminiſtring of the315 Supper to infants as Baptiſme, and if it fayle by your owne judgement in the one, you may very well ſuſpect it in the other; for my part, I ſee not why the Sacramēt of the Supper ſhould be of a greater myſtery then the other, or the ceremony more ſignificant, or that the duty of examining ſhould need more the uſe of reaſon, then be­leeving, repenting and confeſ­ſing our ſinnes. And ſince it is as naturall & proper to infancy to be nouriſht, as to be borne, I ſee not but why they ſhould be as capable of the ceremony of their nouriſhmēt, as of their birth, and ſo of one Sacrament as well as the other. You ſee316 how needfull it is to examine the reaſons, as well as the opi­nions of men, an immoderate veneration of antiquity hath well nigh undone the world, the Fathers with ſome farre fetcht Scripture alluſion or gloſſe, hath bene inabled to e­ſtabliſh ordinances of inſtitu­tion, and inforce practiſe appa­rently very divers from reaſon, and Apoſtolicall preſident, and which ſince by conſequences have ſtuffed bookes with ſo many ridiculous diſputes in this point, as forſooth, whether the childe being wholly in the wombe, and no part appearing it may be baptized, or whether if any part appeare without, it317 may be baptized, eſpecially if it be the head, or the hand, or the foote, whether if it be borne with the after birth, or whether if it be a monſter, it may be baptized, with ſeverall of the like nature, which have miſe­rably tormented the Schoole­men, and are the births of ſuch a premiſſes, it being the na­ture of errour to be fertile, and if you graunt one fundamentall abſurdity, a thouſand will fol­low.

And ſo much for the firſt head I propounded in this ar­gument of authority, namely upon what grounds the fathers that are alleaged, for the chief patrōs of infant Baptiſme, went.

318

The ſecond wherein I ſhall be breefe (for wee build not much upon this bottome) was, whether infant Baptiſme have enjoyed a quiet and peaceable poſſeſſion in the Church from the Apoſtles time downeward, till of late it was interrupted (as is affirmed) by certain unquiet ſpirits in the dayes of Luther.

Though no preſcription will lye good againſt God, yet I am of opinion, that if the poſſeſſion of infant Baptiſme hath bene very antient (which I doubt of) yet the injoyment hath not bene anciently ſo peaceable, as ſome would make us be­leeve.

Let them who liſt or can con­fute319 Ludovicus Vives, who af­firmes in cap. 27. lib. 1. de civi­tate Dei; Neminem olim conſueviſ­ſe baptizari niſi adulta aetate, & qui per ſe peteret baptiſmum, & intelli­geret quid ſit baptizari. None of old (by which it ſeemes hee meant very old) vvere vvont to be baptized but in a full or grovvne age, and vvho deſired Baptiſme for themſelves, and understood vvhat it vvas to be bapti­zed. I find alſo Rupertus Tui­tienſis in his 4. booke of divine offices cap. 14. quoted to have ſayd, In former times the cuſtome of the primitive Churches vvas, that they administred not the Sacrament of regeneration, but onely at the feaſt of Eaſter & Pentecoſt, and all the chil­dren of the church, vvhich through­out320 the vvhole yeare, through the vvord vvere mooved, vvhen Easter came gave up their names, and vvere the follovving dayes till Pentecost in­ſtructed in the rules of faith, rehear­ſed the ſame, and by their Baptiſme, and dying thus vvith Christ, roſe againe vvith him.

So the famous Eraſmus, as I find him quoted in his annota­tions upon the 5. of the Ro­manes, affirmes, that baptizing of children vvas not in uſe in Pauls time. And our Doctor Feild in his learned Treatiſe of the Church p. 729. affirmes, that many very anciently, vvho vvere borne of Christian parents, beſides thoſe vvho vvere converted from Pa­ganiſme, put of their Baptiſme a long321 time, inſomuch as ſome vvere elected Biſhops, before they vvere baptized, as vve read (ſaith he) of Ambroſe; to proove which hee quotes Ruffinus lib. 2. cap. 11. But to come more particularly to a few antient and authentique proofes, with which I ſhall content my ſelf.

Hee that ſhall read Iuſtin Martyr, who lived about Anno 150. and is beleeved to have bene converted to Chriſt with­in 30. yeares after the Apoſtle Iohn, when it is credible alſo very many were living, who had bene frequent auditors of the Apoſtles, hee, I ſay, who ſhould conſider in ſecunda pro Chriſtianis Apologia, the de­ſcription322 he makes of the man­ner of Chriſtian Baptiſme, would ſurely not pick out of it the Baptizing of Infants, as the moſt uſuall and ordinary pra­ctiſe of thoſe times; its worth the relating at large, being of ſo great Antiquity; I vvill novv tell you, ſayes he, hovv vve dedicate our ſelves to God, being renevved by Christ, least if vve ſhould have past by this, vve ſhould ſeeme to deale ma­lignantly, and diſſemblingly in this diſcourſe; vvho ever have bene per­ſvvaded, & have beleeved that thoſe things are true, vvhich are delivered and ſpoken by us, and have ingaged themſelves to live accordingly, they are taught to pray vvith fasting, and to beg of God the remiſsion of all their323 past ſinnes, vvee alſo praying and fa­sting vvith them, then they are brought to us, vvhere there is vvater, and in the ſame manner of regenera­tion, vvith vvhich vvee are regenera­ted, they are regenerated; for in the name of our Lord God the parent of all things, and of our Saviour Ieſus Christ and of the holy Spirit, they are then vvaſht vvith vvater. Nor is it any prejudice to this teſti­mony (by which as by way of Apologie, the regular and or­dinary way of Baptiſme is de­clared) that I find him quoted by ſome as owning infants Bap­tiſme, for as much as they ſay in a treatiſe which goes under his name (which whether it be his or no is doubted by all men,324 and particularly by Bellarmine himſelf, who yet is willing e­nough to make uſe of it, and therefore not of that authority as the quotation I bring) hee gives a knite of infant Baptiſme by conſidering in a word or two the conditiō of thoſe chil­dren, who dye baptized, and of them who dye unbaptized, ſince it is not my part here to proove that infant Baptiſme, as well as many other unwar­rantable practiſes, crept not in betimes, but to ſhew by ſtory, what was the moſt uſuall and authenticke practiſe of the ad­miniſtration of this ordinance, or what was the opinion and judgement of the moſt antient325 and learned men about it.

The next authority I ſhall bring is of Nazianzen, another Greeke Father, a man of great eſteeme & authority, he plain­ly councells, that Baptiſme ſhould be differred, Donec pueri de fide ſua aliquid poſsint reſpondere; till chil­dren ſhould be able to anſvver ſome­thing of their faith, and therefore councells to deferre Baptiſme at least till the third yeare of their age. Wherein although hee made haſt, not being altogether per­haps free from the ſuperſtition of the daunger of dying with­out Baptiſme, which crept in betimes, yet overcome by the truth and the reaſon of the or­dinance, hee judged it fit to de­ferre326 it till ſuch time as they were capable of having & ma­nifeſting actuall faith. This fa­mous authority of a man ſo great and learned, Bellarmine anſwers onely thus, That other Fathers vvere of another minde, and that the commodity is very little, but the daunger (to wit, according to his opinion of the neceſſity of Baptiſme to ſalvation) is very great.

The next and laſt authority I ſhall bring, ſhall be that of Tertulliā, who flouriſhed about 203. yeares after Chriſt, the moſt famous of the Latin Fa­thers, of him Hierom in an epi­ſtle of the Chriſtian writers, af­firmes, that nothing vvas more lear­ned,327 or acute, a man of that au­thority, with the famous and antient Cyprian, that hee called him his master, and as Hierome affirmes of him, hee never past a day vvithout the reading of Tertul­lian.

This Tertullian in a treatiſe that hee hath of Baptiſme to­wards the end, hath theſe ex­preſſions; firſt in the generall, Baptiſmum non temerè credendum eſſe, ſciant quorum officium est. That Baptiſme is not ſlightly or raſhly to be committed to any, let them knovv vvhoſe duty it concernes. To give to every one that aſketh belongs to almes; rather conſider this, Give not that vvhich is holy to dogs, nor cast your pearles to ſvvyne. And lay hands ſud­dainly328 on no man, least you partake of their ſinnes; then hee apologi­zeth why the Eunuch & Paul were ſo ſoone baptized, & then goes on; Itaque pro cujuſque perſo­nae conditione, ac diſpoſitione, etiam aetate cunctatio baptiſmi utilior est, praecipue tamen circaparvulos. There­fore in regard of the condition and diſpoſition of each perſon, the differ­ring of Baptiſme is more proffitable, eſpecially for young children; for vvhat neceſsity is it, ſayth hee, for the vvitneſſes to expoſe themſelves to daunger, &c. It is true the Lord ſaith, do not forbid them to come to me, let them come therefore vvhen they grovvolder, vvhen they learne, vvhen they are taught vvhy they come; Fiant Christiani quum Chri­ſtum329 noſſe potuerint; Let them be made Christians vvhen they can knovv Chriſt. Then he tells them, They deale more vvarily in ſecular things, that divine thinges are given, vvhere they vvould not betruſt earth­ly. And laſtly concludes, that they vvho underſtand the vveight of Baptiſme, vvill rather feare the at­taining then the differring of it: ad­ding that, Fides integra ſecura est de ſalute; An intier faith is ſecure of ſalvation. Thus the excellent & antient Tertullian.

Nor can that ſtand to any purpoſe, which ſome (who are loath to have ſo great and an­tient an authority againſt them in the point of infāt Baptiſme) alleage, that parhaps Tertul­lian330 ſpeakes here of the Bap­tiſme onely of thoſe infants, whoſe parents were unbelee­vers, becauſe hee ſpeakes of the daunger of the witneſſes, or ſuerties, for where the parents are Chriſtians, there the wit­neſſes ſeeme not to be expoſed to that daunger? To which I anſwer, that the witneſſes were not freed from daūger, though the parents were Chriſtians, for though the parents may help with the witneſſes, to the edu­cation of the child, yet they cannot ſecure themſelves nor others, that they ſhall ſtand to that covenant which is made for them.

Beſides the reaſon of his aſ­ſertiō331 againſt infant Baptiſme, runnes upon principles com­mon to all infants, of what ever parents they be borne, for hee would have none come, till they be capable of learning, & being taught why they come; hee would have none declar'd Chriſtians by that ceremony, till they can know Chriſt, and concludes that hee would not have divine myſteries be truſt­ed with infants, whom wee would judge it improper & un­comely to be truſt with earth­ly and ſecular affaires.

I ſhall content my ſelf with what hath bene ſaid already to this head, having neither the deſire, nor the commodity to332 make a large and generall ſearch; beſides that a few of the moſt authentique, & moſt antient writers after the Scrip­tures, ought to be of more au­thority then many hundreds (if there could ſo many be found) of latter times, it being my undertaking to proove that moſt antiently, beginning with Chriſt and the Apoſtles times the ſubjects of Baptiſme, were perſons profeſſing faith and re­pentance, not infants, and that the moſt authentique and pri­mitive Fathers were of this minde and judgement.

We have done therefore with this head, wherein if the moſt authentique & antient autho­rity333 be ours, and the reſt neceſ­ſitated to their opiniōs by falſe premiſes and principles by no meanes to be received, or allo­wed, and which alſo as ratio­nally produce other cōſequen­ces, which in theſe times men are loath to admit of; no men I hope will blame us for our pre­ſent beleefe, concerning the ſubject of Baptiſme, nor object hereafter as an argumēt againſt us, the authority of the fathers.

CHAP. XVI. In which is handled, whether Baptiſme be to be repeated; but more eſpecially, whether ſuch as were baptized in infancy, ſhould be accounted baptized, or are to have that or­dinance adminiſtred to them.

HAving givē the due bounds to the ordinance of Bap­tiſme,334 in reſpect of the ſubject of it, and ſayd what I judged cōvenient to that purpoſe, there is a very conſiderable queſtion yet remaining, and which can­not be left out in this diſcourſe, and that is, If infants ought not to be baptized, whether ſuch as were baptized in infācy ſhould be baptized againe?

Wherein firſt will come to be conſidered, whether Bap­tiſme be to be repeated or no?

I anſwer, there have bene ſome of that opinion, as Mer­cion and his followers, who had their firſt, ſecond and third baptiſme: Alſo a religion cal­led the Hemerobaptiſtae, that is, the every day baptizers, that335 avowed, becauſe wee ſinned e­very day, therefore wee ſhould be every day baptized, and practiſed accordingly.

Secondly according to the received opinion, that I conceave it is not to be re­peated.

Firſt becauſe the covenant of grace is but once made, and ſtruck with every man, & this is the ſeale of the Covenant, it is the Sacrament of regenera­tion, initiation and incorpora­tion; but theſe things are not capable of being reïterated, therefore the ſeale and ſigne thereof ſhould not be, to this agrees that place Heb. 6.4.5.6. For it is impoſsible for thoſe vvho336 vvere once inlightned, and have ta­ſted of the heavenly gift, and vvere made partakers of the holy Ghost, and have tasted the good vvord of God, & the povvers of the vvorld to come, if they ſhall fall avvay, to renevv them againe to repentance, &c.

The Apoſtle ſpeakes not here of theft, perjury, adultery, or any ſinne in particular, but of an intire revolting and falling away; when a ſinner offends not God in any particular, but renounces wholly to his grace, bids him adieu for ever; Now he falls thus, who revolts from the word of God, who extin­guiſheth the light of it, & who deprives himſelf of the taſt of the heavenly gift, and quits the337 communion of the ſpirit, in the participatiō of its grace, which cannot be without the ſinne a­gainſt the holy Ghoſt, and a to­tall falling from God: Now it is impoſsible, ſayes hee, thoſe ſhould be renevved by repentance, having ſinned againſt the holy Ghoſt, they have a heart that cannot repent; now they having bro­ken covenant with God in the higheſt manner, and being un­capable of repentance, which is to precede Baptiſme, they are incapable of Baptiſme; for others though they ſinne, the ſame covenant, repentance, & Baptiſme ſtands good for ever.

Secondly becauſe the ſigni­fication, the fruit & uſe of Bap­tiſme,338 is not for a moment, or reſpecting the time paſt onely, but reſpects the future alſo, and the whole life of the baptized perſon, as appeares Rom. 6.2. So as the Baptiſme of repen­tance once receaved for remiſ­ſion of ſinnes, remaynes as a pledge by us of the covenant of God, and that perpetuall waſhing which we have by the blood of Chriſt, Marke 14. Iohn did baptize in the vvildernes, and preach the baptiſme of repentance for the remiſsion of ſinnes; which is to be often thought of, for the full aſſurance of our pardō, for that promiſe is of perpetuall uſe and influence, He that beleeveth and is baptized, ſhall be ſaved; and Gal. 3393.27. As many as have bene bapti­zed into Christ, have put on Christ.

But thirdly the greateſt rea­ſon why Baptiſme is not to be repeated, is becauſe neither in precept or example wee find it repeated, which is the word of our inſtitutiō. But on the other ſide, There is one Lord, one faith, one Baptiſme, which is one, Ʋnitate uſus legitimi, in the unity of the lawfull uſe, as well as in other reſpects; ſo as there is no thought of leaving Chriſt, as if there were to be exſpected a new regeneration, and a new Baptiſme: The Fathers alſo were of this opinion, Tertull. lib. de Baptiſ. Semel lavacrum ini­mus, ſemel dilicta diluuntur. So Cy­prian.340 lib. 2. Epiſt. 3. Baptiſma ſemel ſumitur, nec rurſus iteratur. Baptiſme is once received, nor is it re­peated againe.

The queſtion then will be, what ſhall become of thoſe that have bene baptized into a falſe name by heritickes that erre about the Trinity, as the Ar­rians, Marcionites, & c. ?

The receaved anſwer is that they are to be baptized aright, with the baptiſme of Chriſt, & in ſuch caſes, Baptiſme is not to be ſaid to be repeated, the for­mer being no baptiſme or a nullity, and this according to the decree of the Counſell of Nice cap. 19. as Bucan quotes it p. 635. The like decree alſo341 hath a Counſell of Carthage, Ii ſunt baptizandi, de quibus incer­tum est, an fuerint baptizati necne, Concil. Carth. 50. cap. 6. They are to be baptized, of whom it is uncertain whether they were baptized or no. The like alſo ſaith Cyprian in his epiſtle 71. ad Quintum fratrem. Here was ſome difference in opinions, Cyprian and his Biſhops were of opinion that Baptiſme in an heretick church was null, and therefore thoſe who came to them were baptized, as ſuppo­ſing that vayne and nothing: others have thought that thoſe onely were to be baptized a­gaine, who had bene formerly baptized by ſuch a church and342 in ſuch a manner as the eſſen­tialls of Baptiſme were want­ing, ſo the Arrians baptized, which rendred that ordinance vayne and null.

The ſame may be affirmed more fully of infant Baptiſme, that it is null and nothing, and therefore that the partie ſo ſup­poſed to be baptized, is indeed ſtill unbaptized, and therefore ought to be baptized accord­ing to the inſtitution of Chriſt, which Baptiſme, when he hath once receav'd, he cā in no way (as is before ſhewed) be ſayd to be rebaptiz'd; for thoſe thinges which cannot be ſhewen done, no reaſon allowes that they ſhould ſeeme to be reïterated.

343

To proceed therefore, The Sacraments in generall, & par­ticularly Baptiſme, is that by which wee pledge our ſelves to God, or in which a formall co­venant is made, in which wee promiſe obedience, and God protection & defence to be our God, and therefore 1. Pet. 3.21. it is ſtil'd a ſtipulation, or cove­nanting; alſo the word Sacra­ment, is from ſacring, making ho­ly, dedicating, or initiating, as juramentum, an oath, is à jurando, from ſwearing.

In the civill law it ſignified an oath, Sacramenti praestatio, & recuſatio, the taking or refuſing an oath: The word Sacrament alſo is taken for a myſtery, for344 the viſible ſigne of an inviſible grace. In a word Baptiſme ſeemes to be nothing elſe, but the ceremony of a myſticall & ſpirituall marriage, for it is a dedication, a covenant, and a myſtery; and as in marriage be­ſides the words, there hath bene uſually ſome ceremo­nious ſigne, as the giving of a ring, or money, or a kiſſe, or the taking by the hand, ſo here, &c.

To examine this therefore by that ſimilitude and reſem­blance, that which is the firſt and principall ingredient into marriage, is conſent, Nam nup­tias non concubitus, ſed conſenſus fa­cit; Not the bed, but conſent makes marriage; for otherwayes that345 joyning, which is fornication, or adultery, would be mar­riage: This ſtands by vertue of the firſt inſtitution, A man ſhall leave his father and his mother, and cleave to his vvife, Ge. 2.24. How? By covenant and conſent.

This is ſo eſſentiall an ingre­dient, as Beza calls it the for­mall cauſe of marriage, others the efficient cauſe; therefore the lawyers ſay, Solus conſenſus matrimonium facit; Onely conſent makes the marriage. But then this conſent muſt be expreſt out­wardly, Niſi quatenus conſentiunt, & conſenſum ſuum exterius expri­munt; becauſe the covenant & contract is externall.

But then laſtly and eſpecial­ly,346 it muſt be the proper con­ſent of the parties married, for the conſent of the parents, who have ſome & the greateſt pow­er beſides, cannot doe it; hence an error of the perſon, makes the marriage alſo null and in­valid, as if I marry one, & ano­ther be put in the place, by the ſame reaſon, if one of the par­ties be mad conſtantly, be­cauſe they cannot conſent, be­cauſe that ſuppoſes not the con­ſent of the marryers, ſo as here is a formall or efficient fayle in reſpect of the conſent, and a materiall fayle in reſpect of the perſons married, which is as it were the ſubject matter of marriage.

347

Let us ſee what help this ſi­militude will give us to the no­tion of infant Baptiſme.

Firſt the great buſines of mar­riage is conſent of the parties married, this is the efficient or formall cauſe of it, ſo in our myſticall marriage, Baptiſme, the covenant ſtruck betweene God and us, implyes eſpecially the conſent of parties; But by infant Baptiſme the infant is not bound, for hee conſented not; againe conſent muſt be ex­preſt, but the child wantes the juſt ripeneſſe and formation of organs inward and outward for ſuch expreſſions, that cannot be, neither hee cannot will it, becauſe he cannot underſtand348 it, nor can hee expreſſe that which within he hath not.

But may not my friends doe it for me?

Perſonall conſent is required to carnall marriage, whē much depends upō the parents, much more to this myſticall; there­fore as a mad man cannot con­ſent nor expreſſe it, for the trouble & diſtemper of his un­derſtanding, ſo nor an infant for the want of the uſe of it; and for parents, and Godfathers & Godmothers, as they call them, they provooke to duty, incite, and incourage, and teach; but as the covenant is made with us, ſo it muſt be made by us: A child may lawfully marry him­ſelf349 to Chriſt, without the con­ſent of his parents, which in the other marriage hee cannot doe; here is therefore no cove­nant, no bond, becauſe no con­ſent on one party, founded on a preſent impoſſibility, for a co­venant is betvveene tvvo conſenting partyes.

It is not therefore the dipping of the child in water, gives bap­tiſme, no more then the bedd gives marriage, where conſent is wanting.

Here you ſee then a fayle of the great matter in the buſines of the covenant, namely the formall, or as ſome will have it the efficient cauſe; you will find a great fayle alſo in the350 ſubject matter, for here is an error of the perſon; Chriſt looks for a beleever, he makes his co­venant in Baptiſme onely with ſuch, the inſtitution is termi­nated upon them; but here is a poore infant as uncapable for the preſent of beleeving and re­penting, as a mad man is of reaſoning, which yet hee may have in the habit, & therefore of covenanting & conſenting, which is a fruit of that faith; and therefore as a marriage made with a man mad, were null, ſo were it much more a madnes to bring to Baptiſme ſuch an one; and ſee whether it may not be thought to hold of the ſame diſtemper, to offer a351 child to that ſacred fountaine, that in the matter of reaſoning and covenanting can doe no more then a mad man: Yee ſee therefore the great and eſſen­tiall fayle of ſuch a Baptiſme, ſo eſſentiall as it makes it a nul­lity, as the like in marriage ren­ders it null and voyd.

Now then to goe on, if there be no bond, no covenant in this infant Baptiſme, no obligation, which is the mayne of it, then there is no ſealing, for a ſeale ſerves but to ratify & confirme a bond and covenant. Againe, as there is no bond, nor ſealing, ſo there is no exhibition, or conveyance of any thing from Chriſt, for there are no pipes to350〈1 page duplicate〉351〈1 page duplicate〉352receive it, that is, as an ordi­nance, there is no reaſon in the uſe of it, no faith, no ſence; you may ſpeake aloude, and ſay, this ſignifies the death of Chriſt, & this his reſurrection, by this you are buried and mortified, and by this quickned; but the child is aſleepe, or dead, or as good; here is no receptive fa­culty, proportionable to the or­dinance, in the manner of con­veighing it.

When Chriſt will ſpeake in an inviſible, ſecret, unknowne and unconceavable way, hee doth it without the help of an outward & viſible ordinance; when Iohn was ſanctified in the wombe, hee needed no word or353 ſigne to conveigh it to him; but here, if Chriſt conveighes not himſelf Sacramētally by words & ſignes, and repreſentations, hee conveyes not himſelf at all by vertue of the Sacrament. So that as there was a fayle in the forme of contract, or covenant, and in the ſubject matter of this ordinance, there is an error of the perſon, ſo alſo in the ends of this Sacrament on Chriſts part, of which you have heard, namely, ſealing up to us our union with Chriſt, and every good thing, and exhibiting & conveighing himſelf to us, in the uſe of this ordinance; and for us who by this meanes ſhould forme a formall cōtract354 with God, and ſhould give a te­ſtimony of our piety and obe­dience to God, Iohn 4.1. And ſecondly ſhould diſtinguiſh our ſelves by this badge, or charra­cter of our profeſſion, from the prophanes of the world, with ſome more of that kind, we are capable of doing nothing, in a buſines ſo active, no more then of receiving, ſo as upon the whole matter, & as the ſumme of this diſcourſe Infant Bap­tiſme is a nullity, as much as the marrying of infants, or the ordination of infants, which latter in ſome parts of the world is alſo in uſe, which all men will judge a nullity; the ordi­nance hath bene profaned to355 ſuch, out of a well meaning ig­norance, and hee that will par­take of that great ordinance, as it is our duty and priviledges, muſt knowingly & beleeving­ly be baptized in the name of the Lord Ieſus; which ordi­nance, when wee have once re­ceived aright, it is, as I ſaid in the beginning, not to be repea­ted.

If any man ſhall ſay, that conſent afterwards may make up the defect, and that there be many things which were ill done, which yet ſtand good when they are done? I anſwer, There may be many great fayles in an action, which may not make it null or nothing; as356 for one to marry one of ano­ther religion, or without ſome due conſents, makes it an ill or an unlawfull marriage, but it doth not make it no marriage; but thoſe eſſentiall fayles, which may be ſaid to nullify it, can never be repaired by any act afterwards; now ſuch are the fayles of infant Baptiſme, as I have prooved, ſuch as enter into the very eſſence of it, na­mely the formall and materiall cauſes, ſo as if you aſke what I lay to the charge of infant Bap­tiſme, I ſay that it is nothing, as the Scripture ſaith that an Idole is nothing, not but that there is a great deale of buſines made of it, as if it were ſome­thing,357 which all can contribute or conferre nothing to the eſ­ſence or being of it, ſo as he that will affirme that after conſent may make that pretended Bap­tiſme reall & true, muſt proove firſt that it hath not failed in its eſſentialls, which I have alrea­dy prooved Baptiſme to have done. To conclude, a man may receive many wounds, and be miſerably disfigured, looſe ma­ny members or parts, and yet remayne a man, but let out the rationall ſoule, which is his forme, but by the prick of a pin, and that which remaynes is no more a man, but a carcaſſe, be­cauſe the cōſtitutive eſſentiall, which is his forme, is gone, and358 it muſt be an Almighty power that muſt give him his being, and denomination of a man againe; of what act ſoever yee may juſtly ſay this is a nullity, that no after act can repaire to give it a being, it may now take upō it ſuch a being as that pre­tended to, but to that it can give no being.

But ſecondly, to urge the for­mer objection a little farther, you will ſay parhaps, That that which is given, cannot be un­given, but to Infants Baptiſme is given already. I anſwer, It is true that which is given can­not be ſayd to be ungiven, but to Infants the Sacrament of Baptiſme is not given, but one­ly359 a certain externall waſhing, with certain externall rites & ceremonies: And the patrons of infant Baptiſme, I hope, will pardon me, if what Chamier affirme of Baptiſme, not given by a right Miniſter; I with much more equity and reaſon affirme here, that it is not a Sa­crament, but a raſhe mockery or deceaving, by no meanes to be indur'd in the Church, Te­merariam ludificationem nullo modo tolerandam in Eccleſia. Tom. 4. Pan­stratiae lib. 5. cap. 14. ſ. 8. The Imperiall Conſtitutions carry, Ʋt ea quae contra leges fiunt non ſo­lum inutilia, ſed etiam pro infectis habenda ſunt; That thoſe things which are done againſt law, are360 not onely unprofitable, but are to be accounted for not done, which rule they ſay is to be un­derſtood of thoſe things where the cauſe of the prohibition is perpetuall, as for example, Ne filius contrahat cummatre, the ſon ſhould not contract with his mother; now the perpetuall cauſe of prohibition is the ſtan­ding law of God, not changed by God himſelf, and in which God himſelf hath not diſpen­ced, as is urged by a late & lear­ned Author. So as that which contradicts the ſtanding rules of God, in the determination & regulating of his ordinances (as Baptiſme given to infants hath largely bene prooved to do)361 muſt by no meanes be accoun­ted an adminiſtration or giving of that ordinance, but as be­fore, a raſh and unadviſed moc­kery of it, or playing with it.

In the third place you may poſſibly object, That Baptiſme requires for the ſubject a true beleever, ſuppoſe an hypocrite profeſſe faith, and ſubmit him­ſelf to the ordinance, will not here be by the ſame reaſō cauſe of Baptiſme, the former being alſo a nullity in reſpect of the true intent of Baptiſme. Anſw. How farre ſuch a caſe may re­quire another Baptiſme, I ſhall not need to determine, if it ſhould, that makes nothing a­gainſt the other, but that that362 doth alſo and more. But here I ſhall put a cleare diſtinction, and help my ſelf by the former ſimilitude of marriage. There be ſome eſſentiall fayles, as I told you, that make marriage a nullity, no ſubſequent act can releeve that, as to give it the denomination of a being then, when it was a nullity; as for ex­ample, conſent afterwards can­not make the no conſent of in­fants to be a marriage, but it gives forme or being to a mar­riage, when the conſent is gi­ven, the like is true of Baptiſme.

But in marriage betweene perſons of yeares, there may be a formall marriage with an hy­pocriticall conſent, a man may363 profeſſe faith in marriage to ſuch a woman, but may intend onely to gayne her eſtate by that pretence & leave her; now the great ingredient unto con­ſent, ſhould be truth and realli­ty, but the fayle of that ſhall by no meanes nullify the mar­riage, he ſhall be ever bound to the duty of a huſband, though hee ſhould profeſſe to have diſ­ſembled his conſent, nor ſhall there be any need of a new marriage, or expreſſing of con­ſent to tye him to it, which the former doth ſufficiently, what ever his intents were. Becauſe that to the reaſon and being of marriage, there is nothing re­quiſite, but that there be a due364 externall performing of the eſ­ſentialls of it. The like may be avowed of Baptiſme, if a man repenting and confeſſing his ſinnes, beleeving and profeſ­ſing ſubjection, be baptized according to the right forme and ceremony of Baptiſme, I ſee not the ground of repeti­tion, what ever the internall fayles may ſeeme to be either of true righteouſnes on mans part, or of preſent influence on Gods part, which are deſire­able to the happy being of Bap­tiſme, elſe ſo often as men find not that preſent influence on Gods part, which to him is free, or doubt of their former ſtate and condition, ſo often365 there muſt be a repetition of Baptiſme, which I ſee no groūd for; the ordinance which is an externall ceremony, having all its externall eſſentialls to the true being of that ordinance; and as the remayning forme produces its effect, when the impediment is taken away, as for example, heavines in a ſtoane carryes it downe, when the impediment is taken away the hand that held it up, ſo Bap­tiſme externally rightly admi­niſtred, may attayne his end, when God takes away the im­pediment.

The like may be ſaid of or­dination, or admiſſion into church fellowſhip, which can­not366 be called a nullity, though the perſons ſhould proove hy­pocrites or unholy, as appeares by this, that ſuch perſons are capable of excommunication, which implyes them members, and the ordinance duly admi­niſtred, notwithſtanding that there may be great internall fayles, but would be certainly a nullity, if ſuch admiſſion or ordination were in infancy, in ſleepe, or in the time of mad­neſſe, as I ſaid before; But what ever the caſe of the Baptiſme of hypocrites may proove (of which notwithſtanding I have told you my opinion) it makes not much to this queſtion, for if it proove not a nullity, it is be­cauſe367 they fayle not in the eſ­ſentialls, if they ſhould require Baptiſme a new, then Baptiſme in infācy much more, in whom it is moſt cleare the fayles of Baptiſme were eſſentiall.

And it is not my part ſo much to proove, that there are no o­ther cauſes of repeating of Baptiſme, as that in this there is cauſe full and ſufficient, to give them a true reall Baptiſme, whoſe pretended Baptiſme, in reſpect of its eſſentiall fayles, prooves voide and nothing.

368

CHAP. XVII. In which is conſidered the time and ranke that Baptiſme is to hold in the order of Ordi­nances.

THere are but two thinges, which I ſhall farther conſi­der, upon this ſubject, the one is the time & order of Baptiſme, the other is the Miniſter of Baptiſme.

That there is an order in all the worſhip of the New Teſta­ment, no man will deny that hath learn't with Paul, to joy in beholding the order and faith of the Saints, Col. 2.5. and none will acknowledge this more then they, who deny themſelves of ſome very conſiderable ordi­nances, for want of comeing to them in the right order, as the369 Lords ſupper for wāt of church fellowſhip: Every thing is ſea­ſonable and bewtifull in its time, out of which it is diſorder­ly and evill, to find the order & time of Baptiſme, will I con­ceive be the eaſieſt thing in all this inquiry, whether you con­ſider Scripture rule, Scripture example, or example of the pri­mitive Church, and indeed of all that ever was, or the reaſon of the thing.

For Scripture rule ye have, Teach all nations, and baptize them, Mat. 28.19. make diſciples and baptize. Marke 16.16. Hee that beleeveth and is baptized, ſhall be ſaved: You ſee here the ranke of Baptiſme immediately after370 teaching, after beleeving, it holds the firſt place of ordinan­ces properly Chriſtian; ye may ſee it againe in the rule in Pe­ters preaching, Repent and be baptized, Acts 2.38. which was inſtantly put in practiſe, which is our ſecond head of proofe, namely Scripture example, for they that gladly received his vvord, vvere preſently baptized, to the num­ber of three thouſand, ver. 41. after which they continued constantly in the liturgicall vvorkes of the Apo­stles doctrine, and breaking bread, & in prayer, ver. 42. In the example of the Eunuch you have the ſame, aſſoone as ever Ieſus was preached, and hee diſcovered water, vvhat hinders me, ſaith he,371 to he baptized? nothing, ſaith Phi­lip, if thou haſt faith, ſo he was inſtantly baptized, Acts 8.38. The like ye have of Cornelius, who upon the firſt preaching of Chriſt, before the aſſembly was diſſolved, was baptized he and his, Acts 10.48. The like you have of the Iaylor Act. 16. to whom at midnight (being a­ſtoniſhed by a miraculous ac­tion) the vvord vvas preacht, and to all in his houſe, and he and all his be­leeving, vvere forthvvith all of them baptized. Here was no loſſe of time, and for the order, it was after faith, and before any o­ther adminiſtration; more ex­amples might be brought of this kind, out of which that370〈1 page duplicate〉371〈1 page duplicate〉372which I conclude is, the order and time of Baptiſme, namely the next ordinance to belee­ving, not but that I would have fit time allowed for the tryall of faith, wherein to be ſure the Apoſtles were not negligent of their duty.

For the primitive times wee can have no better inſtances then what we heare of the Ca­techuminy, who were exclud­ed not onely from the Eucha­riſt, but from the very ſight thereof; and therefore after the word, Sancta Sanctis, they went out, not becauſe they were without faith, for there were two ſorts, audientes, & competen­tes, or electi, the firſt were begin­ners,373 which heard ſermons, & had a deſire to Chriſt, the other were ſuch as deſired Baptiſme, and had given up their names for it, as Auſtin mentions in li­bro de cura pro mortui cap. 12. and others alſo.

Now theſe were ſuppoſed to have faith, and wayted onely a fit time for the adminiſtration of Baptiſme, during which time they were farre enough from being admitted to the Lords Supper, though beleevers jud­ged, but on the other ſide, aſ­ſoone as ever they were bapti­zed, they had Baptiſme, confir­mation, or laying on of hands, and the Lords Supper on the ſame day.

374

And of this the Fathers give a reaſon. In all reſpects the order of the mystery is kept, that first by re­miſsion of ſinnes a medicine be prepa­red for their vvounds, and then the nouriſhment of the heavenly table be added. Ambroſe &c. And as this was obſerved ſtrickly to the ca­techuminy, ſo every body will grant me that to infant Bap­tiſme, this order is ſurely main­tayned.

If you paſſe from precept & example of all times to reaſon, there you will find that what ever makes for the not repeat­ing of Baptiſme in the ordina­ry uſe of it, makes alſo for this as fully or more that it ſhould be the firſt.

375

For firſt, if it be not to be re­peated, becauſe this is the ſeale of initiation, regeneration, and incorporatiō, then by the ſame reaſon this muſt be firſt, as ini­tiation, admiſſion, incorpora­tion, and regeneration, are the firſt internall acts in us, & upon us, by which we are made Chri­ſtians.

Secondly if the ſignifi­cation and uſe of Baptiſme be for ever, and of conſtant & per­petuall uſe, then this ordinance is to lye as the bottome ſtone in the building of ordinances, which is to have a durable and conſtant influence into the whole edifice.

Or thirdly if this be not to376 be repeated, becauſe neither in precept nor example you find it ſo, then muſt this be the firſt, becauſe in precept & example you find it ſo, and never other­wiſe, or if the ends of Baptiſme on our parts (not to mention further thoſe on Chriſts) be, that there ſhould be a formall externall contract paſt with God, by which wee are viſibly handfaſted in this myſticall marriage, or ſecondly to diſtin­guiſh our ſelves by this badge and charracter of our profeſ­ſiō from the evill world, which we renounce with all its works, then certainly this peece is to be firſt adminiſtred before we goe further, and the Sacrament377 of our ſpirituall life and birth, is to be given before that of our nouriſhment and growth: In a word Baptiſme hath bene cal­led of old, & not without rea­ſon, Sacramentorum janua; and is for all theſe conſiderations, which are as many as can con­curre to any one thing, to keep that name & nature ſtill, which is to be the firſt and primitive Sacrament, in which a conver­ted perſon, man or woman, is to communicate. Now thē if the timeing and order of inſtituted worſhip be any thing, as it is of great moment, a great part of it lying in nothing elſe, but the right and orderly adminiſtra­tion of ceremonies, and if the378 Scripture rule and example be any thing, which is all we have to ſhew for any practiſe, then Baptiſme is to be the firſt Sa­crament after beleeving.

Beſides the reaſon of the thing, that which makes it un­lawfull to baptize before teach­ing is, becauſe the Scripture hath rankt it otherwiſe, that ſayes, teach and baptize, not baptize and teach, as the Pa­piſts and others doe; the ſame reaſon will hold for the giving it its preference in time to any other ordinance, becauſe it is rankt immediately after teach­ing, & before any other thing, againe you have the fulleſt con­currence of all example & rea­ſon379 alſo, for the timeing and ranking of this ordinance, as for any thing can be thought.

To what hath bene ſaid in this laſte point, I ſhall onely ad by way of caution, with which I conclude it, that when I give Baptiſme the firſt place in the ranke of ordinances, after be­leeving, I intend not ſuch ex­preſſions to the prejudice of church-fellowſhip, which I conceave is properly the ſtate for inſtituted ordinances, and the ſubject of them, as will more fully appeare by what will be ſayd in the following chapter.

380

CHAP. XVIII. Wherein by way of concluſion, is treated of the Miniſter of Baptiſme, and ſhewed where that power rests, which is to conveigh to us that bleſſed Ordinance, which hath bene all this while the ſubject of our diſcourſe.

WE have found out the ſub­ject of Baptiſme to be a be­leever onely, (that is) one pro­feſſing faith in Chriſt, and ſub­jection to his ordinances; upon which conſideration wee have found cauſe to reject the Bap­tiſme of infants as a vanity of mens invention, and our owne received then, as voyde & null; we have alſo found in the order of Sacraments Baptiſme to be the firſt; the next thing we are to ſpeake of is the Miniſter of this Sacrament, that wee may381 know whence, and how to re­ceive it. And here to omit ma­ny things which might be con­ſidered under this head more generally, & alſo not to trouble our ſelves with the handling of this controverſy, as it is ſtated betweene us and the Papiſts, who putting a more ſimple and abſolute neceſſity upon this or­dinance then is its due, expoſe it in caſe of ſuch neceſſity, to the adminiſtration of all ſorts of people, of what condition or ſex ſoever they be, wee ſhall onely take thoſe two things for graunted, or at leaſt deny them not; firſt, That the errour of the Miniſter doth not enter the eſſence of Baptiſme, nor is of382 thoſe things that can deſtroy it, and make it null: And ſe­condly that by the opinion of antiquity, and learned men, there were certain neceſſitous & extraordinary caſes, where­in others might be uſed for Bap­tiſme, then ſuch as were the or­dinary Miniſters of it.

But now becauſe it is one thing to be, and another thing to be rightly, or well, in rela­tion to our ſelves, and the ordi­nary and orderly adminiſtra­tion of Baptiſme, we ſhall con­ſider whether Baptiſme be a thing of publick or private co­gniſance, and to what predica­ment it belongs, and whether it pretends, which will be the383 bounds of this diſcourſe, and ſhew us whence it is to be fetcht and derived.

That it is a thing of publicke cogniſance, appeares to me both by the primitive commiſ­ſion, and primitive practiſe, the commiſſion lyes Matt. 28.19. Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost.

In the 18. verſe Chriſt tells his Diſciples, that all povver is gi­ven to him in heaven & earth, theſe were his letters patents, by which hee ſhewed hee did no­thing without power and good warrant; now he goes into hea­ven as into one part of his king­dome,384 which was quiet and at peace, and ſitting there at the right hand of his Father, gives an Apoſtolicall commiſſion for all the earth, ſo Marke 16.15. Go into the vvhole vvorld, preach the Goſpell to every creature; here hee oppoſes the whole earth to the bounds and limits of Iudea (by which the Prophets of old were bounded in their adminiſtra­tions) That, he had by an here­ditary right, hee ſent therefore to them, firſt with this caveat, that they ſhould not go into the vvay of the Gentiles, nor enter into any city of the Samaritans, Matth. 10.5. But now by his death & reſurrection, having acquired a right of reigning over all385 men, he gives a commiſſion for all the world, this is Apoſtoli­call, for hee bids them go forth into all the world, which is pro­perly the word of Apoſtolicall commiſſion, whoſe dioceſſe had no bounds, and if not here, where can any Apoſtolicall commiſſion be found? And he tells them their great workes, which was to preach and bap­tize, for although Paul ſayes 1. Cor. 1.17. that hee vvas ſent by Christ not to baptize, but to preach the Goſpell, that muſt be under­ſtood with a limitation, that he was not ſent eſpecially to bap­tize, becauſe the adminiſtra­tion of the Sacraments, which are the appendixes and ſeales,386 though it need as much power, yet a leſſe gift then the preach­ing of the word.

And behold I am vvith you to the end of the vvorld. Here is a word of great incouragemēt & com­fort, Chriſt had told them be­fore, hee was Lord of heaven & earth; he ſends them to manage a great worke, but ſayes hee I will be with you, that is, who ever is publikely deputed for ſuch a ſervice, as they need more eſpecially aſſiſtāce, ſo they ſhall have it, and here he makes a playne difference betweene the makers of Diſciples, & Diſ­ciples to be made; Hee vvill be vvith them eſpecially as they need it most, to vvhom the charge of teach­ing387 and baptizing is deputed; for the Apoſtles were not to continue alwayes, as the world was to be gone through but once, and in­ſtitutions to be ſet up but once, but a publike power was ſtill left, which ſucceeded this A­poſtolicall, which in the next place we come to conſider of, that ſo finding where the com­miſſion reſts, wee may addreſſe our ſelves thither for ordinan­ces, and expect the bleſſing of Chriſts being with it unto the end of the world, for this is a ſtate continuing to the end of the world, to the change of all things.

Now this clearly is the Church, which is the ſubject388 of Eccleſiaſticall policy and power, as the common-wealth is of civill power, ſo as Eccleſia­ſticall and Church power, is eſſentially and primarily in the Church as in the ſubject, Mat. 16. ver. 18.19. And I ſay unto thee that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I vvill build my church, and the gates of hell ſhall not prevaile againſt it: And I vvill give unto thee the keyes of the kingdome of heaven, &c. So as though the uſe of the keyes be divers, according to the variety of callings, and con­ditions in the Church, yet the power of the keyes originally and primarily is given to the Church, for Peter here beares but the perſon of the Church,389 as in other places in which hee anſwers for others, and Chriſt alſo ſpeakes to him as adreſſing himſelf to the Church by him. This is a thing ſo commonly avowed and defended by Pro­teſtāts againſt Papiſts, as I ſhall not need here to proove it. Alſo that other knowne place of Matth. 18.17. Tell the Church, where both Church ſtate, and Church power are clearely ſpokē of: Now where the pow­er of admitting, receaving and caſting out is, there is the pow­er of adminiſtring and commu­nicating all ordinances to the edification of the ſame body; and they which have power of adminiſtring the kingly office390 of Chriſt, conſiſting in caſting out and receaving in, have alſo power of adminiſtring his Pro­pheticall office, of which the Sacraments are a part, & there­fore to the Chriſtian churches, as to the Iewes of old, pertain­eth the publike diſpenſations and ſervices of God. Rom. 9.4.

And hence it followes, that ſuch as were deputed by the church for their Miniſters and officers, were called overſeers, made by the holy Ghoſt, and were to be imitators of the A­poſtles, to whom ordinarily in the executive part they ſuc­ceeded, Acts 20.17.18.19.28.

Hence Peter calls himſelf a fellow Elder, with the ordinary391 Elders, 1. Pet. 5.1. The Elders vvhich are among you I exhort, vvho am alſo an Elder, &c.

To conclude this head, a man becomes a Prophet and able to teach, by vertue of a gift, na­mely of knowledge and utter­ance, 1. Cor. 1.5. But no gift renders a Baptizer, but a call, as being a thing of publike co­gniſance & commiſſiō. Teach­ing out of a gift hath its foun­dation in nature, which ariſeth from a perſonall gift and grace of the ſpirit. But Baptiſme, cen­ſures, ordination and the like, depend not upon a ſpeciall gift, but are acts of power, confer­red authoritatively upon a ſpe­ciall perſon. And thus much392 for the primitive commiſſion for Baptiſme, which falls under a publike cogniſance, upō per­ſons qualified by publike au­thority for the adminiſtration of it.

Next we conſider in this diſ­courſe, primitive practiſe and example, for according to this power & commiſſion, you will find it runne in the example.

The firſt Baptizer who intro­duced that ordinance, & from thence drew his name, Iohn the Baptist, to be ſure had commiſ­ſion for that and all other parts of his miniſtry, according to the prophecies went on him in Eſay and Malachy, Hee came in the ſpirit and povver of Elias, vvas393 the great restorer of Iſrael, this no man will deny. Then Chriſt in the 4. of Iohn is ſaid to baptize (but by his Diſciples) who re­ceived commiſſion for that ad­miniſtration from his perſon & preſence, himſelf either inten­ding to the greater workes of miracles, or teaching, or elſe might abſtaine purpoſely that thoſe baptized by him, might not vaunt of a greater privi­ledge then others. In like man­ner it is probable Peter the A­poſtle communicated of his au­thority to thoſe who were with him, for the baptizing of Cor­nelius and his family, for it is ſayd verſ. 48. of Acts 10. He com­manded them to be baptized in the394 name of the Lord; unles it were ei­ther that of thoſe brethrē there were inferiour officers, or that by commanding is ment, the warrant he gave to Cornelius, & his companie for Baptiſme, of which notwithſtanding hee himſelf might be the Miniſter.

Of the Apoſtles commiſſion you have heard already, you may find it in the execution in divers paſſages.

For others who baptized (ſa­ving thoſe who drew their com­miſſion from Church power, of whom wee ſhall ſpeake after­ward) wee read of Philip and Ananias, the one, to wit Philip, was an Euangeliſt, an order as it is taken of a publike authori­ty395 and commiſſion, as the A­poſtles were. Beſides he had an eſpeciall authority and provo­cation from the ſpirit at that time, for the miniſtry hee had to performe about the Eunuch, by which ſpirit alſo he was mi­raculouſly taken away after the worke done, as you may read Acts the 8. And for Ananias of whom wee read in the 9. of the Acts, that he baptized Paul, he was alſo deputed in an extraor­dinary manner to that miniſte­ry by the Lord, who ſpoke to him in a viſion; And ſuch extra­ordinary and peculiar manner of workings, where the mini­ſtery of converſion lay in a mi­racle, and the Miniſters were396 men acted to it, as appeares by divine revelation, muſt not be drawn into ordinary examples, and here we find alſo particular commiſſion: but thus farre in the example it makes cleare for what wee ſay, that the admini­ſtration of Baptiſme is a thing of publike cogniſance & com­miſſion.

That it hath bene ſince the Apoſtolicall times ſo, is as cleare out of all ſtory, of which the notion of the Catechuminiſts will give an aſſured witnes; Chriſtians in the Church were antiently diſtinguiſht by three degrees, Catechumini, Fideles and Poenitentes; the Catechumeni, or ſuch as were principled in the397 Chriſtian religion, the faith­full & the penitents; the faith­full were ſuch as being paſt the forme of Catechiſts, were ad­mitted to all ordinances, & the penitents were ſuch as had fal­len into ſome ſcandall, & were under cenſure.

The Catechumeni were ſuch (as Origen cont. Celſ. lib. 3. ſayes) vvho vvere nevvly admitted into ſome degree of communion, but not yet bap­tized; of theſe mention is made in the moſt ancient writers Ire­neus, Clemens Alexand. Ter­tullian. Of theſe Clemens ſaith, Sine catechiſmo nulli datur credere; vvithout catechiſing no body can be­leeve.

Of this number ſome (as I398 have formerly had occaſion to ſpeake) were called Audientes, ſome Competentes. The Audientes were ſuch as ſubmitted them­ſelves to teaching by the hear­ing of the word, and being in­ſtructed in the principles of re­ligion, which by their ſubmiſ­ſion and pretence to farther or­dinances, got the name of Ca­techiſts, for otherwiſe neither Iew nor Gentile, nor any were excluded from hearing the word. Conc. 4. Carth. Can. 84.

The competentes, or competitors, were ſuch as being well inſtru­cted in the Chriſtian religion, deſired Baptiſme, and gave up their names, of theſe Auſtin ſayes, Post ſermonem fit miſſa Cate­chumenis,399 manebant fideles. Ser. de Temp. 137. After the ſermon the Catechumini were diſmiſt, the faithfull remayned, to par­take of the Supper & other or­dinances, which partained to full memberſhip.

Out of all this, beſides the pur­poſe for which I eſpecially bring it, two things may be ob­ſerved by the way.

Firſt that of old men were not lightly admitted to the com­munion and fellowſhip of the Church, but after due inſtru­ction and examination.

Secondly that it was uſuall of old to ſtand as competitor for Baptiſme, as a Candidate, as we call them, to ſeeke and deſire it before they had it.

400

But the end for which I eſpe­cially bring this here, is to ſhew that in all times of the Church Baptiſme hath bene a thing of publike cogniſance, and the commiſſion for the adminiſtra­tion of it hath reſted, ſince the times of the Apoſtles, no where but in Church power, nor hath bene no where elſe ſought, nor never by any otherwiſe preten­ded to it I know, ſaving of late yeares by thoſe upon whom the name of Anabaptiſts was primitively and properly fixt, who erring greatly in many other things of as great conſe­quence, might eaſily be miſta­ken in this.

Theſe two things in a word I401 ſuppoſe out of this diſcourſe is evinced, which will directly point out the Miniſter of Bap­tiſme.

Firſt that Baptiſme is a thing of publike cogniſance & com­miſſion.

Secondly that as of old ſince the Apoſtles times, ſo now and alwayes till Chriſt come, the Church is the diſpenſer of ſuch commiſſions and adminiſtra­tions.

That which remaynes now therefore is to find out what a Church is, wherein I hope wee are not to ſeeke.

A Church in a word may be ſaid to be an aſſembly of ſaints, knit together to a fellowſhip402 with Chriſt their head.

I intend not here a diſcourſe of this ſubject, it is enough to my purpoſe that this be conſi­dered and allowed, that belee­ving and ſaintſhip, gives a qua­lification for Church fellow­ſhip, and Church fellowſhip for acts of power, & that Baptiſme doth no more enter the defini­tion of a church, as if a church ſtate could not be without Bap­tiſme, then the communion of the Lords Supper doth, or offi­cers, Paſtors, Elders and Dea­cons. All theſe are but certain acts, by which they make good their fellowſhip with Chriſt, and one another, & are church ordinances, and church dues,403 thinges they have power for, & may juſtly pretend to. Though it will ordinarily be, that a church will conſiſt of baptized perſons, for what ſhould hinder them who have aſſembled for the injoying of ordinances, and who have power for all ordi­nances, from adminiſtring to themſelves in a way of order that ordinance, which is as it were the gate of the reſt, and as wee may call it (for ought I know according to the old name) the ordinance of initia­tion, ſince it is the firſt of church ordinances, the Church cove­nant & aſſembling being more properly called the ſtate for in­joying of ordinances, and the404 ſubject of all ordinances; ſo as ordinarily a church will be an aſſembly of baptized Saints, though the word Baptiſme be no part of the definition, nor doth Baptiſme contribute more to the being of a church, then o­ther ordinances, which for a time they may want. So as yee ſee clearly where to fetch Bap­tiſme, namely where a compa­nie of Saints are gathered toge­ther in Chriſts name, that is, in his power, there is authority a­mongſt them for all commiſ­ſions, for acts of church fellow­ſhip, for the deputing and or­daining of officers, and for the adminiſtration of all ordinan­ces.

405

But here it may be parhaps objected, to which I will ſpeake a word, that Baptiſme not being the ordinance of admiſ­ſion into the Church, nor par­haps neceſſarily to follow af­ter, but may be before it, how appartaynes it to the Church? Anſw. The rule will hold uni­verſally true, that all inſtituted ordinances (of which Baptiſme is one) will fall under the cog­niſance and power of an inſti­tuted body, whether therefore Baptiſme be adminiſtred after admittāce, which in an ordina­ry way ſeemes better, or whe­ther it may precede it, it will be all one in the iſſue, ſince it is in order to church fellowſhip,406 and a full church communion; Now what ever is in order to it, as well as that which follows it, falls under church cogni­ſance and power, and therefore catechiſing, taking account of faith, yea and preaching the word by way of power in order to the converſion of others, eſpecially if they offer and ſub­mit themſelves, falls under Church power; now no man is baptized with a priviledge to go about the world at large, but to live in all the ordinances of Chriſt, and to receive nou­riſhment as well as birth, and the ſeales of both from the church: And therefore as be­fore, I like well for Baptiſme407 the title of the ordinance of initiation, as which in the or­der of ordinances is the firſt, & pretends to further.

Laſtly this rightly ſtated & conſidered, it cannot reaſona­bly be objected, that hee that baptizeth ſhould neceſſarily be himſelf a baptized perſon, for though ordinarily it will be ſo, yet it is not neceſſary to the or­dinance, no more then it is ſim­ply neceſſary to a church ſtate, that the members be baptized, for not the perſonall Baptiſme of him that adminiſters, but the due commiſſion hee hath for baptizing, is alone conſide­rable to make him a true Mini­ſter of Baptiſme; And here that408 expreſſion holds not, one can­not give what hee hath not, as a man cannot teach me that wants knowledge himſelf, be­cauſe no man gives his owne Baptiſme, but conveyes as a publike perſon, that which is givē us by Chriſt: A poore man that hath nothing of his owne, may give me gold, that is the money of another man, by ver­tue of being ſent for that pur­poſe; ſo if any man can ſhew his commiſſion, the writing & ſeale of him that ſent him, it is enough here, elſe what would become of the great Baptizer Iohn the Baptiſt, who had a fayer commiſſion to baptize, but was not himſelf baptized409 that we read of, or if hee ſhould be, which cannot be affirmed, yet the firſt Baptizer, who ever hee was, muſt at the time of his firſt adminiſtration of that or­dinance be unbaptized.

To conclude, in this diſcourſe of the Miniſter of Baptiſme, we have ſhewed eſpecially theſe particulars.

1 That the due adminiſtra­tion of Baptiſme hath bene al­wayes, and is an act of power and commiſſion.

2 That the Churches of Chriſt are now the onely ſub­ject of this power, and are be­truſted with diſpēſing all com­miſſions for the adminiſtra­tions of ordinances, of which410 Baptiſme is one, whether it be adminiſtred after admiſſion in­to Church fellowſhip, (which parhaps will be the uſuall way) or before, (but as other things) in order to it.

3 That Baptiſme doth not enter the definitiō of a church, as Saintſhip profeſt and mani­feſted doth, nor is it ſimply ne­ceſſary to the Miniſter of Bap­tiſme that he be himſelf bapti­zed, ſince his qualification for that worke, ariſeth from his commiſſion, not from his Baptiſme.

FINIS.

The heads of the Chapters.

CHAP. I. Page 1.
Wherein, of the firſt and great end of that or­dinance, the ſealing up of our union with Chriſt, and more particularly, of the moſt illustrious type of Baptiſmeall ſealing, in the Baptiſme of Chriſt.
CHAP. II. Page 18.
Wherein of the ſecond great uſe and end of Baptiſme, aſſuring us of our Iuſtification in the remiſsion of all our ſinnes, together with certain corollaries and inforcements.
CHAP. III. Page 38.
Wherein of a third great uſe and end of Bap­tiſme, whereby is ſealed our communion with Chriſt in his holynes, to wit, a death unto ſinne, and a riſing to newneſſe of life.
CHAP. IV. Page 48.
Wherein is ſhewed the report which the cere­mony of Baptiſme hath, to the forementio­ned ends and uſes of that ordinance; alſo ſome Corollaries.
CHAP. V. Page 58.
In which the proper ceremony of Baptiſme is vindicated by the force of the word, Scrip­ture practiſe, the ſuffrage of learned men, and the uſe of ancient times.
CHAP. VI. Page 101.
Wherein is ſhewed the agreements and diffe­rences that the word preached hath with the Sacraments, together with certain Co­rollaries giving light to the preſent contro­verſy.
CHAP. VII. Page 121.
In which is layd downe the relative and per­ſonall qualifications by which infants are uſually intituled to Baptiſme, by our moſt conſiderable Proteſtant Divines.
CHAP. VIII. Page 143.
In which are contained ſeverall queries and conſiderations, raiſed from the premiſſes, declaring what little ground there will ap­peare from their owne principles and con­ceſsions to conclude for Infant Baptiſme.
CHAP. IX. Page 160.
In which entrance is made into the conſidera­tion of the great argument for Infant Bap­tiſme, drawne from the circumciſion of In­fants, by way of anſwer whereunto five particulars are handled, the firſt whereof is treated on in this Chapter, namely what circumciſion was to the Jewes, and whether the qualification requiſite to it was regene­ration, or the infuſion of gratious habits.
CHAP. X. Page 179.
In which is handled the ſecond particular, pro­poſed in anſwer to the argument drawne from Circumciſion, to wit, how farre the or­dinances of the old Teſtament ſhould regu­late and determine by way of rule and in­ſtitution thoſe of the New.
CHAP. XI. Page 190.
Wherein is diſcuſſed the third particular in anſwer to the argument drawne from cir­cumciſion; ſcil. How we are ingrafted into Abrahams covenant, and by what title wee are call'd Abrahams children.
CHAP. XII. Page 210.
Wherein is handled the fourth Queſtion, pro­poſed to anſwer the argument drawne from Circumciſion, to wit, How farre the Iewes by vertue of their being the ſonnes of Abra­ham, could pretend to new Teſtament Ordi­nances, wherein alſo, beſides ſeverall others, that much agitated place is opened & con­ſidered of, Acts 2.38.39.
CHAP. XIII. Page 237.
Wherein is handled the fifth and laſt queſtion in anſwer to the argument drawn from cir­cumciſion, ſcil. whether Infants not prooving the ſubject of Baptiſme, the priviledges of Chriſtians and their ſtate, may not juſtly be ſaid to be as great as the priviledges of the Jewes and their ſtate.
CHAP. XIV. Page 259.
In which is conſidered that famous and much urged place of 1. Cor. 7.14. Elſe were your children uncleane, but now are they holy.
CHAP. XV. Page 278.
In which the authority of the Fathers, and the practiſe of antiquity, touching the ſubject of Baptiſme, is conſidered.
CHAP. XVI. Page 333.
In which is handled, whether Baptiſme be to be repeated; but more eſpecially, whether ſuch as were baptized in infancy, ſhould be accounted baptized, or are to have that or­dinance administred to them.
CHAP. XVII. Page 368.
In which is conſidered the time and ranke that Baptiſme is to hold in the order of Ordi­nances.
CHAP. XVIII. Page 380.
Wherein by way of concluſion, is treated of the Miniſter of Baptiſme, and ſhewed where that power rests, which is to conveigh to us that bleſſed Ordinance, which hath bene all this while the ſubject of our diſcourſe.

About this transcription

TextOf baptisme. The heads and order of such things as are especially insisted on, you will find in the table of chapters.
AuthorLawrence, Henry, 1600-1664..
Extent Approx. 296 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 214 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images.
Edition1646
SeriesEarly English books online.
Additional notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 2, no. A88809)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 170641)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 249:E1116[1])

About the source text

Bibliographic informationOf baptisme. The heads and order of such things as are especially insisted on, you will find in the table of chapters. Lawrence, Henry, 1600-1664.. [8], 410. [6] p. s.n.],[Amsterdam? :Printed in the yeare 1646.. (Attributed by Wing and NUC pre-1956 imprints to Lawrence.) (Place of publication conjectured by Wing.) (Annotation on Thomason copy: "Rotterdam"; "Aug: 10th".) (Reproduction of the original in the British Library.)
Languageeng
Classification
  • Baptism -- Early works to 1800.

Editorial statement

About the encoding

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial principles

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.

Publication information

Publisher
  • Text Creation Partnership,
ImprintAnn Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2011-12 (EEBO-TCP Phase 2).
Identifiers
  • DLPS A88809
  • STC Wing L663
  • STC Thomason E1116_1
  • STC ESTC R210176
  • EEBO-CITATION 99868996
  • PROQUEST 99868996
  • VID 170641
Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.