Censure Upon the Dialogue of the Anabaptists, Part 6

Censure Upon the Dialogue of the Anabaptists · Part 6

p. 42Of Baptizing Infants.

AGainst baptising of Infants the adversaries first lay this ground,Pag. 129. Baptisme perteyneth onelyonly to them that declare their repentance and faith to those Disciples of Chri…t that baptise them. This appeareth by Iohn Baptists doctrine and practice, Mar. 1, 4, Mat. 3, 6, and Christs disciples, Joh. 4, 1 & 3 22, by Christs commission for all nations, Mat, 28, 19, Mar. 16.16, by the Apostles practise, Act. 2, 38, 41 & 8, 12, 36 &c.

Answ. That baptisme pertaineth to such as declare their repentance and faith, is true; and the Scriptures alledged proue it. But that it pertaineth to such onelyonly, is untrue: and none of the Scriptures vvhichwhich they bring, doe so teach The infants of the Church, vvhichwhich cannot declare repentance or faith, are also to be baptized, as after shall be manifested.

That the practise taught by the foresaid Scriptures, is to be perpetuall; we grant: and they needed not hauehave taken paines to proue it.

Pag. 131.Infants (say they) may not be baptized, because there is neither commandement, example, nor true consequence for it, in all Christs perfect Testament, &c.

Answ, This we deny: commandement there is for it in Math. 28, and Mark 16, & necessary consequences from many Scriptures confirme it;Pag. 132. as shall be proved.

Baptisme (they say) is in that a good conscience maketh request unto God, 1 Pet. 3.21, it is of repentance for remission of sinnes, Mar. 1.… the washing of the new birth, Tit. 3, 5 &c. If it cannot be proved by the Scriptures that infants hauehave their hearts sprinkled from an evill conscience, hauehave repentance, faith &c. they ought not to be baptized.

Answ. Their argument hath onelyonly a shew, no substance of truth. For first a man might frame as good a reason thus: Circumcision is not that which is outward in the fl…sh, but that of the heart, in the spirit, Rom. 2, 28, 29, it is the putting off of the body of the sinnes of the p. 43flesh, Coloss. 2.11, it sealeth the righteousnese of faith which they hauehave, Rom. 4.11, and the circumcising of the fo…-skinne of the heart, Deut. 10 16, to louelove the Lord &c. Deut. 30.6. Now if it cannot be proved by Scripture that infants hauehave the l…ue of God in their hearts, the righteousnes of faith, the putting of of the body of sin &c. they may not be circumcised, and the…r circumcision is nothing. If this be not a good argument to keep children from circumcision, the other is no better to keep th…m from Baptisme. Secondly, Christian infants hauehave the graces they speak of, repentance, faith, regeneration &c, though not actually, or by way of declaration to others; yet they hauehave through the worke of the Spirit, the seed and beginning of faith, virtually and by vvay of inclination; so that they are not wholly d…stitute of faith, regeneration &c. though it be a thing hid and unknown unto us after vvhat manner the Lord vvorketh these in them, Eccles. 11, 5. Which I further proue thus. If infants naturally are some vvayes capable of Adams sinne, and so of unbeleefe, disobedience, transgression &c. then Christian infants supernaturally and by grace, are some wayes capable of Christs righteousnes, and so of faith, obedience, sanctification &c. But infants are capable of the former evils by Adam: therefore they are capable of the latter good things by Christ. That they are capable of the former, is before proved (vvhere vve treated of originall sin) by Rom 5, Psal. 5 1, Ioh. 3, and many Scriptures. The consequence, that therefore they are capable of the latter also, …o wit of Christian graces, is thus manifested. 1 Because the first Adam was a figure of the second Adam Christ, so that as the sinne of the first Adam, his fault, disobedience, and death for it came on all his children, both by imputation and infection or corruption of nature: so the righteousnesse and obedience of Christ commeth on all his children, both by imputation and renewing of nature, unto life and salvation, as the Apostle compareth them, Rom. 5.12.15.16.17.18.19.21. 2 Because infants being by Adam sinners, children of vvrath &c. must be borne againe of the spirits, or else they cannot see the Kingdom of God, Ioh. 3, 3.5.6. But the Christian infants dying in infancie shall see the Kingdom of God, and not be damned (as the adversaries grant) therefore by Christs doctrine they are borne again of the spirit: and so must needs in some measure hauehave repentance, faith, holines, vvithout which there is no regeneration. Again, that infants hauehave the faith and louelove of God in them, and regeneration in their measure is thus proved. They to vvhom God giveth the signe and seale of righteousnesse by faith, and of regeneration, they hauehave faith and regeneration: for God giveth no lying signe, he sealeth no vaine or false covenants. But God gaue to infants circumcision, p. 44vvhichwhich vvas the signe an… …ale of the righteousnesse of faith and regeneration, Gen▪ 17.12, Rom. 4.11▪ & 2.28.29, Coloss. 2.11. Therefore infants had (& consequ…ntly now hauehave) fai…h & regeneration, though not in the crop or ha…vest by de…laration, yet in the bud and beginnings of all Christian graces. They that deny this reason, must either make God th… author of a lying signe and seale of the covenant to Abraham and …is infants: or they must hold that infants had those graces then, b…t not now: both vvhichwhich are wicked and absurd to affirme. Or t…ey must say, that circumcision vvas not the signe and seale of the righteousnes of faith, and then they openly contradict the Scripture, Rom. 4.11.

Moreover, as the Apostle in Rom. 5, compareth our naturall estate in Adam, and our spirituall estate in Christ, so may vvee in this case. If wee cannot justly obj…ct against Gods vvorke in nature, but doe beleeue that our inf…nts are reasonable creatures, and are borne not bruit beasts but men, though actually they can manifest no reason or understanding more then beasts, (yea a yong lamb knoweth and discerneth h…s damne sooner then an infant knoweth his mother:) then nei…her can we justly object against Gods vvorke in grace, but are to beleeue that our infants are sanctified creatures, and are borne beleevers not infidels, though outwardly they can manifest no faith or sanctification unto us. And, why should it be thought incredible that God should worke faith in infants? If because we know not or perceiue not how it can be: let us consider, that wee know not the way of our naturall birth, and other earthly things Eccles. 11 5. Ioh. 3, 8, how then can we know heavenly things? If we make question of the power of God; nothing is unpossible with h…m. Hee made all things of nothing; he can make the dumb beast speake with mans voyce, Numb. 22, hee can make the babe in the moth…rs wombe, to be aff…cted and leape for joy, at the voice of vvords spoken to the mother, Luk. 1.44, and can he not also work grace, faith, holynesse in infants? Hath Satan power by sin to inf…ct and corrupt infants (as is before proved,) and shall nor God hauehave power to cleanse from corruption, and make them holy? If we make doubt of the will of God herein, behold we hauehave his promises to restore our losses in Adam, by his graces in Christ, as he sh…weth in Rom▪ 5, that he will circumcise our heart, and the heart of our seed to louelove him, Deu. 30 6, we hauehave the seale of his promise, in giving circumcision to infants, to signifie and seale the righteousnesse of faith, Rom. 4.11, Gen. 17. And we hauehave assurance of all his promises, and of that to Abraham & his seed in particular, to be confirmed unto us (not abrogated or lessened) by Christ, 2 Cor. 1.20, Luk. 1.72.73 &c. Gal. 3.14 &c. Wherefore they are but a faithlesse and crooked generation, p. 45that notwithstanding all that God h…th spoken and done in this kinde, doe deny this grace of Christ to the infants of his people, and the seale or confirmation of this grace by baptisme now, as it was by circumcision of old.

But they proceed to plead against the truth thus,Pag. 13…. Regeneration is a turning from sin to God, Rev. 6.11. 1 Thes. 1.9. Tit▪ 4.5 Repentance is a sight and knowing of sin by the law a confessing and sorrow for sin, &c. Fai…h is th… ground of things hoped for, &c. Heb. 11.1. and is accompa-with obedience, Iam. 2. Let them either now proue, that infants are turned from sin, see, know, confesse and sorrow for it, beleeue the promises of God, &c. or they say nothing.

Answ. They reason ignorantly and perversly, not onelyonly against the light of Gods word, but of nature. As if some brutish person should plead thus. A man is a living creature that hath a reasonable soule; and the proper affections of a man as he is a man, are the facultie of understanding, of thinking, capablenesse of learning, of remembring, facultie of reasoning, of judging and discerning true and false, good and evill, of approving and improving, of willing & nilling, of speaking, of numbring, &c. Now let them which affirme that infants are borne men (as Christ doth in Ioh. 16.21.) proue that infants doe understand, do think, remember, judge, discerne good and evill, approue, will, speak, &c. or else they say nothing. Were not such a disputer worthy to be laughed and hissed at? who requireth the actuall use and manifestation of humane affections and faculties in infants; vvhichwhich are in them but potentially & in the seed and beginning: and because th…y cannot declare these things by their workes, therefore he denieth them to be of the generation of mankind, or borne men into the vvorld: or that they hauehave the faculties of men at all in them any manner of vvay? Even such is the argumentation of these erroneous spirits against the truth of religion. For as before they reasoned against the sin, transgression, and condemnation of Infants, (contrary to Pauls doctrine in Rom. 5) because infants actually understand not the law, nor transgresse against it; and will not consider how they are sinners originally in Adam: so now also they reason against the grace of Christ in infants, and his work of regeneration in them; because they cannot outwardly manifest the effects of regeneration or fruits of faith, (such as the scriptures that they allege do require in older persons) & wil not understand that these graces are in them through Christ and his spirit, but in the beginnings onelyonly (as I hauehave formerly proved) and are not in them as in those of full age, who by reason of use hauehave their sences exercised to discerne both good and evill. And here I desire to know of the Anabaptists in their next vvritings about these matters; first when they thinke that children p. 46(vvho in their opinion are borne without a…y sin) begin to be sinners, vvhether at 2.3.5.7. or other yeares: and vvhen they can justly reproue a child for sin, if it shew in vvord, deed, or gesture any thing contrary to the law of God, as if it sweare, curse, lye, disobey parents, take anothers goods, be froward, angry, or the lik…. Yea let any of them tell me (if he can) vvhen he himselfe first fell from his innocencie and became a sinner, being none before; by what act or transgression of what commandement. It is strange that an innocent man should fall from his innocencie, and not know when and how. Secondly let them say, vvhether every child so soon as it beginneth to be a sinner, hath not remedy for the sinne by Christ; and so whether it it be not capable of repentance, faith, regeneration, &c. and consequently of baptisme, so soone as it is a sinner. Thirdly, seeing they insist so much on the perf…ction of the ordinances of the new Testament, as of the old, (which thing I willingly grant) I desire to know whether (as God appointed the eight day for the circumcising of a child after it was borne,) Christ hath appoynted any day, monethmonth or yeare for a child to be baptised after it is borne. If they say none, but vvhen the child can manifest repentance and faith: then vvhat manifestation hath Christ prescribed, vvhether if the child say it repenteth him, & he beleeveth, it is ynough, or what rules and ordinances Christ hath given, by vvhichwhich vve may certainly know that now (and not before or after) a child is to receiue baptisme, as a repentant and beleeving sinner: and let them tell us at what age of their children they or any of them hath first baptised his child unto remission of si…s. These things are needfull to be known, that we may vvalke by rule; and being not yet signified (to my knowledge) in any of their writings, I desire for my information, and for the better clearing of these controversies, that they vvould set down their doctrine touching these poynts. For it is required of all parents to bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, Eph. 6.4. this they cannot doe aright, unlesse they know vvhen first they begin to sin, and consequently vvhen first they begin to beleeue. If they blame a child for sinne vvhiles it is an innocent, they commit iniquitie: if they keep a child from Christ and Christian baptisme vvhen it is a repentant & beleeving sinner (which may be so soon as it is a sinner) they vvrong their child most sinfully, to condemne that vvhichwhich Christ justifieth. These things are vvorthy of serious consideration both in respect of our childrens estate, and of our owne.

And now ere I proceed further to answer their cavils, I will shew two commandements for the baptising of infants: the one given of old to our fathers, the other given by Christ.

p. 471. That vvhichwhich vvas once commanded of God, and never by him called back, is now still to be done; as it is vvritten, What thing soever I command you, obserue to doe it, Deut. 12.32. But God commanded the outward seale of his covenant of grace to be given to the infants of his people, as in Gen. 17.12.13. He that is eight dayes old shall be circumcised among you, &c. and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. And this commandement touching the substance of it, and outward sealing of the covenant, hath never by him been abrogated. Therefore it is still to bee continued, and our infants (by vertue of that commandement) are to hauehave the seale of Gods covenant.

The common objection that this proofe is not from Christs testament, but from Moses writings, is of no weight. For Moses wrote of Christ, Ioh. 5.46. The Apostles sayd none other things then those which the Prophets and Moses did s…y should come, Act. 26.22. Christ came not to destroy the law or the Prophets, but to fulfill. Math. 5.17. Paul proveth our justification by faith in Christ from Abrahams example written by Moses, as vvritten not for his sake alone, but for us, Rom. 4.3 — 24▪ Therefore the example of Abrahams infants circumcised, is vvrit…en for us also. To manifest this reason more fully, I lay downe these particulars, 1. That the covenant then made with Abraham vvas the covenant of the Gospell, which we now hauehave. 2 That circumcision the seale of the covenant then, and baptisme the seale of the couenant now, are one and the same in substance. The first is proved thus, Paul sayth, The Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the heathen through faith, preached before the Gospell unto Abraham, In thee shall all nations be blessed, Gal. 3.8. Aga…ne, vvhen circumcision was instituted, the covenant was, Thou shalt be a father of many nations, &c. Gen. 17.4.5. this promise (as belonging to the faith of Christ) is applied to our state under the Gospell, Rom. 4.13.16.17. and is by Paul there opposed to the Law. Moreover the covenant vvith Abraham vvas, that the Lord vvould be a God to him and to his seed after him, Gen. 17▪7. this promise implieth blessednesse to him and them; for Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, Psal. 33.12. and this blessednesse commeth on none by the Law, Rom. 4.15. Gal. 3.10.11.12. and that he should be a God unto us, and we his people, is the summe of the Gospell, Heb. 8▪10 2. Cor. 6.16. Reu. 21.3. The difference between the fathers and us, is, that they had the Gospell in promise; wee hauehave the same Gospell in performance, Luk. 1.69.70, 72.73. &c. Act. 13.32.33. & 26 6. They beleeved in Christ that vvas to come; We beleeue in Christ vvho is come: Their faith and ours is one in substance, Heb. 11. Gal. 3.9. That circumcision and baptisme are also one in substance (though differing in outward signe) is thus p. 48manifested. Circumcision was the signe of faith and holines, Rom. 4.11. & 2.29. Col. 2.11 Deut. 10▪16. Baptisme is the signe of faith and holinesse, Act. 8.37.38▪ Rom. 6.3.4▪ &c. Circumcision was the first signe and seale of entring into the covenant: Baptisme is so now. We now being buried with Christ in baptisme, are sayd to be circumcised in him, Coloss. 2.11.12. vvhichwhich plainly manifesteth them to bee one and the same: even as their other sacramentall signes, are sayd to be the same that we now hauehave, in respect of the things signified, 1. Cor. 10.1.2.3.4. 1 Cor. 5.7.8. Forasmuch then as the covenant vvith Abraha… and with us, and the seale of the covenant then and now, are one in substance: it followeth, that the commandement then to giuegive infants the seale of the covenant, being never repealed, bindeth us to giuegive them the seale of the covenant at this day. The exceptions vvhichwhich the adversaries make of the difference between circumcision and baptisme, shall be answered after in their place.

2 The second commandement for baptising of infants, is in Mark. 16.15. Goe preach the Gospell to every creature; he that beleeveth and is baptised, shall be saved. Math. 28.19. Go teach all nations, baptising them, &c. In this commission of Christ are two things, the preaching of the Gospell to every creature, to all nations; and the sealing of the same by baptisme. The Gospell belonged to infants, & they are necessarily implied in the first: therefore baptisme belonged to infants, and they are as necessarily implied in the later. Christ biddeth them proclaime or preach the Gospell: but vvhat the Gospell is, is not here declared, we must gather it from other scriptures. The Gospel (or Evangelie) is the glad tidings or joyfull declaration that the promise vvhichwhich vvas made unto the Fathers, God hath fulfillled the same unto us their children: the promise, (I say) concerning Christ, and the redemption of the vvorld by him, as these scriptures teach, Act. 13.32.33. Luk. 1.54.55.69.70.71.72.73. &c. Act. 2.38.39. & 26.22.23. Luk. 4.18 — 21. So the Gospell (which is the good tidings of the fulfilling of the promise) is as large as the promise vvas: vvhereupon, not in the forementioned scriptures onelyonly, but in many other places, the Apostles referre the Gospell to the promise (or promises) made of old, as, It is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed: Rom. 4.16. and Now we, brethren, as Isaak was, are the children of promise, Gal. 4.28. and, Christ was a minister of the circumcision, for the truth of God, to confirme the promises (made) unto the fathers: and that the Gentiles might glorifie God for merciemercy, Rom. 15.8.9. and, That the promise by faith of Iesus Christ, might bee given to them that beleeve, Gal. 3.22. and, Paul an Apostle, &c. according to the promise of life, which is in Christ Iesus, 2. Tim. 1.1. and many the like. Not in generall p. 49onelyonly, but the particular promises at severall times, are shewed to be accomplished in the Gospell; as the promise to Adam, Rom. 16 20. from Gen. 3.15. to Abraham, Luk. 1.55.73. Rom. 4.16.17.18. to David, Luk. 1.69.70. Act. 2▪30 31. to Israel by Moses, Samuel, and other Prophets, Act. 3.22.24▪25 Luk. 1.70. so that all the promises of God are yea and Amen in Christ, 2. Cor. 1.20. And for the poynt in controversie, the promise of grace and salvation to Abraham and to his seed, Gen. 17.7. is by the Gpspell shewed to be confirmed, Luk. 1.55. Act. 2.38▪39. Gal. 3.14.16.29. But the promise to Abrahams seed implied his infants, Gen. 17, 7, 10, 12, therefore the Gospell (vvhichwhich is the complement of that promise) implieth our infants: and so the Apostle sayth, the promise is to you and to your children, Act. 2.39. And the signe and seale of the promise vvas giuen to Abrahams children in infancie, Gen. 17, 10, 12. therfore it belongeth to our children in their infancie: and we are sayd to be the children of promise as Isaak was▪ Gal. 4.28▪ But Isaak was the child of promise in his infancie, and had then the seale of the promise in his infancie, when he was but eight dayes old, Act, 7, 8, wherefore we also in our infancie are children of the promise, and hauehave right to the seale of the covenant even then, or else wee are not as Isaak was. And thus Christ commanding the Gospell to be preached, commanded the fulfilling of the promises to be preached, even all and every one of the promises, without excepting any: and so commanded the promise of grace, and accomplishment of it to the seed of the faithfull even in their infancie to bee preached. Likewise commanding the seale of the covenant to be applied unto all vvithin the promise, as freely and generally now as ever it was of old, not excepting infants: he commanded infants to be sealed by baptisme, as they were sealed before by circumcision. And seeing all beleevers are by his commission to be baptised: the infants of the Church being beleevers (in respect of the beginning of faith, though not actually) as I hauehave formerly proved, they are also to be baptised by vertue of Christs commission, Mark. 16. Math. 28. that so the promises unto the fathers may be confirmed, and the Gentiles (as well as the circumcision, that is, the Iewes) may glorifie God for his merciemercy, Rom. 15.8▪9.

Now I will proceed to answer their exceptions; beginning first vvith this about circumcision, and the covenant with Abraham.

1 There was a commandement for circumcision, Pag 145.Gen. 17. there is none for baptisme of infants.

Answ. This is before disproved, and a commandement shewed Mark. 16. For the sealing of the seed of the faithfull in infancie, vvas a part of the Gospell; seeing the Gospel is the fulfilling of the covenant and promise made to the fathers, and to Abraham in speciall, p. 50Act. 13 32, 33. Luk. 1.55.73. If it be objected, that baptising of infants is not there particularly expressed: I answer, neither are other parts of the Gospell particularly expressed th…re: but the G…spell in generall being to be proclaimed, all parts of the Gosp…ll (whereof sealing the infants is one) are necessarily implied. Note also that things are taught & commanded somtime in scripture, though not in expresse words: as the trinitie of persons in the unitie of the Go…head, the resurrection of the dead (as Christ proveth) vvas taught in Exod. 3. Eternall life in heaven, and eternall death in hell are not expressed in Moses law: nor that they should hauehave Synagogues in everie citie for the people to meet on the Sabboth. Neither in the new testament is it taught in express words, that Christ is coessentiall, coequall, coeternall with the father: or, that his death and obedience is the merit of our righteousnesse, or satisfaction for our sinnes: nor …xpr…sly commanded that vvomen should receiue the Lords supper, nor example that any did: vvith sundry other things which though they be not expressed in plaine words, yet are they soundly to be proved by arguments from the scripture.

2 That cōmandement included males onelyonly, children or servant though unbeleevers, and excluded all females, though beleevers so doth not baptisme.

Answ. 1 It is untruly sayd that servants unbele…vers were to be circumcised: they feigne this, the s…ri…ture tea…heth them not so, but the contrary. For circumcision was the seale of the righteousnesse of f…ith, Rom. 4, 11, and should it be set upon unbeleevers, vvhichwhich had no righteousnes▪ no faith? So God should be made the author of a false and lying seale: to signifie and to assure the things which vvere not. Againe, every circumcised person was to eat the Passover, and had all other privileges of Israells law, Exod. 12, 48, 49. the Passover signified Christ, and the eating of it life by Christ, 1 Cor. 5.7.8. Ioh. 6.57. But no unbeleever had these benefites. And if unbeleevers and Israelites had communion together in circumcision, passover, and other holy things, then vvas the Church of Israel no communion of Saints, but a mixture with all sorts of infidels, whosoever would, contrary to Exod. 19, 5.6. Levit. 19, 2, & 20, 7. Deut. 14 …, 2, & 26.18, 19, Levit. 20, 26, 1 King. 8.53. Though females (vvanting that part of the body) were not outwardly circumcised, for that foreskin which was not, could not be cut off: yet may we not say they were excluded, for then they might not hauehave eaten the passover, Exod. 12.48. They vvere vvithin the covenant (D…ut. 29, 10, 11, 12) and implied in the males. As the men had that signe of purification (according to the nature of the male) vvhichwhich vvomen had not▪ so women had another kind of purification (according to p. 51the nature of the female) vvhichwhich men had not, Levit. 12. Each …x had their portion in the things that figured their redemption by Christ, according to their severall natures. Therefore vvhen the outward signe was changed from circumcising to baptising, wherof the female is as capable as the male; both sexes are baptised, Act. 8.12. So infants now are as capable of baptisme, as they vvere of circumcision, there is nothing therefore to debarre th…m from it.

3 The law required circumcision to be performed on the eight d…y: so doth not the law of baptisme.

Ans What of this? the law of baptisme appoynteth no day at all for any: shall none therefore be at all baptised? The law required the Passover to be kept on the 14 day of the first monethmonth, Exod. 12 The law of Christ appointeth no day vvhen to eat the Lords supper: yet it is the same in substance that the Passover was, 1 Cor. 5.7, 8, so baptism is the same in substance that circumcision was, Coloss. 2.11, 12. and as all may now eat the Lords supper, which might then eat the Pascha: so all may now be baptised, which then were circumcised.

4 But when faith is manifested, then is baptisme to be performed.

Ans. Th…y meane by manifestation, profession with mouth; and by then they mean not before that time. This is denyed, and formerly disproved, and they hauehave no one word of God to confirme their doctrine. 2 Though infants manifest no faith by their owne mouth, yet the mouth of God manifests them to hauehave faith in the begining or feed therof, because he testifieth them to be holy, 1 Cor. 7, 14, which is not vvithout faith: and testifieth them to hauehave grace and righteousnes by Christ, answerable to the corruption and unrighteousnesse which they hauehave by Adam, Rom. 5. as is before declared.

Againe th…y say,Pag. 145. Neither circumcision nor baptisme are seales of the covenant of life and salvation: that whi…h is now the seale, was ever the same, which is the h…ly spirit of promise, 2 Cor. 1, 22, Ephes. 1, 13, & 4▪30.

Ans. A bold untruth contradicting the Apostle, who calleth the signe of circumcision, the seale of the righteousnes of faith, Rom. 4.1…. and righteousnesse of faith is life and salvation, Gal. 3.11. Ephes. 2▪8. and the covenant which circumcision sealed, was that the Lord would be their God, Gen. 17.7.10. and so he would giuegive them life and salvation, Reu 21.3.4. Whereas they except, The Spirit is the scale: it is true; but they should obs…rue that it is an invisible seale in the heart; vvhereas Paul speaketh of an outward visible seale, which is also a signe, and on the body. Again, the covenant may hauehave more seales then one: so that if the Spirit were an outward seale, yet might circumcision be a seale also of the same thing. Moses calleth p. 52circumcision a signe or token, Gen. 17.11, but he no where calleth it a seale ▪ yet Paul calleth it a seale, because in truth it was so, and more then a bare signe. For a signe is to make some other thing knowne unto us, as the doole-stone or land mark is for distinction of grounds: or it is further to put us in minde of things formerly done, as the stones at Gilgall vvere for a memoriall to Israell how their Fathers passed through Iordan, Ioshu. 4.20.21.22. But a seale goeth yet further, and certifieth or assureth of any promise or gift. Now because circumcision was such a signe as assured unto Abraham his righteousnesse by faith in Christ the promised seed: therefore the Apostle rightly calleth it a seale. VponUpon which ground vve also rightly call the Passover, Baptisme, and our Lords Supper Seales, because they are such signes as certifie and assure us of forgivenesse of sins, and of righteousnesse and salvation by Christ. And from this we hauehave a most certaine ground for the baptisme of infants: because baptisme is no more now, then circumcision vvas of old, namely a signe and seale of righteousnesse by faith. And if infants had such a seale under the promise of the Gospell: how should it with any colour be denied now under the performance of that promise? unlesse we will say, Christ hath not confirmed the promises made unto the fathers, contrary to Rom. 15.8. 2 Cor. 1.20.

Further they say,pag. 146. There is but two covenants, the Law and the Gospell, the Old and the New, Gal. 4. The old Covenant, the Law, was made with the children of Abraham after the fl…sh, and had circumcision in their fl…sh for a signe thereof. The new covenant the G…spell, is not made but with the one seed, Gal. 3.16. that are of the faith of Abraham. The children of the fl…sh are not they to whom this covenant is made, Rom. 9.8 the children of the fl…sh must be but out, &c. Gal. 4 30. so that the covenant with Abraham and his children after the flesh, was not the covenant of life and salvation; it was the covenant of worke, of the Law. &c.

Ans. In this their plea, there is a little truth, but much errour and delusion. It is true, there were but two Covenants, the Law and the Gospell. There is sophistry and delusion in their saying the covenant of the law was with the children of Abraham after the flesh: for as after the fl…sh meaneth naturall generation, so Isaak, Iakob, and all the Israelites, even Christ himselfe was Abrahams child after the flesh, Math. 1.1. Rom. 1.3. & 9.3.4.5. yet were not they aliens from the covenant of the Gospell. But as the fl…sh meaneth corruption of nature, Rom. 8.1.8.9. and as men hauehave no other generation of the Spirit, but of the fl…sh, Iohn▪ 3. vers. 5.6. in this sense it is true, that the children of the flesh are not the children of God, Rom. 9.8. and they are under the Law, not under the Gospell. But this is nothing p. 45against the truth we maintaine. For Isaak who was Abrahams seed after the flesh in the first sense, but after the Spirit, and by promise in the second sense, hee was circumcised in his infancie, Now all the Christian Church are as Isaak, children of the promise, Gal. 4.28, and our infants though by nature (as it is corrupted) they be children of wrath, Ephes. 2, yet by promise and grace in Christ, they are children of God, Rom. 5, and therefore are to hauehave the seale of the covenant of grace in infancie, as Isaak had; even as by Abrahams justification, the Apostle proveth the justification of us all, Rom. 4.3.22.23.24.

Errour it is that they say, Abrahams children had circumcision in the flesh for a signe of the old covenant or Law For first, the Law was given by Moses, Iob 1.7. many yeares after Abraham, and could not disanull the covenant with Abraham, or make the promise of none effect, as the Apostle plainly teacheth us Gal. 3.17. Christ also sayth, Circumcision was not of Moses, but of the fathers, Iob. 7.22. Secondly, the covenant which circumcision sealed, was that the Lord would be a God to Abraham and his seed, Gen. 17.7.10, this was the covenant of the Gospell, Heb. 8.8 10, Rev. 2 1.3. Thirdly, Circumcision was the seale of righteousnesse of faith, Rom. 4 11, but the Law is not of faith, Gal. 3.11.12, therefore circumcision was a seale of the Gospell promised, a seale of the covenant of grace.

Wheras th…y say, the new covenant is not made but with the one seed, Gal. 3.16, it is true, & maketh against them: for that one seed, is there shewed to be Christ: not Christ in his own person onelyonly, but Christ with his Church, which make one mystical body, 1 Cor. 12.12. Eph. 5.30.31.32. Now the infants of the Church, are by the covenant of grace of the body of Christ, even as by nature they are of the body and stock of Adam, as before (in the treaty of Originall sin,) we hauehave proved by Rom. 5, so that the new covenant is made with them also, and therefore the seal of that covenant is due unto them now, as it was in Abrahams daies.

N…xt this, they goe about to proue,Pag. 147. That the covenant wherof circumcision was a signe, Gen. 17, was not the same which we hauehave now in the Gospell: because the Lord sayth, it is not the same, Jer. 31.31, Heb. 8.6. it is a new covenant that we hauehave under the Gospell.

Answ. It is no marvell though these men so often slander us, vvhen they dare belye the Lord himselfe. Neither doth the Prophet, nor the Apostle (in the places by them cited, or) any where say, that the covenant vvhichwhich Abraham had, and vvhichwhich vvas sealed to him by circumcision, is not the same which we hauehave. I hauehave before proved them to be one in substance by Gal. 3, and Rom. 4.11. The covenant spoken of by Ieremy, was made vvhen God took them by the hand to bring them out of Aegypt, Ier. 31.32, p. 54Heb. 8, vvheras the covenant vvith Abraham was many yeares before, Gal. 3.17. Therefore the covenant made vvith Abraham by promise, is the same that we now hauehave by performance and confirmation of that prom…se, Luk. 1.54 55, 72▪ 73 Rom. 15.8.

Againe they say,Pag. 148. though Abraham himselfe had the covenant of grace promised him, by which promise he had salvation in the M…ssiah to come; yet ha… he not the ordin…s of the new covenant which wee hauehave: and therefore none of his seed in the fl…sh could be partakers of that which he had not himselfe.

Answ. They grant enough to their own condemnation: for if Abrahams covenant was of grace and salvation by Christ; then vvas it not of the Law (as before they pleaded) for that causeth vvrath and damnation, Rom. 4.15, Gal. 3.10.12. We plead not for the same external Ordinances or manner of outward …ispensation: but for the same substance of the covenant, which was of faith, not of works; and so of the Gospell not of the Law, as Paul teacheth us, Rom. 4. Gal. 3. The Israelites Passeover of the Lamb, and our Passeover Christ: their feast of unleavened cakes, and ours, (1 Cor. 5.7.8.) differ apparantly in the outward Ordinances. So their bread of Manna from heaven, ours of wheat from the earth; their drink of vvater from the Rock, ours of wine from the Grape, (in the supper of our Lord) how greatly doe they differ in the outward things: yet were they the same spirituall meate and drinke both to them and us, even Christ: as the Apostle teacheth 1 Cor. 10.3.4. So Circumcision and Baptism, differ much in the outward rite and signe; but not in the substance or thing signified.

Yet cease they not their idle contention, but further say concerning us,Pag. 148. They speake untruely [in saying that the covenant which this new is not like, is that Law given upon mount Sina, Exod. 19. not that in Gen. 17.] Marke the words (in Ier. 31, Heb. 8,) Not like the covenant that I made with their fathers, when I tooke them by the hand to bring them out of Aegypt, which is mentioned in Exod. 3, not Exod. 19, then did God appeare to Moses, and commanded him to take them by the hand and lead them out of Aegypt, where the covenant is mentioned in ver. 6, I am the God of thy fathers, Abraham &c. I am come to deliver them &c. to bring them into a good land &c. which promise was made unto their father Abraham.

Answ. The untruth and ignorance is in themselues that so reason. For there was no covenant made in Exod. 3. Let the place be veiwed. Though if there had then a covenant been made, it were nothing to our purpose; because Abraham was dead many yeares before, and we reason of the covenant made vvith him and his seed, whiles he lived, Gen. 17. But in Exod. 19.5 &c. treatie is of a covenant to be made: in Exod, 20 &c. the Lawes are promulgated. p. 55In Exod. 24, 7, 8, the covenant is made up and dedicated. And that this was that first and old covenant which should be abolished, as Ieremy foretold, the Apostle doth plainly manifest. For having shewed the promise hereof in Heb. 8.8.— 13, hee prosecuteth the same matter in Heb▪ 9, shewing the differences between the first covenant and the second, or the old and the new; and how a covenant (or testament) must be confirmed by bloud and death: vvhichwhich for the new was by the death of Christ, Heb. 9.15.16, and for the first, it vvas with the death & bloud of bullocks and goats, vvherewith Moses sprinkled the people, v. 18 19.20. And this was that action recorded in Exod▪ 24, done at mount Sina. Moreover obserue here these mens fraud: Ieremy speaketh of a covenant made; they tell us of a covenant (or promise) mentioned in Exod. 3, as if to make a covenant when they came out of Aegypt, and to mention a covenant or promise made many yeares before with Abraham in Canaan, were all one. That which is alledged of the land of Canaan promised in Gen▪ 17, 8, is true, as a type or figure, but not as the maine thing there intended. For Abraham himselfe had no inheritance in the land of Canaan, no not so much as to set his foot on: Act. 7.5. how then did circumcision seal that to Abraham, vvhichwhich God never performed to him? Is not this to make Gods promise to him, vaine? The Apostl… is a better expositor, who saith, that circumcision sealed to him righteousnesse of faith, which he had before, Rom 4.11, and telleth us, how by faith Abraham soiourned in the land of promise, as in a strange Countrie, and looked for a heavenly citie and countrie, which he understood to be figured by that earthly land: Heb. 11.9.10.16. And if …h… poss…ssion of Canaan was that vvhichwhich circumcision sealed, then Abrahams servants; yea and all his sonnes by Keturah, and all pros…lytes of other families, that were circumcised, were deluded with a vaine promise: seeing none of all these had ever inheritance in Canaan, but onelyonly the Israelites the posterity of Isaak, which were numbred in Numb. 26▪2. — 53.

Againe, they except thus. The covenant is made in Gen. 17,Pag. 150. with Abraham and his seed, not with every faithfull man and his seed. Is every faithfull man Abraham? What proofe for that? It is well if wee be Abrahams seed &c.

Answ. The exception is frivolous: for by vertue of that covenant vvith Abraham vvho circumcised his infants, Isaak his son, Iakob his son, all the Isra…lits in their generations, and every faithfull Proselyte of the heathens, circumcis…d their infants. So the faithfull now, vvho all are Abrahams seed, and heyres by promise, G…l. 3.29, doe seale their infants vvith Bap…ism…, as of …ld …h…y did vvith Circumcision, for the promise is to such and to their children Act. 2.39. When Paul bringeth Abrahams example for justification by faith, Rom. 4. if any should trifle and say, What is that to us? We are not Abraham: the Apostle telleth, it vvas not written for his sake alone, but for us also, Rom. 4.23.24. So say we; that Abraham gaue his infants the seale of the covenant, it is not written for him alone, but also for us.

But they proceed and say;Pag. 151. In Rom, 4, 21, Abraham received the signe of Circumcision, the seale of the righteousnesse of faith which hee …ad, when he was uncircumcised, that he should be the father of the faithfull &c. This proveth that Abraham received Circumcision to seale up his fatherhood of the faithfull; not that he received it to seale up his faith in the Messiah, which he had 24 yeares before: but a seale of his faith in beleeving God, that hee should be the father of many Nations, Gen. 17.4, Rom, 4.17, and this was imputed to him for righteousnesse, Rom. 4.22.

Answ. They are blinde, and would make blinde. 1 There is no faith that can be imputed to any man for righteousnesse, but the faith that is in the Messiah; as the Apostle proveth at large, in Rom. 3, 21.22.24.25. and Rom. 4. Gal. 3.2 And Abraham beleeeving the promise of a seed, vvhichwhich beleefe was counted to him for righteousnesse, Gen. 15.5.6. beleeved Christ principally, as his seed after the flesh: for otherwise how could all nations be blessed in him, that is in his seed, as God promised, Gen. 12.3. Gal. 3.8.16. 3 The Apostle disproveth their vaine glosse, when having shewed how Abrahams faith was counted to him for righteousnesse, Rom. 4.19.— 22, hee annexeth, that this was written for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we beleeue in him that raysed up Iesus, v. 23 24. But if Abrahams faith had not beene the faith in Christ, the Apostles argument from his example had been impertinent.

Finally they say,Pag. 152. Abraham received Circumcision as none received it: and faith was required of none to Circumcision: but faith is required to Baptism: & therfore these be but mens dreams, & chaff in sted of wheat.

Answ. In deed they would giuegive us chaffe for wheat. They would hauehave us beleeu that Abrahams circumcision sealed his fatherhood, not his faith in Christ: which dream is before refuted. They would teach us two or moe circumcisions, one which Abraham had, another vvhichwhich other men had. But as there is one Lord, one faith, one baptisme, Eph. 4.5. so we finde but one circumcision, which all our fathers received. They would perswade us, that vvhatsoever Paul saith, that circumcision was the se…le of the righteousnesse of faith, Rom. 4.11. yet faith was required of none to Circumcision. But vvho vvill beleeue this their dreame? Will God seale righteousnesse of faith to them that hauehave no faith? This is to make God the author of vaine and worthlesse seales. If it sealed not to men righteousnesse p. 57of faith, what sealed it? Not the land of Canaan, for (as is foreshewed) no child of Abraham by Keturah, no Proselyte had inheritance in Canaan: no nor Isaak, nor Iakob, who were but strangers in the land as Abraham was, Heb. 11.9. Not the covenant of the Law, for that vvas not given till many yeares after Abraham, neither could any man hauehave righteousnesse by it, but wrath and curse, Gal. 3.10. But had not errour blinded their eyes, they might see that the covenant sealed by circumcision was, that the Lord vvould bee a God to them and to their seed after them, Gen. 17.7. and this vvas the covenant of grace in Christ, Heb. 8.8.10.

Against Peters doctrine in Act. 2.38.39, where he saith, the promise is made to you and to your children; they cavill thus,Pag. 136▪ Wheras many stumble at the word Children, conceiving that it is meant of Infants, it is here and elsewhere used often in the Scriptures for men of understanding: Act. 3.25, &c.

Answ▪ How struggle these men against the light! It is true, that the vvord Children often meaneth men of understanding: but meaneth it not infants also? The word seed, used in Gen. 17, often implyeth old persons also: will they therefore inferre, that the promise and seale thereof to Abrahams seed, belonged not to his seed in their infancie? So nether is there any reason to think that the promise to the Iewes and their children mentioned in Act 2, is meant onelyonly of men of understanding, and not also of their children in infancie. For vvhen the Apostle speaketh of the promise to them and to their children, concerning Christ and remission of sinnes by him, and sealing the same by Baptisme: he hath evident reference to the promise made of old to Abraham, vvhichwhich concerned the same things, and vvas sealed by circumcision: as appeareth by comparing Luke 1.54.55.72.73 &c. Galath. 3.8.16.

Whereas the Apostle in 1 Cor. 7.14, calleth a beleevers children holy; these men expound him thus:Pag. 136▪ If your children in your own judgement be holy, and you doe not put them away when you are converted to the faith, but use th…m still as your children, &c. then may you keepe your wiues being holy, they being of a neerer naturall bond then your children, and use them still as your wiues &c. Their reason of this interpretation is; Because holynesse sometime signifieth when a person or thing is set apart or sanctified to the beleever, 1. Timothy 4.5, Titus 1.15. Thus is the unbeleeving wife holy, and thus are the children h…ly, and not otherwise.

Answ. That children are thus sanctified to the beleever is true: but in saying, and not otherwise, they doe violence to the p. 58Apostles doctrine, and the truth is not in them. For first he meaneth not the children to be holy in the parents judgements; but telleth them his owne judgement, they are holy; and useth it as a reason to confirme his former doctrine. Secondly, he meaneth not in respect of putting the children away from civill use as children; for so no mor… should be said for the children of the faithfull, then for their infidell servants: for Philemon mought and did retaine Onesimus for civill use as a servant, before he vvas converted to Christ, Phil v. 10.11, &c. and beleeving servants might dwell and converse civilly with unbeleeving masters, 1 Tim 6.1 2, Yea misbegotten children and bastards were not to be put away in respect of civill use: for vvho sho…ld nourish or bring them up, rather then their own parents? 2 Sam 11 4.5, & 12.14.15 &c. Thirdly, they corrupt the Apostles reason, which is not to this effect, If you may keep your children, then you may keep your wiues: But thus, your unbeleeving vviues you may keep, for they are sanctified unto you, because the children vvhichwhich you beget of them are holy: and so the holinesse of the children is an argument and proofe that they might still reteyne th…ir unb…leeving vviues. Fourthly, they change the Apostles vvord am…ss…: he saith not of unbeleeving vviues that they are holy, but sanctified to the beleeving husbands; but the children vvere holy. Fif…ly, the sanctification of meats, & purity of other things, mentioned in 1 Tim. 4.5 Tit. 1.15, is not meant of religious sanctification, but for civill uses: vvhereas the children of beleevers are otherwise holy, namely, in respect of the covenant of grace and Church of God, as is aboundantly proved before, by Rom. 5, vvhere, as they hauehave naturally sinne and unrighteousnesse by Adam, so they hauehave holinesse and righteousnesse by the grace of God in Christ. Also by Gen. 17, compared with Rom. 4.11, where Abrahams (and all faithfull mens) children, are with their parents in the covenant of grace, and hauehave the seale of the righteousnesse of faith. And upon this ground doth Paul strongly proue the beleevers might keep their unbeleeving wiues, because the children which they had by such, were (by reason that one parent was a Christian) holy, to wit, with holines of the covenant made with the faithful and their seed. And in this respect the children of those that are in the covenant, are said to be borne unto the Lord, and to be his children, Ezek. 16.8.20, 21. vvheras in the other respect, all children in the world are the Lords, Exod. 19, 5. And so the children of the Church are called the holy seed, diff…ring heerein from the seed of other peoples, Ezra 9.1.2, vvhichwhich if th…se opposites had understood, they could not thus hauehave stumbled at the Apostles words, and wrested his meaning.

p. 59But they plead further, that the Apostle saith not, else were your Infants, but else were your Children uncleane, but now they are holy: so that all the children of unbeleevers are as holy by this place as infants, &c. and so must be baptised.

Answ. Herein they seek to pervert the straight wayes of God.Pag. 138. As if they should say: God (vvhen he made vvith Abraham that everlasting covenant vvhichwhich Circumcision vvas a seale of) said not that hee vvould be a God unto him and to his Infants after him, but unto his seed, Gen. 17 7, so that all the seed of Abraham (Ismaelites, Edomites &c.) vvere as holy, and as well within the covenant of grace and to be circumcised, as the Is…a…lites vvhichwhich vvere the generation of Isaak. But they should obserue that the covenant of merciemercy passeth from the fathers to the children from age to age, even to the thousand generation, if they louelove God, and keep his commandements: whereas if they …ur…e away and hate him, he visi…th their iniquity, Exod. 20.5.6, Ez…k. 18 9.10.13. Children of beleevers vvhen they are borne of th…ir parents, (and all are borne infants) are all in the covenant vvith their parents; and vvere of old to be circumcised, are now to be baptized. If the children be of yeares vvhen their parents enter into the covenant, either they assent and enter into covenant vvith them, or they diss…nt and enter not. So Isma…l Abrahams child, being taught of his father to keep the vvay of the Lord (Genes▪ 18.19.) and not disobeying, he vvas vvith his father circumcised at thirteene yeares of age, Genes. 17.25. Likewise all children now assenting unto and vvalking in the faith vvith their parents are to bee baptized at what age soever. But vvhen Ismael fell from his obedince, then vvas he cast out of Abrahams house, and vvas no longer counted for Abrahams seed, but in Isaak vvas his seed called, Genes. 21.10.12. Ismael was still Abrahams seed and child in nature, according to the flesh; but hee continued not still the childe of the covenant, Galath. 4.29.30, nor Abrahams seed according to the promise. Even so, if children of beleevers now being of understanding, doe refuse the faith of Christ, or fall from it, they are to be kept out of the Church▪ or cast out from it: and so the seale of grace and salvation belongeth not unto them, (Ezek. 18, 24, 2 Chro. 15.2, Matth 3.7.9.10,) as it belongeth to all the infants of the faithfull, and to all their children (of what age so ever) that receiue the faith of Christ, and abide in it vvith them. And these men greatly mistake if they think we hold children are to be baptised, or are holy, because they are our children by nature, (for so they are children of vvrath, Eph. 2.3,) but they are holy, and to hauehave the seale of salvation, because God hath graciously accepted p. 60them into his covenant with our selues: and keepeth them in it, untill they fall from faith and obedience of Christ; even as wee our selues continue in the covenant, whiles we continue in the Christian faith, and no longer, 2 Tim. 2.12. As we are the children of the first Adam, we are all sinners, disobedient, unrighteous and under condemnation: but as vve are the children of the second Adam (Christ) we are all holy, made obedient, righteous; and heyres of salvation, according to the Apostles doctrine in Rom. 5▪12— 21.

Against an other proofe for baptisme of Infants, gathered from Pauls words in 1 Cor. 10▪1, 2 &c. vvhere he speaketh of all the Israelits Baptism in the cloud & in the sea: they struggle vvith little reason or colour of truth. For (to omit their discourse of Pauls scope in bringing that in, vvhichwhich no way cleareth the controverse) they tell us.Pag. 141. 1 That Moses did not at all wash them with water in the cloud and sea. Pag. 142.2 Th…t this of Moses is called baptisme by comparison, as Noahs Arke is called the figure of the Baptisme that saveth us: for as the Arke saved those in it from drowning: so the Israelites were all under the cloud and in the sea, and therein baptized or safeguarded from destruction of their enemies. 3 That it pleased the Holy Ghost to say they were baptised in the sea and cloud, because the cloud and sea was their safety, as Noes Arke was: And as Christ saith, they are baptized that suffer for his sake. So there is as much warrant to enioyne infants to suffer persecution, because it is called Baptisme: as to baptise them, because the clowd and sea is called Baptisme.

Answ. How many vvrestings and vvindings are in these mens vvords? First, they say, Moses did not at all baptise them with water. And why? Was there no water (thinke they) in the clowd and in the sea? Let them consider Exod. 14.24.25. compared with Psal. 77.16.17, &c. and they may see there vvas vvater enough in the clowd: and they will not say (I think) that there vvas no vvater in the sea. All outward baptising or washing, must be with water or some other liquor. If they were not baptised with water, vvhat other liquour were they baptised in? not vvith bloud, as in the Baptisme of suffering death for Christs sake, which they impertinently mention. Not vvith vvine or strong drinke: for they found none such in the wildernesse. If they can shew nothing but water to baptise them in, let them deny no more (for shame) that they were baptised with water. God spake to our fathers by the Prophets at sundry times (or in **foreign.sundry parts, as it vvere by peice meale) as the Apostle teacheth Hebrew. 1.1. By Moses he shewed how the clowd removed from before Israel, and stood behind them, (as they passed through the sea) and p. 61gaue them light, but vvas darknesse to the Aegyptians: and from this fierie cloudie pillar the Lord looking, troubled the Aegyptians, and took off their charret wheeles, that they draue them heavily, Exod. 14.19.20 24.25. This being briefly and obscurely told by Moses, God after inlargeth by Asaph another Prophet, vvho sheweth the manner of it; how not onelyonly the vvaters of the sea saw the Lord, vvhen they fled and parted; but the clouds also (from aboue) poured out vvater vvhen they rained; the skies sent out a sound by thunder, &c. thus the ground being softned vvith the raine, occasioned the charret vvheeles of the Aegyptians (sticking in the mire) to fall off, and hindred their pursuit:Rom. 16.25.26.Rom 16:25Rom 16:26 Psa. 77.16.17, &c. After this the Apostle (taught by Gods spirit) manifesteth the mystery which before was kept secret; namely how this passage under the cloud (which rained) and through the sea was a baptism to the Israelits:1. Cor. 10.1.2. &▪ Mark. 1.5. Act. 16.33.1 Cor 10:11 Cor 10:2Mark 1:5Acts 16:33 even as Christian mens washings in rivers or vessels, was a baptisme to them. And as the manna which Israel ate, and vvater from the rock which they drank, vvas the same spirituall meat and drink which we hauehave signified by bread and wine in our Lords supper; so their vvashing in the cloud & sea, and our vvashing in vessels or rivers, is spiritually the same baptisme. From hence we gather the baptising of our infants by two arguments: 1 All our fathers (saith Paul) were baptised in the cloud and sea: therfore (say we) infants: for seeing there vvas no other baptisme but that in the cloud and sea, such of our fathers as then vvere infants vvere at that time baptised, or else many of our fathers (even al the infants of many thousand families) vvere never baptised: vvhichwhich is contrary to the Apostles doctrine. And if infants had baptisme under Moses, it cannot (vvith any colour of reason) bee denied them under Christ. 2. In that the Apostle teacheth us, that the extraordinary and temporary sacraments (or seales of salvation) vvhichwhich Israel had, vvere the substance and truth vvhichwhich wee now hauehave, though Moses doth not so express: it followeth upon like ground, that their ordinary seales, namely Circumcision and the Passouer, vvere the same in truth and substance vvith baptism and the Lords Supper vvhichwhich vve now hauehave. And being the same, as infants had circumcision then, so they are to hauehave baptisme now.

Secondly, vvheras they say that of Moses was called baptisme by comparison, as if it were not properly baptisme; they swerue from the right way: it was as truely and properly baptisme to them, as ours is to us, though the manner of administration differ: even as their Manna and vvater vvere as truly and properly the sacrament of Christs body and blood to them, as bread and wine in the Lords supper are to us. Otherwise the Apostle should not say truly, that hey vvere the same. 1. Cor. 10.3.4.

p. 62Thirdly, Noes ark is not called the figure of baptisme, as these corrupters of scripture tell us: but baptisme (sayth the Apostle) is a like-figure (or antitype) 1 Pet. 3.21. So that the saving by water of eight men in the Ark, was a type or figure: and the saving of a few now by vvater in baptisme, is an antitype, or like figure: both of them figuring salvation by the death of Christ. Fourthly, neither do these men set down the reason fully and rightly, why they are sayd to be baptised, namely, because the cloud and sea was their safetie as Noes ark was; for though it may in some sense bee granted that these were th…ir safetie, as baptisme is our safetie (for it is sayd to saue us, 1 Pet. 3.21.) yet properly th…y were sayd to be baptised in the cloud and sea, because they were in them sacramentally washed from their sins, & planted together in the likenesse of his death, buriall, and resurrection, as we are now by baptisme, Rom. 6.3.4▪5. The cloud served them for three users, 1. to protect and keep them safe, Esai. 4.5.6. 2 to guide them in the way that they should go, Numb. 9.17. &c. Exod. 13.21. and these two were ordinary, 3. to baptise them by powring down water, and this was extraordinary, and but one time in the red sea, for ought we finde. And in this respect Paul sayth they were baptised in it. Fiftly, their last speech of inioyning infants to suffer persecution, as well as to baptise them, is spoken vvith a wry mouth: for as vve enjoyne not infants to bee baptised, though we baptise them; so can we not enioyne them to suffer persecution. But this we say and know, as infants are baptitised into Christ, so oftentimes they suffer persecution for Christ: being with their parents afflicted, imprisoned, banished, &c. yea and bereaved of life it selfe, so that they hauehave even the baptisme of blood or martyrdome also.

Wheras we find mention of whole housholds to hauehave been baptised by the Apostles; from which example it is probably gathered that infants also were baptized. Against this they dispute thus,Pag. 143. 1. There are many housholds in which there are no infants.

Ans. This is true: and it is also true that in many there are infants. Therefore this argument is propounded but as probable, not as certaine.

2 They say, It is most sure as the Apostles practised in one houshold, so they practised in all. But in the Iaylors house they baptised such as they preached the word unto, and such as beleeved, Act. 16.31.34. and this is most plaine that infants cannot heare nor beleeue, &c.

Ans. It is not most sure, but altogether unlikely, as themselves, I think,Mat. 10.13 14.Matt 10:13 will acknowledge. For there is no likelihood that all housholds to whom the Apostles preached, did beleeue every one in them,1 Cor. 7.13.16.1 Cor 7:131 Cor 7:16 though some did. And they grant that none but beleevers were baptised. So then if the goodman of the house, and the men p. 63onelyonly beleeved, there none but men were baptised: if women onelyonly beleeved, they onelyonly were baptised. Therfore the Apostles practise was not alwayes alike in respect of the persons that they baptised. So for infants, such houses as had none, wee easily grant that no infants vvere there baptised. But such as had infants, their parents beleeving, we hold that their infants vvere baptized; for there is no exception of infants at all in any place of the Apostles Acts. The barre vvhichwhich they put, that infants cannot heare nor beleeue, is soone removed. We know infants can heare, though not vvith understanding: we know also (and hauehave proved before) that they beleeue, though not actually or professantly. And this faith begun in them in their regeneration, is a sufficient ground vvhy infants should be baptised, as I hauehave formerly manifested.

Finally,Pag. 143. unto Christs words Mark. 1….14. suffer ye little children to come unto me, &c. for of such is the kingdome of God: they say, It is not s…yd, Infants are of the kingdome of heaven, that is, obeyers of the Gospel, Luk. 4 43▪ but that they that enter into the kingdom of heaven, must become as little children, for of such like is the kingdome of God. And, This is Christs meaning, men must bee converted and receiue the kingdom of God as a child. &c.

Ans They speak like children in understanding. 1. The people brought yong children properly unto Christ, not men converted & become like children: Mark. 10.13. For the children the disciples rebuked the bringers: for their rebuking Christ vvas much displeased, and sayd, Suffer the little children to come unto me What reasonable creature will now deny that Christ speaketh here of children in yeares, not of old men like children. The children that were brought, Christ took up in his armes, put his hands one them & blessed them: may we think he took up aged persons. 2 The reason vvhy he would hauehave such chil…ren suffered to come to him, is, for of such is the kingdome of God, Mark. 10.14 If he had not meant this of yong children themselues, but of men like children in some condition; there had been no weight in his words: but the people might hauehave brought unto him upon that ground, doues, and serpents for Christ to lay hands upon and blesse: for as godly men must in some thi…gs be like children, 1. Cor. 14▪20. so must they in some things also be like serpents, and like doues, Math. 10.16▪3▪ They wrest the t…xt, when they expound f… of such is the kingdome of God, thus, for of such like: as if Christ meant n…t the children properly, but ancienter men like such children. They might even as well say, that when Paul writeth, I beseech thee, being such a one as Paul the aged, (Philem. v. 9 that he …peaketh not this of himselfe, but of some other man▪ like himselfe, that made request for Onesimus. But ignorant and unstable men vvill pervert all scriptures p. 64to their owne perdition. That infants of the faithfull are indeed of the kingdome of God, is before proved from Rom. 5. and many other scriptures.

Now vvhereas Christ blessed the children; they tell us, he baptised them not, vvhichwhich we grant: but if they vvhichwhich were by nature children of wrath and curse, were now by grace made children of blessing in Christ; then were they in deed of the kingdom of God, and such as might receiue baptisme the signe and seale of blessednes.

Lastly they say, It is a blessing to infants to be created, to liue, to grow in stature, wisedome, &c. to hauehave their sight, their limbs, &c. so that Christs blessings extend as well to this life as that which is to come.

Answ. All Gods benefits for this life and the next, are in deed blessings: But Christ blessed not those children with any such vvordly temporal blessings particularly; but gaue them the blessing of God in generall: and men are too presumptuous that will vvithout due proofe restreine that to some particulars vvhichwhich the Lord hath not restreyned. Wee know that our blessednesse from God in Christ, is our eternall salvation, Rom. 4▪6. &c. It vvas his l…st farewell to his beloved disciples to lift up his hands and blesse them, Luk. 24.50. and it is the summe of the Gospell, that in Abrahams seed (that is Christ) all nations shall be blessed, Gal. 3.8. This grace Abrahams infants had, this grace Christ gaue to little children: and the same he vouchsafe to continue unto us and to our children throughout their generations: preserving us and them from the curse of Anabaptistrie, whereby so many errours are sparsed, scriptures wrested, and soules perverted unto destruction.

FINIS.

End of the text · Henry Ainsworth, Censure Upon the Dialogue of the Anabaptists (1623)