The Plea for Infants and Elder People Concerning their Baptism, Part 2 · Argument 4
IIII. Argument.
THoſe holy things, which God by his merciful providence hath preſerved for his people, through the hands of prophane perſons are not to be rejected for the authors ſake. Ezra. 1: 11, But the ſcriptures and baptiſme, hath God preſerved in the popiſh aſſemblies for the benefit of his people. Therfore not to be rejected for the Authors ſake.
If it be objected againſt the Minor, it is not true baptiſme but falſe that is adminiſtred in the Aſſēblies of Antichriſt: I anſwer, though it may be ſayd to be falſe in regard of ſome humane deviſes uſed in the adminiſtration thereof: yet is it true baptiſme in reſpect of the matter, forme, and author thereof, which cauſeth it to have a true being.
Mr Smyth.
I anſwer directly that if it could be proved that baptiſme in the kingdome of AntichriſtAnſw. is appointed by Chriſt, and that water is the true matter of baptiſme, and the true forme is waſhing into the Trinitie, I would yeeld unto you, but this you have not proved &c. but to deal ſomething more fully, &c. …. water is not the matter of baptiſme, but onelyonly the inſtrument. &c.
R. Clyfton.
Firſt I have proved that baptiſme which is adminiſtred in the AntichriſtianRep. churches is not to be iterated: but that Chriſt appointed baptiſme in the kingdome of Antichriſt, I do not affirm; onelyonly this I ſay, that Chriſt ordeyned this ſacrament for his church, which becoming Apoſtate & yet reteyning the ſame, is notwithſtanding baptiſme, becauſe it is of God. And ſo I affirme that Chriſt is the Author of baptiſme, which the Antichriſtians pollute by their adminiſtration thereof, as God was the author of that circumciſion obſerved in the apoſtate church of Iſrael. And therefore as circumciſion received of the Iſraelites in their Apoſtaſie, ſtood as the ſeal of Gods covenant to ſo many as repented: So baptiſme received in Babylon confirmeth the promiſe to al Gods people departing thence, and returning to walk in the wayes of the Lord.
But concerning the matter and forme of baptiſme you charge me to have ſayd in my anſwer to your ſecond Argument, That water is the matter and the forme waſhing with water into the Trinitie. In calling water the matter▪ if ſo it had pleaſed you, you might have underſtood my meaning, viz. that I underſtood thereby the outward ſigne or element, whereof in Poperie was no change. They uſed the ſame which Chriſt ordeyned. And in calling it the matter, I did not intend the ſubject or partie baptiſed (which I know muſt be alſo one that beleeveth, or the ſeed of ſuch,) but conſidering what Chriſt ordeyned to be obſerved in this Ceremonie, I found theſe: water, and the baptiſing therewith into the name of the father, &c. The former I called the matter or element wherewith the partie is baptiſed, meaning that material outward ſigne, that Chriſt ordeyned in this ſacrament as in the other, he hath done the like. For it was not in my thought to intend, that if the water be adminiſtred with this forme of words, that it is baptiſme without a fit ſubject to be baptiſed: Nay I hold it an error in the Papiſts which baptiſe their bells, and wil have bread conſecrated (as they ſpeak) to be a ſacrament, though it be never received but layed up in a box.
Concerning the ſubject of baptiſme or matter (as you terme it) I wil not contend: but in that you denye the Infants of beleevers to be fit matter of baptiſme, the contrarie I affirme and have proved before.
2. I ſay that waſhing into the name of the father of the ſonne & of the Holy Ghoſt, Anſ.is not the forme of baptiſme: for to waſh a Turke, Jew, Foole, madman or Infant into the Trinitie is not true baptiſme, &c.
I anſwer, firſt, I know that formes can not conſiſt without their ſubjects,Re. & therefore I ſay, the forme of baptiſing is reteyned in Poperie, applied to infants, though corruptly in that ſtanding. Secondly, I ſtand not to defend, that to baptiſe an unfit ſubject is true baptiſme: but this, that the baptiſme of Apoſtates is not to be iterated when they repent and turne to God no no more then the circumciſio of the Iſraelites in the like cauſe, 2 Chro. 3…. 6.-11. 21. as before I have ſhewed.
3. That infants are to be baptiſed, I have already proved. And to baptiſe a Iewe, Turke, Foole &c. continuing in their infidelitie, madnes &c. we do not affirme it lawfull, nor yet the baptiſme of Apoſtats, for all ſuch abuſe that holy ceremony being guilty thereof, as they are of the body and bloud of Chriſt, that receave it unworthely 1 Cor. 11.
The true forme of baptiſme conſiſts in 3. things 1. waſhing with water 2. a new Anſ.creature, 3. into the name of Christ or into the Trinitie.
This might alſo be graunted, ſaving that by new creature, you mind onelyonly…p. ſuch as are of yeares, and ſo appere to vsus new creatures by their profeſſion, excluding infants, who alſo muſt be ſo accepted of vsus inreſpect of the covenant, whereof they are partakers, as wel as theire parents. Alſo the children of the faithful may be eſtemed new creatures, ſeing they are holy: and are ſo to be accounted til they manyfeſt themſelves otherwiſe, which may be the caſe of old perſons, as of S. Magus &c. And the Apoſtle in the place alledged, ſpeaketh of ſuch as are of yeares; and by the ſpeach of a new creature, implyeth a ſpecial vſe and fruite of the thing ſignified by the outward ſigne, and ſo is not a part of the external forme of baptiſme † as byMat. 3. 11 man it is adminiſtred.
But if an infant &c. be waſhed with water into the Trinitie. I ſay there is neither An.true matter nor forme: And ſo al infants baptiſed by Antichrist &c. are to renounce it and to receave Chriſts marke of baptiſme &c. and when they ſhal manifeſt a new creature &c. and then be baptiſed into the Trinitie, this is not Anabaptiſtry, but the true apoſtolick baptiſme: and ſo Christ, Iohn, and Christs Apoſtles were Anabaptists, with you Sir. &c. for they baptiſed men that were waſhed before, a thouſand tymes with the Iewes baptiſmes, Heb. 9. 10 &c. if it be blaſphemy to ſay Chriſt, John, or the …Apoſtles were anabaptiſts, though they were oftentymes ſome of them baptiſed into the Meſſiah in type &c. ſo ſhall it be blaſphemy in them that cal the true Chriſtianes Anabaptiſts &c.
Sir, if you mind wel your compariſon it holds not, for thoſe waſhings…p. vnderunder the law were proper ordinances of the old Teſtamēt, declaring their repentance † and clenſing from their dayly ſinnes, and pollutions by faithJoh. 13 10 in Chriſt then to come: But baptiſme (whereof we ſpeak) is an ordinance of the Goſpel, and that but * one, as their circumciſion likewiſe was, andEphe. 4. 5 therefore being once adminiſtered (though in ſome corruption) is Anabaptiſme, to be iterated. And it is ſuch a waſhing as preacheth … vsus the purging of our ſinnes by Chriſt. And therefore it is not … often waſhings under the law that can make men ANABAPTISTS: for you know in what ſenſe people now are called ANABAPTISTS viz. for their reiection of the baptiſme of the Goſpel which they have received, and Baptiſing themſelves agayne, as you have put in practiſe. And ſeing that which was adminiſtered in the Popiſh Aſſemblies, is Baptiſme; it wilbe no blaſphemy in vsus to cal them ANABAPTISTS that have there with bene once baptiſed and do recounce it, and take to themſelves a new of mans invention. What els is here ſayd, is anſwered before.
And thus I conclude the confirmation of this fourth Argument, that although the POPISH CHƲRCHES be apoſtate, the MINISTERY WORSHIP AND GOVERMENT falſe; yet the word and baptiſme therein reteayned (being the Lords ordinances) are not to be reiected with their pollution, but (purged from theſe ſtaynes) ſtil to be retayned, and with Gods people to be caried with them out of ſpiritual BABYLON as the Iewes did the veſſels of the Lords houſe out of Babilon of Chaldea. For the precept concerning Apostate Churches is †Hoſ. …. Rev. 1…to take away their fornications, and not the things of God polluted therewith.