The English Nonconformity Under King Charles II and James II, Chapter 9
CHAP. IX. Point VI. Of the Article of Baptized Infants Salvation.
M.
THE sixth Point of our Non-conformity is a new Article of Faith in these words, in a Rubrick which we must Profess, Assent and Consent to [It is certain by the Word of God, that Children which are baptized and dying before they commit actual sin are undoubtedly saved].
L.
And what have you against Assenting to this?
M.
1. That it is a New Article of Faith. 2. That it is arrogant and divisive, making a grand Controversie one Article of Faith. 3. It is certainly false in most if not every one that declareth such assent. 4. It is a dangerous adding to the Word of God.
L.
Why call you a Rubrick an Article of Faith?
M.
It is most expresly made such: What is an Article of Faith but that which must be Assented to as certain by the Word of God? Will you deny the Name where there is this Definition?
L.
But how do you prove it to be new?
M.
Because it was never made for us before; you have the affirmative: If you say it was ever before, prove it. It's not in the Bible, it's not in our 39 Articles, nor Creed.
L.
Are not the old words of the former Book to the same sense?
M.
Not at all: If they were why did the New Convocation alter them? The old words plainly signifie no more than this that Infants baptized have all ex parte ministri, and may be saved without Confirmation, Exorcism, Chrysme, Spittle, Salt, Milk and Honey, and such other additions, supposing him ex parte sui under the promise of Salvation, that is, to be the seed of the Faithful: Though I verily believe that after the making of the Common-prayer Book, our Canon-Makers in Bancrofts dayes began to warp towards a worser sence. But our Defenders of the Liturgy expound it as I say; and the tenor of the words may tell the Reader that they meant no more.
L.
Tell me first where it is that your Controversie lyeth?
M.
I. Negatively, 1. It is not whether the Infant Seed of one believing Parent should be Baptized: This is agreed on.
2. It is not whether those may be dedicated to God as our Children and baptized, who are Adopted, or any way made our own Children, as Abrahams bought and born to him in his house as his propriety were. Though we cannot say we are certain of this, yet we will not contradict them that say they are.
3. It is not whether Hypocrites Children have not so far a right to Baptisme Coram Ecclesia as that the Minister ought to baptize them if it be justly demanded.
4. It is not whether there be a certainty of the Salvation of all the baptized Infants of true faithful Christians, that die before actual sin: Though all good Christians are not certain of this: yet with the Synod of Dort we hold that Christians have no just cause to doubt of it.
5. It is not whether they may not be good men that think all baptized ones absolutely in a state of Salvation. None of these are the Controversie.
II. But it is 1. Whether all Infants without exception that be baptized, are saved if they then die.
2. Whether this be certain by the Word of God.
3. Whether all that be not undoubtedly certain of it, should be no Ministers?
L.
But it is not said [All Infants], but [Infants] indefinitely.
M.
1. There is no place of doubting of their universal sence. For an Indefinite term in re necessaria is equal to an Vniversal. And they except the unbaptized from Christian Burial.
2. It is Baptized Infants as such that they speak of, and that under no other Character, nor with the least exception. And a quatenus ad omnes valet argumentum.
3. The Canon commandeth Ministers to baptize all Infants without exception that are brought to them on any Sundays or Holydays to be baptized after the Manner of the Church of England.
4. I have spoken with the Bishops that brought in and promoted this Article, and they own the universal sence, supposing the true form of Baptisme; and say, that as any man hath right to take up an exposed Infant in the streets and take it in, so hath any one to bring the Child of a Heathen, Infidel, Atheist or Sadducee to baptisme.
5. If they had meant it only of some baptized Infants and not all, they knew the Non-conformists were of the same mind; and then they would have told us, what sort they mean.
L.
I. And why may not an Article of Faith be newly declared? we have not read the Fathers? It may not be unknown to them: And I have heard that they are for it.
M.
The most ancient Churches were so much employed in baptizing the adult Converted from Infidelity, that we read little or nothing expresly and particularly what they did about Infants in Baptisme: They baptized none at age without a serious Profession of true Faith and Repentance and holy Dedication to Christ: They used to keep these as Learning Catechumens long before they baptized them, save in case of necessity near death. Therefore they had their set-times of the year for baptizing (two or three times) as our Bishops have now for ordaining. And after all this strict preparation, they pronounced the baptized in a state of Salvation, but it was only on supposition that he was a sincere penitent covenanting Believer. Even Hildebrand (Pope Greg. 7.) in his time concludeth that baptisme saveth none that dissemble or have not the Faith and Repentance which they profess: which the Papists do ordinarily confess, and Protestants much more.
And as for Infants, the Ancients compelled▪ not Christians themselves to baptize them, but left them to their own choice. Tertullian is for long delay till-they understand, saying, Cur festinat innocens at as: Greg▪ Nazianzene would have them stay at least three years: In danger of Death they alway hastened: Augustine and many others that had Christian Parents were not baptized till at Age. And they took Christians Infants, as Paul did, to be not unclean but holy, and would receive others brought by such as adopted or owned them as Pro-parents. But it was never the judgment of the ancient Churches that all Heathens or Infidels Children have right to Baptisme and Salvation if any will but offer them to Baptism. Much less that it is certain by Gods Word that all such are saved.
2. Articles of Faith are all contained in the Scripture, and that is not new; therefore nothing that is new can be an Article of Faith; nor can it be said to be newly declared which was there from its beginning.
L.
II. And why call you it arrogant and dividing?
M.
Because it presumptuously condemneth the Reformed Churches and the Christian World, determining that to be so certain by Gods Word, that none should doubt of it that will be a Minister, when the Christian World is of many several opinions about it.
L.
What be those Opinions about it?
M▪ 1. Some hold that the Covenant being the same pardoning saving Covenant that is made to the faithful and their Seed, and their Children expresly called Holy, they are all in a state of pardon and salvation before baptisme, and baptisme doth but celebrate and invest them in it before the Church; and solemnly seal their Covenant right. And that this saving right is given only to the seed of the sincerely faithful, or at most to those that have such Pro-parents, though the Seed of Hypocrites must be received by the Church, that know not mens hearts. And this I take to be the Truth.
2. Some others hold that this right to Salvation belongeth to them that have Grand-fathers and Grand-mothers or remote Ancestors that were truly Godly Christians.
3. Some hold that it belongeth to all the Seed of professed Christians how bad soever the Parents be.
4. Some hold that it belongeth only to the Children of true Believers that are baptized, but not to the unbaptized.
5. Some hold that it belongeth to Hypocrites Children that are baptized, but not to the unbaptized.
6. Some hold that it belongeth to all baptized ones if they have God-fathers that profess Christianity.
7. Some hold that it belongeth to all baptized by a true believing Minister, for the Faith of the Church.
8. Some hold that it belongeth to none that by Baptism are taken into any Congregation guilty of Heresie or Schism.
9. Some hold that it belongeth to all that are baptized by a Minister who is ordained by Bishops that have uninterrupted Canonical Succession, and not to others.
10. Some hold that the Baptisme of a Lay-man or a Woman may be effectual to the Salvation of such.
11. Some Conformists hold that all Infants in the World are saved, baptized and unbaptized.
12. The most of the Papists hold that the baptized are saved both from the pain of Sense and of Loss, but the unbaptized are saved from the pain of sense only, but not of loss; and so have neither Joy nor Sorrow.
13. Many wise Men hold that Salvation is certain according to the first Opinion to the Seed of Sincere Believers, but that we have no certain notice at all, what God will do with all the rest (baptized or unbaptized).
14. Many think that God hath a certain number of Infants Elect whom he will save, and will cast away the rest, but that no man can know who they be; though the Faithful may have some uncertain hopes for their Children more than others, but no Promise.
15. Some think that the Common state of Infants in the Life to come is utterly unrevealed and unknown to us.
I do not say that none of these opinions should be disclaimed: But among all which Learned, godly men of all Countries hold, to say he that is not certain of some one of them as God's word is unmeet to be a Minister is dividing arrogance, of men that overvalue themselves.
L.
III. How then can you make good your charge of falsehood? May it not be true among many false ones?
M.
I make it good two ways; men must say they are certain that are not certain. 1. No man can be certain that God's word saith that which it doth not say: But God's word doth not say directly, or by consequence that all baptized dying Infants are undoubtedly saved. He that saith there is such a word, let him produce it.
It is suspicious that these same men that subscribe, that nothing is necessary to Salvation, but what is contained in the Scripture, or may be proved by it, would impose this belief on us, and never tell us so much as by a Marginal citation of any one text of Scripture where it may be found. All that ever by talk I could hear of them is, Gal. 3. 26, 27. Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Iesus, for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ. As if they would have us believe. 1. That all Atheists and Infidels children have faith in Christ Iesus if they be but baptized. 2. Or that all the Galathians that Paul wrote to were in a state of certain Salvation, when it is apparent that he spake to the adult, whom elsewhere he saith he feareth lest he have bestowed on them labour in vain, and as bewitched men, they had disobeyed the truth, &c. 3. Or that all that put on Christ Sacramentally by Profession and Baptism were in a state of certain salvation, even Simon Magus. How commonly when they confute the Separatists, that alledge the titles of Saints, holy, children of God, &c. given to all the Churches by the Apostles, do they themselves expound it of a sanctity of Profession and Relation as distinct from a saving state of Grace, as to many of the visible members of the Church. And must we now believe that the visible and the invisible membership are of equal extent. If this prove that all the baptized adult have put on Christ savingly, and have right to Heaven, it will confute the universal Church that hath ever believed the contrary, and it will be good news to all worldly hypocrites: But St. Peter saith, It is not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good Conscience to God. And he told Simon Magus that he had no part in that matter, not for apostacy, but because his heart was not right in the sight of God. And sure it is no streight gate by which men enter into a state of Salvation, if all the hypocrite flagitious sinners are in it, that will but be baptized.
But if this Text say not that all adult hypocrites baptized, so dying are saved, much less doth it say it of all the children of them, and of all Infidels that are baptized. Is this to give us proof of undoubted certainty?
They alledge also Mar. 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, what then. Ergo, all Infants that are baptized, that neither believe, nor are the seed of believers shall be saved. This is a new Gospel, and no proof that the authors of it say true.
Another is Ioh. 3. 3, 5. Except a man be born again of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. Doth this prove that all are born again of the Spirit that are baptized? Is this proving by God's word.
L.
What is your other proof, that it's a false profession of them that declare Assent to this Doctrine.
M.
2. It is this. He that saith a thing is undoubtedly certain by God's word which God's word contradicteth, doth certainly speak falsely. But so doth he that maketh this profession.
That God's word contradicteth it, I have proved so fully in my two Disputations of original sin, and my Treatise of Infant Baptism, and Methodus Theologia, that I must not here repeat it, viz. by abundance of plain Texts that appropriate the Covenant-blessings to the Faithful and their Seed, and exclude or curse the seed of the wicked, at least as out of the Covenant of God: I will now repeat but one. 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your children unclean, but now are they holy. If the children of Infidels are not holy but unclean, they have no right to the promise of Life, or to the Seal and Investiture by Baptism. But, &c. Ergo.
I know Dr. Hammond will have Holiness here to be nothing but [the Church useth to baptize such on presumption that they will be educated to Christianity:] and uncleanness to be but [the Churches use to refuse such, supposing they will not be so educated. And so that the Seed of the Faithful have no special promise of pardon and life. But, 1. I have as aforecited and to Mr. Tombes proved many such promises to the Seed of the Faithful, which Divines should not unthankfully like Anabaptists deny.
2. And I ask such Doctors what baptism doth for the Infants at present and on what account? Doth it put them in a present right to Salvation? If not, why are they at present baptized, when God instituted no baptism but one, which is for signification and investiture in the present remission of sin…: And so saith the Liturgie: And if so then on what account is an Infant saved? Is it meerly because another undertaketh to teach him hereafter? No man can undertake that he shall believe or live. If he could, that would but prove that he shall be pardoned when be believeth and not before. And if all Infants, whom any Christian will undertake hereafter to teach, though they never live to be taught, or will never believe, be by this put into a present right to Salvation, a stranger's undertaking of meer teaching upon utter uncertainty of life and success, is supposed to have such a promise which yet these Doctors deny to be made on the accounts of their own parents interest in Christ and them; and his dedicating them to Christ. And if these promising Godfathers be meer Lyers, the Child is supposed to be baptizable and savable by it.
But if they say that the right to Salvation comes, ex opero operato, by meer baptizing, whether the Child have undertakers or not, I answer, that a prophanation of God's ordinance is not a saving act: God hath said no such thing, but that the Children of Infidels are unclean and unholy, and doth not say except some body will baptize them. And why should not the Church baptize as many Infidels Children as they can catch up, though none undertake for them, if baptizing them do certainly save them if they so die.
I conclude therefore that seeing no man can be certain that all the baptized Children of Heathens, Infidels, Jews, Atheists or Diabolists are in a state of Salvation, God never promising it, but saying the contrary, whoever professeth this undoubted certainty, speaketh falsely, that which he hath not.
L.
But they say not [I am undoubtedly certain of it] but only that it is undoubtedly certain in it self.
M.
This is to jest with holy things? To be certain is to be a Truth that hath ascertaining evidence, if you mean objective certainty: and how can any man profess or affirm that who knoweth it not? He that affirmeth that it is objectively certain, doth therefore affirm that he knoweth it to be so, and is subjectively certain, if he mean that it is evident and certain to others and not to him, it's a contradiction: for if he know it not to be certain he cannot tell that another doth.
L.
But though you be not certain of it, the subscribers may.
M.
1. I have proved that no man is certain of it, 2. Judge by all the rest of their wisedom, whether every Youth that comes for Ordination from the Universities, be so much wiser than we, that they are certain of this which we think uncertain or false. Judge by their other qualifications, whether the seven thousand Ministers that declared their assent to the Book before they ever saw it, are like to be certainer than the two thousand that were cast out: And are they certain of this that are uncertain of many great and weighty truths through ignorance?
3. Yea many Conformists and Papists, say that Infant Baptism cannot be proved by Scripture, but by Tradition. And can Ten thousand Ministers then be certain by Scripture that baptized Infants are saved? How gross a contradiction is this?
4. And judge farther of the credit and modesty of such men: some Divines say that Faith it self hath not evidence, and that he that doubteth of Christianity and the Life to come may be saved, if his belief of it be but strong enough to make him trust and prefer it before all this world. And I hear their greatest Divines say that few would be saved if none but they that are undoubtedly certain of the Life to come, and of the truth of the Gospel should be saved. And yet all must be cast or kept out of the Ministry that will not affirm that they are more certain of a hard Controversie if not of an untruth, than Christ requireth us to be of our very Christianity.
L.
IV. What is the fourth part of your reason against this point?
M.
1. We dare not father that on God which he never spake. 2. And we dread the curse, Rev. 22. against them that shall add to his word, viz. that he will add his curses upon them. How terribly are false Prophets threatned that say, Thus saith the Lord, when the Lord never said it: This is to belie God and to take his name in vain. And for Nine thousand or Ten thousand Ministers to affirm that this is certain by God's word that they are undoubtedly saved, and when they have done cannot to this day, shew us one word of God that saith it, is such an adding to his word as we had rather still be called all that's naught, and imprisoned than be guilty of.
We take it for a Fanatick presumption in Papists to pretend to be infallible in Councils, in determining those things which out of the Council through ignorance they understood not: and how it should be but by Enthusiasm, or fanatick pretence of Inspiration, that a multitude of raw ignorant fellows, or lads should come to find that in God's word as undoubtedly certain, which none of us in forty or fifty years search could ever find there, I cannot tell.
L.
I know not what to say to this: I would they had left it to mens free thoughts.
M.
And do you think now that it's lawful for us deliberately to Assent and Consent that this is an undoubted certainty when we are not certain, nor believe it to be true. Should we lie to be conformable, were there but this one thing it obligeth us to Nonconformity whatever we suffer for it.