The Estate of Children of Church Members and their Right to Baptism, Treatise · Part 3 · Chapter 4
CHAP. IIII. SECT. I.
IƲſtin Martyr (as the Authors of ignorance, or the Printer by overſight calls Juſtin Martyr) in his oration ad Antoninum Pium; I will declare unto you, how wee offer up our ſelves to God, after wee are renewed though Chriſt — thoſe amongſt us, that are inſtructed in the faith, and beleeve that which wee teach them is true, being willing to live according to the ſame, wee doe admoniſh to pray for the forgiveneſſe of their ſinnes, and we alſo faſt and pray with them, & then they are brought by us to the water, and there as wee were newborne, are they alſo by newbirth renewed, and then in calling upon God the Father, the Lord Jeſus Chriſt and the holy Ghoſt, they are waſhed in water — Mr. Blackwood addeth — that of Juſtin alſo, That wee do bring the party ſo waſhed (not the beleever, as hee expreſſeth it) and joyned to the brethren, as they are called, where they are gathered together (to common prayers and ſupplications, is not expreſſed as Mr. Blackwood hath it, but thus) that wee may pray both for our ſelves and for the party newly enlightned, &c. Now whereas the Treatiſe brings this to prove the third Propoſition, that the people were commonly firſt inſtructed, and then baptized, &c. Mr Blackwood is more peremptory in that matter, making this teſtimony contrary, and ſo inconſiſtent with any other teſtimony in the queſtions aſcribed to Juſtine, and concludeth hence, that in Juſtines time Paedobaptiſme was not in the world. Let us therefore conſider whether this apology and that which is recorded in it, bee ſo demonſtrative a proof of ſuch a concluſion.
It's ſaid that whoſoever were perſwaded and beleeved, &c. they were brought to the water and waſhed — that proveth that all ſuch perſons were received to Baptiſme, but what? Ergo, none but ſuch were baptized? non ſequitur. It's ſaid, Rom. 10. 13. Whoſoever ſhall call upon the name of Lord ſhall bee ſaved, therefore all ſuch ſhall be ſaved: True, but not ergo none other ſhall bee ſaved. For Mr. Blackwood grants Infants may bee ſaved. One might better have concluded from Juſtins ſpeech in that apology — wee beleeve that God doth love thoſe (onelyonly) which imitate his virtues — moderation, love, righteouſneſſe, &c. that they beleeved that God loved no Infants, for they could not imitate — God in juſtice and love, &c. yet I ſuppoſe Mr. Blackwood would bee loth to thinke ſo of thoſe beleevers in Juſtins time. And ſo when hee there ſaith: But wee have learned that immortalitie (ſcil. of bleſſedneſſe) is onelyonly theirs who live honeſtly and holily before God; therefore they had learned, that the kingdome of glory belonged to no Infants: For they could not live ſo: here Mr. B. will not thinke that excluſive particle [onelyonly] concluding againſt babes, to whom hee holdeth the kingdome of glory doth belong, and why then is a particle farre leſſe excluſive, ſo concluſive againſt Infants? When Juſtin in that Apology commeth to ſpeake of the other Sacrament of the Lords Supper — hee ſaith, unto which none is admitted, but hee that doth beleeve our Doctrine, having been waſhed in the Laver of regeneration unto the remiſſion of ſinnes, &c. but hee ſaith not ſo in the other — none but ſuch as beleeve what wee teach to bee true, &c. are waſhed or baptized, &c. Mr. B. might have conſidered that the occaſion of this Apology was to take off aſperſions caſt upon growne Chriſtians, as for their babes they were not eyed by the adverſaries, as capable ſubjects of ſuch crimes charged on their Parents. Hence that ſpeech in this Apology — you when you heare mee expect a Kingdome, raſhly ſuſpect it of ſome humane kingdome, when wee ſpeake it of the kingdome of God. So they endeavour to make us daily infamous by objecting impious crimes againſt us — and — heinous things are divulged of us through the peoples tales of putting out light, and then lying promiſcuouſly together, & of devouring mans fleſh, &c. and that at our ſacred myſteries we promiſcuouſly commit filthineſſe, &c. So that it were impertinent to mention their religious way of devoting and offering up their children to God, they were not accuſed, no apology is needed for them; but it's meet to apologize onelyonly for the perſons accuſed, and declare what manner of perſons they are, and how they devote themſelves to higher and holier uſes, &c.
Let the reaſons bee weighed which Juſtin here urged, why they baptized perſons adult, and with him that urgeth thoſe for reaſons, it enforceth more then probable grounds to convince, that Baptiſme of their Infants was in uſe. For having ſpoken of that their being new borne, as they were, (that is Baptized) hee gives theſe two things as reaſons: Dixit enim Chriſtus, Niſi renati fueritis, non intrabitis in regnum caelorum; & addes — rationem ejus rei hanc accepimus ab Apoſtolis, quoniam prima nativitas, nec ſcientibus, nec volentibus nobis ex complexu parentum, humoreque, genitali, &c. Firſt, the neceſſitie of regeneration in and by Baptiſme (as the ordinary way.) [For ſo hee underſtands Iohn 3. 5. whether rightly or no, I diſpute not, but to him it was ſo and that ſufficeth.] Secondly, the native pollution and originall ſinne (for that hee intends by nativitie] received from their parents; which are reaſons valid as well for baptiſme of Infants as growne ones too, and with any, to whom they are reaſons for Baptiſme, and are the very reaſons uſed by Origen, Cyprian, Ierom, Ambroſe, Auſtin, and others, whoſe judgement was for baptiſme of Infants, as well as adult perſons.
Yea but there is no mention made here of Infants baptiſme, no nor was it ſuitable to the occaſion of the Apology, as wee ſaid before, and yet it followeth not, that it was not practiſed then, becauſe not expreſſed. Mr. B. ſaith, hee ſets downe here the practiſe of the Church, both for word, prayer and adminiſtration of the Sacraments, and that ex profeſſo. Yet Mr. B. may perceive that there is no mention of any doctrinall inſtructions held out at the baptizing of perſons, or at the adminiſtration of the Lords Supper, occaſioned by the joyning of new members to them at other times. Afterwards indeed when hee commeth to ſpeake of the manner of their carrying it on the Lords day, hee mentioneth ſomething that way, but nothing in ſpeaking of occaſionall meetings for ſolemn cloſing with baptized perſons at other times. Yet I thinke Mr. B. would bee loth to conclude the word was not taught, when the Sacraments were adminiſtred to any. If he omit a thing which is profeſſo, hee was to mention, what wonder if he paſſe over in ſilence a matter of which hee had not then occaſion to ſpeake? Tertullian de corona militis ſaith almoſt as much in ſubſtance as Iuſtin, and it is as well urged againſt Paedobaptiſme, becauſe hee ſaith, when wee come together to the water, wee doe promiſe there to renounce the Devill, &c. Yet it is evident Baptiſme of Infants was in uſe in his time; why elſe doth hee condemne it, and would not have their Suſceptors runne hazzards by becomming ſureties for them? So that this is but a fallacious way of concluding à dicto ſecundum quid, ad dictum ſimpliciter. Something more wee ſhall adde of Juſtin occaſionally afterwards.
SECT. II.
RAbanus is the next witneſſe to Propoſ. 3. which ſaith the Catechiſme which is the doctrine of faith, muſt goe before baptiſme, &c. hee was Anno 840. when none queſtions the conſtant uſe of Paedobaptiſme, and ſo the intent is not touching what is to goe before their baptiſme, but what was to precede the baptiſme of Pagans or Jewes turned to the faith. Rabanus de inſtitutione Clericorum hath that paſſage of the 4th. Carthage Councell; Thoſe which are to bee baptized are to give in their names, and are to bee long under abſtinence of Wine and Fleſh, &c. and yet in the ſame place ſaith, Whether Infants or young men come to the Sacrament of regeneration, they no ſooner approach to the Font of life, but the uncleane ſpirit is driven away from them by the exorciſing of the Prieſts, &c. Theſe are no contraries but may very well ſtand together with Rabanus, that thoſe that are to bee baptized bee ſo prepared thereto, ſcil. if adult, and yet Infants alſo not capable of ſuch preparation may and are to bee baptized, wherefore this is ſtill but racking of Authors to make them ſpeake that which they never intended.
SECT. III.
BAſil is the next Author brought in, Contra Eunomium l. 3. ſaying, muſt the faithfull bee ſealed with Baptiſme? Faith muſt praecede and goe before. Mr. Blackwood inlargeth the teſtimony in words to like purpoſe. For Baptiſme is the ſeale of faith, faith the confeſſion of the Deity: For firſt hee, (ſcil. that is made godly by grace of whom hee before ſpake) muſt firſt beleeve and after bee ſealed with baptiſme — and — baptiſme is the forgiveneſſe of the debt of priſoners, the death of ſinne, the regeneraon of the ſoule, — How can this, ſaith Mr. Backwood, bee affirmed of Infants? And againe — I will roule in mire — walke deceitfully — ſweare and lie, and then when I am full with evills, I will ceaſe and receive baptiſme — which ſhewes ſaith Mr. B. at what time perſons were wont to bee baptized, not in their Infancy, but when they were men, if the faithfull — if one that is made godly▪ by grace bee to bee baptized — hee muſt firſt profeſſe his faith: ergo, none other is to bee baptized, if brought to baptiſme in any other way — non ſequitur; yea but that doth plainly reſiſt the tradition of wholeſome baptiſme — For baptiſme is the ſeale of faith, &c. ſaith Baſil. What doth reſiſt the wholeſome tradition of baptiſm? Paedobaptiſme without actuall faith expreſſed? — Baſil intended it not, but if one that is made godly by grace (being changeable by nature) ſometimes by negligence fall from grace, &c. and ſo hold forth any other thing then is conſonant to the doctrine of the Trinitie confeſſed in Baptiſme; This is reſiſting that tradition of Baptiſme, he doth not intend by tradition of Baptiſme a rule that onelyonly actuall confeſſors of the Trinitie muſt bee baptized. Let him expound himſelfe; for in his fifth booke againſt Eunomius pag. 119. ſpeaking of that forme of baptizing in the name of the Father, Sonne and Holy Ghoſt, hee calleth that the tradition, ſcil. touching baptiſme, if by his deſcription hee intend the ſeale of faith, ſcil. the Covenant and doctrine of faith, it hurts us not, if of faith whereby wee beleeve, it is an imperfect deſcription of baptiſme. Baptiſme, ſaith hee, is the forgiveneſſe of ſinne, &c. if he meane it, that it is ſo really to all that are baptized, then Simon Magus and Ananias had not periſhed in their ſinnes, if hee ſpeake it, that it is ſo Sacramentally, that may bee affirmed of Infants Baptiſme. As for Mr. B's expoſition that Baſils other ſpeech, I will lie and ſweare, and when full of evills &c. then receive Baptiſme, ſheweth the time when perſons were wont to bee baptized; I wonder at his collection, doth hee thinke men ſhould ſinne to the full, till they are even weary, and then come to bee baptized? is that a fit time, when they have ſerved the Devill to the utmoſt, and been his old ſworne truſtees, then to liſt themſelves under Chriſts command? Verily if Mr. B. thinke ſo, Baſil did not, for hee rather reproveth perſons for deferring their Baptiſme, as if a man might bemire himſelfe in ſinne as much as hee would, and then at laſt one waſhing in baptiſme would make all clean, which hee thus ſarcaſtically derideth.
Aretius had no ſuch thought of Baſils judgement in this caſe, who yet had reaſon to know Baſils mind, better then Mr. B. or I. And hee in his Commentary on Luke 18. brings in Baſil as uſing this argument amongſt others — Infantes capaces ſunt foreign, ergo etiam participes ſunt ipſius Baptiſmi. — Baſil then had other arguments for Paedobaptiſme: but this was one, Infants are capable of ſalvation ſealed in Baptiſme, therefore are they alſo partakers of Baptiſme.
SECT. IIII.
EƲſebius teſtimony lib. 6. hiſt. eccl. touching Origens and others being Catechiſts at Alexandria, might have been ſpared: Mr. B. in his Preface uſeth the ſame argument.none denying but that Adult Pagans, or the adult children of perſons baptized, were to bee ſo catechiſed (thence the name of Catechumeni in Authors uſually ſo taken.) But that hindred not, but that children alſo were baptized in Origens time, witneſſe Origens words in his ſecond Tom. Hom. 14. upon Luke: little ones (ſaith hee) are baptized unto remiſſion of ſinnes, &c. The Authors ſtories to confirme the third, fourth, and fifth Propoſition might have been alſo ſpared, as not concluding what they intend, that in thoſe times no Infants were, or were to bee baptized. Some were adult Pagans, which came in upon their owne right onelyonly, and were amongſt the number of ſuch Catechumeni, whoſe baptiſme were prevented by Martyrdome, as the woman the Treatiſe mentioneth, Propoſition 3. and Evirenitana the Virgin, Propoſition 5. and ſundry others mentioned by Cyprian de baptiſmo haeret. quoted by Mr. B. in his Preface. Some adult Pagans, which after inſtruction, actually came to receive baptiſme of which the treatiſe mentions examples, as Clodoveus king of France with his 3000. Souldiers, alſo thoſe learned men, Virinus Marcellinus and Juſtinus in the time of Decius Quirinus the Roman Captaine under Trajan Hermingildus, Anno 700. in the dayes of Tiberius the ſecond, Torpes in the dayes of Nero, Nemiſſius in the time of Pope Stephen "and of Valeria… and Gallienus Emperours and Baſilica in Gallienus his time, Mauro, Honoratus, Ragatianus, Hilarius, Victorinus, Apronianus, Tobia King of Perſia, Claudius the Roman, and his wife in Pope Gayus his time; they might have more inſtances too, but theſe are more then enough, unleſſe pertinent, proving what is not denied, that adult Pag…ns were firſt catechiſed ere baptized. But what then? ergo none elſe but ſuch baptized? Non ſequitur. If we were now to deale with Indians in ſuch ſort, wee would take the like courſe, yet maintaine Pedobaptiſme to bee an ordinance of Chriſt. Cyprian which mentions that of the Catechumeni, yet who more ſtrong for Paedobaptiſme then hee? Auſtin who l. 8. Confeſſionum writeth of Victorinus his open confeſſion before his baptiſme, yet who pleads more for Paedobaptiſme then hee? ſome were children of Chriſtian parents, which yet were not baptized, till growne, as Ierome, Ambroſe, Auſtin, Gregory, Nazianzen, (added by Hen. Den) Conſtantine the Emperour, Theodoſius the Emperour, Lu…gerus, Pancratius, Pontius, Nazarius, Tecla and Eraſma Tuſca, a certaine brother mentioned in Euſebius.
And what of all this? ergo, children of inchurched Parents ought to ſtay unto adult yeers, before they bee baptized, becauſe theſe did ſo: Non ſequitur. A facto ad jus non valet conſequentia. Nay then they ſhould ſtay, till neere their death, becauſe Conſtantine, Theodoſius and others did ſo; which to our Authors would bee a non ſequitur. Yea, or at leaſt wee muſt ſtay till 30. yeeres old, becauſe Jerom, Auſtin and others did ſo, or what is the ſequell hereof? Is it this, ergo none other which came of Chriſtian Parents were in thoſe times baptized, till grown up to full yeers of diſcretion? — I wholly deny it, if the Authors had brought as many more inſtances,, unleſſe they could ſay and prove it, and ſo it was with all other children of Chriſtian Parents, their induction is not regular. It is evident that the baptiſme of ſuch perſons was deferred through corruption in the perſons, whom it concerned. Some out of groundleſſe ſuppoſals of a neceſſitie to conforme to Chriſts baptiſme, who was baptized at 30. yeers old. Whence it is that Gregory Nazianzen refuteth that ground of deferring baptiſme. Others thought it might bee ſome defilement, yea defacing to their childrens baptiſme, as well as their owne, if they ſinned after baptiſme, and therefore thought it good to bee deferred. Others had a ſuperſtitious conceipt of an excellency of being baptized in Jordans waters, above others which occaſioned Conſtantius deferring his Baptiſme, Euſeb. lib. 4. de vita Conſtantini, Theodoret lib. 1. Hiſt. Eccleſ. c. 35. ſome parents were diſcouraged from bringing their children to baptiſme through the covetouſneſſe of the Miniſters, requiring (as then the uſe was) ſo much for an offering from and for any perſons which were baptized, which occaſioned delayes in many. Whence that Canon of the Councell of Ell… bertinum cited in Trecius his Decretalls; that every Biſhop ſhould looke to it, throughout the Churches, that thoſe which bring their Infants to Baptiſme, if they offer any thing freely of their owne accord it ſhould bee received of them. But if otherwiſe through povertie they have nothing to offer, the Prieſt ſhould not violently take any pawnes of them, becauſe many of the poorer ſort fearing the ſame did withhold their children from Baptiſme.
SECT. V.
BEſides many other cauſes mentioned by Gregory Nazianzen in his 40th. Oration de baptiſmo, where hee blameth not onelyonly the deferring of elder perſons that are at their owne diſpoſe, but the deferring of the baptiſme of children by their Parents, and becauſe Gregories teſtimony is made uſe of by the Treatiſe in confirmation of the fourth Propoſition. Its meet it ſhould bee cleared, whether hee bee more ours or yours. I deny not but hee giveth his adviſe out of caſe of danger of death, the childrens baptiſme bee deferred, till they are three yeers old, this was his peculiar fancy in this particular, but yet this is not to ſpeake for the Anabaptiſts tenent, which ſay a man muſt firſt bee of yeares of diſcretion, able to hold forth his knowledge in Articles of Religion, beſides his faith in Chriſt, and repentance of his ſinnes, &c. this a child of three yeeres old is not able to doe, wee ſay that unripe children before capable of profeſſing their knowledge, faith and repentance are to bee baptized, and ſuch a one is a child alſo of three yeers old. And I wonder our adverſaries urge not a ſpeech of his in that oration ſpeaking of perſons that cannot receive baptiſme, hee reckons as ſome growne ones that cannot through ſome ſuddaine exigent albeit they deſire it: ſo others which cannot by reaſon of their Infancy, but hee intends that of ſuch as cannot come of themſelves, unleſſe by others helpe: and eſpecially Infants, which cannot come meerely in their owne right. And he ſpeakes of perſons who if not baptized, they themſelves are exempted, from guilt of neglect or contempt, albeit not of loſſe by it; as his words evidence ſpeaking of them, foreign, which being unſealed or unbaptized are without ſinne, although they ſuffer loſſe or hurt, but doe not act: it unleſſe they are not without originall ſinne, that is not his meaning, but they themſelves ſinne not therein perſonally in neglect or contempt of Gods Ordinance, (and therefore albeit he had inveyed ſo much againſt the ſinne of thoſe whoſe baptiſme was deferred, hee hereby cleareth them from that blame) but hee accounteth that even thoſe babes are ſufferers in this omiſſion, and at a loſſe, that in others right, and by others helpe they are not brought to baptiſm, albeit by reaſon of Infancy they cannot of themſelves receive baptiſme▪ and that this is his meaning let his words declare; ibid. foreign, &c. Haſt thou an Infant? Let not wickedneſſe take occaſion (ſcil. to cauſe a deferring of it's baptiſme) let it bee ſanctified from Infancy, and conſecrated to the ſpirit from its tendereſt age, yea but by reaſon of the weakedneſſe of its age thou art affraid to have it ſealed? how art thou a mother of a feeble mind, and of a very little faith? where he toucheth upon another cauſe why Chriſtian Parents ſometimes deferred their childrens baptiſme, ſcil. a diſtruſtfull feare of hazzarding their babes health if dipped, as amongſt many the uſe then was in baptiſme; ſo then hee chargeth the matter not upon the child but upon the parent in point of guilt if not baptized: and obſerve hee accounteth it a wickedneſſe, not thus to devote them from their tendereſt yeeres, their firſt birth (ab ipſis unguiculis, as the word is) unto the Lord in baptiſme, and that ſinne taketh occaſion to put it ſelfe forth very much in caſe of Infants, whence Parents are tempted to deferre their childrens baptiſme, and imputeth it to the weakeneſſe of their faith) which if ſtronger might arme Chriſtian parents againſt any ſeeming diſcouragements, hee maketh the practiſe of Infants baptiſme a matter of faith in Chriſtian parents, if they had faith enough they would not deferre the ſame, and ibid. anſwering the query about Infants baptiſme, that it were better they ſhould bee ſealed without knowledge then die without baptiſme, hee giveth his reaſon from circumciſion, which was wont to bee adminiſtred the eighth day after the childs birth, and in the ſame Oration hee ſaid, that albeit other things had their definite ſeaſons, yet all times were fit for waſhing or baptiſme, becauſe no time was free from hazzard of death, and that the time of our ſalvation was at all times to bee attended — foreign; every ſeaſon is a time for thy baptiſme: and ſpeaking of pretences to put off baptiſme hee addeth, foreign; it reacheth all degrees of ages, all kinds of life, it armes one againſt aſſaults which may bee occaſioned by any of them, ſcil. by Satan: and ibid. ſpeaking in anſwer to ſuch as pretend Chriſts age when baptized; hee was pure in and of himſelfe, and needed not purging as thou doſt, there was no danger to him in the delay of baptiſme, but no little hazard impendeth over thee, if but from hence, that thou art borne onelyonly in ſinne, and being not immortall muſt die. Hence his deſcription of baptiſme under divers notions, calling it a gift, becauſe ſaith hee its given to them which have contributed nothing before hand thereto: grace, becauſe its beſtowed on ſuch as are indebted: baptiſme, becauſe ſinne is buried in the water, ſcil. Sacramentally: and now let all judge to which ſide Gregory Nazianzen moſt propendeth; hee himſelfe was baptized at above 30. yea but he approveth not of it as lawfull in any caſe to deferre it to above three yeeres, and in ſome caſes, ſcil. of hazard of life, to be adminiſtred before; ſurely if hee had thought baptiſme of a very babe unlawfull as Anabaptiſts doe, hee could not bee ignorant, that upon no pretence of any hazards of life any ſinne was to bee committed. Auſtin, Jerom, and Ambroſe were baptized when grown up men, yea but when they better underſtood the point they diſallow neglect of childrens Baptiſme, as the parents ſinne, as Jerom in his Epiſtle to Laeta, and Auſtin frequently, and ſo Ambroſe all one for Paedobaptiſme as an ordinance of God, and ſo as counting it ſinne to neglect it.
SECT. VI.
BUt to returne to our ſtories, wee know what Origen, and Auſtin have ſaid, what was the uſe of the Churches from the Apoſtles time as well as what was done in their time; wherefore if wee had no inſtances of children baptized that would ſuffice; But ſtory will furniſh us with inſtances of children baptized within the compaſſe of time wherein this Treatiſe preſenteth us with inſtances.
Polydore Virgil in his ſecond book of the Hiſtory of England ſpeaking of King Lucius, ſaith, that he Anno ſalutis 182. regni vero 13. being moved out of a love of Religion, dealt with Eleutherius Biſhop of Rome by letters, that hee would admit him and his people by baptiſme unto the number of Chriſtians. Upon which Fugatius and Damianus (men of eminent pietie) were ſent into Britaine, who baptized the King with his houſe, and his whole people, and therefore the Brittiſh children too, unleſſe no part of Lucius his people, which Johannes Balaeus more fully cleareth, in his booke of Brittiſh writers, Centuria prima cap. 27. where hee reciteth the occaſion why Lucius ſent Eluinus and Meduinus (two prime men) unto Eleutherius to bee this — Anno 170. according to Balaeus, others ſay, Anno 173.And Lucius ſent thither the more ſpeedily, becauſe hee heard that the name of Chriſtians begun every where to be inlarged, and that many of the Nobilitie, (eſpecially at Rome) together with their wives and children, had ſworne unto that Chriſtian faith (ſcil. were baptized;) for that was that hee writ about as before wee had it, that hee and his, might bee reckoned amongſt the number of Chriſtians; and baptiſme is a ſolemne obligation of the party baptized unto the Chriſtian faith.) Afterward when the Pagan Saxons had overrun Brittaine and Religion began to be worne out againe, Gregory the firſt ſent over Auſtin, Anno 596. where after he had preached amongſt the heathen Saxons, hee baptized 1000. men, women and children in a River. Hiſtory of Brittaine pag. 214. Inas alſo King of the Weſt Saxons with his Counſell made Lawes touching the orderly living of Miniſters and Infants being baptized within 30. dayes. Beda hiſt. l. 3. c. 7.Beza's hiſt. Dr. Ʋſher alſo in his booke of the Religion of the ancient Iriſh, cap. 5. ſaith that the Iriſh did baptize their Infants, without any conſecrated Chriſme; and that corrupt uſe of Chriſme wee know was very ancient indeed. And before Clodovius King of France was converted, whilſt hee was yet Pagan, his gratious wife Cleotild daughter of the Duke of Burgoine, having a ſonne by him, it was baptized by the ſame Remigius Biſhop of Raines, (which afterward baptized him being converted as the Treatiſe ſaith) at which Pagan Clodovius was at firſt diſpleaſed. Afterward ſhee brought forth another ſonne, which by the Kings conſent was in like ſort baptized; after which Pagan Clodovius being put to the worſe by the Almaines, vowed, if hee got the victory he would imbrace the Chriſtian faith, to which his wife had ſo oft perſwaded him, and proving conquerour did ſo, and was baptized by Remigius. Fabian, 1 par. of his Hiſtory c. 97. the Centurie writers give other Inſtances Cent. 6. cap. 6. mentioning out of Gregorius Turocenſis, the young ſonne of Chilperick: alſo of Theodebert borne to King Childebert as baptized, as alſo Theodorick another child of his baptized, alſo of a young ſonne to King Egilolph baptized; other inſtances might bee given out of Nauclerus, the authors of this Treatiſe mention Conſtantines baptiſme, when ſo old; but why doe they not mention alſo his ſonne Criſpus too, which was baptized as well as hee by Sylveſter Biſhop of Rome ſaith Nicephorus hiſt. Eccleſ. l. 7. c. 23. the authors mention Clodoneus his Baptiſme but not his children, and Conſtantius, but not his ſons baptiſme, doe either diſcover their ignorance or guile.
SECT. VII.
THe next Authors teſtimony to the third Propoſition is that of Polydor Virgil de Inventoribus rerum, li. 4. cap. 4. It was the cuſtome in old time to baptize thoſe for the moſt part which were come to their full growth apparelling them after baptiſme in white, which was done at Eaſter and Pentecoſt, &c. yea but before the old time of baptizing grown perſons at Eaſter, (which was certaine hundred yeeres after Chriſt ere that cuſtome began) children were baptized (as is confeſſed they were) in Origens time, and before, by a Church cuſtome; for then it was the cuſtome before this cuſtome came up here mentioned to baptize children. And let us heare whether Pollidor Vilgil in the very quoted place will not ſay as much, for hee there expreſſing his judgement for Paedobaptiſme doth quote Cyprian as ſpeaking of it as [from the beginning] that albeit Infants could not make confeſſion of their faith by reaſon of age, yet others confeſſion ſhould bee inſtead thereof in baptiſme; now if that were à principio, even from the beginning of the Chriſtian Church; Paedobaptiſme was ancienter then this old cuſtome, and for this alſo Polydore there citeth Ambroſe lib. 2. de vocatione gentium.
SECT. VIII.
BEatus Rhenanus upon Tertullian is next, who is ſaid to write that the old cuſtome was that thoſe that were come to their full growth at Eaſter, &c. they leave out the word [ferè] almoſt, or for that moſt part, &c. and the reaſons hee gives why it was ſo, ſcil. becauſe thouſands of Pagans daily flocked then to the Churches, then the Infants being compared to thoſe Pagan parents, and children which could conceive of what was taught them, yea and thoſe adult Pagans thus flocking in by thouſands daily, no wonder that it bee ſaid that it was then the uſe for the moſt part that thoſe who were baptized, were at their full growth, and adding the other cauſes of deferring baptiſme, no wonder Shamier (who yet ſpeaketh of Paedobaptiſme) ſpeakes of ſo few children of old baptized.