The Estate of Children of Church Members and their Right to Baptism, Treatise · Part 3 · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI.
HEre the Authors forget and miſtake their owne witneſſes names, they are in ſuch a hurry they bring in proofes that the Teachers according to the ancient Fathers right did ſo, and ſo making the Fathers, and thoſe Teachers diſtinct, as perſons of whom the teſtimony is brought, and as witneſſes by whom, and yet in the proofes, the ancient Fathers themſelves are the witneſſes of what was done by thoſe Teachers after them, as Hilary, Tertullian, Arnobius, Ambroſe, &c. theſe might ſay what was in their time, but cannot ſay what Teachers after them will doe or practiſe, unleſſe the Authors can by a ſpell play the Witch of Endors trick to fetch up old Samuel in his likeneſſe to ſpeake after he was dead.
SECT. I.
BUt let us heare what any of them ſay, if wee have not heard it before; Hilary.As for Hilaries teſtimony of his owne baptiſme, it's not materiall, wee mentioned him among the Authors inſtances of Adult perſons baptized, Propoſition 3. as for his interpretation of baptizing in, or upon the name, that is, upon confeſſion of the beginners, it's as eaſily rejected, as urged, unleſſe his grounds were ſhewed or were Scripture proofe.
SECT. II.
Ambroſe.THe next witneſſe is Ambroſe de ſpiritu Sancto. l. 2. in our Sacrament there are three queſtions propounded and three confeſſions made, without which three queſtions no man can bee waſhed, if Mr. B's anſwer bee good to that part of Tertullian in the beginning of his booke de baptiſmo, mentioning, that a man without coſt, or pompe, is let down into the water: Obſerve ſaith Mr. B. that hee ſpeakes of a man, not of an Infant, ſo I might as well ſay here, hee ſpeakes of a mans baptiſme, not of an Infants, which then alſo was in uſe, but that I feare ſome body would ſit upon my skirts preſently, and aske mee whether an Infant be not ſub genere iſto ſubalterno hominis, whether an Infant bee not homo, and I ever thought before Mr. B. helped me with that diſtinction, that when the Scripture ſaith it's appointed to all men once to die, &c. Heb. 9. that Infants alſo were there counted men to die as well as others, not to mention other places of Scripture, or authors for the uſe of the word that way; and I wonder Mr. B. when hee ſuppoſeth Rom. 5. 18. makes for his fancy of generall redemption of children, whether of Pagans or Chriſtians, then Infants are men, on whom the free gift commeth, and yet here homo demiſſus in aquam in Tertullian muſt bee onelyonly a growne man, not Infants, as if Infants now were not homo: but this anſwer muſt bee better grounded, or elſe I ſhall keepe my opinion, that as an Infant is homo; ſo Tertullians teſtimony there ſpeaking indefinitely of any baptized perſon, man or woman, Infants, youths, or riper perſons, &c. hee doth beare implicite teſtimony in that very place to Paedobaptiſme, as in his time. But to returne to Ambroſe, I ſay that in Ambroſe his time ſuch confeſſions, and queſtions were, and Infants were baptized too, that corruption being then in uſe of adding to Infants baptiſme interrogations to them that brought them to baptiſme, which anſwered in their names, and made confeſſion in their ſtead. For others were baptized in Ambroſe his time and before, then ſuch as could perſonally anſwer or make confeſſion, yea, and that it was Ambroſe his judgement, that it was the mind of God that others ſhould bee baptized, then could make ſuch confeſſions, witneſſe that among other places of Ambroſe, which hee hath in his 5th. Tom. in his Homilies upon Luke. Jordan was turned back, ſignifying the future myſteries of ſalvation in baptiſme, by which little ones in their Infancy are cleanſed from the wickedneſſe of their natures: (namely in a Sacramentall way.)
SECT. III.
BUt it will bee here objected, that that cuſtome of ſuſceptors in Infants baptiſme, and the interrogations, and queſtions that were put to them, or others in their ſtead, doth ſhew, that of old none but growne perſons were baptized upon confeſſion of faith, for that when Infants are baptized they muſt alſo make confeſſion by others. I anſwer, if the very uſe of ſuſceptors in baptiſme were an argument of force againſt Infants baptiſme of old, it might as well bee of force againſt the baptiſme of adult perſons too upon the ſame ground, as then in uſe; ſince they alſo had of old their ſuſceptors: when Pagans deſired to be baptized, they had thoſe which inſtructed them before hand, and when they were baptized they preſented them to baptiſme, and undertooke for them alſo. Stories are plentifull in inſtances, that after that corrupt cuſtome of ſuſceptors in baptiſme came up, adult perſons had ſuſceptors as well as Infants. Epidophorus at Carthage of the Church of Fauſty had the Deacon of the Church to bee his ſuſceptor. Magdeb. hiſt. cent. 5. c. 6. Juſtinian the Emperour was ſurety for Gethes King of the Herulians, when baptized, and divers others the Centuriſts mention as do other Hiſtorian; nor doth it follow becauſe ſuch confeſſions, and anſwers were made by ſuch as brought Infants to bee baptized, that therefore it argues onelyonly adults uſed to bee of old baptized, rather it argues that of old it was the doctrine of the Church, that Infants were baptized principally in others right, which offered them to baptiſme, namely, their godly parents, or ſuch as tooke them as their owne adopted children, to bring them up in Gods feare. Hence even after the corrupt and abuſive practiſe of ſuſceptors came up; Stories are not wanting to tell us of Chriſtian parents which were ſuſceptors to their owne children: witneſſe the Story mentioned by Fabian in his 5th. book c. 114. Andovera wife to Chilpericus having a little daughter born in her husbands abſence did by the perſwaſions of the Biſhop Fredegrand become witneſſe to it her ſelf at its baptiſme. The Centuriſts mention the ſame Story out of Ganguinus. Hence alſo Auſtin in his 14th. Sermon upon the words of the Apoſtle, ſpeaking of Infants Baptiſme ſaith, if baptiſme profit the baptized, I demand whom it benefiteth, the beleeving or the unbeleeving? but God forbid I ſhould ſay that Infants are not beleeving, I have but now diſputed it before. Hee beleeveth in another which ſinneth in another, ſcil. in the parents which alone convey ſinne to the Infant: It beleeveth then and it's baptiſme is valid, and it's joyned to the faithfull formerly baptized. This the authoritie of the Church our mother holdeth: This doth the ſure Canon (or rule) of truth obtaine.
Thus far forth then it was looked at as a doctrine not onelyonly which the Church had in it, but which the Scripture, the rule of truth contained in it: that in the buſineſſe of Baptiſme at leaſt the faith of ſuch as conveyed ſinne to the child, even of the parents, was in ſtead of its owne perſonall faith, ſo farre as to make its baptiſme valid and beneficiall to it.
SECT. IIII.
Arnobius.THe next witneſſe is Arnobius upon the Pſalmes, which Perkins putteth at the yeere 290. but becauſe Perkins in Praepar. ad Demon. Probl. and Rivet in his Crit. ſac. makes it a ſpacious booke as mentioning on Pſal. 119. the Pelagian hereſie which came up above ſixſcore yeeres after Arnobius his time, I ſhall not attempt to fight againſt a ſhadow. Albeit the place being of the way of Adults Baptiſme concludeth nothing againſt what wee maintaine.
L…do Vives.Ludovicus Vives is the next who in his notes upon Auſtin de Civitate Dei l. 1. (cap. 26. ſaith the Treatiſe, but it's rather) cap. 27 as Hen. Den. more truely quoteth it, affirmeth that in times paſt no man was brought to bee baptized but thoſe that were come to their full growth, who having learned what it concerned deſired the ſame: But whether hee that lived but in Henry the eighths dayes, or Auſtin whom hee expounds which lived above twelve hundred yeares agoe, had better reaſon to know what was done of old, let any ſober minde judge.
Strabo.To the ſame purpoſe Walefrid Strabo who lived about the yeare 800. ſeemeth to ſpeake, but Origen who was in the yeare 201. according to Oſiander, or 230. according to Perkins and Ʋſher, hee mentions Paedobaptiſme as from the Apoſtles, as well as Auſtin doth. Melivitan.And ſo doth the Milevitan councell in the yeare 402. (according to Wolfius) ſay as much, that the Catholique Church hath alwayes underſtood Infants to bee defiled with Adams ſinne, and according to the rule of faith to bee on that ground (namely amongſt others, for it's knowne ſundry other gounds were of old urged for Paedobaptiſme, as that Matth. 19. 13, 14, 15. Suffer, &c. For of ſuch, &c. urged in Tertullians time 200. yeares before, as appeares by his aſſaying to take off that ground in his booke De Baptiſmo before mentioned) baptized. See the 1. Tome of Councells.
SECT. V.
Bucer.THe next witneſſe is Bucer in his Annotat. upon the 4th. of John, ſet out Anno 28. So much as in the Apoſtolicall writings are written of baptiſme, is apparent that baptiſme was adminiſtred to none by the Apoſtles, but to thoſe of whom concerning their regeneration they made no doubt, &c. I have looked that very booke (and a booke diſtinct from his greater booke on the Evangeliſts) and there is no ſuch words; It's a meere forgery. Bucer is againe cited Propoſion 6th. ſaying that Chriſt hath no where plainly commanded that children ſhould bee baptized. If the ſpeech had been juſt thus, yet it's evident his Intent was not that children ought not to bee baptized by vertue of Gods command, which is the direct concluſion ſubſcribed to in the explication of it at Wittenberg by him and others, as before: but that the command was not in ſo many words expreſſed, but by neceſſary conſequence to bee concluded. His booke intituled The groundworke and cauſe, I have not, though like teſtimonies have been anſwered before.
SECT. VI.
Ruffinus.THe next is Ruffinus in his expoſition upon the Symbol, that thoſe at Rome and Aquila that were to bee baptized muſt firſt acknowledge and confeſſe the 12. Articles of the Creed. Here Ruffinus is as one againſt Paedobaptiſme. By others when Origens authoritie is urged upon Rom. 5. for Paedobaptiſme, then it is ſpurious and the words of Ruffinus. Now how ſhould one behave himſelfe amidſt this contradiction of the antipartie? Well, wee ſhall ward off both Blowes as they come God willing. As for this teſtimony, as much is in the Treatiſe and the ſame place brought out of Auſtin in his 8th. Booke of Confeſſions, that albeit the Authors conceale the name of the place where Victorinus was to have made confeſſion of the faith, as the cuſtome was; namely, at Rome. Yea but how then ſaith Auſtin lib. 4 cont. Donat. cap. 13. 14. that it was ever the uſe of the Churches, and that delivered from the Apoſtles to baptize Infants? Verily both are ſubordinates and not contraries. According to the ſubjects mentioned, if ſpeaking of Adults, then the former is true; if of Infants, then the latter is as true. Albeit it's as true after the cuſtome then in uſe in Ruffinus his time that Infants did make confeſſion by their ſureties; as according to God they did and doe now confeſſe their faith (ſo farre as concerneth their baptiſme) in their parents: even as every man (Deut. 16. 17.) giving as hee was able, their males which perſonally there appeared came not before the Lord empty, not any of them but gave, ſcil. in their parents offering for them.