Second Reply to Baxter, Part 1 · Chapter 2 · Section 1
Section I. Tertullians Witnesse justified.
THe first witness he opposeth is that of Tertullian Tertullians witness justifyed.my first witness; to justifie whose denyall of Infants Baptism as an ordinance of Christ I have produced a 7-fold Argument, and the concurring Testimony of diverse learned men, viz. Illiricus and his companions, Beatus Rhenanus, Scultetus, Daille, and Dr. Barlow, who concluded, that he denyed Infants Baptism as unwarrantable and Irrationall.
To which Mr. Baxter in substance saith these two things, first, that it appears by Tertullians opposing it, that it was de facto in use, and that some did practise it in that century, thereby contradicting my self, in affirming that it doth not appear to have been practised, till the following century; and demands why that has not been answered? Secondly, that what Tertullian spoke about the matter, it was only in point of conveniency, about deferring of Baptism in Children and others also, but concludes not against baptizing of Infants, being himself for it, in case of danger of death.
To both which in my answer to Mr. Wills, I have largely spoke, though Mr. Baxter is pleased to overlook it, and not at all to regard what I have said.
Having as to the first affirmed with Dr. Barlow, that the notion of the thing as urged from divine authority, came into the world before the practise of it; the arguments about which are thus early (in its first appearance) and most substantially refuted by this great Doctor Tertullian; not only as to the mistaken, Scripture then and ever since pretended for it, viz. suffer little children to come to me, &c. but also the utter in capacity of Children, or any but grown persons, to perform that great ordinance aright; the folly of Witnesses so unwarrantably to undertake for children, the great Basis upon which afterwards it was built, the danger of prophaning an ordinance of Christ, the insignificancy of the ends pretended to take away sin; which was a witness with a witness, striking at the root and foundation of all the pretentions to it, as more at large is there shewed.
And as to Tertullian's being nevertheless for it, it is an utter mistake, as I have demonstrated, who was only, upon the superstitious conceit then it seems fancyed: for the baptizing of dying persons, as some were in after times when Austin caused his dying distracted friend to be baptized, Tom. 7. Col. 89. Amicus quidam Augustinus etiam nescius baptizatur: Protogenes also caused sick children, to be baptized for their health, as before. But what is this to the baptizing of children, as an ordinance of Christ, to admit them into the Church, and the priviledges thereof, the thing pretended to and pleaded for?
And therefore, Is not Mr. Baxter worthy of blame to pretend to answer books, and take no more regard to what is said by his opposite? which when he or any body else replys to, respecting what hath been said to this witness, they may expect an Answer; but in the mean time let what hath been said suffice.