Scripture Warrant Sufficient Proof for Infant Baptism, Chapter 4
CHAP. IV.
I Thought I had done with you, when you had answered my Questions, but it seems no: There are several other faults you find with me, and the first is about Election in my Sense.
I do not find the word Election mentioned in the p. 90. which you direct me to; how then can you know my Sense of it? nor do you tell me what is your Sense; this would run us into another controversie, and then my Book would swell into that bigness, which I resolve it shall not.
Then you tell your Reader, Whilst his Book may cause many weak Readers to think that Circumcision did, and that Infant Baptism doth great things towards their Salvation, &c.
I do not make your Baptism by Dipping to be of that concernment to Salvation, that none shall be saved without it: but a few words to both.
And first for Circumcision, because your party told me, God circumcised the Heart of no Infants, and will not have them to be included in the Seed, Deut. 30.6. but onelyonly Adult persons; for Infants cannot love God, as it is there set down. No more can you, thô you be Adult, answer it, Legally. But that God did not circumcise the Hearts of any Infants, then, this I do not believe, upon this ground.
I cannot conceive, how it can consist with the Wisdom, Holiness, and Goodness of God, to Institute an Ordinance in his Church, for Spiritual and Saving Ends, and strictly to command this Ordinance to be administred to such subjects (as Children of eight dayes old) which are not capable to understand the ordinance, nor Co-work with God in the ordinance; and he himself not to work with his own Institution, when and where he pleaseth, to the good and benefit of that Subject to whom it is Administred, this Subject having need of the Spiritual good Signified and Sealed thereby. It doth implicitely charge the Institution with Vanity: And I am confirmed the more in it, because all the godly mentioned in the old Testament, except Manasseh, were such as from their Childhood grew up in the service of God; so that I Question not, while man did circumcise the Flesh, God did circumcise the Heart. I gave you an instance of a Child that died before it was five years old, that did express this love to God. Your reason hath thus much strength in it, Because Infants express not the Acts of Rational Love, therefore they have not the principle of Rational Love in them.
The same I may say for Baptism, being Christs own Institution, this in the hand of his Spirit accompanying it, when and where he pleaseth, shall be the mean to convey spiritual blessings to the Hearts of some Infants, and prove to them the true washing of Regeneration; which I ground upon, Eph. 5.26. Tit. 3.5. 1 Pet. 3.21. Where Sanctification, and Salvation twice, are given to Baptism as an Instrument in the Hand of the Spirit. How he doth it, I do not trouble my self to answer, I leave that to him that Institutes: If you can tell me how the water of Jordan cleansed Naamans Leprosie, then possibly I may tell you. The word foreign, I do not now trouble my self about the signification, meerly because I aim at brevity. How often do we meet with Christians educated under godly Parents, troubled, because they could not tell the Time, when God first began to work upon them; it hath proved to them a great objection against the soundness of their Work. But if God did begin his Work in their Baptism, and Parents followed God by Prayer, for the blessing of his Ordinance, and remembrance of his Covenant, how could they know it, by reflection upon themselves?
As for that Joh. 3.5. Whether Baptism be meant by the Water there, is a Question very much controverted; I marvel to read Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, &c. All that lived next the Apostles, yea Totus chorus Antiquitatis, as Marlorate saith, understanding Baptism by it, and yet all to be mistaken, our first Annotatours upon the Bible seem to speak well upon it: This I am satisfied in, that the common answer given to it, that it is but of the import with Mat. 3.11. Holy Ghost and Fire, is no answer to it. For God did never institute Fire, as he hath done Water to be an Element to constitute a Sacrament. But of all men the Anabaptists that put Salvation in Dipping, (whence that silly woman, who told a Friend of mine, Had I died before I had been baptized (by Dipping she meant) I had perished;) they had need understand it so; then tho' Faith come by Hearing ordinarily, (I hope all born deaf shall not therefore be damned because they cannot hear, and so not believe) yet God hath not so tied up himself to one Instrument to work Grace by, because a Carpenter is tied to his Axe if he will hew his Timber.
Obj. If so, then baptize all Children, yea and Men too.
Ans. I deny the consequence. For Baptism is a Priviledge belonging to the Church, whereof the Children of visible Believers (being Saints, 1 Cor. 7.14.) are Members with their Parents; and therefore have a right to this initiating Ordinance, which Children out of the visible Church have not.
Next you fall upon me for the Experience I have found of the benefit of the improving Abrahams and my Baptismal-Covenant (which I never thought the World should know, nor ever should have known it, had I not contrary to my own thoughts been drawn forth to appear publickly in this controversie,) your Sentence upon it is this.
It would make a well man sick to see what work he makes of it, for after all his shifting from Post to Pillar, he only gets stomack to reject the Counsel of God against himself, Luke 7.30.
For my rejecting the Counsel of God, the Holy God shall judge between you and me; and for what you scoffe at, I leave it to learned, sound, and holy men to judge. But did all Children under Abraham, and their Baptismal-Covenant, improve them, and feel the advantage they have by them, in the time of their fears from sin, they would slight all the Anabaptists Books against Infant-Baptism as much as I do; and they might sell their Books to the Tobacco Shops for other uses.
Come on then, Mr. Grantham, I will take your Sentence into pieces, and consider your words, Sickness, Post, and Pillar.
Mr. Grantham is Sick, how shall we get him Cured? After some years Study of Physick, I have been a Practitioner of it thirty years, and tho' I have not attained the skill in it some men have, yet if you dare trust your self with me, I will assure you I will do you no harm, if I cannot do you good. But what is your disease, Mr. Grantham? I searched your writing to find it out; and at first I thought the signs did not agree; for in one place, p. 11. you write thus: Infants, have no Iniquities for God to Remember, but only Original Sin to Pardon; and in several places you tell us, Infants are Innocent; now he must be a more cunning Taylour than I am, who can stitch these two words, Innocency and Pardon together. I never knew Innocency needed pardon before; that Adam needed it before his Fall while he was Innocent, is a New Notion to me; but notwithstanding you would have us think you acknowledge Original Sin, that Infants are guilty of, yet this is only Peccatum Originans, by Imputation, but for that which is Peccatum Originatum (as Divines do distinguish) the inherent Corruption of our fallen Nature; this you plainly deny, by telling us they are Innocent, and corrupting that Text, Ephes. 2.3. And were by Nature the Children of wrath, most grosly and absurdly; so that I find your disease ly in your head, and you are very sick of the Disease called Pelagianism. A proud disease, to lift up sinful man, and debase the Grace of God; for you tell us that Text, Ephes. 2.3. p. 30. Is best Interpreted of the Adult, and quoting the verses before, with some variation from the Text too, which ought not to be in Quotations, then you adde, and so were by Nature Children of Wrath. I have not yet met with a man so audacious to put a word into a Text, which quite varies the sense of the Text; yea and makes the Text speak absurdly. This is sure, they cannot be Children of Wrath by Nature, who are not Children of Sin against God by Nature; Sin onelyonly causeth Wrath: But I pray tell us, Mr. Grantham, what is Nature? I thought Natura had been a Nascor, Natus. Which is first I pray, Nature, or Walking, and Working, which the verses before speak of? Can any Creature move from place to place, unless it be first an Animal, hath not an Animal a Locomotive Nature or Principle, and so this nature be the cause of the walking? The Child in the Lap hath a locomotive faculty, tho' as yet it cannot walk, it hath the nature; and so the corrupt nature is the cause of its walking Corruptly: this is excellent Logick, the effect to be before the cause. If you consult learned Men, they tell you, That Nature, foreign, the word in the Text, Primo fignificat generationem ipsam, seu nativitatem. Ephes. 2.3. Secundo ipsam rei essentiam. Gal. 4.8. Tertio significat proprietatis rei essentiales. 2 Pet. 1.4.
This is your Diseale Mr. Grantham, and I will give you a Receipt for the Cure of it, infallible I warrant you.
R. Gen. 5.3. Adam begat a Son in his own Likeness, after his Image: The Hebrew words for Likeness, and Image, are both the same in Gen. 1.26, 27. God Created Man in his own Image, &c. These words, His own, in these two Texts are quite opposite.
Gen. 17.12. No need of Circumcising Isaacs Flesh at eight days old, if his Heart needed no Curcumcising at the same time. Deut. 10.16. & Ch. 30. v. 6. Add to these Job 14.4. Job. 15.4. Job 25.4. Psal. 51.5. John 3.6. Eph. 2.3. This is Divine Authority, Mr. Grantham.
As for humane Authority, Grotius on Luke 2.22. names several of the Learned Grecians, and their sayings, which shew they were not ignorant of the Corrupt nature of Man; other learned Men, quote many places out of Plato, where he speaks the same thing. So Stobeus, yea Aristotle, tho' a great Friend to corrupt nature, yet acknowledge, there is in us somewhat foreign, naturally repugnant to right Reason. As for the Romans, there are Tully and Seneca, who speak so clearly of it, that I can but wonder at that Judgment of God, in giving up Christians now, to such Blindness, that they cannot see that Evil which the Heathen who had onelyonly the Light of nature, could see, and leave their Testimony against it; yet these men did not know that Original Sin by Imputation, which is all you acknowledge.
One word more, Mr. Grantham, and so I will leave you as to this point; you have been a great Professor so long, a Teacher, a great Writer: I doe but ask you, Were you never sensible of, humbled, and abased under the sense of this corrupt Nature? Then God keep me from the Conversion of those men, who never were so convinced of their vile nature, as to abhor and loath themselves before God, under the Sense of it: as also from them, who are the chief cause of their own Conversion.
I know well, you will allow Gods Grace and Help some room in Conversion: but there must be something of our own above that, else no Conversion, this Similitude will shew it clearly. After the House of Commons have been a long time consulting about a Bill, read it over three times; sent it to the House of Lords, they have done so too, both Houses met in the Painted Chamber, and agreed; yet here is no Law, it must now be carried to the King, and if he saith, Le Roy le Veut, now it is a Law, and carrieth power with it, before it had no power; by this we see where the Supream Power lieth. Thus let the great God set himself to convert a Sinner, use all his moral Arguments, from Himself, Promises, Threats, &c. yet if it doth not please the Imperial Highness of the Will, to declare and give her Consent, all Gods Actings come to nothing; if it doth, then Conversion is wrought. Let God heal the understanding of its Blindness, (which is done by a Physical act) and now lay Divine objects before it clearly, that it seeth them as they are, God, Christ, Holiness, in their adequate goodness, Sin in its evil, and now work so sweetly and rationally, affecting the Will also by his gracious Presence with it, that now Sensu Composito, there is a consequential Necessity for the Will to follow the Judgment, else it were Brutish; to talk of any kind of necessity, it is such an affront offered to the Perogative, and intollerable breach of the Priviledges of the Will, that there must be a Liberty left to her, to admit, or reject all Gods workings, else our ears are filled with out-cries. The way of working I speak of, gives too much Honour to Grace; and that God doth manifest Grace to one man more than to another, and consequently it would argue an Individual personal Election. Hence these men deny Regeneration to Infants, because the Honour of their great Diana, the Liberty of the Will, would be Eclipsed; for their Wills are not thought to act in their Regeneration. We shall hear you speak plain anon.
Now for the Post, which is that, Mr. Grantham? you name this first, and it stands first in my Book, Gods Covenant with my Father Abraham; tho' you scoff at it, yet you spake very true, it is a Post indeed, not an Egyptian Reed, 2 King. 18.21. on which if a man lean, it will goe into his hand. No, Mr. Grantham; I will venture still to trust and lean upon it, a very strong Post to lean on, when a Man is weak.
Which is the Pillar? The next is my Baptismal Covenant, of which the Post was the ground: then this Post and Pillar, in which the Grace, Goodnesse, Faithfulnesse and Truth of God are engaged; the Blood and Spirit of Jesus, signified and Sealed unto my Faith embracing both, shall be to me as Jachin and Boaz the two Pillars in Solomon's Porch, 1 King. 7.21. to help bear up my infirm weak Soul in times of Temptation, for to them I hold. Now, mock on Mr. Grantham.
One of your Tribe, a young confident Anabaptist, tells me, If you have nothing more to shew for your Covenant Interest in God, as being your God, than that, (he referrs to that experience I declare in my short Treatise, which made Mr. Grantham Sick;) it would be no better than a Lie in your right hand: but I have better hopes of you. What are the sure Notes of our interest in God, I shall not come to you to learn; but I look upon those notes as good as your Self-Regeneration and Better.
Next he falls upon me for being asleep when I was Sprinkled and Crossed, and desires to know of me, what ground any man hath, his Parents or himself, to Baptize any person when they are asleep? this is no idle enquiry, but calls for the Consideration of all serious Christians. Thus Mr. Grantham.
You forgot your self, will you allow us to Baptize, I was Sprinkled, you tell me: but was I asleep? Why would not you wake me? Say, I was not born then. Your excuse is sufficient, but how doe you know I was asleep then? I presume so; but remember your Book, Presumption is no proof: and sure I am all Children are not asleep when they are brought to be Baptized. The last Child I Baptized was awake, so might I be.
Baptism, is in the Application of the Water, and its odds (to use your words) but the Water did wake me, if I were asleep. If Isaac were asleep when he was brought to be Circumcised, its odds, but the cutting of his Fore-skin did wake him; but suppose he had not, was it therefore no Circumcision, did it take away the efficacy of the Ordinance? This is a profound Question, where shall we have a place to dispute, and determine it? The Theatre at Oxford, is not worthy of such a question; it shall be Merchant-Taylours Hall in London.
Then you fall upon me, about falling away.
I do not remember any word I had about it. But this shortly I say, If it be true what yours prate about here, that a Person truely regenerate may fall away totally and finally; I would never preach Comfort to any regenerate Person, till I see him Dying, and sure he could not live; now I see he hath persevered to the end, now I will preach Comfort: So that all the Exhortations of Christians to Rejoyce, Phil. 4.4. 1 Thes. 5.16. &c. all the Consolations of the Gospel, may be laid by, for they all depend upon my Will. Suppose I have walked fifty years with God, and have but one month to live, whatsoere temptation to sin may befall me in that month, I cannot tell; and what my Will may do I cannot tell; Grace with Mutability would not keep me in my Innocent estate, then Grace, Mutability, and Sin, will not keep me in fallen estate; take away Mutability out of the first Covenant, fix the Will, there will be no need of a second Covenant; and if this Covenant doth not provide some help against Mutability, we are but miserable under it. Alas, what tormenting fears do many Christians live under for fear of Non-perseverance, notwithstanding all the Promises of the Gospel for their support!
The Doctrine of Damning of Infants, you cry out upon, and ashamed you are, you say, that the Presbyterians and Independents should be of that opinion, for others it seems 'tis no matter.
I have read eight Opinions about the state of Infants after death, Baptized and Unbaptized, but I have not spoken one Word about them: I leave secret things to God.
Then you are ashamed of my Conceit, and Dr. Ames Fancy, about the Soul being Passive in Regeneration. I shall let it alone to another place: How do you look when you are ashamed, Mr. Grantham? do you Blush? If you make me one of the Adulterous Generation, that will not believe without a Miracle, as you speak, yet I will not be ashamed to say, Regeneration is a Miracle.
Some indeed do abuse, Ephes. 1.19, 20. to uphold this false Opinion, that none can believe without such a power as by which Christ was raised from the dead; whereas the Apostle onelyonly shews that the Faith of Christians doubts not at all, but that the same God which had power to raise up Christ from the dead, has power to raise us up also; this Power is irresistible that raised Christ from the dead, Men and Devils cannot resist it. But the Power of Gods Grace by which God works in men in an ordinary way is not irresistible, Act. 7.51.
Indeed and indeed you abuse the Text in restraining the sence to the Resurrection of our bodies onelyonly, for Paul puts himself in foreign. Considering himself as a Believer in Christ, but Paul was a Pharisee, and the Pharisees did believe the Resurrection of the Dead, Acts 23.6, 8. So that Paul did believe your Interpretation, before he was a Believer in Christ; but to make him a true Believer, yea to make Jews and Gentiles to believe in a crucified Christ savingly, to raise us up from the Death of Sin, to the Life of Holiness, it will require as great a power, as that power which raised Christ from the Dead. Col. 2.12. speaks the sence clearly. For the resistance spoken of, Act. 7.51. A man hath many Children, he commands them things just and good, he exhorts them to obey him, he promiseth, he threatens, he corrects, still they resist him, and will not obey; thus did God with these Children, and they resist; what then, what do you infer hence? Tho' God intends the Conversion of a Soul, and works to attain his End, yet mans will may so Resist him, that God shall fail of the end he intended: This must be the thing you would maintain, else the Text will not serve your opinion; but God saith, Isa. 43.13. I will work, and who shall let it? who? any mans Will: Take you him, Mr. Grautham for your God, whose will you can so resist as to make him fail of his end, when he Wills and Intends a gracious work upon the Soul; and by this Resistance of yours, Demonstrate (to use your own word) that God is not most Blessed: to fail of ones Will and Intention is the want of a degree of Blessedness: my Will is Crost, I cannot have my Will. I will say with profound Bradwardin *De causa Dei, l. 3. C. 29., Illum nolo, &c. I will not have him for my God, who cannot most omnipotently make me both to Will, and do, what he Wills.
The following Paragraph speaks strangely; This strange Doctrine of damning the greatest part of the World, and that before the World was, is so pernicious, that it makes God the Author of all Sin; and more such stuff, that I care not for transcribing it.
What did you find in my Book, that you write at this rate? you run into other Questions, that have no ground for them in my Book.
I shall not concern my self to give you any Answer: Only thus,
I know none that say, that God made Men to Damn them; that Damnation was the End wherefore he made them.
As for the greater part of the World being Damned, this offends you: I pray whose Opinion are you of? Huberus? The Promiscuous Salvation of All: Or are you of Caelius Secundus Curio's Opinion, That the number of the Elect and Saved, is much greater than the number of the Reprobate and Damned? whether you, or these, or Christ be truest (Math. 7.14. Few find it;) the Day of Judgment will determine.