A Counter-Antidote, Chapter 4
CHAP. IV. Wherein Mr. Shutes arguments to prove our Churches no Churches, and our Baptism a counterfeit, are examined and answered.
1. IN page 186. he asserts, That Adult believers have nothing to do with the Ordinance after the first institution or Plantation of the Gospel in a Family, unless it be such, whose Parents deprived them of it in their Infancy: But Baptism of Right is devolved upon the Infant Seed of Believers.
1. Answer, If this be true, then the Children of unbelievers have no right to Baptism, neither as Infants nor when Adult believers, it the right be devolted upon the Infants of believers.—This in the first place is enough to convince him of his great error and mistake, … he will not say that unbelievers Children have any right thereto in their Infancy. Tho' his evidence that Abrahams natural Seed, tho' ungodly persons, were required to Circumcise their Children, and their Children had the same right to it; for were none but godly Jews to circumcise their Male infants? Pray observe this.
2. Besides, did not God expresly command Abraham as well to circumcise his Male Infants as himself; and so his offspring their Children after him in their generations? And now did our Saviour give such a Commission about Gospel Baptism, viz. that first those that believed should be Baptized, and then their Infants; or was there not the same purity of reason for Christs Commission about Baptism to have run thus, as there was for Gods Commission so to run to Abraham about circumcision? If what you say was true but we will come to his reasons to prove our Baptism a counterfeit, and our Churches no Churches of Christ.
In Page 186. first, because, saith he, they disown the Covenant God made with Abraham, in which the very foundation; for Baptism, was laid; let them find another foundation for it, if they can; for that Covenant is founded upon Christ himself, &c.
1. Answer, This in the first place is not that he charges us with, viz. that we disown … Covenant God made with Abraham; for the Covenant of Grace, God promised to him … contend for it as far forth as any can—But we do say the Covenant of circumcision is disannuled; that we do disown to be in force now.
2. Could he prove that Baptism is founded upon the Covenant made with Abraham, he would seem to say some thing: But we deny that utterly; for had not Christ Instituted or given it forth in the New Testament, none could have known that Baptism had been an Ordinance; it was not Imprinted on the Hearts of Men, but it is a mere positive precept.
3. I will shew you therefore another foundation for it, and not the Covenant God made with Abraham, viz. the great Commission of Jesus Christ, Mat. 28. 18, 19, 20. Mark. 16. 16. If we have it not here, saith Mr. Richard Baxter, where have it we? But you are wiser it appears than that Pedo-Baptist. Now Friend, since our Baptism is founded on Christs Commission, both as to subject and mode of Baptising, our Baptism is no counterfeit, and so you will know one day.
2. Your second reason is, because we Baptise the Adult Seed of Believers, th… were Baptised in their Infancy, as they ought not.
Answer, You do but beg the question. We 'tis true, do Baptise the Adult Seed of some Believers, but we deny they were Baptized in their Infancy, they were but Rantized; but had they been in their Infancy Baptized, i, e. Dipped, yet not having the prerequisites of Baptism, viz. Faith and Repentance, they were not the true subjects of that Gospel ordinance. But Friend, do we do well to Baptise the off-spring of unbelievers, since by your argument they in their Infancy could not have true right to it, it being intayled on Believers Seed only? is that Branch of our Baptism a counterfeit also?
3. You say their Baptism cannot be good, because they deny it to their own Seed and off-spring; when as the Covenant is made to Believers and their Seed: So that either they are no believers themselves, or else they Reprobate their own Children.
1. Answer, Our Baptism may be good in your own opinion, I suppose, if our parents were unbelievers—But Friend, whose authority renders any Ordinance good? If we act according to the authority of Christ in Baptism, is not our Baptism good? We deny Baptism to our Children, because all are required to believe, repent, &c. before Baptized, Mat. 28. 19, 20. Mark 16. 16, Act. 2. 36, 37. Act. 8. 12, 14, 39, &c.
But do we reprobate our Children because we Baptise them not? is that in our power? or can Baptism bring into, or cast out of Gods election?
3. Friend, we deny that the Covenant of Grace, God promised to Abraham, gives any a right to Baptism. No, no, 'tis Christs positive command. If the Covenant of Grace gave Lot no right to circumcision, as it did not, because not commanded of him, how can the Covenant of Grace give right to Baptism to any, person but to such only that Christ hath commanded to be Baptised?
4. And lastly, you say their Baptism cannot be good, because their Principle is to Baptise Adult Believers, but not their Seed; which is to Baptise, but part of the believer; whereas they should Baptise, not only a part of him, but all of him: So that their Baptism is but a counterfeit Baptism.
Answer, Is this to shew your great wisdom? But are our Children a part of our selves and are we not believers without our Children? How if our Children should prove unbelievers, then I fear we shall not go for compleat believers, but one part of us is a believer, and the other part of us an unbeliever; also then if your Child should perish, but a part of you would be saved; is it fit such stuff should be Printed? Do not mistake your self, you are one compleat Man, and your Son another, and you are no less compleat a Man if you have no Child at all: So it you are a believer you are a compleat believer and want no part, and if your Child is an unbeliever: yet you are not less a compleat believer.
But you that Sprinkle only the Face, I am sure you do not Baptise the whole person of a Child, nor any part of it, nor of the Adult neither: What shall I call your Baptism.—
In Page 187. you quote our three Queries, but answer none of them.
1. Whether Children are in the Covenant of Grace, absolutely or conditionally? …. Whether that can be an ordinance of Christ to which there is neither precept nor example? 3. Whether in matters of meer positive right, such as Baptism is, we ought not to keep expresly and punctually to the revealed will of the Lawgiver?
Had you answered these three queris to the purpose, you had done, ten times more than what is contained in your whole Book.
But instead of answering you ask this question, viz. where do you find any command for the Infant Seed of believers, to stay till they are Adult, to be Baptized?
1. Answer, Where did God expresly forbid Abraham to circumcise his Male Infants, on the 7th or 9th day, or not to circumcise Female Infants?
2. There needs no Negative Law where there is a Law in the affirmative; if on the 8th day, it follows not on the 7th or 9th; if Males only are expressed, not Females; so if believers, if such who are taught and made Disciples by teaching, are commanded to be Baptized, then all must stay till they do believe, and are taught and made Disciples, before Baptized.
3. Was not the Gospel, think you, planted in Joseph and Mary's House, and yet the Holy Child Jesus stayed till he was about 30 years old, before Baptized. Also Gregory Nazianzen in his 4th Oration, saith Dr. Duveil, gives an instance of those who died without Baptism by reason of Infancy.
And the same Nazianzen, saith he, tho' he was a Bishops Son, being a long time bred up under his Father, was not Baptized until he came to Mans age; and so Basil the Great, who was born of pious Parents, and instructed from his Childhood, was not Baptized until a Man.
The like he says of Hiorem, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Augustin, &c.
Nothing of this nature ought to be done in Gods worship, without authority from his wor…; prove if you can, one Infant was Baptized from the beginning of Matthew, to the end of the Revelations of John.
Arguments to prove that those Churches who are gathered by Faith and Repentance, and upon the profession of Faith are Baptized (which are called Anabaptists) are true Churches of Christ▪ which Mr. Shute den…es so to be.
1. ARgument All those Churches who are rightin matter and form are true Churches.
But those Churches, falsly called Anabaptists, are right in matter and form …rgo they are true Churches.
The matter of true Churches are godly person, or true believers; the true form is the order or … of the Gospel Church, viz. The A…ult upon the profession of Faith and Repentance, Baptized; and so with joynt consent give themselves up to the Lord, and one to another, to walk in fellowship and commanion in all the Ordinances of the Gospel.
2. Arg Those Churches which consist of godly persons owning all the essentials of the true religion, among whom the word of God it truly preached, and the Sacraments are duly administred, are true Churchs of Jesus Christ.
But th…se Baptized Churches we contend for, falsly called Anabaptists, do consist of godly persons owning all the essentials of the true religion, among whom the word of God is truly preached, and the Sacraments duly and truly administred, ergo they are true Churches of Jesus Christ.
3. Arg▪ Those Churches that are constituted according to the direct pattern laid down in the New Testament; are true Churches of Jesus Christ.
The Baptized Churches, falsly called Anabaptists, are constituted according to the direct pattern laid down in the New Testament, ergo they are true Churches of Jesus Christ.
To these let me add the fourth, which Mr. Collins hath in his half Sheet.
4. Arg. Those Churches who make Christs merits the foundation of their Salvation, and his Doctrin the foundation of their Churches constitution, are true Churches, and their Baptism is Authentick: But the Baptists do thus, ergo.
5. Arg. If the ordinances of Christ are to be kept as they were first delivered to the Saints, and as practised by the Apostolical Church, our Baptism, which you call … counterfeit, is Christ's true Baptism.
But the Ordinances of Christ are to be kept as they were first delivered to the Saints, and as they were practised by the Apostolical Church, ergo, our Baptism is Christs true Baptism.
But Friend, how can you hold Communion with such persons who have a counterfeit Baptism? for I hear you break Bread with some who own no other Water-Baptism but that of Believers only, and deny Infants to be subjects thereof. I think none of our godly Brethren who are Pedo-Baptists, ever denied our Baptism, tho' they strive to justify theirs: which of them will call the Baptism of believers, yea, tho' such who were Sprinkled when Babes, to be a counterfeit? Without repentance you must be accountable for this one day.