Laying on of Hands Upon Baptized Believers, Treatise 1 · Chapter 4
CHAP. IV.
Shewing upon what ground ſome of the Independent and Presbyterian Perſwaſion have aſſerted Laying on of hands on baptiſed Perſons.
IN Pag. 36. Mr. Danvers having done with Tradition and Fathers, he tells us, he will conſider the Scripture-grounds urged in proof hereof by the Independents, and thoſe of the Presbyterian Perſwaſion; In the firſt place (which is the principal) Heb. 6.1, 2. which he ſaith, Mr. Hanmer modeſtly expreſſes to be but a probable ground.
To which I ſhall give this anſwer, that tho Mr. Hanmer uſes ſuch a Phraſe (viz. calling Heb. 6.1, 2. a probable ground) he doth not ſay, 'tis but a probable ground; and thoſe that read his Book ſhall find, that by the Teſtimony of divers famous Men, he abundantly endeavours to prove it to be abſolutely the Laying on of hands intended in that Scripture. (See Page 25, 26.) And ſince I find many eminent Men ſpeaking ſo plainly on this account of Heb. 6. 1, 2. and to ſatisfy ſome Perſons herein, and prevent miſtakes, take a few inſtances out of Mr. Hanmer, as the Judgment of ſeveral Divines upon that Text.
The firſt I ſhall cite is Didoclavius, who of three Interpretations of this Text, mentioned by him, admits of this, Cap. 2. viz. Laying on of hands after Baptiſm, and before admitted to the Lord's Table: And gives a reaſon why it may be called Confirmatory; Nempe ratione Eccleſiae approbantis, & confirmantis ſua approbatione examinatum, ad verum illud ac genuinum Confirmationis Sacramentum admittentis: (viz.) Becauſe of the Churches approving, and by their approbation confirming of the Perſon examined, and admitting him unto that true and genuine Rite of Confirmation.
The next is Major on Heb. 6.2. On this place (ſaith he) all that I have ſeen (mark) underſtand it of Impoſition of hands on ſuch as have been baptized only. Bullinger.
Mr. Hooker, Lib. 5. Sect. 6. in his Appendix, Pag. 3. alledging T.C. thus ſpeaking, Tell me, why there ſhould be any ſuch Confirmation, ſeeing no one Tittle thereof can be found in Scripture? Thus anſwers ironically, except the Epiſtle to the Hebrews, chap. 6. 2. be Scripture; plainly intimating (ſaith Mr. Hanmer) he thought that place to be a ſufficient ground for it, and that to be the meaning of the Apoſtle there.
Mr. Parker, de Polit. Eccleſ. lib. 3. c. 15, 16. refuting the Arguments of ſuch as plead for Epiſcopal Confirmation, at large aſſents (ſaith our Author) to what is by me delivered.
First, He ſhews the general nature, and end of it, viz. admiſſion of Members into the Communion of the Church, which accordingly was uſed towards ſuch as were converted. This Impoſition of hands (ſaith he) Heb. 6.2. is that very Eccleſiaſtical Union, by a ſolemn profeſſing of Faith, and admiſſion into the Church.
Secondly, He ſhews the neceſſity of it from this Text, Heb. 6.2. (ſaith Mr. Hanmer.)
Thirdly, That it ought to be done publickly, and before the Church: Et hic ordo inter gravia negotia agitur, enim de membro recipiendo, publicum hoc est, & publici juris, & ideo non niſi Eccleſiae conſenſu ejuſdem, cui adjungendus est competens, perficiendus. This courſe is to be reckoned among the weighty affairs, it is a publick thing, and of publick right; for the matter in agitation is concerning the receiving of a Member, and therefore not to be performed without the conſent of that ſame Church, to which the Competent is to be joined.
Fourthly, He ſhews the Antiquity thereof, and that 'tis an Apoſtolical Inſtitution, and the practice of the Antient Church.
He further affirms, pag. 28. that Piſcator ſo underſtood Heb. 6. 1, 2. viz. to mean Laying on of hands upon the Baptized; Alſo Beza, Paraeus, and Rivet, whoſe words take as follows …mpoſitio manuum, cujus mentio fit, Heb. 6.2. referenda est ad ſolennem Baptizatorum Benedictionem, quae à Paſtoribus ſolebat fieri, eos in Chriſtianiſmi vocationis confirmantibus: Impoſition of hands, whereof mention is made Heb. 6.2. is to be referred to the ſolemn Benediction of the Baptized, which was uſed to be performed by the Paſtors, confirming them in the calling of Chriſtianity. He mentions the Doctors of Leyden, ſhewing this to be their ſenſe upon this Text alſo.
Calvin, who gives this only as the chief thing intended by the Apoſtle in this place, from hence draws this remarkable Inference; wherein (ſaith Mr. Hanmer) he plainly declares his apprehenſions concerning the Original and Antiquity of this practice in the Church of Chriſt: Hic unus locus, &c. This one place (ſaith he) abundantly teſtifies that the-original of this Ceremony, viz. Confirmation, or Laying on of hands, flow'd from the Apoſtles, which yet afterwards was turned into a Superſtition; as the World almost always degenerates from the best Inſtitutions into Corruption: Wherefore to this day this pure Inſtitution [mark] ought to be retained, but the Superſtition to be corrected. Why ſhould Mr. Danvers preſume to ſay theſe Men confeſs the Scripture is but a probable ground, and that Tradition and Antiquity is the more certain? And again that there is nothing but a faint inſinuation from the Scripture to ground Laying on of hands upon? What Men can ſpeak more fully to a Text?
But to proceed, he adds Hyperus, who ſaith, Impoſition of hands, Heb. 6.2. was in the confirmation of thoſe that had been baptized and rightly inſtructed, that they might receive the Holy Spirit. He urgeth ſeveral other Perſons of the ſame mind, as Illyricus, Mr. Deering, &c.
To which I might add what Mr. Hughes late of Plymouth in his Ep. to Mr. Hanmer's Book, mentions on this account, ſpeaking of Heb. 6.2. It is by ſome glorious Lights in the Church (ſaith he) underſtood of Confirmation, in that Phraſe of Impoſition of hands, annexed to Baptiſm, Heb. 6. Whence it is ſaid, that this abundantly teſtifies that the Original of this Ceremony flowed from the Apoſtles.
Before I proceed, I might cite a paſſage full to the ſame purpoſe, as the Judgment of the Learned Aſſembly of Divines, which take as follows, out of their Annotations on Heb. 6.2. Laying on of hands, ſay they, is uſually called Confirmation; which ſtood firſt, in examining thoſe that had been baptized what progreſs they had made in Chriſtianity. Secondly, In praying for them, that God would continue them in the Faith, and give them more Grace, ſtrengthning them by his Holy Spirit, they laid their hands upon them: whence the Apoſtolical Conſtitution was called Laying on of Hands.
Moreover, What Mr. Baxter ſpeaks upon this account I can't well omit, Confirmat. p. 124, 125. If the Ʋniverſal Church of Chriſt (ſaith he) have uſed Prayer, and Laying on of hands, as a practice received from the Apoſtles, and no other beginning of it can be found; then we have no reaſon to think this Ceremony ceaſed, or to interpret the foreſaid Scripture contrary to this practice of the Ʋniverſal Church. But the Antecedent is true, ergo. And if any ſay, Anointing and Croſſing were antient; I anſwer (ſaith he)
Firſt, That they were as antient in the Popiſh uſe as the matter of a Sacrament, or neceſſary Signs, is not true, nor proved, but frequently diſproved by our Writers againſt Popiſh Confirmation.
Secondly, Nor can it be proved, that they were as antient as indifferent things.
Thirdly, We prove the contrary, becauſe they were not in Scripture-times, there being no mention of them.
Fourthly, So that we bring Antiquity but to prove the continuance of a Scripture-practice, and ſo to clear the practice of it: But the Papiſts plead Fathers for that which the Scripture is a ſtranger unto.
I ſhall cloſe this with Reverend Mr. Hooker: The antient Cuſtom of the Church (ſaith he, Eccleſ. Polit. p. 351.) was, after they had baptized, to add thereto Impoſition of hands, with effectual Prayer for the illumination of God's moſt Holy Spirit, to confirm and perfect that which the Grace of the ſaid Spirit had already begun in Baptiſm: for the means to obtain the Graces which God doth beſtow, are our Prayers; and our Prayers to that intent are available as well for others as for our ſelves.
But to paſs by this, I intreat the Reader to conſider, that tho we have urged the Teſtimony of ſeveral Authors, who are one with us in the main concerning our Practice herein, yet we build not upon Men or Tradition, but on the Word of God; neither do we ſuppoſe any neceſſity for us to take up new weapons to defend ſo plain a Truth, ſince our Adverſaries have been ſo ſufficiently worſted and put to flight by the Sword of the Spirit, as uſed by ſeveral eminent Saints in times paſt. What we have mentioned of Authors, we have been in part forced to by what Mr. Danvers and others have ſaid of them. And that leads me to what he ſpeaks, pag. 40. of the Scripture-grounds on which the Baptiſts have aſſerted this Rite (as he calls it) and founded this Practice of Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers, as neceſſary to Church-Communion, as before eſpecially held forth, Heb. 6.1, 2. tho not affirmed with that ſobriety and modeſty, as the other from Probability, but rather Infallibility, denying fellowſhip to any that do not receive it, &c.