Laying on of Hands Upon Baptized Believers, Treatise 1 · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI.
Opening, and further proving Laying on of hands from Acts 8.16, 17. and 19.6. Alſo ſhewing the Judgment of Antient and Modern Writers upon thoſe two Places.
MR. Danvers having laboured to weaken the proof of our Practice from Heb. 6.1, 2. (tho all he ſays ſignifies nothing) comes p. 45. to examine Acts 8.17. and 19.6. which we affirm to be full Precedents for Laying on of hands upon baptized Believers. The ſum of his Objections, or the way he takes to invalidate what we infer from thence, take as follows, p. 46.
Object. As to that of Samaria, it is ſaid that ſeveral being converted in that City, and baptized by Philip, who wrought many Miracles, and continued ſome time with them, Acts 8.13. yet did not he impoſe hands upon them as we read of: the Church of Jeruſalem hearing that Samaria had received the Word of God, and that the Spirit was not fallen upon any of them, viz. in a viſible manner, (which was a Phraſe attributed to thoſe extraordinary Meaſures frequently given in thoſe days, Acts 10.44. which ſometimes did fall upon them before Baptiſm, and ſometimes after) ſent Peter and John, who it ſeems were extraordinarily gifted by God, ſo that on whomſoever they prayed, and laid their hands, the Spirit was viſibly, extraordinarily, and immediately given; and 'tis ſaid they laid their hands upon them, but how many 'tis not ſaid; ſurely not upon all, for Simon by his profane offer diſcovered he had neither lot nor part therein, tho baptized, &c.
Anſw. The firſt thing he hints at, as an Objection againſt our Practice from this place, is becauſe Philip laid not his hands upon them, after he had baptized them: Which we have anſwered already; but this I muſt ſay now, that if Peter and John laid their hands on thoſe Believers in Samaria, as Men miraculouſly gifted, or by virtue of their extraordinary Attainments, it might ſeem ſtrange that Philip laid not his hands upon them, being (tho but a Deacon) endowed with thoſe extraordinary Gifts, and had wrought wonderful Signs and Miracles in the ſame City before: The reaſon therefore why Philip did not impoſe hands upon them was,
1. Becauſe not miniſterially capacitated ſo to do, it not belonging to him on the account of his Office, nor his extraordinary Gifts and Endowments. This alſo I might further ſhew, becauſe the Church at Jeruſalem did not ſend to Samaria Men ſimply indowed with miraculous Gifts, but ſuch as had Miniſterial Power and Authority as the Servants of Chriſt, in his Name to compleat and perfect what was wanting among them.
'Tis an Act (ſaith Dr. Hammond on Acts 8.17.) reſerved to the Rulers of the Church, and not communicated or allowed to inferiour Officers, ſuch as Philip the Deacon here.
2. But whereas Mr. Danvers ſeems to affirm, that as ſome in the primitive time had the Gift of Healing, ſo others had the Gift or Power to give the Holy Spirit; 'tis utterly denied, and the contrary has often been proved, for that 'tis only the Gift of God, and Chriſt's bleſſed Prerogative; they were found in their Duty, they prayed, and laid on their hands, and left the iſſue to God to give the Spirit, according to his promiſe and good pleaſure.
Object. But probably ſome may object, We read of none but the Apoſtles that laid hands on baptized Believers; and tho they acted not by virtue of their miraculous Endowments, nor had power to give the Holy Spirit, yet they might act herein by virtue of their extraordinary call unto that Office.
Anſw. I affirm that they acted in all other Ordinances, yea, and did whatſoever they did in the Worſhip and Service of Chriſt, by virtue of the ſaid extraordinary Call unto the Miniſtry, as well as in this: But doth it therefore follow that nothing the Apoſtles practiſed is a Precedent or Rule unto us, as ſome ignorantly have affirmed, unleſs ſo called of God, and endowed as they were?
3. Had not Matthias the ſame power to adminiſter Ordinances (who was mediately called to his Office by the Church) as the other Apoſtles immediately called by Chriſt Jeſus? and is not the End and Work of the Office (however called to it) one and the ſame? viz. the work of the Miniſtry, the perfecting the Saints, and edifying the Body of Chriſt, Eph. 4.
4. We read hardly of any that preached the Word Authoritatively, or officiated in any Goſpel-adminiſtration by virtue of their Office, beſides the extraordinary Apoſtles; and therefore if what they did be not a Law or Rule to us, and to all ordinary Miniſters, to the end of the World, we ſhall be at a loſs in many other reſpects: It muſt therefore be granted, that what they taught and practiſed as an Ordinance of Chriſt, and foundation-Principle of his Doctrine, they delivered it unto faithful Men, that were their Succeſſors, that they might be able to teach others alſo, 2 Tim. 2.3. And this agrees with Phil. 4.9. Thoſe things that you have both learned and received, heard and ſeen in me, do; and the God of Peace ſhall be with you.
5. Had it been a Service for that Day only, and none to be Adminiſtrators thereof but thoſe great Apoſtles, it would not have been left as a ſtanding, or foundation principle in God's Houſe, and been joined to Faith, and the Reſurrection.
In the 2d place, he would have us believe the end of that Adminiſtration was for the extraordinary or viſible Gifts of the Holy Spirit, which we have clearly refuted; yet I ſhall ſay further, that by his arguing, the Apoſtles reſolved that all the Church at Samaria, yea and that at Epheſus, ſhould have the extraordinary Gifts, ſince they laid their hands on all that were baptized, without exception. Nay, it follows roundly, that where ever the Apoſtles found any particular Diſciple, or Diſciples, that had not received thoſe viſible, or extraordinary Gifts, they were to lay their hands on them to that end: For I preſume Mr. Danvers judges, had Paul found 1200, as he found 12, at Epheſus, who had not received, nor heard of the Holy Ghoſt, he would have laid hands on them; which preſuppoſes alſo, that thoſe miraculous Gifts were promiſed, and belong to every particular Member in the Church, which is directly contrary to 1 Cor. 12.4, 7, 8, 9, 29, 30. for tho (as we have proved) the Holy Spirit be promiſed to every ſincere Believer in the Lord Jeſus, yet are not the extraordinary Gifts promiſed to any in particular, being only reſerved in the boſom or breaſt of the Almighty, to whom, and after what manner he will diſtribute them. 1 Cor. 12.4. There are diverſities of Gifts, but the ſame Spirit; to one is given by the ſame Spirit, the word of Wiſdom; to another the word of Knowledg; to another Faith; to another the gift of Healing, by the ſame Spirit; to another the working of Miracles; to another Prophecy; to another diſcerning of Tongues, v. 8, 9, 10. Are all Prophets? are all workers of Miracles? have all the Gift of Healing? do all ſpeak with Tongues? &c. Hence nothing can be clearer than this, that tho all have right to the Spirit, yet but very few had the extraordinary Gifts thereof in the primitive Times.
The Third thing Mr. Danvers ſeems to affirm, is, that all in Samaria that were baptized, had not hands laid upon them, becauſe it is ſaid of Simon, he had no part nor lot in that matter.
1. Here he begs the Queſtion, taking for granted, that Simon had not hands laid upon him; but why might not Simon have lot and part in that matter, if by Lot and Part be meant the viſible, or miraculous Gifts of the Spirit, ſince Hypocrites may partake of them, as our Saviour plainly ſignifies, and alſo doth our Apoſtle, 1 Cor. 13.1, 2?
2. He might come under the Ordinance, and yet his heart not being right with God, he might not have any part or lot in the bleſſed Comforter, the Spirit of Promiſe; which the World receiveth not, nor can an unſanctified Heart partake of.
3. Their reception of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, was partly to convince the Apoſtles and Believers themſelves that Chriſt had made good his promiſe of ſending the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, to them.
4. By Lot or Part in that matter, may not be meant partaking of the ritual, or external part of the Ordinance, but rather refers to his deſire of having power to be an Adminiſtrator of it upon others, ſo that the Holy Spirit might be given to thoſe he laid his hands on. But,
5. If we ſhould grant Simon had not hands impoſed upon him, which I rather incline to, yet would it not hurt our Cauſe in the leaſt, becauſe he might be diſcovered to be a profane Wretch before it came to be his lot to partake thereof: if therefore it appears, and may be granted, that all that were baptized in Samaria came under this Appointment ſave Simon, we have as much as we deſire: And ſurely this cannot rationally be denied by any that read the words, verſ. 12. When they believed they were baptized, both Men and Women. Compare this with verſ. 16. that the Holy Spirit was fallen on none of them †M. Blackwood notes the emphaſis to lie in this Pronoun Relative They; the Antecedent hereunto muſt needs be the Baptized, &c.only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jeſus. Muſt not they, and them, mean all who are ſaid to be baptized? So likewiſe when 'tis ſaid ver. 13. they laid their hands upon them; doth not them intend the very ſame they prayed for? and ſhall we think they did not pray for them all? had not all the like need of God's Spirit? and is it not promiſed to all the Sons and Handmaids? Or ſhall we think the Apoſtle did not pray for the Women as well as the Men, the weaker Veſſels, as well as the ſtronger? In Mat. 28.19, 20. (as 'tis well noted by Mr. Fiſher) 'tis ſaid, Go, teach all Nations, baptizing them; and in the words following, teaching them to obſerve all things I have commanded you. By them muſt needs intend them all, and every of them that were made Diſciples, and baptized.
One word or two further concerning what Mr. D. objects againſt us from Acts 19.6. from the Effects that followed this Adminiſtration; he ſtill arguing as if that were the abſolute End thereof: Which, as a great Doctor well obſerves, is too trifling a fancy to be put in balance againſt so ſacred an Inſtitution. But let us examin this Scripture a little more: Have you received the Holy Spirit ſince ye believed? (ſaith our Apoſtle.) They ſaid unto him, We have not ſo much as heard whether there be any Holy Spirit. Ʋnto what then were ye baptized? &c. Two things are here very remarkable.
1. That the Holy Spirit (according to the ſenſe of the Apoſtle inquiring after their reception of it) is the undoubted Right of every baptized Believer in Chriſt Jeſus, appears from theſe two expreſſions; Have ye received the Spirit ſince ye believed? (No.) Ʋnto what then were ye baptized? It ſeems ſtrange (as if Paul ſhould ſay) that you having believed in Chriſt, and been baptized, have not yet received the Holy Spirit, ſince it is the great Legacy our Lord and Maſter left to every one of his Diſciples?
2. 'Tis evident that whoſoever was baptized after Chriſt's reſurrection in his Name was inſtructed into the Promiſe of the Holy Ghoſt, and conſequently into Laying on of Hands, the outward Ceremony, or Miniſtry of it, belonging to them as Perſons ſo conſidered. Paul ſeems to queſtion their Baptiſm, ſince they were wholly ignorant of that glorious Promiſe of Bleſſing, annexed thereto; which conſidered, may fully ſatisfy any unbiaſſed Perſon that the extraordinary or miraculous Gifts could not be the End of this Adminiſtration: and as touching thoſe Effects that followed, 'tis clear the like Effects followed all other Ordinances as well as this.
Object. And whereas Mr. D. preſumes to ſay, They were ſome of the Church of Epheſus; and again, not the whole Church.
Anſw. 1. Can it be thought that thoſe were at that time Members of the Church, and yet ſo ignorant of the Holy Spirit? And ſurely Paul would not have baptized them again, if they had been Members of the Church before.
2. They are not called the Church, nor of the Church, nor ſome of the Church, but certain Diſciples; yea, and ſuch as appears were only inſtructed into the Baptiſm of John.
3. Tho we read but of 12 that had hands laid on them, which was the number of the Men *How many Women is not expreſſed, they are ſeldom the leſſer number.that Paul found at that time who lay ſhort of their Duty and Privilege in that reſpect; ſince we ſee the Spirit was their Right, as baptized Believers, it follows that it is the duty of every Believer to yield obedience to this Ordinance, as well as thoſe twelve. The way of God touching the Adminiſtration of Goſpel-Inſtitutions being one and the ſame in all the Churches of the Saints, notwithſtanding what has already been offered, may be a ſatisfactory Anſwer to Mr. D. concerning what he minds from thoſe two Scriptures: yet finding ſo many Learned Men, both antient and of later times, agreeing with us in their Expoſitions on theſe two Places; and not knowing but their Words may with ſome take more place than what ſuch a one as I may ſpeak, I'll cite a Paſſage or two.
Cyprian, ſpeaking of Acts 8.17. ſaith, It was not neceſſary they ſhould be baptized again, only what was wanting, was performed by Peter and John, that by Prayer and Impoſition of Hands the Holy Spirit ſhould be invocated.
Saith Hierom on the Acts of the Apoſtles, We find another Inſtance of the Celebration of this ritual Myſtery, for it is ſignally exprest of the Baptized at Epheſus: Paul firſt baptized them, and then laid his Hands upon them, and they received the Holy Spirit. And theſe Teſtimonies are the great Warranty for this holy Ordinance.
Eucherites is cited by Dr. Taylor p. 43. ſpeaking, thus: The ſame thing now done in Impoſition of Hands on ſingle Perſons, is no other than what was done upon all Believers in the deſcent of the H. Spirit.
He mentions Zanchius, ſaying, I wiſh the Examples of the Apoſtles and Primitive Churches were of more value amongſt Chriſtians. It were well if they were ſo, (ſaith the Doctor) but there is more than meer Examples; theſe Examples of ſuch Solemnities, the Apoſtles are our Maſters in them, and have given Rules and Precedents for the Church to follow: this is a Chriſtian Law, and written (as all Scriptures are) for our Inſtruction.
Eſtius on Heb. 6.2. affirms that the Laying on of Hands mentioned Acts 8.17. Acts 19.6. by St. Luke, is that of Confirmation, whereby the Spirit of God is given to Perſons baptized, wherewith with they being ſtrengthned, confeſs the Name of Chriſt undauntedly among the Enemies of the Faith. And again (ſaith he) That Hands were wont to be laid upon Perſons baptized, after the example of the Apoſtles, all Antiquity teacheth.
Dr. Hammond alſo in his Annot. on Acts 8.17. ſaith; That it was Confirmation, may appear probable, becauſe it ſo ſoon attended their Converſion and Baptiſm. When the Apoſtles which were at Jeruſalem heard that Samaria had received the Word of God, they ſent Peter and John, verſ. 14. Which agrees well (ſaith he) with that of Confirmation, which is an Act reſerved to the Rulers of the Church, and not communicated or allowed to inferior Officers, ſuch as Philip the Deacon here.
And then paraphaſing upon Acts 19.6. he ſaith, After this Paul by Impoſition of hands, and benediction, gave them Confirmation, by which means the Holy Spirit came on them.
Mr. Ralph Venning in his Remains, ſpeaking of Acts 8.17. and 19.6. gives his underſtanding upon them; That it was the practice of the Apoſtles, after they had baptized Perſons, ſooner or later, to lay Hands upon them.
Thus from what has been ſaid, I hope it may appear to all inquiring Souls, in oppoſition to what Mr. Danvers ſaith, page 47. that theſe two Places are clear Precedents and Rules for this Practice, as well as Heb. 6.1, 2. and other Scriptures we have inſiſted upon, for as much as there was a Laying on of Hands practiſed immediately after Baptiſm, and with much certainty upon every Member, or baptized Believer, and to ſuch an End as is attainable in theſe times.