Light Broke Forth in Wales Expelling Darkness, Chapter 10
CHAP. X.
Proving, in Oppoſition to what Mr. James Owen ſaith, that Children have no right to be baptized, altho Chriſt bleſſed them.
MR. Owen quotes Mark 10. 13, 14, 15, 16. And … brought little Children to him, that he ſhould touch them, that he would put his Hand upon them, and pray. Mat. 19. 13. And his Diſciples rebuked thoſe that brought them; but when Jeſus ſaw it, he was diſpleaſed, and ſaid, Suffer little Children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of ſuch is the Kingdom of Heaven, &c.
Saith Mr. Owen,
Let us conſider in this remarkable Scripture who were thoſe that were brought to the Lord Jeſus; the Text ſays they were little Children, ſuchas were taken up in Arms, as we tranſlate the word foreign therefore, ſaith he, it being evident that thoſe Children brought, as it is probable, by the Godly Parents unto Chriſt, were very little, they themſelves were not of Age to come unto him, nor profeſs Faith in him.
2. Why were they brought to Chriſt? that he ſhould put his Hands on them and pray. They that brought them to Chriſt did believe they could receive a Bleſſing by laying of Hands, and Prayers of Chriſt; altho the little Children underſtood not at preſent what Chriſt had done to them. As, ſaith he, Parents brought their Children to …hriſt to bleſs them, ſo do we bring them to Chriſt by Baptiſm to receive a Bleſſing. Why cannot they receive a Bleſſing from him now, as in the days of his Fleſh? Are his Bowels ſtraitned towards them?
Anſw. What doth this prove touching the Lawfulneſs of Infant-Baptiſm? we acknowledg and readily grant that they were little Children that were brought to Chriſt, and that he … his Hands upon them, and bleſſed them; but is this a Warrant for us to Baptize our little Children?
You say As thoſe Parents brought their Children to Chriſt to bleſs them, ſo do you bring them to Chriſt by Baptiſm.
Answ. And with ſhame you may ſpeak it, unleſs you had Authority to Chriſt ſo to do: Who hath required this thing … our Hands? May you not, as the Ancient Fathers did, by the ſ…me Argument bring little Children to the Lord Je…us by bringing them to the holy Sacrament of the Lord's …upper? Alſo you have as much ground from God's Word to do that, as to bring them to the Sacrament of Baptiſm
No doubt they were brought to Chriſt to be healed of ſome Bodily Diſtemper, for the Lord bleſſed and healed Diſeaſes by laying his Hand on the Sick; and we all know that they are capable of that Bleſſing, … not of the holy Sacraments, which al…ne belong to Adult Perſons that believe, and are able to examine themſelves. True, Chriſt's Bowels are not ſtraitn…d now he is in Heavan to young or old, but what o… th… Wiſdom did not lead him to baptize little Children,, and he knows how to let out his Bowels towards them without your reaching him. Will you direct the Almighty, or have Chriſt to bleſs an Human Invention? Were i… his Appointment he would no doubt bleſs it to little Children, but that you will never be able to prove; and it argues you have a bad Ca…ſe in hand, in that you make uſe of ſuch Childish Arguments to prove it; and bring Texts ſo remote from the Buſineſs.
You ſay, Chriſt prayed for them whom the Father had given him, John 17. 9. and if the Children of the Faithful not of the World, but are Chriſt's, we ſhould ſuffer them to come to him, and receive his Mark which is Baptiſm.
Anſw. 1. Are all the Infants of Believers given unto Chriſt, and ſo not of this World? Do you believe it? Sir, all that the Father hath given to Chriſt, ſhall come unto him, and every Soul of them ſhall be ſaved. Now do all the Children of the Faithful come to Chriſt, and ſhall they all be ſaved? or are you not to be rebuked and ſharply reproved for what you write, to blind the Eyes, and deceive the Children of the Faithful, to make them think their State is good and ſafe, when perhaps they are in the Gall of Bitterneſs, and Bond of Iniquity? Had not Abraham an Iſhmael, Iſaac an Eſau, and David an Abſalom? O, and what ungodly Perſons do daily ſtill proceed from the Loins of Godly Parents! And how gracious do many Children of wicked Parents prove when grown up!
2. You know not whether theſe little Children were the Children of Godly Parents or not, nor who they were that brought them to Chriſt; their Parents might be ungodly as far as we know, and yet ſome of their Relations, Kindred, or Neighbours might believe that Chriſt would bleſs them, and heal them; therefore they might bring them to Chriſt.
3. You ſay Baptiſm is Chriſt's Mark; but I have ſhewed the fooliſhneſs of that Aſſertion: Baptiſm is not diſtinguiſhing Mark that God's Children have on them, but his Mark and Seal is his holy Spirit, and his holy Nature or Image ſtampt upon the Soul.
4. You ſay, that Chriſt was very angry with his Diſciples for forbidding little Children to come unto him.
Reply. From hence we may gather, it was not the Command of their Maſter that they ſhould be baptized, or come that way unto him; for if it had, beſure the faithful Diſciples of our Lord would not have once attempted to forbid them to be brought to Chriſt.
Moreover, it is thought the Reaſon why the Diſciples forbid them to bring little Children to our bleſſed Lord, might be, left by their crying they might diſturb him, for that we ſee little Children in a Croud of People are ſubject to do.
But you inſiſt to ſhew what great Bowels Chriſt manifeſted to theſe little Children, and fain would have it, becauſe he knew they were in God's Covenant, &c. duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page duplicate page
Anſw. By this you ſeem to intimate, that all Infants are in Covenant with God; for, I ſay again, you cannot prove that theſe little Children were Children of faithful and holy Perſons. However I will add here what I have ſaid in Anſwer to Mr. Burkitt on this Argument, to which, or any other of my Anſwers he hath not attempted to give any Reply; but, as I am inform'd, is reſolved to let it reſt in ſilence, and write no more on the Subject. Take his Argument from this Text, which is in ſubſtance the ſame that you further inſiſt on about Chriſt's Bowels and Love to thoſe little Children.
If Infants, ſaith he, be capable of Chriſt's Bleſſing on Earth, and of his Preſence in Heaven; if they be Subjects of his Kingdom of Grace, and Heirs of his Kingdom of Glory; then they have an undoubted right to the Privilege of Subjects, among which the Seal of the Covenant is not the leaſt.
Anſw. 1. We anſwer, and argue thus to the firſt part of the Propoſition, viz.
In many of the Jews and others who were ungodly Perſons, were capable of Chriſt's Bleſſings, i. e. of being healed of their Bodily Diſeaſes, they were Subjects of Baptiſm: Is this ſound arguing? What farther Bleſſing Chriſt vouchſafed to Infants, when he laid his Hands upon them, we know not, for that was the way Chriſt took oftentimes in the healing the Sick, and ſo bleſſed many Perſons that never were baptized, as we read of.
2. We (as I have before told you) do deny Infants are Subjects of the Viſible Church; therefore if by the Kingdom of Grace any intend not that, they beat the Air: Alas! ſuch …o arguing beg, and prove not; beſides, it doth not follow, I ſay again, tho Infants may be Heirs of the Kingdom of Glory therefore they have an undoubted right to the Privileges of the Subjects of God's Church; for then it would follow they have right to one Privilege as well as to another, and are to have Fellowſhip with the Saints and Houſhold of God, as well as Baptiſm.
Mr. Burkitt argues further thus, viz. Thoſe whom Chriſt invites to him, and are received by him, his Miniſters may not refuſe, nor put from them: But Infant …re by Chriſt invited to him, and were received by him, therefore the Miniſters of Chriſt may not, ought not, durſt not refuſe them into Communion with them.
Take my Anſwer.
Anſw. 1. Chriſt invited Multitudes to come unto him, and he received them ſo far as to feed them with Barley-Loaves and Fiſhes, and to the Bleſſing of healing them of their Bodily Diſtempers: But may his Miniſters therefore receive all ſuch into their Communion?
2. In the days of Chriſt when he was upon Earth, there were many who are ſaid to come unto him, whom he might receive into his Preſence and Company, yet his Miniſters might not baptize them, nor receive them into their ſpiritual Communion; nor indeed you dare not ſo receive infants, I mean into your Communion of the Lord's-Supper. We read of ſome Phariſees and Lawyers that came to Chriſt, and he received them into his Company, who, it appears, came to tempt him. Alſo the Sadduces are ſaid to come unto him, who ſaid there was no Reſurrection; may Chriſt's Miniſters baptize ſuch, and receive them into their Communion? Therefore in Oppoſition to what Mr. Burkitt ſays in his Book, I affirm, there were then other ordinary ways of coming to Chriſt than by Admiſſion into his Church: Chriſt invited the worſt of Sinners unto him, who nevertheleſs did not receive him. Therefore there are ſome who muſt be excluded whom Jeſus Chriſt graciouſly inviteth.
Mr. Burkitt's Appeal for Proof of this Argument to St. Mark 10. 3. Suffer little Children to come unto me, for of ſuch is the Kingdom of Heaven, doth not his Buſineſs; they do not belong to the Kingdom of Grace, i. e. the Church; for if they did belong to that, or were of the Viſible Church, as ſuch, then he need not by Baptiſm make them belong to it. If Chriſt owns them Subjects or Members of his Viſible Church, then Pedo-baptiſts need not add them thereto by Baptiſm: For if, as they are the Seed of Believers, they are already (fide foederis) not only in Covenant with God, but alſo belong unto his Kingdom or Church upon Earth, all the World may ſee that Mr. Burkitt goes about to give them that very Right or Privilege which they had before and without Baptiſm.
Doth Chriſt (ſaith he) take Children into his Arms, and ſhall his Church caſt them out of her Imbraces?
Anſw. May I not argue thus, i. e. Doth Chriſt receive all Perſons into his Arms of Mercy, to heal their Bodily Diſtempers, of which perhaps ſome were wicked and ungodly? And ſhall the Church refuſe to receive all ſuch into her Imbraces? Beſides, all thoſe pretended Conſequences make no more for Infants to be baptized, than for their receiving the Lord's-Supper, and all other Privileges that belong as well as Baptiſm to Adult Perſons who believe or are Diſciples.
Does Chriſt, ſays he, own them for Subjects in his Kingdom, and ſhall we allow them no better ſtanding than in the Devil's Kingdom?
Anſw. Does Chriſt own Infants to be Subjects of his Kingdom, and yet did not baptize them? (for that he did not) and ſhall we attempt to baptize them, as if we were wiſer than he? I muſt again turn the Edg of the Sword upon this Man: If little Children were brought to Chriſt and he did not baptize them, then we muſt not; But little Children were brought to Chriſt and he did not baptize them, therefore we muſt not. Here is both Truth and Reaſon in this Argument, as Dr. Taylor confeſſeth, but none of either in his.
It is confeſſed by Mr. Burkitt himſelf, That Chriſt did not baptize thoſe Infants that came to him, and whom he took in his Arms and bleſſed, becauſe with his own Hands he baptized none at all, John 4. 1, 2.
Therefore ſince Chriſt who was God, foreſaw what Contention would ariſe about the baptizing of Infants, had it been his Will they ſhould be baptized, would he not at this time put the Matter out of doubt, and have baptized them, or have given Command to his Diſciples ſo to have done?
If therefore Infants be in ſo good a Condition as he ſays, i. e. Subjects of Chriſt's Kingdom of Grace, let us let them alone, for we cannot by baptizing them put them into a better State than they are, without any Warrant from Chriſt; and by baptizing them not, we cannot put them into any worſer State or Standing than they are in without it.
Many Pedo-baptiſts are angry with us, becauſe we ſay we know not but that the Children of. Unbelievers and Infidels may be in a good Condition as well as Children of Believers, tho we deny not but that the Children of Believers have a greater Advantage than the Children of Unbelievers namely, by the Prayers, good Education, and the good Example of their Parents, &c.
But ſaith Mr. Burkitt, Can any wiſe or good Man believe, that our Saviour would ſpeak ſuch favourable words of Infants, and his outward Geſture manifeſt ſo much good Will towards them, only with an Intent to enſnare and deceive us? doubtleſs it was to encourage his Miniſters to perform all charitable Offices towards them.
Anſw. 1. He miſtakes, our Saviour ſpeaks very little concerning Infants, and that which is ſaid of them was accidentally ſpoken, being occaſioned by thoſe who brought little Children to him, which the Diſciples forbad, and from hence he ſpoke what he did. Moreover, the cauſe why our Saviour ſpoke thoſe words, might be more for the ſake of Parents, that they might not be afraid touching the Condition of their dying Babes, than to ſhew any Ordinance belonged to them; for had it been ſo, doubtleſs the Diſciples would not have for bad thoſe People to bring little Children to Chriſt. 'Tis therefore an Argument againſt Infant-Baptiſm, and not for it, becauſe the Diſciples were appointed by their Maſter to be the Adminiſtrators of that Ordinance on ſuch to whom it did of right belong; and had Infants been the Subjects, would they have forbid People to bring Infants to him?
2. We therefore may rather conclude, had they been the Subjects of Baptiſm, Chriſt, by not hinting any ſuch thing in the leaſt on this occaſion, might rather have left us in a Snare, in ſpeaking nothing of it neither here nor at any other time.
3. Therefore Chriſt ſpeaking ſo favourably of Infants, and yet baptizing them not, may teach us to judg favourably of them, and do any charitable Office towards them, but not to preſume to give them holy Baptiſm without Chriſt's Warrant no more than any other Goſpel-Ordinance. 'Tis no matter what Calvin ſpoke, 'tis no Sin to keep ſuch out of Chriſt's (viſible) Fold, whom he has given no Authority to take in: Nor have any People a more charitable Opinion of the State of dying Infants than thoſe ſtil'd Anabaptiſts.
4. Thoſe who are capable of ſome kind of Bleſſings of Chriſt, we have ſhewed, are notwithſtanding not capable of Baptism. We read not the Diſciples baptized theſe little Children, nor any elſe.
Object. To this he, as you do, anſwer, Perhaps they were baptized before: But, ſays Mr. Burkitt, it doth not follow, that the Apoſtles did not baptize thoſe Children, becauſe no mention of it: The Scripture no where tells us that the Apoſtles themſelves were baptized; ſhall we conclude therefore they were never baptized?
Anſw. 'Tis no matter whether we read or read not, that the Apoſtles were baptized, ſince we find it was Chriſt's Precept and Practice to baptize Diſciples, or ſuch who did believe in him: We read of multitudes of Diſciples, that were baptized, and we know the way of Chriſt was one and the ſame; that which was the Duty of one Diſciple, as a Diſciple, was the Duty of every Diſciple. We read but of two or three Churches who broke Bread, or celebrated the Lord's-Supper. Could any Pedo-baptiſt but ſhew us a Precept for Infant-Baptiſm, or but one Example or Precedent where one Infant was baptized, we would not doubt but thoſe little Children might be alſo, but this they cannot do.
And whereas Mr. Barkitt and you ſay, That there is not the ſame Reaſon why Infants ſhould be admitted to eat the Lord's-Supper, as there is for them to be admitted to Baptiſm.
I anſwer; We deny it utterly. What tho the one be a Sacrament of Initiation, and the other of Confirmation? Yet pray obſerve, that Repentance and Faith is required of them that are to be baptized, even actual Faith and Repentance, as well as actual Grace and Examination, &c. to diſcern the Lord's-Body, in thoſe who are to receive the Lord's-Supper. If all that were to be circumciſed, had been required to repent and believe as in the caſe of Admiſſion to Baptiſm, ſomething had been ſaid, but the contrary appears. Male-Infants, as ſuch, had a right to that, but have no ſuch right to this.
You ſay, Chriſt did not lay his Hands upon little Children to heal them of Sickneſs, becauſe the Apoſtles would not have been ſo cruel as to hinder them to come to Chriſt to heal their Diſtempers, &c.
Anſw. Is it then greater Cruelty to hinder little Children of the Bleſſing of being healed of Bodily Diſeaſes, than to hinder them of Convenant-Bleſſings, Spiritual Bleſſings? How abſurdly do you argue!
You add alſo, Chriſt baptized them not at that time; for, ſay you, they were baptized before by John the Baptiſt, and Chriſt laid his Hands upon them to bleſs them; ſay you, laying on of Hands followed Baptiſm, Acts 8. 17. Heb. 6. 2. many of the Anti-pedo baptiſts own it, for they lay their Hands on thoſe they baptize, you ſay rebaptize.
Anſw. We rebaptize none: Rantiſm is not Baptiſm, &c. but you ſhould firſt prove John the Baptiſt did baptize any Infants, for that you have not done, nor ever can do. We ſhall ſee what Proof you have for what you ſay by and by. As to laying Hands on baptized Believers, the Scriptures you mention prove that an Ordinance of Chriſt, but not upon Infants; the Apoſtles never taught or practiſed any ſuch thing, tho 'tis true 'tis a Popiſh Rite: for as the Baptiſm of Believers is corrupted and changed to Infants, ſo laying on of Hands on baptized Believers is corrupted and changed by the falſe Church to Infants alſo.
You ſay, The Kingdom of God under the Goſpel is made up of Children, and of ſuch that are like to them.
Anſw. If by the Kingdom of God you mean the viſible Church, 'tis utterly denied; when you write again prove it, that the viſible Church under the Goſpel is made up of Infants, tho we deny not that the Goſpel Church is made up of ſuch, who like little Infants are meek, humble and harmleſs Perſons; in Malice all Believers ſhould be as little Children.