Light Broke Forth in Wales Expelling Darkness, Chapter 21
CHAP. XXI.
Shewing that there is no Bleſſing to be expected in Baptizing Infants, but rather the diſpleaſure of the Jealous God, demonſtrating contrarywiſe to what Mr. James Owen hath ſaid (alſo Mr. Burkit and Mr. Daniel Williams, and all other pedobaptiſts,) that it is avery ſinful and an unlawful practice.
AS Mr. Owen hath laboured in vain to ſhew the uſefulneſs of Infant Baptiſm, ſo Mr. Burkit a Learned Miniſter of the Church of England, who in his late Treatiſe for Infant Baptiſm alſo did, ſee page 35, 36, 37, 38. of his Book.
1. Mr. Burkitt ſaith Children are hereby Intereſted in all the prayers of the Church.
1. Anſw. If you pray for them as Members of the viſible Church, what ground have you ſo to do from Gods word, ſince God in the Goſpel times had not made them Members thereof.
2. Can't we pray for our Children, tho' as yet they are not Members, that they may become Members thereof.
2. He ſaith, by vertue of this admiſſion, they have intereſt in the ſpecial providence of God.
Anſw. No doubt but God doth exerciſe his ſpecial Care and Providence over all Elect Infants, but not the more for your baptizing them without his authority, or Command, much leſs Infants of Believers as ſuch.
3. He ſays, Hereby the Church ſtands nearer to them then to the reſt of mankind, &c. mentioning that Text, Ifa. 54. 13. Thy Children ſhall be all taught of God.
1. Anſw. Neither you nor Mr. Burkitt nor any pedobaptiſts in the World can bring Infants nearer to God, nor his Church by any act done by you without any rule left by Chriſt.
2. Does that Text, Iſa. 54. 13. refer to Infants of Believers as ſuch, or to thoſe godly and new re-born Children, who being born in sin, are indeed her Spiritual Children.
4. He ſaith, Irfant Baptiſm, is an act of Dedication, &c.
Anſw. Who commanded you this way to Dedicate your Children to the Lord? Will you Teach the Almighty, or are you wiſer than he? Doth he in his word require you ſo to do.
2. May not the Papiſts ſay as well, that thoſe Perſons they bring under their voluntary Vows, are thereby Dedicated unto God?
5. Mr. Burkitt ſaith, 'Tis great advantage to Infants, as 'tis an Act of reſtipulation, that is, ſaith he, a Child at baptiſm enters into Covenant with God.
Anſw. I anſwer, Poor Babes, 'tis without their knowledge and conſent, or God's appointment, which is worſt of all, or they being able to perform it then, nor many of them ever after, God never giving them his Grace ſo to do. But wo to them if they do not perform this Covenant, if Mr. Burkitt and Mr. Daniel Williams ſay true; he Mr. Daniel Williams in his Book called the vanity of youth. page 131.ſays in his Catechiſm as followeth, That thoſe Children who perform not their Baptiſmal Covenant do.
1. They reject Chriſt. 2d. They renounce the Bleſſings of the Goſpel. 3dly. that 'tis Rebellion againſt their Maker. 4thly. That 'tis ingratitude and perjury againſt their Redeemer. 5thly. Groſs injuſtice to their Parents. 6thly. That 'tis ſelf-killing Cruelty to their own Souls. 7thly. 'Tis (he ſaith) a damning Sin, nay its the heart of all Sin.
Is this indeed the love you Pedo-baptiſts have to your poor Infants. What bring them into ſuch a Covenant, without their knowledge and conſent, or God's appointment, and then threaten them if they break it, with Hell and Damnation, and what not?
Do you know they are all Elect Perſons, and ſo ſuch that God will in time call, give grace to, and ſo change their evil and depraved Natures? if not, do you not heap up a multitude of evils upon them, and hereby make their condition worſe, or aggravate their Sin and miſery for ever.
I know not whether you be of this Pedo-baptiſts mind, or not, but I think Mr. Williams Worthy of blame as well as Mr. Burkit.this Doctrine does not fit a Chriſtian Catechiſm? If God had required Infants to enter into ſuch Covenant, ſome reaſon he might have thus to ſpeak; But ſince neither he nor you can prove it; This to me ſeems a daring boldneſs in a Miniſter of the Goſpel to aſſert, (who I hope is a good Man) God (I grant) expects, that all true believers ſhould perform their Baptiſmal Covenant, but then know, they are required of God actually to enter into it, & they freely of their own choice enter into it; alſo they are ſuch God hath given habitual Grace to perform it; And he hath promiſed them alſo a farther ſupply of Grace to enable them ſo to do; but nothing of this you can prove in Infants Covenanting in their Baptiſm, (but more of this by and by) nor will their Sureties help the matter; for if they cannot perform thoſe things they promiſe for themſelves, how ſhould they be able to do it for others? beſides 'tis an humane Invention, and not appointed of God.
But truly Mr. Williams's Doctrine afflicts my Mind: Strange! is this Sin the damning Sin? I thought the damning Sin (by way of eminency) had been the Sin of unbelief. Suppoſe your own Child ſhould not believe, he is bound by vertue of that Baptiſmal Covenant you brought him into, but when grown up, diſowns that (you call) Baptiſm, &c. for his not believing 'tis a Truth of Chriſt, muſt he be damned?
But to proceed;
Mr. Burkitt having ſhewed the advantages of Infant Baptiſm, without giving one Scripture Text to prove what he ſays is true; he in Page 38. comes to ſhew, that Baptiſm is more uſeful and beneficial to a Child in Infancy, then to omit it till riper Age; becauſe no Infant Memberſhip is capable of Hypocriſy, which Perſons grown up are.
1. Anſw. Then give them the Lords Supper alſo, for doubtleſs if they receive it, they will not eat and drink their own damnation, as may be ſome that have it given to them, do. I tremble at what you dare to ſay and write, in which you ſeem to arraign the Wiſdom of the ever bleſſed Jeſus who he hath appointed believers or Adult perſons, who are gracious to be Baptized, and none elſe; and do you ſay, the Ordinance better ſuites with the Ignorant Babes? ſhould you dictate to your Earthly Prince, would he allow it? much leſs to contradict or Correct him, as if your Wiſdom were more then his.
2. Mr. Burkitt ſayth, 'tis more advantageous to Infants, than thoſe of riper years; as it is a pre-engagement upon them to reſiſt Temptations.
Anſw. He may after this rate bring them under an hundred Engagements and Covenants, which may be more plauſible ones too: may you not when they know what they do, make them take a Solemn Oath? or enter into Bonds upon pain of ſevere Puniſhment, that they ſhall not yield to Temptations, and pretend 'tis God's Law they ſhould do ſo, which if you can deceive their Judgments, they will dread as much, (nay it may be more) the breaking thoſe Oaths and Covenants, then this you bring them into, without any authority from Jeſus Chriſt.
3. Mr. Burkitt ſaith, Baptiſm in Infancy is more advantageous then at riper years, as it is an early remedy againſt the malady of Original ſin.
Anſw. Speak, Doth Baptiſm take away Original ſin, or free them from that Malady or not? you know ſome of the Antient Fathers were carryed away with ſuch a dream; how comes it to paſs then, that this contagion appears ſo ſoon, and to be as ſtrong in your Children as in ours, who never were Baptized at all? But does not St. Peter tell you (1. Pet. 3. 20.) Baptiſm waſhes not away the filth of the Fleſh; Or is not Original Pollution a filth of the Fleſh? What ſtuff is this you would force upon us and the World? we affirm Infants are no more capable of this Ordinance then any other. Why do you ſay of no Right but this? we challenge all the World by God's Word, to prove that they are capable of Baptiſm, any more then of the Lords Supper.
4. He ſays Baptiſm Adminiſtred to Infants has this advantage, it puts the Chriſtian upon more bitter mourning for actual Sin, from that conſideration of that ſhameful Perjury and wilful Apoſtacy that is found in ſuch Perſons ſins.
Anſw. He is I find one of Mr. Wiliams's Brethren, i. e. he is of his belief The danger of Infants Baptiſmal Covenant layd open.it ſeems, but tremble at the thoughts of the Conſequences of your Doctrine. Have not your Children whengrown up, enough ſins to mourn for and bewail before the Almighty God, but you muſt bring them into a Covenant which you know they would break when they come to riper Age? and ſuch is the pravity of Human Nature, that there is no avoiding of it without a ſupernatural work of Grace; their Burden is heavy enough, you need not add to it.
2. Is it not ſad, that Men ſhould give cauſe to their Children to think they are guilty of Perjury? when in truth they never were, nor of Apoſtacy from God upon that account. Our firſt Apoſtacy was bad enough, you need not go about to make them guilty of another. Alas! their pretended baptiſm never brought them one ſtep nearer to God, then thoſe Children are, who were never Baptized in their Infancy at all, where then is the Apoſtacy he ſpeaks of.
3. You hereby bring them under neceſſity of committing the Sin of Perjury, and of Apoſtacy, at leaſtwiſe in your own conceit, and in others too, if they can believe what this Man ſays, and ſo to cauſe them to mourn for that, or thoſe ſins moſt, which may be (if all things were rightly con…'d) are no ſins at all. I do not mean that any of t… actual tranſgreſſions may not be ſin; but that they are not guilty of Perjury and Apoſtacy, by breaking that you call their Baptiſmal Covenant: For if God brought them not into that Covenant, nor into any Covenant relation with himſelf thereby, I cannot ſee how there ſhould be ſuch a sting in the Tayl of it, as he affirms, and indeed, had they themſelves, of their own accord and conſent, entered into an unlawful or an unwarrantable Covenant which they were no ways able to perform, it may be doubted whether it would be Perjury in them if they kept it not, beſides, I hope they have not forſworn themſelves, how then is it Perjury?
4. Moreover, I deſire all thoſe Parents who baptize their Children, and you alſo, to conſider in the fear of God, the natural tendency and Conſequences of your bringing poor Babes into ſuch a Covenant.
1. That you force them to enter into this Covenant without any Authority or Command from God; for I challenge you and all pedobaptiſts in the World to prove God hath any where directly or indirectly, required any ſuch thing at your Hands.
2. Conſider that 'tis not only a reformation of Life, or a bare refraining from the groſs acts of ſin, that you aſſert, is comprehended in this Baptiſmal Covenant, you cauſe Infants to enter into; but it is Regeneration it ſelf, i. e. a change of Heart, and ſavingly to believe in Chriſt; this you oblige your poor Babes to perform. Now what Arminianiſm is here fomented, if once you ſay or think, they are capable to perform this Obligation? but if they do not do it, wo be to them.
Moreover what guilt do thoſe of the Church of England bring their poor Sureties under, unleſs they stand obliged no longer then the Child abides in Infancy; and if ſo, what need of their Obligation at all, if they intend no more.
3. Conſider, you brought them into this Covenant without their knowledge and conſe…t, they never ſubſcribed to it, nor knew any thing of it, nor were they capable ſo to do.
4. Conſider, that whatſoever you think, that ſuch is the pravity of their natures, by means of our firſt Apoſtacy from God, or Original … that they do and muſt of neceſſity break it, as I … before, unleſs God ſhould by ſupernatural Grace, change their Hearts and Nature, and remove the vicious habits thereof, which you had not the leaſt ground to believe he would do, or leaſtwiſe to all or the greateſt part of them, God having made no ſuch promiſe; and by woful experience, we daily ſee many, or moſt of thoſe Children, are never converted, but from the Womb go aſtray, and are guilty of almoſt all manner of abominable ſins, and ſo live and dye.
As to the Adult.
1. Conſider as I ſaid before,
1. That all Believers, God himſelf doth require or Command in his Word to enter into this Baptiſmal Covenant.
2. And they before they enter into it, have a principle of divine life infuſed into their Soul, or Grace implanted in their Hearts, having paſſed under the work of Regeneration, being dead to Si… (of which Baptiſm is a lively Symboll) or is as your Church ſays, an outward ſign of an inward ſpiritual Grace. Not as Mr. Baxter obſerves, a Sign or Simbol of future, but of preſent Regeneration, which is confirmed by what St. Paul Teaches, Rom. 6. 3, 4.
2. How ſhall we that are dead to ſin live any longer therein? not may be dead, but are dead, and ſo Buried with Chriſt in Baptiſm, verſe 3. 4. If you ſay all Adult Perſons Baptized are not Converted, I anſwer, they appear ſo to be, and as ſuch voluntarily enter into this Covenant: Beſides God does not require them without Faith to do it. Baptiſm doth not only repreſent the Death and Burial of Chriſt, but alſo ſignifies our Death to Sin, or that Bleſſed work of Mortification or the remainder of the Body of Sin and Death, by which means Believers who enter into this Baptiſmal Covenant are putinto a Gracious and Meet Capacity to perform that Sacred Obligation; but ſo are not Infants.
3. That every true believer baptized, conſiders, ponders upon, and weighs with all ſeriouſneſs and deliberation Imaginable, the nature of this Covenant before he Signs it. And
4. That he doth it freely and voluntarily, and with his full liking, approbation and Conſent, neither of which do, nor can do thoſe poor Infants you force to enter into this Covenant. Theſe things conſider'd, it appears, as it is a ſinful Act in you to bring them into this Covenant (ſince 'tis done without Command or Authority from God) ſo 'tis cruelty alſo towards your own Babes, by making them to become guilty of Perjury, and thereby damning (as Mr. Williams ſays) their own Souls.
5. Conſider every true Believer that is liſted under Chriſt's Banner, by entring into this Baptiſmal Covenant, is by Chriſt compleatly armed, i. e. he hath the Chriſtian Armour put upon him, Ephes. 6. He hath the Breſt-plate of Righteouſneſs, the Shield of Faith, and for a Helmet, the hope of Salvation; and the Word of God, like a Sword in his Hand, to cut down all his Enemies. Thus by the help of theſe Sacred Graces of the Spirit, he is enabled to fight againſt Sin, the World, the Fleſh, and the Devil. But alas! you liſt your poor Babes into this War, and make them Covenant and Vow to forſake the Devil and all his Works, the Pomps and Vanities of this wicked World, and all the ſinful luſts of the Fleſh, but Arm them not. Did Baptiſm confer Grace and Arm their Souls, it was ſomething, but who dares aſſert that? Or if he does, who will or can believe him.
6. God hath alſo promiſed to aſſiſt, ſtand by, help and enable all Believers Baptized, with farther ſupplies of Grace, nay, they being actually United to Chriſt, have his bleſſed influencies flowing to them, beſides the promiſes of God, the Death, Reſurrection and Interceſſion of Chriſt, and the everlaſting Covenant of Grace, which is ordered in all things, and ſure, firmly ſecures all their Souls. But thus it is not with thoſe poor Babes you bring into this Covenant: You are like Pharoabs Task-maſters, Command the making Bricks, but allow them no Straw.
4. Again conſider, how hereby great part of the Nations are perjur'd. I will appeal to the Conſciences of all thinking and underſtanding People, whether according to your principle and practice, it is not ſo. Mourn O England and lament, ſad is thy Caſe? If theſe Men ſpeak right or truly, what a multitude in thee have been made to enter into this Covenant, who never performed it. O Perjur'd Nation, Perjur'd People, and Perjur'd Paſtors, for ſo are all thy Debauched, Drunken, Swearing and unclean Teachers, are not theſe Perjur'd alſo? Have they kept their Vow and Covenant? Alas! inſtead of Mourning for this Sin, we may conclude they never thought of it. But let them break off their ſins by Righteouſneſs, I mean repent, and leave thoſe groſs acts of Wickedneſs, of which many, both Prieſts and People are guilty, and get renewing Grace, and never let them fear this new deviſed ſin of Perjury: For if God's Word convinces of all Sins, and doth not convince of this ſort of Perjury, this is no Perjury; (I mean the ſimple breaking of that Covenant) tho' thoſe ſins by which they are ſaid to break it, are horrid Treaſon and Rebellion againſt the God of Heaven, and provoke him to wrath every day. But God's word doth convince of all Sin, but doth not convince of this ſort of Perjury, as is affirmed. 'Tis not this which is the Self killing Murther, the damnable Sin; No no, but 'tis their unbelief, and contempt of God's Grace, or neglecting the great Salvation offer'd unto us by Chriſt in the Goſpel.
5. Baptiſm adminiſtred in Infancy, hath, ſaith Mr. Burkitt, this ſingular advantage above that which is adminiſtred at riper Age, in that it gives the pious Parent a good Ground and Hope that his Children dying in Infancy, are certainly ſaved, it makes (ſay you) that Ordinance a Channel of Grace, &c.
1. Anſw. This is like to the reſt. But Sir, by what Authority do you aſſert all theſe things? You know what wonderful Vertue the Papiſts ſay, is in many of their Popiſh Rites, Ceremonies and Reliques, i. e. in their croſſing of themſelves, and in their Holy-water, eſpecially in their Agnns Dei. But how do they prove it? Even as well as you do, what you ſpeak here upon this account, and we have the ſame reaſon to believe them, as to believe you in what you ſpeak, without Proof or Authority from God's word.
2. Pious Parents! But alas, how few are there of that ſort? but what hope have the Impious, Prophane, and ungodly Parent of the Salvation of his dying Children? But Sir, I thought all the Pious and Believing or Godly Parents Children, were born in Covenant with God, that their Parents Faith would have ſecured them, whether Baptized or not, were not the Jews Female Children ſaved? they were not Circumciſed; And were not their Male Infants ſaved, who dyed before the Eighth Day?
3. From what Scripture is it, theſe Pious, though Ignorant and deceiv'd Parents, may have hope that their Children that dye in their Infancy ſhall be ſaved, and none but theirs that are Baptized, or rather Rantiſed.
4. Will Pedo-Baptiſts make Baptiſm their Saviour? Can Baptiſm ſave them, And is it ſo indeed? Is it in the power of Parents to ſave or damn their Children? And how came Baptiſm to have ſuch power in it? or who made that a Channel of Grace to dying Infants? Do you not place that Virtue in an external Rite, that only belongs to the Blood of Chriſt, and ſanctifying Grace of God's Spirit? Mr. Perkins *Perkins on Gal. c. 3. p. 256.ſaith, That Baptiſm indeed ſaveth, but ſaith he, that is not the Baptiſm of Water, but the ſtipulation of a good Conſcience by the Reſurrection. Again he ſaith, the outward Baptiſm without the inward, is no mark of God's Child, but the mark of a Fool, that makes a Vow, and afterwards breaks it.
5. May not this Doctrine of theirs, clearly tend to ſcare and affright poor Parents with fear, that all their Babes that dye in their Mothers Womb, or before baptized, are damned? And Oh, in what a ſad Condition are all the Children of the ungodly and impious Perſons, whoſe little Babes you dare not, cannot Baptiſe, if you are true to your own Principles? But that Text may give us better ground of Hopes a Thouſand times, concerning the well being of our dying Infants, where our Saviour ſaith, for of ſuch are the Kingdom of Heaven; and that alſo which you mention, I ſhall go to him, he ſhall not return to me; together with the infinite Mercy of God, through the virtue of Chriſt's Blood, who can convey help and healing to dying Infants and Ideots, in ways we know not of, nor are we to trouble our Selves about ſuch ſecret things that are not revealed.
6. Mr. Burkitt ſaith, the practice of Infant Baptiſm appears moſt beneficial, becauſe it prevents ſuch ſhameful and ſcandalous neglects of Baptiſm, to the blemiſh of Chriſtianity.
Anſ. Is it then a ſhameful ſcandal to neglect a Tradition of Man? (For ſo I have proved Infant Baptiſm to be) Where is the ſhame that ought to be in Chriſtians, that Chriſts Laws and Precepts are neglected, and his precious Ordinance of Baptiſm expoſed to Contempt and Shame, as it is by you and Thouſands more, whilſt the Statutes of Omri are zealouſly kept and obſerved, as the Prophet of old complained; I mean humane Rites and Traditions or Statutes, (like thoſe of Omri; inſtituted by him and Jeroboam) which the Wiſdom of your Church, and many corrupt Churches have been zealous for to this day; and thus I have run through and examined Mr. Burkitts Six particulars, which he brought to prove the uſefulneſs of Infant Baptiſm, above the baptiſm of Believers, which our Bleſſed Saviour Inſtituted; and now ſhall ſhew you further that Infant Baptiſm is ſo far from being more uſeful then that of the Adult, that it is a palpable error, and therefore of no uſe at all, but the contrary, viz. a very ſinful thing.
Reader, can that be uſeful, or any ways beneficial which Chriſt never Commanded or required to be done in his Name, but is unrighteouſly Fathered upon him, to the utter making void his own Ordinance of baptizing Believers?
2. Can that have any uſefulneſs in it, that brings guilt upon the Parents in doing it, making them guilty of Will, Worſhip, or of a humane Tradition?
3. Can that be uſeful that brings Babes into ſuch a Covenant, which Chriſt never Ordained them to enter into, and to which they directly nor indirectly conſented nor approved of; and which they are utterly unable to keep; and which giveth them no ſtrength to perform; nor is there one promiſe of God made to aſſiſt or help them to do it, and yet for not keeping of it, they are charged with Perjury, with ſelf Murder, nay, with Hell and Damnation?
4. Can that be of uſe to Infants that may baſely beguile and deceive them, cauſing them when grown up, to think they were thereby made Chriſtians, and become the Children of God, Members of Chriſt, and Inhabitants of the Kingdom of Heaven, nay, Regenerated; and from hence never look after any other work of Grace nor Regeneration, but conclude all is well with them?
5. Can that be an uſual thing, which the doing of it is a palpable alteration of the words of Chriſt's Commiſſion, and ſo inverts that Holy Order left by him for baptizing, who requires none to be baptized before they be firſt Taught and made Diſciples?
6. Can that be of any uſe to an Infant which you, nor no Man elſe can prove from Gods Word, to have any uſe and Bleſſing in it to them?
7. Can an humane Rite or Tradition, think you, ſave poor Children, or a little Water ſprinkled on the Face, waſh away Original Sin? Or will God bleſs a Tradition of Man.
8. Can Water beget Children to Chriſt, or can that be uſeful to them, which they have only the bare ſign of, and not the thing ſignified, viz. the Sign of Regeneration, but not Regeneration it ſelf, a ſign of Grace, but not Grace it ſelf? you give them the Shell, but no Kernel; the name of a Chriſtian, but no nature of a Chriſtian, making that you call Chriſt's Baptiſm, (as Dr. Taylorſaith,) a ſign without effect, and like the Fig-tree in the Goſpel, full of Leaves, but no Fruit.
9. Can that be uſeful that tends to make the Goſpel Church National, (and confounds the Church and the World together) which ought to be Congregational, a holy and ſeparate People, like a Garden encloſed?
10. Can Baptiſm be more uſeful to Infants then adult Believers, notwithſtanding the Scripture ſaith, that the Perſon baptized, doth not only believe, but call upon the name of the Lord, Acts 22. 16. Can Infants do that?
11. Can Infant Baptiſm be more uſeful then that of Believers, and yet Baptiſm an Ordinance of the Souls Marriage with Chriſt? and is not that (as Mr. Baxter ſaith,) a ſtrange Marriage, where there is nothing ſignified of conſent? and are Infants able ſo to do?
12. Can Infant Baptiſm be more uſeful then that of Believers, and yet Baptiſm call'd the Anſwer of a good Conſcience? Can a little Babe anſwer a good Conſcience by being baptized in Obedience to Chriſt, and to ſhew forth his Death and Reſurrection?
13. Can Infant Baptiſm be more uſeful then that of Believers? Whereas the firſt has no promiſe of God made unto it, and yet the other hath many, as Acts 2. 36, 37, 38. Mark. 16. 16.
14. Can that be an uſeful thing that fruſtrates the Sacred and Spiritual ends of Baptiſm? which we have ſhewed are many, but as adminiſtred to poor Babes, 'tis rendred wholly of none effect, and an inſignificant thing.
Mr. Perkins hints that Baptiſm ſignifies two things, (1) our Union with Chriſt, (2) our Communion with him, now how does this appear in Infants as ſuch, as it does in Believers; Perkins on Gal. p. 265.
16. Is not that an abſurd Doctrine and Practice that renders the fruitful Womb of a godly Woman, more advantageous to increaſe, the Church of Chriſt, then a fruitful Goſpel.
17. Is it not a very abſurd thing to ſay, that Abraham could by his Money, purchaſe and bring Strangers and proſelyted Gentiles into the Covenant of Grace, and if Abraham could buy them and bring them into the Covenant of Grace with Silver and Gold, what need was there of Jeſus Chriſt to buy or purchaſe them with his own Blood?
18. Is not that an abſurd Doctrine and Practice that holds forth, that godly Parents have power to bring in their Children into the Covenant of Grace, or keep them out of it? for if you by baptizing them do not bring them into the Covenant of Grace, but you do believe they were in the ſaid Covenant by being born of Believers, by being begotten by you according to the Fleſh, then it will follow, if we are Believers, our Children are in as good a Condition as yours, though they were never baptized.