Anti-Paedobaptism Part 2, Section 15
SECT. XV.
That Infants are not proved to be Christs Disciples, from being Subjects to Christ, Christians, belonging to Christ, Luke 9. 47, 48. Matth. 18. 5. Mark 9. 41.
THe sum of the next Argument is, Infants are capable of being Subjects of Chrsts kingdom, therefore of being his Disciples. The reason of the Consequence is, that Christs Church is as properly called his Kingdom as his School, all Subjects of Christ in his visible Kingdom are Christians, all Christians Disciples, according to Acts 11. 26. Infants are capable of being Subjects in any Kingdom on Earth, nothing can be shewed to prove them uncapable, they were actually Subjects of Christs Kingdom before his coming in the flesh.
To all which I answer, Its enough to deny the consequence sith infants may be subjects which imports onelyonly somthing passive, whereas [Disciple] imports action, which agrees not to infants. But I distinguish, subjects of Christs Kingdom may be so called from active or passive subjection, visibly or invisibly, by extraordinary or ordinary operation. I deny infants to be subjects of Christs Kingdom actively, visibly, by ordinary operation through Preaching the word in which sense alone the term [subject of Christs Kingdom] is equipollent to [a Disciple Matth. 28. 19.] and in which sense alone the consequence is true. Though in common speech arising from the fond conceit as if baby-sprinkling made them Christians, infants are called Christians, yet in Scripture none are called Christians till they believe. Christiani non naseu…ur sed fiunt. Our Infants are children of Christians, But not themselves Christians till they beleive in Christ. Acts 11. 26. is so far from proving infants called Christians, or Disciples, that both v. 26. & 29. prove the contrary, as was shewed above. Though infants be reckoned as parts of human Kingdoms, yet it follows not they are parts of Christs visible Kingdom or Church. For then natural fools, yea the mostungodly professed unbelievers, must be subjects of Christs visible Kingdom or Church, because such are subjects of human kingdoms. I have seen Ephes. 5. 24. and see nothing there for Mr. Bs. purpose, but against him, there being no subjection there meant but what is willing, which infants have not, except by extraordinary operation unknown. Infants whether of believers or unbelievers are capable of being Christs subjects passively, or actively by extraordinary secret invisible, and unknown operation, but not actively, visibly by ordinary means for want of the use of reason. This consequence will never be proved by Mr. B. Infants were members of the Jewish Church, therefore visible Church members of the Christian Church. To this argument, Infants were Disciples in the Jewish Church, Ergo, God will shew the like mercy now, I answer by denying his antecedent, which he would prove from John 9. 28. we are Moses Disciples in opposition to Jesus Disciples, But infants were Moses his Disciples. This proposition I deny, and Mr. B. hath brought nothing to prove it. The Text mentions none as Moses Disciples but persons of years, and therefore theres no need of further answer to his argument.
3. My third argument saith Mr. B. to prove some infants are Disciples, is this from Christs own words. If Christ would have some children received as Disciples, then they are Disciples; But Christ would have some such received as Disciples; Therefore some such are Disciples. All the question is of the antecedent and that is plain in Luke 9. 47, 48. compared which Matth. 18. 5. and Mark 9. 41. He that receiveth this childe in my name receiveth me. Here observe. 1. It was the childe himself that Christ would have received. 2. He would have him received [in his name] now that can mean no less than as a Disciple: when they are baptized it is into his Name: And that which in Luke is called [receiving in Christs name] is expressed in Mark [one that belongeth to Christ] and in Matthew [in the name of a Disciple] though some of these places speak of infants, some of others: yet compared, they plainly tell you this; that to receive [in Christs Name] and [as belonging to Christ] and [as a Disciple of Christ] in Christs language is all one, for they plainly express the same thing intended in all. So that Christ hath encouraged me to receive children [in his Name] Luke 9. 47. And he expoundeth it to me, that this is to receive them [as belonging] to him, and as [Disciples] I know some frivolous answers are made to this: but they are not worth the standing on. Mr. Blakes Argument hence remaineth as good as unanswered.
Answ. What Mr. Blake alleged in his Birth privilege, p. 21: about these Texts was answered in my Examen, pag. 134. and what he replied in his Answer to my Letter, cap. 11. sect. 5. was refelled in my Postscript, pag. 145, 146, all which I have reviewed with what Mr. Blake refers to in his Repulse of Mr. Blackwood, pag. 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. and do not finde wherein my answer in my Postscript is deficient, and therefore see no reason to be moved by Mr. Bs. vain talk that Mr. Blakes Argument hence remains as good as unanswered, and do conceive it more abundantly answered than such a far-fetch'd argument deserved. Yet Mr. B. brings it again into the field, and Mr. Blake Vindic. Foederis, pag. 414. says, he will forbear to make any rejoynder to the Reply of my Apology, pag. 145. because Mr. B. hath here done it for him. Now what saith Mr. B. He saith, I know some frrivolous answers are made to this; but they are not worth the standing on.
To which I reply, if the Answers be more frivolous than the Argument they are not indeed worth standing on. But let us see what kinde of Argument it is. 1. Mr. B. should have concluded that Some Infants are Disciples, and he concludes that Some Children are Disciples, or else he means by [some such] in the minor and conclusion others than by [some Children] in the major, now some Infants and some Children are not all one. 2. The phrase in the middle term [received as Disciples] may be understood two ways, 1. thus, that Christ would have them received as being Disciples, and in this sense I grant the Consequence, but deny the minor, understood of some infants. 2. That he would have them received with such tenderness and love as is given to Disciples, though they be not Disciples. And in this sense I might grant the minor, and deny the Consequence of the major, though I think the minor is not true in that sense. And to Mr. Bs. proof of this, I say, 1. theforeign, Matth. 11. 1…. (which is less than foreign) notes a little childe that could call to his fellows. word foreign, Luke 9. 47. doth not note an infant always. For Jairus his Daughter though twelve years old, is called foreign, a little childe, Mark 5. 41▪ 42. And yet that age might be a patern of humility, seldom are children of that age ambitious, though they be impatient. And that the little childe Matth. 18. 2. was not an infant but a person of some years, is made probable, in that Christ is said to call him, and to set him, or make him stand in the midst of them. 2. Beza saith, Perhaps it should be read foreign, such a little childe. So the Syriack Interpreter reades, and it is very probable by comparing it with Matth. 18. 5. where the words of Christ are related, and there it is foreign, one such little childe, and Mark 9. 37. foreign, one of such children. 3. But if the reading be allowed as the Copies now have it, yet it is not unusual that [foreign, this] is all one with [foreign, such] as on the other side foreign is 2 Cor. 2. 6. all one with foreign. So in the same Chapter foreign, Luke 9. 26. is not meant of one particular person, but of one so qualified, and in like manner 2 Tim. 3. 5. foreign, from these turn away, that is, as our Translators well render it, from such turn away, and v. 6. foreign, is rendered [of this sort] There are more of the like, 2 Thess. 3. 14. 2 John 7. 1 John 2. 22. Luke 8. 14, 15, 21, &c. So Grotius in Luc. 9. 48. foreign, id est, foreign, Ut apud Matthaeum, quomodo & hic Syrus interpretatur. And this may be confirmed by reason thus, If foreign, Luke 9. 48. must be expounded of this little childe, then the speech of Christ is to be understood onelyonly of that one individual little childe and no other, for in that sense it is a Pronoun demonstrative, and so notes a demonstrative individual, as Logicians speak, and so it shall note not onelyonly the childe himself, as Mr. B. observes, but even that particular little childe then present, and it would onelyonly import a privilege appropriate to that little childe, and agreeing to no other, whereas the sense is manifest from the words there, and other places, Matth. 10. 40. Luke 10. 16. John 13. 20. to be this, whosoever shall receive any one that comes in my Name, though he be as mean and as inconsiderable as this little childe, receiveth me; and therefore it is added presently, For he that is least among you all, the same shall be great, which shews that by [this] or [such a little childe] he meant the Apostles, whosoever receiveth any of you, though as mean as this little childe, or such a little childe, receiveth me. 4. There are sundry things in the Text, and in parallel places, which do evince, that the receiving the little childe, neither is nor can be meant of a little childe in respect of age, much less an infant.
As, 1. that it is supposed that the little childe here meant may be received in Christs name, but that agrees not with the meaning of the speech as there is meant to understand it of a little childe in age. For receiving in Christs name presupposeth coming in Christs name, as John 5. 43. 2 John 10. &c. that is either professing Christs name or Preaching or acting in Christs name. And that this is presupposed here, Luke 9. 48. appears partly by the phrase receiveth him that sent him, which intimateth this to be the force of the speech, he that receiveth one such little childe sent by me receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me, and partly from the very next v. 49. where John is said to answer and say taking occasion, as it seems by the relation from Christs words, Master we saw one casting out Devils in thy name, which words intimate that he understood▪ receiving in Christs name to be meant of one acting or speaking in Christs name, and thus is the phrase [in my name, in the name of the Lord] often used Matth. 7▪ 22. & 21. 9. & 23. 39 & 24. 5. which thing is more fully confirmed by Mr. Bs. parallel place. Mark 9. 37, 41. It is plain that Mark sets down Christs words upon the same occasion of their contention for preheminence which Luke doth, and the same words v. 37. and there expresseth it, whosoever shall receive one of such little ones in my name, which cannot be meant of that little one then set before them, but of his Apostles and others who should be as mean as such a little one, and v. 39. expounds [in my name] of acting in my name, and v. 41. whosoever shall give you a cup of cold water in my name because ye are Christs, that is, ye are sent by Christ, or act for Christ, which shews v. 37. to be meant of the Apostles not little children in age, but such as did act for Christ though mean as little children. The same may be proved from Matth. 10. 40, 41, 42. 2. Again, the receiving of the little childe proves it is not meant of a little childe in age. For what is the receiving? It is, 1. by hearing Luke 10. 16. 2. By entertaining upon travayl, as Luke 9. 52, 53. they did not receive him by making ready for him, and Mark 9. 41. by giving a cup of cold water, which was no small kindness to a travailer in those dry and hot Countreys. But what kindness had this been to a little childe in age as an infant, that travayls not? On the contrary, not receiving is expressed Matth. 10. 14. Mark 6. 11. by not entertaining them into their house nor hearing their words. so the New Annot. on Matth. 10. 42. [he that receiveth you] Luke 10. 16. John 13. 20. that heareth your Doctrine willingly, and entertaineth you, which receiving agrees not to infants, nor any other receiving mentioned in the Gospels that hath such a blessing assured to it as here. 3. The reward annexed, to wit, the receiving of Christ shews the receiving of a little one in Christs name, to be another thing than the receiving of a little infant in Christs name, that is, after Mr. Bs. silly conceit, the receiving into the visible Church by baptizing it. For then the greatest blessing, that is, of receiving Christ and his Father should be annexed to so poor a thing as may be done by every poor Presbyter, or Curate, how ill mannerd soever he be; the baptizing, that is, as now its used and defended, the sprinkling of a little holy water on an infant. 4. It appears that a little infant is not meant Luke 9. 48. from the description of the little childe there meant. For Mr. B. himself compares that speech in Luke with the like, Matth. 18. 5. Now such a little childe Matth. 18. 5. is expressed v. 6. one of these little ones which believe in me, (not as Mr. Cobbet in his Just Vindication, pag. 117. fondly conceives without any other Author that ever I heard of besides himself, one of those little ones, who are the little ones of them that believe in me. For then it should be either foreign, or foreign, or some such supply, and it would be ridiculous to imagine the scandalizing to be of infants, the penalty of which is …eavier than to have a milstone tied about the neck, and to be cast into the Sea, that little infants are those not to be despised, whose Angels behold the face of Christs Father, v. 10. The little ones Matth. 18. 6. are called Christs brethren, Matth. 25. 40. answering to them that believe) and v. 3. one that becomes as a little childe, v. 4. one that humbles himself as this little childe, which it is meer dotage to expound of little infants. Again Mr. B. referrs to Matth. 10. 41. and there the little childe received is a Prophet, and a righteous man. Hereto I add the expressions of many writers. Piscator (to whom Mr. Blake refers) Analys. Luc. 9. 48. innuit amorem suum …rga demissos animo in exemplo pueruli praesentis. Schol. in Matth. 18. 5. propter nomen meum, propterea quod in me credit, Beza annot. in Matth. 18. 5. puerulum talem foreign, id est, quempiam ita se demi…t…ntem ut puerum referat: nec enim propriè de pueris agit. Par…s in Matth. 18. 5. dicit, qui susceperit unum ex parv…lis talibus, hoc est, unum ex vobis pueri instar humiliatum. Diodati on Matth. 18. 5. [one such] namely, a true Christian that shall have layd aside all worldly pride, whereby he is become abject in the sight of the world. New Annot. in Matth. 10. 42. [one of these little ones] who newly made profession of religion: on Matth 18. 5. one like such a childe in the qualities before mentioned. Mr. B. himself confesseth that some of these places speak of infants some of others: yet saith …e, compared they plainly tell you this; That to receive [in Christs name] and [as belonging to Christ] and [as a Disciple of Christ] in Christs language is all one; for they plainly express the same thing intended in all. From whence I infer, that if the same thing be intended in all, and all express the same thing, then is no other thing intended or expressed, Luke 9. 48. than what is expressed and intended Matth. 18. 5. Mark 9. 41. Matth. 10. 42. and then, it is certain that Luke 9. 48. is not meant of a little infant in age, nor the receiving such as agrees to such an infant, sith it is certain that Matth. 18. 5. Marke 9 41. Matth. 10. 42. are not understood of either of these, and it follows upon Mr. Bs. confession that some of these Texts speak not of infants, that none of them speak of infants, sith they all express and intend the same thing; and thus Mr. Bs. own observation refu…es himself. But saith he, when they are baptized it is into his name.
Answ. Mr. B. it seems would have this the sense: whosoever receiveth to Baptism in my name one little childe receiveth me to Baptism, which should imply it to be a gratefull office to receive him to Baptism, and the offending Matth. 18. 6. and despising v. 10. should be not admitting to Baptism, and when it is sayd [whosoever] shall receive one such little one, it would imply it to be a gratefull work for any person though no Minister to receive to Baptism, and an ungrateful work for any to refuse to baptize. I grant that in the places named to be such a little one, Matth. 18. 5. to belong to Christ, Mark 9. 41. to be a Disciple of Christ, Matth. 10 42. note the same sort of persons, yet I deny that proposition, which is the hinge of Mr. Bs. proof, [every one that belongs to Christ is a Disciple of Christ] For the holy Angels, those yet uncalled whom his Father hath given him, John 17. 10. belong to Christ, and yet are not to be called Disciples of Christ. And therefore I infer, that Mr. B. hath no encouragement from Christs exposition of these Texts to account infants Disciples, and what he collects in his own fancy without the Text is frivolous and self contradicting, so little worth the standing on, that for my part I think this sheet of his Book, what ever be said of the rest, worth no more than a sheet that is made thur is piperisque …ucullus, yet he cannot forbear but must add more of this frivolous stuff.
In answer to this objection, Infants cannot learn, and therefore cannot be Disciples, he adds thus much more. 1. They can partake of the protection and provision of their Master (as the children of those that the Israelites bought) and enjoy the privileges of the family and school, and be under his charge and dominion, and that is enough to make them capable of being Disciples.
Answ. What privileges of Christs family and school, infants enjoy, I know not, what ever they be what ever protection, provision, rule, care is for them, yet this is not enough to make them Disciples, as Christ meant, Mat. 28. 19. till they have learnt, or profess learning of this Lesson, that Jesus is the Christ; all that is said here of Children may be said of slaves bought with money, they are all then with him Disciples of Christ, though professed infidels.
2. They are, saith he, devoted to learning, if they live: however they are consecrated to him as their Master, who can teach them hereafter, and that is yet more.
Answ. I may add, they may cry, as Cyprian, and his sixty six Bishops alleged for their Baptism, and suck, and smile, and play with the mother, and that is more than this, but neither the one nor the other any thing to the denomination of a Disciple of Christ.
3. Saith he, I wonder you should be more rigorous with Christ in this case than you are with men. Is it not common to call the whole nation of the Turks both old and young by the name of Mahometans, or Disciples of Mahomet?
Answ. What a pretty passage is this to set out a man as rigorous with Christ, who expounds his words Matth. 28. 19. according to his constant language in all the Evangelists, because he allows not infants to be called Disciples, as if Christ forsooth did plead for infants discipleship, and I were so stiff, as that I would not yield to him. But he thinks I will allow Mahometans children to be called Mahomets disciples, for it is the common use, and why not then we and our children by the name of Christians and Disciples of Christ. Answ. I confess I think the common use now is to call the Turks young and old Mahometans, and in Chorographical relations, English, French, &c. are called Christian Nations, old and young, termed Christians: but neither do I finde the common use to be to call infants either Mahomets or Christs Disciples, nor if I did, should this sway me at all to allow infants discipleship according to Matth. 28. 19. till Scripture use of the term [Disciple] applicable to that sense can be shewed.
But Mr. B. hath more of this childish arguing. And when a man hired a Philosopher to teach him and all his children, were they not all then Disciples of that Philosopher? They are entered under him as their Master for future teaching, are at present in the relation of Disciples.
Answ. It is no such strange thing to hear of a Physician taking a stipend to cure a man and all his children, but to hear of a Philosopher hired to teach a man, and all his children, even his infant children, and counting them Disciples, and entering them under him as their master, is so strange to me that it seems to me somewhat like a tale of a man of Gotham. Yet if there were any such thing acted by wise men in sober sadness, it is nothing to prove infants Disciples in Christs or his Apostles language. But the prettiest part of this Comedy or poppet play of Mr. B. is yet behinde.
4. Saith he. And truly I wonder also that it should go so currant that infants are not capable of learning, the mother is a Preacher to the infant, partly by her action and gesture and partly by voice. Answ. And why not by smiles, and kisses and whipping? But what then? They can dishearten and take off from vices and teach them obedience. Answ. Tis true they can still them from crying: but how they can take them off from vices and teach them obedience to Gods Command I am yet to learn, it may be nurses may better inform me than Mr. B. Me thinks saith he, we should not make an infant less docible than some brutes. What doth Mr. B. mean by this? Doth he think they that deny infants to be Disciples allow brutes to be Disciples? A parret I think will sooner learn some words of Christs than an infant, yet I think neither learn any thing of the Doctrine of Christ till they understand it. But I am referred to nurses, who he saith, will tell me more in this than he can, It may be so; yet sure nothing to shew that any have made their infants learn the Doctrine of Christ. He adds. And what if they cannot at first learn to know Christ? even with men of years that is not the first Lesson: if they may be taught any of the duty of a rational creature it is somewhat. Answ. If they do not learn to know Christ they learn not that which should make them Disciples of Christ. It is somewhat indeed that they can learn to kiss the mother, stroke her breasts, &c. but whats this to make them Disciples of Christ? And if they can learn nothing of the parents either by action or voyce; yet Christ hath other ways of teaching than by men even by the immediate working of his Spirit.
Answ. 'Tis true, and he may make infants Disciples, nor do I deny it to be done invisibly, but it would be a greater wonder than yet Mr. B. hath had for all his wonderments, a very prodigy that any of them should become a visible Disciple. 'Tis true they may learn something of God very young and are to be bred up in the nurture of the Lord. But that in their infancy at two or three dayes old they are learners of the things of God, of the admonition of the Lord from mothers and nurses is a fiction like Galilaeus his New World in the Moon, or Copernicus his Circumgyration of the earth.
Mr. B. tels us he might argue further, All that are saved are Christs Disciples, some infants are saved, Ergo. And I might answer him, that they may be saved, and yet no visible Disciples according to the meaning of Christ Matth. 28 19. But sith he hath put this off to another time I shall take a little breathing from Mr. B. and set him aside a little while till I have heard what his seniors say further for their baby-baptism.