Examination of Marshalls Sermon About Infant Baptism, Part 1

Examination of Marshalls Sermon About Infant Baptism · Part 1

An Examen OF THE SERMON Of M^r. STEPHEN MARSHAL, About Infant-Baptisme, in a Letter sent to him: Divided into Foure Parts.

1. Concerning the Antiquity of Infant-baptisme.

2. Concerning the prejudices against Antipaedobaptists from their miscarriages.

3. Concerning the Arguments from Scripture, for Infant-baptisme.

4. Concerning the Objections against Infant-baptisme.

In which are maintained these Positions.

1. Infant-baptisme is not so ancient as is pretended, but as now taught is a late Innovation.

2. Antipaedobaptisme hath no ill influence on Church, or Common-wealth.

3. Infant-baptisme cannot be deduced from Holy Scripture.

4. Infant-baptisme is a corruption of the Ordinance of Baptisme.

LONDON, Printed by R. W. for George Whitington. 1645.

p. 1Infant-Baptisme Is not so Ancient as is pretended: As now Taught, Is a late Innovation.

PART I. Concerning the antiquity of Infant-Baptisme.

SIR,

§. 1. The prologue Of the occasion, and en… of this writing.IT is now full nine moneths since, that being informed by one of the Members of the Assembly, in which you are one, that there was a Committee chosen out of the Members of the Assembly, to give satisfaction in the point of Paedo-baptisme, and advised by the same person out of his tender love to me, to present the reasons of my doubts about Paedo-baptisme, to that Committee; I drew them up in Latine, in nine Arguments, in a scholastique way, and they were delivered unto Mr. Whitaker the Chair-man of the Committee, about nine moneths since: to which I added after, an addition of three more reasons of doubting, with a supplement of some other things wanting; which was delivered to Mr. Tuckney, and joyned by him to the former Papers. My aim therein was, either to find better ground then I had then found to practise the baptizing of Infants, from that Assembly of learned and holy men, whom I supposed able and willing p. 2to resolve their Brother in the Min…st…ry; Or else according to the solemn Covenant I have taken, to endeavour the reformation of these Churches according to Gods word, by informing that Assembly what I conceived amisse in the great ordinance of Baptizing. The successe was such, as I little expected: to this day I have heard nothing from the Committee by way of answer to those doubts; but I have met with many Pamphlets, and some Sermons, tending to make the questioning of that point odious to the People, and to the Magistracie. Among others, reading the Sermon of Mr. Richard Vines, on Ephes. 4.14. before the Lord Major: and the Sermon you preached at Westminster Abbey. I perceive there is such a prejudice in you, and it may seem by the Vote pass…d about the members of the visible Church, in the generality of the Assembly, that he is likely to be exploded, if not censured, that shall but dispute against it: and therefore little or no likelihood that this matter will be argued, as I conceive it doth deserve, in your Assembly. And further, I perceive there is a great zeale in your spirit against the denying of Children baptisme, as if it were a more cru…ll thing than Hazaels dashing out Childrens brains; That it were an exclusion of them out of the Covenant of Grace, &c. Which I the more admire, considering the report which hath been of you, as a sober, learned, holy, well-tempered man, that you should be so transported in this matter, as to be so vehement in maintaining that which was accounted heretofore in many ages, but an Ecclesiasticall tradition, for which you are fain to fetch a command from Circumcision, and conf…sse no expresse example in Scripture for it: and go not about to prove it, but by consequence inferr'd from five Conclusions, which though you call undeniable, yet others do not think so, nor yet see reason to subscribe to your judgment. You are not ignorant, I pr…sume, that Mr. Daniel Rogers, in his Treatise of the Sacrament of Baptisme, part 1. pag. 79. confessed himself yet unconvinced by demonstration of Scripture for it. And whereas your Achilles for Paedo-baptisme, is the Circumcision of Infants, me thinks Mr. Balls words, (Reply to the Answer of the New-England Elders, about the third and fourth Positions, pag. 38, 39.) cut the sinews of that argument. But in whatsoever they agree, or differ, we must look to the Institution, and neither stretch it wider, nor draw it narrower then the Lord hath made it; …or he is the Institutor of the Sacraments according to his own good pleasure; and it is our part to lea…n of him, both to whom, how, and for what end the Sacraments are to be p. 3administred; how they agree, and wherein they differ. In all which we must affirm nothing, but what God hath taught us, and as he hath taught us. And whereas the words of Paul, 1 Cor. 7.14. are your principall strength to prove the Covenant-holines of Infants of a believing parent, Musculus a writer of good esteem, in his Commentary upon that place confesseth, that he had abused formerly that place against the Anabaptists, but found it impertinent to that purpose. And for my part, after most carefull and serious reading and perusing of many Authors, and among the rest, your Sermon, I cannot yet find it to be any other then an innovation, in comparison of many other things rejected late, maintained by erroneous and dangerous principles, having no true ground from Christs institution, which alone can acquit it from Will-worship, and which hath occasioned many errors in doctrine, corruptions in discipline and manners, unnecessary and vain disputes, and almost quite changed the ordinance of Baptisme. Wherefore, upon advise, I have resolved to examine your Sermon, who are a leading man, and in respect of your eminency, either likely to be a very good, or very bad instrument, as you are gui…dd; that you may either rectifie me, or I you; and that we may (if the Lord shall see it good) give one another the right hand of fellowship, and stand fast in one mind in the truth of the Gospel, and cleare the truth of God to the people, whose eyes are upon us. And so much the rather have I pitched upon your Sermon, because I conceive it contains in a plain way as much as can be wel said for Poedo-baptisme; and your Epistle seems to intimate your publishing of it to be for the ease of the Assembly, and possibly it may be all I may expect from them. Now the Lord vouchsafe to frame both your spirit and mine, that we may seek and find truth, in humility and love, in this great businesse, which concerns the soules, & perhaps lives and estates of many millions, yea of all godly persons; and the glory of God, and honour of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that we may trample under our feet our own credit, our own opinion, if it stand not with the honour of Christ, and the truth of God.

§. 2. Of the stating the question, partition of the Treatise, sum of the Answer to the Testimonies of Antiquity for Infant-baptisme.LEtting passe the Epistle, and leaving the various Questions, and allowing the stating of the Question, conceiving you mean it of baptizing by warrant of ordinary rule of Scripture, without extraordinary revelation or direction. Whereas you affirme, that the Infants of Believers are to be baptized with Christs baptisme, by duplicate page p. 1duplicate page p. 2duplicate page p. 3duplicate page p. 4the lawfull Minister according to ordinary rule.

I deny it.

That which you say for the practise of baptizing infants may be reduced, 1. To the testimonies of Antiquity. 2. To the novelties and miscarriages of the opposers of it. 3. To the arguments produced for it. 4. To the answering objections against it. I shall by Gods assistence examine each of these. First you affirm, That the Christian Church hath been in possession of it for the space of fifteen hundred years and upwards, as is manifest out of most of the Records that we… have of Antiquity both in the Greek and Latine Churches.

To this I answer, that if it were true, yet it is not so much as may be said for Episcopacy, keeping of Easter, the religious use of the Crosse, &c. which I conceive you reject. 2. That the highest testimonies you produce come not so high. 3. Those that be alleaged, being judiciously weighed, will rather make against the present doctrine and practise, then for it. 4. There are many evidences that do as strongly prove (as proofes usually are taken in such matters) Quod ab initio non fuit sic, That from the beginning it was not so; and therefore it is but an innovation. The first of these I presume you will acknowledge, that for Antiquity not-Apostolicall, there are plain testimonies of Episcopacy, keeping of Easter, the religious use of the Crosse being in use, before any of the testimonies you, or any other can produce for baptizing of infants; and therefore I will forbear mentioning proofes so obvious to Schollars. The second and third thing I shall make good in the weighing of the Testimonies you produce, and the fourth in the close.

§. 3. Of the pretended Testimony of Justine Martyr.YOur Testimonies are either of the Greek or Latine Churches. Of the Greekes you alleage foure. The first is Justine Martyr, of whom you say, That he lived Anno 150. which wants somewhat of 1500. years; and therefore you did somewhat▪ overlash, in saying that it is manifest out of most of the Records of the Greeke and Latine Church; The Church hath been in possession of the priviledge of baptizing Infants 1500. years and upwards; and then you say, In a Treatise that goes under his name: By which it is manifest▪ that you know that it was questioned whether it was his or no; and I conceive you could not be ignorant, that it is not only questioned, but also proved by Perkins in his preparative to the demonstration of the Probleme, by Rivet in his Critieus sacer, by Robert p. 5Cooke of Leeds (if my memory faile me not, to which I am inforced to trust in many things, being spoiled of my bookes) in his Censure, and confessed by Papists, to be none of Justine Martyrs, but to bee written a great while after his dayes; for as much as it mentions not only Irenaeus, but also Origen and the Manichees: Now what doth this bastard Treatise say? You say Question 56. Justine Martyr disputes the different condition of those children who die baptized, and of those children who die unbaptized. The question propounded is. If Infants dying have neither praise nor blame by works, what is the difference in the resurrection of those that have been baptized by others, and have done nothing, and of those that have not been baptiz…d, and in like manner have done nothing. The Answer is, this is the difference of the baptized from the not bapti…d; that the baptized obtaine good things (meaning at the Resurrection) by baptisme, but the unbaptized obtain not good things. And the… are accounted worthy of the good things they have by their baptis…, by the faith of those that bring them to baptisme. You may by th… testimony see (what ever Age the book was made in) what the reason of baptizing of Infants was: Not the supposed Covenant of grace, made to believers and their seed, which you make the ground of baptizing of infants: but the opinion that the not baptized should not obtain good things at the resurrection (meaning the Kingdome of God, mentioned Joh. 3.5.) but the baptized should; and that by reason of the faith of the bringers, what ever the Parents were, and therefore they baptized the children of unb…lievers, as well as believers if they were brought.

§. 4. Of Irenaeu… his Testimony.YOur next Greek Author is Irenaeus, who was indeed a Greeke, and wrote in Greek, but now only we have his works in Latine, (except some few fragments) for which reason we are not so certain of his meaning, as we might be if we had his own words in the language in which he wrote. You say he lived in the same Century, and it is acknowledged he lived in the same Century with Justine Martyr but not with the Author of the Questions & Answers ad Orthodox…s, who (as hath been said) lived in some Age after. Irenaeus is by Vsher placed at the yeare 180. by Osiander at the yeare 183. so that though he were of that Century, yet he flourished in the latter part of it, and so reacheth not to your 1500. years & upwards. Of him you say, that l. 2. c. 39. he saith, Christus venit per seipsū omnes salvare, omnes inquā, qui per eum renascuntur in Deū, infantes & parvulo… & pueros, &c. p. 6Now it is well knowne, say the Glossers upon that text, renascenti… nomine, Dominica & Apostolica Phrasi Baptismum intelligi: You might have added what follows. Aperte confirmans Apostolorum traditionem de baptismo infantium parvulorum adversus Anabaptisticam impietatem. But I pray you, whose Glosse was this? Was it any other then Fevardentius (if I mistake not) of whom Rivet. Crit. Sacr. lib. 2 cap. 6. Juniores tantum, qui in opera Irenaei incident monitos volo, ut caveant ab illis Editionibus, quas impudentissimus ille Monarchus Fevardentius, homo projecta audacia et nullius fidei, foede in multis corrupit, & annotationibus impii… et mendacibus conspu…cavit. And for the glosse its false: for no where doth our Lord, or the Apostles call baptisme, Now birth, although our Lord speake of being borne againe of water Ioh. 3.5. and Paul of the washing of regeneration. Tit. 3.5. and for the words themselves without the glosse, all the strength lyes in this, that the word (Renascuntur) is used for Baptisme by the Ancients, which yet possibly was not the word Irenaeus used in his owne writing; and how the Latine translation alters the meaning of Irenaeus, you may see somewhat in Rivet. Vossius Thesibus Theologic. de Padebapt. Thesi. 7. intimates, that the proper acception is of sanctification, and that the word may be so taken, yea and that it is not meant of Baptisme, the words and the whole scope of Irenaeus in that place shew. For the scope of Irenaeus in that chapter is to refute the Gnosticks, who sayd that Christ did not exceede one and thirty yeeres of age; against whom Irenaeus alleageth, that Christ lived in every age, of infancy, youth, old age, that by his age, & example, he might sanctifie every age, so that here Irenaeus speakes not of being borne againe by Baptisme: for it is said, who are borne againe by him, that is, by Christ. Not as if he had baptized infants, but because he was an infant, that by the example or vertue of his age, he might sanctifie infants, as the whole context will shew, which is this. Magister ergo existens, Magistri quoque habebat aetatem, non reprobans nec supergrediens hominem, neque solvens suam leg…m in se humani generis, sed omnem…tatem sanctificans per illam, quae ad ipsum erat, similitudinem. Omnes enim venit per seipsum salvare, omnes inquam, qui per eum renascuntur in Deum, Infantes, & parvulos, & pueros, & juvenes & seniores. Ideo per omnem venit aetatem, & infantibus infans factus sanctificans infantes, in parvuli… parvulu…, sanctificans hanc ipsam habentes aetatem, simul & exemplum illis pietatis effectus & justitiae & subjectionis. In Iuvenibus Iuvenis exemplum Iuvenibus fiens, & p. 7Sanctificans Domino: sic et senior in senioribus, ut sit perfectus Magister, non solum secundum expositionem veritatis, sed secundum aetatem, sanctificans simul & seniores exemplum ipsis quoque fiens deinde & usque ad mortem pervenit, ut sit primogenitus ex mortuis ipse primatum tenens in omnibus princeps vitae, prior omnium, et praecedens omnes. Which he confirmes by the testimony of Iohn the Apostle, from whom he saith, those that conversed with him related, that Christ lived about fifty yeares, which all sorts of writers doe reckon among Irenaeus his blemishes, and thereby shew how little credit is to be given to the too much entertained Apostolicall traditions.

§. 5. Of the supposed testimony of Origen.THe next Greeke Author is Origen, who you say lived in the beginning of the third Century, Perkins and Vsher place him at the yeare 230. but for his works, as of old they were counted full of errours and dangerous to be reade, so as now they are, we can hardly tell in some of them what is Origens, What not: for the originall being lost, we have only the Latine translation, which being performed in many of his works, and particularly the Homilies on Leviticus, and the Epistle to the Romanes, by Ruffinus, it appeares by his owne conf…ssion, that he added many things of his own, insomuch that Erasmus in his censure of the Homilies on Leviticus saith,Si igitur aliquis ante …atu… Pelagium vel ante exortum A…ium in Pelagi…orum & Aria…orum erro…es acer et vehemens, e…sque ex professo quamvis Hereticorum nomine suppresso divexa…s pr…b…bile non est tale Scriptu… esse …jus Authoris … nomen pref…rt Rivet. tract…t de Patrum Auth…rit. cap 14. that a man cannot be certaine whether he reades Ruffinus or Origen; and Perkins puts among Origens Counterfeit works his Comentary on the Epistle to the Romans, as being not faithfully translated by Ruffinus: the like is the judgement of Rivet and others, and I suppose did you reade the passages themselves you cite, and consider how they are brought in: and how plaine the expressions are against the Pelagians: you would quickly conceive, that those passages were put in after the Pelagien heresie was confuted by Hierom and Augustine, who often tells us that the Fathers afore that controversie arose, did not speake plainly against the Pelagiens: and of all others, Origen is most taxed as Pelagianizing. Wherefore Vossius in the place aforenamed, though he cite him for company, yet addes, sed de Origene minus laborabimus quia quae citabamus, Graece non extant. But what saith the supposed Origen? In one place▪ that the Church received this tradition of baptizing infants from the Apostles: in another according to the observance of the Church baptisme is granted to infants, you adde, (as foreseeing that this passage would p. 8prove that then it was held but a tradition) that then the greatest points of faith were ordinarily called traditions, received from the Apostles, and you cite 2 Thes. 2.15. To which I reply, true it is that they did call the greatest points of faith, though written, traditions Apostolicall, as conceiving they might best learne what to hold in points of faith, from the Bishops of those Churches where the Apostles preached, and therefore in prescriptions against Heretickes, Tertullian, Irenaeus and others, direct persons to go to the Churches where the Apostles sate, specially the Romane Church which seemes to have beene the seed of Appeals to Rome, and the ground of the conceit which was had of the Popes unerring Chaire. But it is t…ue also they called Apostolicall traditions any thing though unwri…ten, which was reported to have come from the Apostles; as the time of keeping Easter, and many more, which was the fountaine of all corruptions in discipline and worship. And that in those places you cite, is meant an unwritten tradition, not only the not citing any Scripture for Baptizing of Infants, but also the very Phrases, Pro hoc et Ecclesia ab Apostolis traditionem suscepit & Secundum Ecclesiae observantiam, are sufficient proofe to them who are acquainted with the Ancients writings of those times.Consuetudo tamen Man is Ec…lesia in baptizandis parvulis nequaquam sper…enda est, neque ullo modo superflua deputanda, nec omnino credenda nisi Apostolica esset traditio. Augustin. lib. 10. cap. 23. de Genesi. So that yet you have not proved that the baptisme of Infants was time out of minde, that it had beene received in the Church, or was delivered over to the Church in Origens time, and was of ancient use in the Church afore his time. But these passages prove that in the time when the framer of those passages wrote, it was accounted but an Apostolicall tradition, according to the observance of the Church. Like speeches to which are found in Pseudo-Dyonisius in the end of his Hierachy, and Augustin. lib. 10. de Genesi ad literam. c. 23. and elsewhere, which argue that it was held as an Ecclesiasticall tradition in those times.

§ 6. Of the Testimonies of Gregory Nazianzen and the Greeke Church.THe fourth and last of the Greeke Church you name is Gregory Nazianzen, who is by Perkins placed at the yeare 380. by Vsher 370. much short of 1500 yeares and upwards, you say that Orat. 40. in Baptismum, he calls baptisme, signaculum vita cursum in euntibus, and commands Children to be baptized, though afterwards he seemed to restraine it to the case of necessity. But doth he seeme onelyonly to restraine it to the case of necessity? the words are plaine, that he gives the reason why Infants in danger of death should be baptized foreign, that they might not p. 9misse of the common grace, but foreign, he gives his opinion of others, that they should stay longer, that they might be instructed, and so their minds and bodyes might be Sanctified, and these are all you bring of the Greek Church. By the examination of which you may perceive how well you have proved, that it is manifest out of most of the Records that we have of antiquitie both in the Greeke and Latine Church, that the Christian Church hath beene in possession of the priviledge of baptizing the infants of beleivers for the space of 1500. yeares and upwards. Whereas the highest is but a bastard Treatise, and yet comes not so high, if it were genuine; the next without a glosse, which agrees not with the text, speakes nothing to the purpose, the third is of very doubtfull credit, the fourth which was sundry hundreds of yeares after Christ restraines it to the case of necessity. But it is wonder to me, that if it were so manifest as you speake, you should finde nothing in Eusebius for it, nor in Ignatius, nor in Clemens Alexandrinus, nor in Athanasius, nor in Epiphanius, that I mention not others: to me it is no small argument that baptisme of Infants was not universally knowne in the Greek Church, no not in Epiphanius his dayes, who is said to flourish in the yeare 390. because in his Panarium, disputing against the Hieracites, that denied Infants inheriting the Kingdome of heaven,Lib. 2. heresi. 47 vel. 67. because not striving. He brings the Infants killed by Herod, the words of the Lord concerning Ieremiah Chap. 1. of his prophesie: Christs blessing and receiving of infants, the children crying Hosanna: but nothing at all of Infants-baptisme, which had beene as proper to his purpose if he had beene acquainted with it. But besides the continuance of the questions to baptized persons, and answered by them, in many Authors mentioned, this is to me, and it seemed so to Hugo Grotius, Annot. in Matth. 19.14. No small evidence, that baptisme of Infants many hundred yeares was not ordainary in the Greeke Church: because not onelyonly Constantine the Great, though the sonne of Helena a zealous Christian as its reported, was not baptized till aged, but also that Gregory Nazianzen who was the sonne of a Christian Bishop, and brought up long by him, was not baptized till he came to be a youth, as is related in his life. And Chrysostome though (as Grotius saith) according to the truer opinion, borne of Christian Parents, and educated by Meletius a Bishop, yet was he not baptized till past 21 yeares of age. Grotius addes, that the Canon of the Synod of Neocaesarea held in the yeare 315. determines p. 10that a woman with childe might be baptized, because the baptisme reached not to the fruit of her wombe, because in the confession made in baptisme, each ones own free choice is shewed. From which Canon, Balsamon and Zonaras do inferre, that an Infant cannot be baptized, because it hath not power to choose the confession of divine baptisme. And Grotius adds fur…her, that many of the Greeks in every age unto this day do keep the custome of diff…ring the baptisme of little ones, till they could themselves make a confession of their faith. From all which I inferre, That the Anabaptists need not blush to say (which you seem to make a part of their impudence) that the Ancients, especially the Greek Church, rejected the baptisme of Infants for many hundred yeeres.

§. 7. Of the testimony of Cyprian,I Proceed to the Writers of the Latine Church, you alledge for Baptisme of Infants. First Cyprian, one of the ancientest writers amongst the Latines: which is true; He is placed by Perkins at the yeare 240. by Vsher, at the yeare 250. Yet Tertullian was before him, and counted his master: Now in Tertullians time, it appeares (saith Grotius in Mat. 19.14.) there was nothing defined cencerning the age in which they were to be baptized, that were consecrated by their parents to Christian discipline, because he disswades by so many reasons (in his book of Baptism c. 18.) the baptizing of Infants. And if he did allow it, it was only in case of necessity, as may appeare by his words in his book de anima, c. 39. But you say, Cyprian handles it at large, in Epist. 59. ad Fidum. It is true, he doth say enough in that Epistle for bapt…zing of Infants▪ and more then enough, except he had spoken to better purpose. The truth is, the very reading of that Epistle, upon which Hierom, and especially Augustine rely for the proving of the baptizing of Infants, is sufficient to discover how great darknesse there was then upon the spirits of those that were counted the greatest lights in the Church. You say, upon this occasion, Fidus denied not the baptisme of Infants, but denied that they ought to be baptized before the eighth day. But you might have further observed, that Fidus alleadged, considerandam esse legem Circumcisionis antiquae, that he thought the law of ancient Circumcision was to be considered. And, Vestigium Infantis in primis partus sui diebus constitut… mundum non esse dixistì: Thou hast said that the footstep of an Infant being in the first dayes of his birth, is not clean. Whence it plainly appeares, that there was a relique of Judaisme in him, and that he p. 11did not well understand the abrogation of the Ceremoniall Law: and the truth is, the contentions about Easter, neere that age, do plainly shew, that Iudaisme was not quite weeded out of the mindes of the chi…fe teachers among Christians. You say Cyprian assures him, that by the unanimous consent of 66 Bishops gathered together in a Councell, baptisme was to be administred to Infantes, as well as to growne men; and not to be restrained to any time, which is true, but you adde, and proves it by such arguments as these. They are under originall sinne, they neede pardon, are capable of grace and mercy, God regards not age, &c. But the resolution of Cyprian with his Collegues is not so lightly to be passed over, sith the determination of this Councell, as far as I can by search finde, is the very spring-head of Infant-baptisme. To conceive it aright, it is to be considered, that you are mistaken, about the proofe of their opinion; the things you mention, are not the proofe, but are produced in answer of objections. The proofe is but one, except you will make a proofe of that which is in the close of the Epistle, which is, that whereas none is to be kept from baptisme, and the grace of God, much lesse New-borne Infants, who in this respect doe deserve more of our ayde, and Gods mercy, because in the beginning of their birth they presently crying and weeping doe nothing else but pray. The onelyonly proofe is this, the mercy and grace of God is to be denyed to none, that are borne of man, for the Lord saith in the Gospell, that the sonne of man came not to destroy mens soules, but to save them, and therefore as much as in us lyes, if it may be, no soule is to be lost, and therefore all infants at all times to be baptized. Whence we may observe: 1. That they thought baptizing, giving Gods grace, and the denying it, denying Gods grace: Secondly, that they thought the soules to be lost that were not baptized. Thirdly, that therefore not onelyonly Infants of beleivers, but all infants were to be baptized. Whence Tossanus in his Synopsis, Notes this for Cyprians errour that he taught, Infantes Statim esse baptizandos ne pereant, quod eis misericordia non sit deneganda Ep. 8. lib. 3. Then follow the objections, which are three. First, That Infants are not capable being so young: this he answers by saying God regards not age, which he proves by an allegoricall accomodation of Elisha, his stretching himselfe upon the little Childe, to the applying of Gods grace to Infants. The second objection is, But we shun to kisse Infantes as uncleane in the first dayes of their birth: p. 12to this he answers, that to the cleane all things are cleane; and we ought not to decline the embracing Gods worke. The third objection, was the Law of circumcision, to this he answers, that in Circumcision the eighth day was a figure of the resurrection of Christ: Which is now accomplished, and we are to account now nothing common or uncleane: and therefore we are not to account this an impedinent to obtaine grace by Baptisme. Then he addes further, if any thing could hinder from obtaining of grace, greater sinnes should hinder men of yeares from it, now if greater sinnes hinder not men of yeares from it, but that they when they beleive obtaine forgivenes, grace, and Baptisme, by how much rather is an Infant not to be forbidden, who being newly borne, hath not sinned, except in that being borne carnally according to Adam, he hath contracted the contagion of ancient death in his first Nativity, who in this respect comes more easily to receive remission of sinnes, because not his owne sinnes, but anothers are forgiven him: So that whereas you say, that Cyprian proves: that Infants are to be baptized because they are under Originall sinne, they neede pardon; You may perceive that the argument is rather thus, they have lesser sinnes then others, they neede lesse pardon then men of growne yeares, and therefore there is lesse hinderance in them to come to Gods grace, remission of sinnes and Baptisme: thus have I considered that famous resolution of a Councel of 66. Bishops, which for the nakednes of it I should more willingly have covered, were it not that the truth hath so much suffered by the great esteeme that this absurd Epistle hath had in many Ages.

§. 8. Of the testimony of Augustine.YOu adde next to Cyprian Augustine, who flourished about the yeare 405. according to Perkins, 410. according to Vsher, and I follow you to consider him next; for though Ambrose and Hierome are reckoned somewhat afore him about 30. or 20. yeares, yet they lived at the same time, and the Authority of Augustine was it which carryed the Baptisme of Infants in the following ages, almost without controule, as may appeare out of Walafridus Strabo placed by Vsher, at the yeare 840. who in his booke De rebus Ecclesiasticis cap. 26. having said …hat in the first times, the grace of Baptisme was wont to be given to them onelyonly, who were come to that integrity of minde and body, that they could know and understand, what profit was to be gotten in Baptisme, what is to be p. 13confessed, and beleived, what lastly is to be observed by them that are new borne in Ch…ist; confirmes it by Augustines owne confession of himselfe continuing a Catechumenus long afore Baptized. But afterwards Christians understanding Originall sinne &c. Ne perirent parvuli si sine remedio regenerationis gratiae defungerentur, statuerunt eos baptizari in remissionem peccatorum quod & S. Augustinus in libro de baptismo parvulorum ostendit, & Africana testantur Concilia, & aliorum Patrum documenta quamplurima. And then adds how God-fathers and God-mothers were invented and addes one superstitious and impious consequent on it in these words. Non autem debet Pater vel mater de fonte suam suscipere sobolem ut sit discretio inter spiritalem generationem & carnalem, Quod si casu evenerit, non habebunt carnalis copulae deniceps adiuvicem consortium, qui in communui filio compaternitatis spiritale vinculum susceperant. To which I adde that Petrus Cluniacensis, placed by Vsher, at the yeare 1150. writing to three Bishops of France against Peter de Bruis, who denyed Baptisme of Infants, sayes of him, that he did reject the Authority of the Latine Doctors, being himselfe a Latine, ignorant of Greeke, and after having said recurrit ergo ad scripturas, therefore he runnes to the Scriptures: he alleageth the examples in the New Testament, of Christs curing of persons at the request of others, to prove Infants Baptisme by and then adds, Quid vos ad ista? Ecce non de Augustino, sed de Evangelio protuli, cui cum maxime vos credere dicatis aut aliorum fide alios tandem posse salvari concedite, aut de Evangelio esse quae posui si potestis, negate. From these passages I gather, that as Petrus Cluniacensis urged for paedo-baptisme the authority of Augustine and the Latine Doctors, So Peter de Bruis and Henricus appealed to the Scriptures, and the Greeke Church: Now the reason of Augustines authority was this, the Pelagian heresie being generally condemned, and Augustines workes being greatly esteemed, as being the hammer of the Pelagians, the following refuters of Pelagianisme, Prosper, Fulgentius &c. the Councells that did condemne it as those of Carthage, Arles Milevis &c. did rest altogether on Augustines arguments, and often on his words, and Augustine in time was accounted one of the foure Doctors of the Chu…ch, esteemed like the foure Evangelists, so that his …p…nion was the rule of the Churches Judgement, and the schooles determination, as to the great hurt of Gods Church Luther and p. 14others have beene of late. Now Augustine did very much insist on this argument to prove originall sinne, because Infants were baptized for remission of sinnes, and therefore in the Councill of Milevis he was adjudged accursed, that did deny it: But for my part I value Augustines judgement iust at so much, as his proofes and reasons weigh, which how light they are you may conceive.

August. t…m 1. Confess. lib. 1. c. 11 & Sig…abar signo Cru…is ejus & con…i…b…r ejus sa…e jam inde ab ute…o matris m…ae, quae multum speravit in te And then followes, how being young and falling sick, he desired, and his mother thought to have him baptized, but upon his recovery it was differred.First, In that whereas he makes it so Unive…sall a tradition, his owne baptisme not till above thirty, though educated as a Christian by his mother Monica, the Baptisme of his sonne Adeodatus at 15. of his friend Alipius, if there were no more, were enough to p…ove that this custome of baptizing infants, was not so received, as that the Church thought necessary that all children of Christians by profession should be baptized in their infancy. And though I conceive with Grotius annot. in Matt…. 19.14. that baptisme of Infants was much more frequented, and with greater opinion of necessity in Africa, then in Asia, or other parts of the world, for (saith he) in the Councells you cannot finde ancienter mention of that custome, then the Councell of Carthage. Yet I doe very much question whether they did in Africa, even in Augustines time baptize children, except in danger of death, or for the health of body▪ or such like reason: I do not finde that they held that Infants must be baptized out of such cases, for it is cleare out of sundry of Augustines Tracts, as particularly tract. 11 in Johan: that the order held of distinguishing the Catechumeni and baptized, and the use of Catechizing afore baptisme, still continued, yea and a great while after, insomuch that when Petrus Cluniacensis disputed against Peter de Bruis, he said only, that ther… had beene none but infants baptized for 300. yeares, or almost 500. yeares in Gallia, Spaine, Germany, Italy, and all Europe, and it seemes he denyed not the baptizing of growne persons in Asia still; whence I collect, that even in the Latine Church, after Augustines dayes, in sundry ages the baptizing of persons of growne age did continue as well as baptizing of infants, till the great darknes that over-spred the W…sterne Churches, spoiled by Barbar…us Nations, destitute of learned men, and …uled by ambitious and unlearn…d Popes, when there were none to Catechiz…, and therefore they baptized whole Countries upon the baptisme of the King of that Country, though both Prince and people knew little or nothing of Christianity, but were in respect of manners and knowledge Pagans still, which hath beene the great p. 15cause of the upholding of Papacie, and corrupting of Christian Churches, I mean this great corruption of baptizing, making Christians, giving Christendome (as it is called) afore ever persons were taught what Christianity was, or if they were taught any thing, it was only the ceremonies and rites of the Church, as they called them.

2. You may conceive how light Augustine's ju…gement was,Rivet. tract. de Patrum authoritate, c. 9. Augustinus aeternis flammis adjudicat Infantes fine baptismo morientes· by considering the ground upon which Augustine held, and urged the baptisme of Infants so vehemently; which was, as all know that read his works, the opinion he had, that without baptisme Infants must be damned, by reason of originall sinne, which is not taken away but by Baptisme, yea, though he wanted baptisme out of necessity; urging those places, Joh. 3.5. Rom. 5.12. continually in his disputes against the Pelagian…, particularly tom. 7. de natura & gratia, c. 8. And tom. 2. ep. 28. he saith, Item quisquis dixerit, quod in Christo vivificabuntur etiam parvuli, qui sine Sacramenti ejus participatione de vita exeunt, hic profecto & contra Apostolicam praedicationem venit, & totam condemnat ecclesiam. And in the close of the Epistle, calls it, robustissimam & fundatissimam fidem, qua Christi ecclesia, nec parvulos homines recentissime natos a damnatione credit, nisi per gratiam domini Christi, quam in suis Sacramentis commendavit, posse liberari. And this, Perkins in his Probleme, proves, was the opinion of Ambrose, and many more: And hence, as Aquinas, so Bellarmine, proves baptisme of Infants, fro… Joh. 3 5. And this hath been still the principall ground. The ground that you go on, that the covenant of grace belongs to believers and their seed, I cannot find amongst the Ancients. Yea, as you may perceive out of Perkins in the place alleadged, although Ambrose, and Augustine in his 4. book de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 22. yielded, that either Martyrdome, or the desire of Baptisme, might supply the defect of Baptisme, and some of the School-men, Biel, Cajetan, Gerson, do allow the desire and prayer of parents for children in the wombe, in stead of baptisme: Yet we finde no remedy allowed by them, but actuall baptisme for children born into the world: So strictly did Augustine and the Ancients urge the necessity of Baptisme for Infants born.

3. You may consider, that Augustine held a like necessity of Infants receiving the Lords supper, from the words, Joh. 6.53. as is plainly expressed by him, lib. 1. de peccat. merit. & remis. c. 20. And accordingly, as in Cyprians time, the Communion was given to Infants, as appears by the story which he relates of himself, giving the p. 16Communion to an Infant, in his book de lapsis, mentioned by August. epist. 23. So it is confested by Maldonat on Joh. 6. that Innocentius the first, Bishop of Rome, held it necessary for Infants; and that this opinion and practise continued about 600 yeares in the Church, though it be now rej…cted by the Romane Church in the Councel of Trent.

4. You may consider, that Augustine held such a certainty of obtaining regeneration by Baptisme, that not only he puts usually regeneration for Baptisme, but also he makes no question of the regeneration of Infants, though they that brought them, did not bring them with that faith, that they might be regenerated by spirituall grace to eternall life; but because by Baptisme they thought to procure health to their bodies, as is plain by his words, epist. 23. ad Bonifacium. Nec illud te moveat, quod quidam non ea fide ad Baptismum percipiendum parvulos ferunt, ut gratia spiritali ad vitam regenerentur aeternam, sed quod eos putant hoc remedio temporalem retinere aut recipere sanitatem: non enim propterea illi non regenerantur, quia non ab illis hac intentione offeruntur; celebrantur enim per eos necessaria ministeria. By which last words you may perceive how corrupt Augustine was in this matter, so as to excuse, if not to justifie their fact, who made use of Baptisme in so profane a manner, as to cure diseases by it: which is no marvaile, if it be be true which is related, of the approbation that was given of the Baptisme used by Athanasius in play amongst boyes.

5. You may consider, that in the same Epistle, when Bonifacius pressed Augustine to shew how Sureties could be excused from lying, who being asked of the Childs faith, answered, He doth believe, (for even in Baptisme of Infants they thought in all ages it necessary that a profession of faith go before) He defends that act in this absurd manner: Respondetur credere propter fid…i Sacramentum, And thence is he called a believer because he hath the Sacrament of faith. Which as it is a ridiculous playing with words, in so serious a matter before God, so it is a senslesse answer, sith the interrogation was of the Childs faith before it was baptized, and the answer was given before, and therefore it cannot be understood of believing by receiving the sacrament of faith, which came after.

6. It is apparent out of the same Epistle, that Infants were then admitted to baptisme, whether they were the children of believers, or not; it was no matter with what intention they brought them, nor whose children were brought; yea it was counted a work of charity to bring any children to baptisme, and in this case the faith p. 17of the whole Church was counted a sufficient supplement of the defect of the parents or bringers faith: So that whereas the present defenders of Infant-baptisme, pretend Covenant-holinesse a priviledge of Believers, it was no such matter in the time of the Ancients, but they baptized any Infants, even of Infidels, upon this opinion, That Baptisme did certainly give grace to them; and if they dyed without baptism…, they did perish. And thus I grant that it is true, the Epistle of Cyprian is cited and approved by Augustine: but neither is Augustine to be approved for approving it, nor doth it advantage your tenet, that you have cited his citation of it.

§. 9. Of the testimonies of Hierom and Ambrose.NExt to Augustine you place Hierom, and it is true that he cites and approves Cyprians Epistle, in the end of his third book of his Dialogues against the Pelagians; and he cites, and approves, and commends Augustine's books, de peccat. merito, & remissione, ad Marcellinum, in which he maintains baptisme of Infants, and Infant-communion, as necessary to salvation, and the certainty of regeneration and salvation to Infants that are baptized, and receive the Lords supper. So that the same answer is to be given concerning Hierom, which is to be given concerning Augustine. The last you alleadge, is Ambrose, who lived about the same time, though he be placed some yeares before Augustine and Hierom; And it is confessed that he was of the same judgement, and many other of th… Ancients of the same time, and in after-ages, but nothing comparable to those already named, and therefore adding no more weight to the cause.

§. 10. O… the vali…ity of proof by these testimonies, and of the evidences that Infant-baptism is an innovation.NOw these, you say, you relate not to prove the truth of the thing, but only the practise of it. It is well you added this, that you might disclaime the validity of these t…stimonies for proof; for the truth is, they rather prove the thing to be an error, than a truth, which was held upon such erroneous ground as they taught and practised it, to wit, the necessity of Baptisme to salvation, Joh. 3.5. The certainty of remission of originall sin by baptisme; The denying of Gods grace to none, And the perishing of those to whom Baptisme was not given. Whether you have any better p…oofs, I shall consider hereafter: in the mean time this I adde. 1. That concerning the practise, your testimonies prove not, that it was in practise, bu… in case of supposed n…cessity. 2. That there was still in use a constant course of baptizing, not only the converted from infidelity, but also the grown children of professed believers, when they were at full age. 3. That they did alike conceive a necess…ry of, and accordingly practise the giving of the Lords supper to Infants. 4. That they made no distinction p. 18between the Infants of believers and unbelievers being brought to them.Chamier panstr. Cathol. to. 4. l. 5. c. 15. §. 19. Denique hunc morem quis non videt ejus temporis …sse, cum vix mil…esimus quisque bapt…zabatur non adultus, & in Catechumenis diligenter exercitus. H. Hamond, A practicall Catech. l. 1. §. 3. pag. 23. And those other fundamentals of faith which all men were instructed in anciently, before they were permitted to be baptized. 5. That your ancientest testimonie for practise, according to any Rule determined, is Cyprian, neer 300 yeeres after Christ. 6. Lastly, there are many evidences that do as strongly prove, as proofs are usually taken in such matters, That it was not so from the beginning: As particularly, 1. The continued propounding of the ordinary questions even to Infants, concerning their faith, repentance, and obedience, afore they were baptized, which in the School-men was still held necessary, and therefore Sureties thought necessary to answer for them, yea even in Reformed Churches, unto this day: which as it was conceived by Strabo, and Vives in his Comment on Aug. lib. 1. de civit. Dei, c. 27. a cleare evidence; so I conceive any reasonable man will think it to be a manifest proof, that at first none were baptized but such as understood the faith of Christ. 2 The examples before mentioned, of the baptizing Gregory Nazianzen, Chrysostom, Augustine, Constantine the great, &c. being children of professors of Christianity, is a manifest proof they did not then baptize Infants ordinarily, but extraordinarily in case of necessity. 3. Specially if we joyn hereto the disswasions of Tertullian, and Gregory Nazianzen forementioned. 4. The plain testimony of the Councel of Neo-Caesarea agai…st it, before mentioned. 5. The silence of the chiefe writers, Eusebius, &c. concerning it. 6. The many passages in Augustine, and others, referring it only to Apostolicall tradition, and that usually proved by no higher testimony than Cyprian, & that brought in upon erroneous grounds, is a strong evidence it came not from the Apostles. To all which I may add the testimony of Hugo Grotius before recited, concerning the Greek Church; the testimony of Ludovicus Vives, Comment. in August. de civit. Dei, l. 1. c. 27. affirming, that he heard, the old use continued in some Cities of Italy, of not baptizing, till the party baptized did desire it. Which it seems Bellarmine, an Italian, when he mentions that speech of Vives, did not deny. More testimonies and …vidences might be brought out of sundry authors: but these are enough to me, and I think to any that search into Antiquity, to prove, that the custome of baptizing Infants was not from the beginning, and ther…fore is but an Innovation: especially that your tenet, and practise accordingly, is a very late innovation, [That Baptisme is to be given to Infants of Believers only, because of supposed Covenant-holinesse] not elder then Zuinglius, and so not much above one hundred yeares old, so far as I can find.