Infant Baptism Plainly Proved, Tract · Chapter 4
CHAP. IV.
The third ſubordinate Propoſition laid down, proved three ways; further confirm'd from thoſe Inſtances of whole Houſes being baptized, recorded in Scripture.
Prop. III.
THe third Propoſition then is this, That all thoſe that are under, or are the actual Subjects of that grand Promiſe of the Covenant, wherein God promiſeth to be a God to Abraham, and his Seed in their Generations, are the due Subjects of Baptiſm, and ought according to the revealed Will of our Lord Chriſt to be baptized.
That the Infant-Seed of Believers are the proper Subjects of that Promiſe, hath been already proved. I am now to prove, that they being under, or the proper Subjects of the Promiſe, are the due Subjects of Baptiſm. Now this may be evidenced paſt all rational Contradiction theſe three ways.
I.
From the Command of God, enjoining and expreſly requiring all Abraham's Seed in their Generations to keep the Covenant. The words are expreſs, Gen. 17.9. And God ſaid to Abraham, Thou ſhalt keep my Covenant therefore, thou, and thy Seed after thee, in their Generations.
And that it may clearly appear, how this Command doth warrant, yea, require the Application of Baptiſm to the Infant-Seed of Believers as they are Subjects of the Promiſe, theſe five things muſt be diſtinctly proved.
1. That by [Covenant] in this Command, is meant the [Token of the Covenant].
2. That the Covenant of Grace always had, and ſtill hath an out outward Token annexed to it.
3. That this Command obligeth, not only Parents to have the Token applied to themſelves, but to apply it, or to take care that it be applied to their Infant-Seed, as Joint-Subjects with them of the Promiſe.
4. That as Circumciſion was the Token of the Covenant during the Old-Teſtament-Adminiſtration, ſo Baptiſm is the Token of the Covenant under the New.
5. That this Command doth equally and alike concern Believers with reſpect to Baptiſm, as it did the Jews with reſpect to Circumciſion.
Theſe five things being cleared up, and proved, what we affirm will be ſufficiently eſtabliſhed. And therefore for the firſt.
1. That by the Covenant in this Command is meant the Token of the Covenant. This is plain from the Verſe immediatly following. Only let it be obſerved, that the Covenant is firſt more generally laid down, Thou ſhalt keep my Covenant, thou, and thy Seed after thee, in their Generations. And then what ſhould be this Covenant at that time, during the firſt Adminiſtration, is declared in the next Verſe, it ſhould be Circumciſion. The Command requires the keeping of the Covenant in general. Circumciſion is ſpecified to be the Covenant at that time to be kept, though not the only Covenant to be kept.
2. That this Covenant, which hath been already proved to be the Covenant of Grace, always had, and was to have, and conſequently ſtill hath a Token annexed to it. This is evident,
1. From the expreſs Letter of the Command. We evidently ſee the Command is given to Abraham's Seed in their Generations, that is, to all his Seed in their Generations. 'Tis not limited to either his Natural or Spiritual Seed, but takes in both. And that this Command reacheth Abraham's Spiritual Seed, as well as his Natural, is further evident, becauſe the ſame Perſons muſt needs be intended in the Command, that are intended in the Promiſe, verſ. 7. Now Abraham's Spiritual, as well as his Natural Seed, were undoubtedly intended in the Promiſe. Hence this Command obligeth the one as well as the other. So that while Abraham had a Seed upon the Earth, they in their Generations, that is, they and their Children, are under the Obligation of this Command, which undoubtedly proves that this Covenant always had, and was to have a Token annexed to it, otherwiſe God would not command Abraham's Seed in their Generations to keep the Covenant, unleſs there had been a Covenant, that is, a Token to be kept.
2. And yet further, this is evident de Facto, that there always has been, and ſtill is a Token annexed to the Covenant. That it had a Token annexed to it during the Old-Teſtament-Adminiſtration, is granted by all; and that it ſtill hath a Token, and that Baptiſm is that Token, will appear when I come to the fourth Particular. And therefore,
3. That this Command obligeth Parents, not only to have the Token applied to themſelves, but to apply, or take care that it be applied to their Infant-Seed. This is evident two ways.
(1.) From the expreſs Letter of the Command, Abraham's Seed in their Generations are expreſly commanded to keep the Covenant, and under that Phraſe [their Generations] we are to include their Infants; both Parents and Children are included in the Promiſe, and conſequently both muſt needs be included in the Command. So that Children are under the Command to keep the Covenant, which in reſpect of them can only intend their reception and bearing of the Token of it, and ſo they are under the Obligation to keep it. Whence they, not having it applied to them, are ſaid to break the Covenant. And if they are thus far to keep it, it will undeniably follow that it is their Parents duty to take care that it be applied to them.
(2.) This is evident from the Diſpleaſure of God againſt Parents, when the Application of the Token of the Covenant to their Children hath been neglected, Exod. 4.24, 25, 26. From whence it is plain, that as the Infants of Abraham's Seed, be they Jews or Gentiles, are under the Obligation to keep the Covenant, that is, the Token of it; ſo it is the Duty of Parents to take care that it be applied to them, and anſwerably that they do keep it.
4. That as Circumciſion was the Token of the Covenant under the Firſt-Teſtament, ſo Baptiſm is the Token of the Covenant under the New. That Circumciſion was the Token of the Covenant under the firſt Teſtament is expreſly declared, Gen. 17.19. And that Baptiſm is the Token of the Covenant under the New-Teſtament, is evident in the general.
1. Becauſe unleſs Baptiſm be the preſent Token, the Covenant hath no Token at all, which we proved before it was to have. Now if Baptiſm be not the Token, what is the Token to be kept? The Command is yet in force, therefore there is a Token ſtill to be kept. But now there is no Token can with any ſhew of Reaſon be ſuppoſed to be intended in this Command, but only Baptiſm, and therefore that muſt needs be the preſent Token of the Covenant.
2. This will more fully appear, if we compare Baptiſm with Circumciſion, the former Token of the Covenant. Look what Ordinance under the New-Teſtament moſt exactly agrees with Circumciſion, and ſerves to thoſe uſes and ends, for or with reference unto which a Token was annexed to the Covenant, that muſt needs be the preſent Token, and that is undeniably Baptiſm. For let us but conſider what were the Uſes and Ends with reference whereunto Circumciſion the firſt Token of the Covenant was appointed, and we ſhall find that Baptiſm is appointed with reference to the very ſame Ends and Purpoſes. As for Inſtance,
(1.) Circumciſion, as the Token of the Covenant, was that ſolemn Rite or Ordinance whereby Perſons were admitted into, and incorporated in the Church viſible. Now that Baptiſm is appointed for, and ſerves to the ſame uſe and end, is plain, 1 Cor. 12.13.
(2.) Circumciſion was appointed for the ſealing, confirming, and aſſuring to thoſe that were the Subjects of the Covenant all that Good, or all thoſe Benefits and Bleſſings contained in it. Hence it is ſaid to be to Abraham, a Seal of the Righteouſneſs of Faith. And of what uſe it was unto him with reſpect unto the Righteouſneſs of Faith, of the ſame uſe it was to him with reſpect to the whole Good of the Covenant. And look of what uſe it was to Abraham, of the ſame uſe it was to all that were the due and proper Subjects of it, ſeeing he received it not only as a particular Believer, but as the Father of, and anſwerably was in his receiving of it the Pattern to all that ſhould be received into the ſame Covenant with himſelf; and of the ſame uſe is Baptiſm, as is evident, 1 Pet. 3.21. with Acts 2.38.
(3.) The uſe and end of Circumciſion was to engage thoſe to whom it was applied to keep exactly to the Articles of the Covenant. Hence they are ſaid to be circumciſed to the Lord, Jer. 4.4. And for the ſame end again Baptiſm is appointed; hence the Baptized are ſaid to be baptized into or unto the Name of the Father, the Son, and Holy-Ghoſt, and into or unto Chriſt, Mat. 28.19. with Gal. 3.27.
(4.) Circumciſion was appointed a viſible Badge whereby the People of God were diſtinguiſhed from the reſt of the World. And of the ſame uſe is Baptiſm, Gal. 3.27. afore cited. Now from the Uſes and Ends that the Scriptures declare Circumciſion was appointed for, and did ſerve unto, we may ſee what were the Uſes and Ends in general, for or with reference unto which a Token was annexed to the Covenant. And from the agreement of Baptiſm with Circumciſion, in reſpect of the Ends and Uſes the one or the other were appointed for, it evidently appears that Baptiſm is the preſent Token of the Covenant, and anſwerably is that Ordinance appointed and ſubſtituted in the room and ſtead of Circumciſion.
And as a Cloſe to this, let it be obſerved, that though it ſhould be granted that there were ſome Uſes and Ends, for and with reference unto which Circumciſion was inſtituted, in reſpect of which Baptiſm agrees not with it; yet that hinders not, but that Baptiſm may be and is the preſent Token of the Covenant, ſeeing it ſerves to, and performs all thoſe Uſes and Ends that a Token of the Covenant under the New-Teſtament can be ſuppoſed to ſerve to and perform. But,
5. That this Command doth equally and alike concern Believers and their Seed, as it did concern the People of God and their Seed under the firſt Teſtament. As it obliged them to be circumciſed themſelves, and to take care that their Infant-Seed were circumciſed with them; ſo it ſtill obligeth Believers to be baptized themſelves, and to take care that their Infant-Seed be baptized with them. And this is evident from the Conſideration of two things in the Command.
1. That the Command, as firſtly and more generally laid down, did not determine what the Token of the Covenant ſhould be, and hence was applicable, and did oblige to whatever Token God ſhould inſtitute. The words are plain and expreſs, Thou ſhalt keep my Covenant, thou, and thy Seed after thee, in their Generations; nor thou ſhalt be circumciſed or be baptized, but thou ſhalt keep my Covenant, that is as afore, the Token of the Covenant. Hence as this Command, as thus generally laid down, no more obliged to Circumciſion, than to Baptiſm; all that it obliged to was to keep the Covenant. So when Circumciſion was inſtituted, it obliged to that; but when Circumciſion was laid aſide, and another Token inſtituted, which is Baptiſm, it now obligeth to that, ſeeing the Command in the general is not revoked, only the Token altered; but the Command is ſtill the ſame, and obligeth to keep the Covenant ſtill, and anſwerably it obligeth Parents to have the Token applied to themſelves, and take care that it be applied to their Children.
2. Conſider the Extenſiveneſs of the Command. It is laid upon Abraham's Seed in their Generations, without any limitation, and hence reacheth to, and lies upon Abraham's Seed under the New-Teſtament, as well as it did upon his Natural Seed under the firſt Teſtament. So that the Command not determining what the Token ſhould be, only enjoining the keeping of it, whatever it ſhould be, and conſequently being applicable to Baptiſm as well as to Circumciſion, and extending to and reaching all Abraham's Seed, and conſequently believing Gentiles as well as the Jews; it is all one as if God had ſaid, Thou ſhalt keep my Covenant, thou, and thy Seed after thee, their Generations. Circumciſion under the Firſt-Teſtament, and Baptiſm under the ſecond, theſe being the Covenants ſucceſſively the one after the other to be kept. So that here is an expreſs Command for the Baptiſm of Infants, though not in the very Term [Baptiſm], yet under this general Notion, as it is the Token of the Covenant.
That Baptiſm is the preſent Token of the Covenant, is before proved. That this Command requires all Abraham's Seed, and that in their Generation, including both Parents and Children, to keep the Covenant, that is, the Token of it, is according to the expreſs Letter of the Command.
And that believing Gentiles as Abraham's Seed, and that under that Phraſe, [thy Seed in their Generations] are included both Parents and Children, hath been abundantly proved. So that ſtill to require a Command for Infant-Baptiſm, is little leſs than to reject the Scriptures. What though it be not commanded under that preciſe Term of [Baptiſm] ſeeing it is commanded under that Notion, as the Token of the Covenant? And what though Infants are not expreſly mentioned, ſo long as they are undeniably included in the Command, in that Phraſe, [thy Seed in their Generations]? Surely it is all one as if they had been expreſly mentioned.
Now that this is the true ſence of this Command, might be further ſhewn from the Lords varying the Phraſe when he inſtitutes Circumciſion, the then Token of the Covenant, and from the neceſſity of interpreting other Commands, as the prohibiting the making of graven Images, ſo the requiring the Obſervation of the Sabbath after the ſame manner. But that's for the firſt way how this laſt Propoſition may be proved, and ſo I ſay it may be proved from the Command lying upon all that are the Subjects of this Promiſe, to keep the Token of the Covenant, that is, to receive and bear it, which Token to be kept is at preſent Baptiſm.
II.
That the Infant-Seed of Believers, as under, or as the Subjects of the Promiſe, may and ought to be, and anſwerably in Primitive Times; and that from the very firſt Inſtitution of Baptiſm, were baptized, may be proved thus, viz. Becauſe they as the Subjects of the Promiſe do appertain, and were owned and looked upon, both by our Lord Chriſt and his Apoſtles, as appertaining to his viſible Church, Kingdom and Body. Now all that do appertain, and anſwerably were owned and look'd upon by Chriſt and his Apoſtles, as appertaining to his viſible Church, Kingdom and Body, may and ought to be, and anſwerably were baptized, cannot be rationally queſtioned, becauſe Baptiſm was inſtituted for this very end, ſolemnly to admit and incorporate into the viſible Church, Kingdom; or Body of Chriſt all that do appertain thereunto, and there was no other way or means appointed for that end and purpoſe. Hence all that do appertain, or were owned and look'd upon, either by Chriſt or his Apoſtles, as appertaining to his viſible Church, Kingdom, or Body, may and ought to be, and anſwerably were admitted and incorporated thereinto this way, viz. by Baptiſm.
That Baptiſm was appointed for this end and purpoſe, is plainly expreſt, 1 Cor. 12.13. And that there is any other way appointed for that end and purpoſe, is not, neither can be affirmed by any. Now that Infants, as under, or as the Subjects of the Promiſe, do appertain to the viſible Church, Kingdom, or Body of Chriſt, and were owned and look'd upon ſo to do both by Chriſt and his Apoſtles, is plain.
1. Becauſe as under the Promiſe, and in Covenant with God, they are, as perſonally and particularly conſidered, the actual Subjects of the Promiſe of Salvation. Now whoſoever is, as perſonally and particularly conſidered, an actual Subject of the Promiſe, they muſt needs appertain to the viſible Church, Kingdom, or Body of Chriſt. Chriſt is only the Saviour of his Body, Eph. 5.23. Though it is true, Chriſt in a large ſence may be, and is in Scripture ſaid to be the Saviour of all Men, and the Saviour of the World; yet none but ſuch as are Members of his Myſtical Body, at leaſt do appertain thereunto, and have a right of Admiſſion thereinto, are under the Promiſe of Salvation by him, as perſonally and particularly conſidered. Hence all others are ſaid to be Strangers to the Covenants of Promiſe, Eph. 2.12. So that the Infant-Seed of Believers being under the Promiſe of Salvation by Chriſt, and that as perſonally and particularly conſidered; and he being only the Saviour of his Body, they muſt needs appertain to his Body, and anſwerably ought to be admitted and incorporated into it, which can be no other way but by Baptiſm.
2. That the Infant-Seed of Believers do appertain to the viſible Church, Kingdom, or Body of Chriſt, and were owned and looked upon ſo to do by our Lord Chriſt and his Apoſtles, is evident, becauſe the Apoſtle expreſly tells us, that the Promiſe was made unto Chriſt, meaning it of Chriſt Myſtical, that is, the Myſtical Body of Chriſt, And that the Apoſtle here ſpeaks of the Myſtical Body of Chriſt as viſible, is ſufficiently evident, becauſe particular and individual Perſons might be ordinarily known to appertain to the Body of Chriſt, as here ſpoken of. Hence ſaith the Apoſtle, verſ. 28. ſpeaking to the Galatians, as viſible Members of the Church, Ye are all one in Chriſt. Now it cannot be ſuppoſed, that every individual Perſon among the Galatians were really of the inviſible Body of Chriſt. The Apoſtle ſufficiently implieth his Fears of the contrary, Gal. 3.4. ſo again, chap. 4. verſ. 11, & 20. But yet not being ſo far apoſtatized as to diſanull their Memberſhip in the Body of Chriſt, he tells them they were all one in Chriſt, which undeniably ſhews the Apoſtle ſpeaks of the Myſtical Body of Chriſt, as viſible. Now we evidently ſee he owns all to whom the Promiſe appertains, to appertain to the viſible Body of Chriſt; or as the Promiſe conſtitutes of the Body, ſo it appertains to them as Members of it. Now I ſay, they appertaining to, and being owned by Chriſt and his Apoſtles ſo to do, to the viſible Church, Kingdom, and Body of Chriſt, they undoubtedly may, and ought to be, and anſwerably were by Chriſt and his Apoſtles, or by others by their allowance and direction admitted and incorporated thereinto by Baptiſm.
3. That Infants as under this Promiſe may an ought to be, and anſwerably were in Primitive Times baptized, is yet further evident, becauſe the Apoſtle Peter plainly declares, that Intereſt in this Promiſe is alone by it ſelf a ſufficient Ground for the application of Baptiſm. Hence he exhorts thoſe awakened Jews to be baptized upon this Ground, or for this Reaſon, that the Promiſe did belong unto them, Acts 2.39. ſaith he, Be baptized for the remiſſion of Sin, for the Promiſe is to you. It is true, he exhorts them to Repentance, with which Faith muſt be conjoin'd as neceſſary to their Intereſt in the Promiſe; but it was their Intereſt in the Promiſe, that he grounds his Exhortation to them to be baptized upon. Hence however Perſons come to have an Intereſt in the Promiſe, whether it be by their deſcent from Covenant-Parents, or by their own perſonal Faith and Repentance, it is all one as to our preſent purpoſe. 'Tis their Intereſt in the Promiſe that is the proper Ground, and that alone is a ſufficient Ground for the application of Baptiſm, Be baptized, for the Promiſe is to you; not, be baptized becauſe you have repented, but becauſe the Promiſe is to you. And this is agreeable to the firſt Command to keep the Covenant, that is, the Token of the Covenant; the Command is grounded upon Intereſt in the Promiſe, Gen. 17.9. Thou ſhalt keep my Covenant therefore, that is, upon this Ground, becauſe the Promiſe is unto thee, and having the Promiſe, thou ſhalt upon thy Intereſt therein keep my Covenant. So that Intereſt in the Promiſe is a ſufficient Ground for the application of Baptiſm, and Infants having an Intereſt in the Promiſe they have a ſufficient Ground for the application of Baptiſm to them, and anſwerably may and ought to be baptized. And that which may yet further aſſure us, that it is Intereſt in the Promiſe that is the alone Ground, and that that is a ſufficient Ground for the application of Baptiſm, is the Reference that Baptiſm hath to the Promiſe. It hath no neceſſary reference to Repentance, nor Repentance any neceſſary reference unto it; and hence Baptiſm may be applied where Repentance goes not before, as is evident in the caſe of John Baptiſt, and our Lord Chriſt himſelf. 'Tis the Promiſe alone that Baptiſm hath a neceſſary reference unto. Hence whoever have an Intereſt in the Promiſe, they are the true and proper Subjects of Baptiſm, and anſwerably ought, (as in Primitive Times they had to have it applied to them.
IV.
For the further Confirmation of this laſt Propoſition, namely, That the Seed of Believers, as being under the Promiſes of the Covenant, may and ought to be baptized; let the ſeveral Inſtances of Houſholds being baptized be duly weighed. That whole Houſholds, together with the Heads or Governours of them reſpectively, were frequently baptized, is expreſly declared in Scripture, Acts 16.14, 15, 33. So 1 Cor. 16.16. Now that we may ſee what Evidence theſe Inſtances give to the Truth pleaded for, let three things be conſidered.
1. That there is a very great Probability, if not an abſolute Certainty, that if not all, yet ſome in or of theſe Houſholds were baptized, as the Seed of believing Parents, without reſpect had to any perſonal Qualifications of their own. And the Probability (if not Certainty) of this will appear, if we firſt conſider that we muſt comprehend all the natural Seed in thoſe Houſholds ſaid to be baptized, Whoever were comprehended, yet none of the Children ought to be excluded. We muſt take the words of the Holy Ghoſt according to their proper ſence and ſignification. Now the words do neceſſarily include their Children.
2. Theſe Houſe or Houſholds may be rationally ſuppoſed to be conſiderably great. Theſe Phraſes of Houſholds, all his, and the like, are a ſufficient Ground for ſuch a Suppoſition.
3. That not only Infants new born, but Children, as arrived to a higher ſtate of Childhood or Youth muſt be ſuppoſed to be baptized upon the account of their Fathers Faith, ſuppoſing there were any ſuch in thoſe Houſholds. And the reaſon of this is evident, becauſe it cannot with any ſhew of reaſon be ſuppoſed, that ſuch Children, though arrived to ſome uſe of Reaſon, could yet attain to ſuch a meaſure of Knowledg in the Myſteries of the Goſpel, as would have been neceſſary to qualify them for Baptiſm, had they been to be baptized on their own account, in ſo ſhort a time as did intervene between the Converſion of Parents, and the Application of Baptiſm. Children, though paſt meer Infancy, yet while in their Youth or Childhood, cannot be ſuppoſed to attain to the Knowledg of Goſpel-Myſteries in the ſame ſpace of time that Perſons come up to their full maturity may do. So that it muſt be either granted, that ſome in or of theſe Houſholds were baptized as the Children of believing Parents, on the account of their Parents Faith; or we muſt either deny, not only that there were any pure Infants, but any Children in their Childhood or Youth in theſe Houſes; or elſe we muſt contradict the expreſs Letter of the Scriptures. But now to deny the former, is at leaſt (to ſay no more) ſomewhat unuſual; that ſo many Houſes, and theſe conſiderably great, ſhould not only have no meer Infants, but no Children yet in their Childhood or Youth, is utterly improbable; and to depart from the Letter of the Scriptures, where there is no reaſon why we ſhould ſo do, is not only unreaſonable, but in a ſence impious. So that theſe Inſtances made it at leaſt exceeding probable, that ſome were baptized as the Children of believing Parents, without conſideration had to any perſonal Qualifications of their own. Houſholds were baptized, and it can hardly be ſuppoſed that ſo many Families, and theſe conſiderably great, ſhould have neither any new born Babes, nor yet any as yet in their Childhood or Youth; and if any ſuch there were, they muſt be baptized upon the account of their Parents Faith.
This will more clearly appear, if we take a particular account of Lydia's Houſe, ſaid to be baptized with her, Acts 16.14, 15. For, 1. It is evident her Houſhold was with her at that Aſſembly to whom the Apoſtle preached, as appears from ver. 15. 2dly, It's evident that this was an Aſſembly of Women, verſ. 13. 3dly, There's no mention made of the converſion of any, excepting. Lydia her ſelf. Now that Lydia ſhould have an Houſhold all of Women, as ſo they muſt be in caſe ſhe had no Children, and theſe grown up and all converted at one and the ſame Sermon, when not one in the whole Aſſembly beſides was converted, and yet that the Holy Ghoſt ſhould take no notice of any of their Converſions, but only of Lydia's her ſelf, ſeems utterly improbable. That ſuch a thing is poſſible cannot be denied, but ſure that it is improbable muſt be granted. As for thoſe Brethren mentioned verſ. 40. there is no rational ground to ſuppoſe that they were of Lydia's Houſhold ſaid to be baptized. It is certain they were not, for they were all at the Aſſembly with her, which is expreſly ſaid to have been an Aſſembly of Women. But,
2. Let it be conſidered that it doth not appear from Scripture, that my one in or of thoſe Houſholds ſaid to be baptized, were converted before their Baptiſm, excepting only the Perſons whoſe Houſholds they were. This is evident paſt all Contradiction in reſpect of Lydia's Houſhold. And as for the Jailor's, though it be ſaid, that Paul and Silas ſpake to him to Words of the Lord, and to all that were in his Houſe; yet,
(1.) From this it cannot be concluded, that any ſaid to be baptized were converted before their Baptiſm. Acts 16.33. ſeems to intimate that it was after; and beſides, all things are not recorded in the Scriptures exactly in the order in which they were done.
(2.) It doth not appear, that thoſe to whom the Word was ſpoken were the ſame individual Perſons ſaid to be his, who were baptized, they ſeem rather to be the Priſoners, and thoſe that appertained to the Priſon, as Under-keepers, and ſuch like.
(3.) Though ſome of them might be the ſame Perſons, yet it doth not appear that they were converted by the Word. So that from theſe Paſſages it cannot be proved, that any of his, ſaid to be baptized with him, were converted before their Baptiſm.
And as for what is ſaid concerning his rejoicing, be with his Houſhold believing in God; if the words were rightly tranſlated, they are ſo far from proving the Converſion of his Houſhold before their Baptiſm, that they rather intimate the contrary; they ſhould be tranſlated, He rejoiced with his Houſhold, he believing in God. And the Apoſtle laying the Ground of his Houſholds rejoicing in his perſonal Faith, ſeems plainly to imply, that the Good that was the matter of their Joy, did ariſe from his Faith.
And as for Stephen's Houſhold, there is nothing evidencing that any of them were converted before their Baptiſm, although it is ſaid, they addicted themſelves to the Miniſtry of the Saints, yet that they were the ſame Perſons intended in that Term [Houſhold] ſaid to be baptized, is uncertain; or ſuppoſe ſome of them might be, yet whether they were converted before their Baptiſm is uncertain; how long this Epiſtle was written after he and his Houſhold were baptized, we cannot ſay; ſome then in their Childhood might be grown up to a capability of miniſtring to the Saints when this Epiſtle was written.
3. Let it be conſidered in the laſt place, that though it ſhould be granted, that ſome in or of thoſe Houſholds might be converted before their Baptiſm, yet from thence it cannot be concluded, that all intended in theſe Terms [Houſes or Houſholds] were ſo. Suppoſe ſome in the Jailor's Houſe might be concerted before their Baptiſm, yet it will not follow from thence, that all were ſo: and much leſs will it follow, that there were none in Lydia's Houſe baptized, but ſuch as did perſonally believe. Now if there be but a probability, that any one in or of theſe Houſholds ſaid to be baptized, were baptized on the account of their perſonal Faith, that gives as full an evidence to the Truth pleaded for, as the probability of all in thoſe Houſes being baptized on the ſame account would do. So that ſure it cannot be denied, but that all theſe Inſtances do at leaſt make it probable, that ſome were baptized in Primitive Times, as the Children of believing Parents, without Conſideration had to any thing in themſelves; and a Probability added to thoſe foregoing Arguments may greatly eſtabliſh us in the Truth pleaded for. But as a Cloſe of all, let theſe two things be conſidered.
1. The utter Improbability, in caſe it had been the will of our Lord Chriſt that none but adult Believers ſhould be baptized, that the Holy Ghoſt ſhould leave upon record the Baptiſm of ſo many Houſholds, and yet leave it utterly uncertain whether any in or of theſe Houſholds were baptized on the account of their perſonal Faith and Repentance, eſpecially there being ſo great a Probability, according to the account he gives us of ſome of thoſe Houſholds, that there muſt needs be ſome more of them, who muſt be baptized on the account of their Parents Faith. We cannot reaſonably imagine, that the Holy Ghoſt would record theſe Inſtances ſo as to give ſo great an occaſion of Miſtake to the People of God, to take up a Practice ſo prejudicial to the Honour of Chriſt, and his Intereſt in the World, as our Oppoſers ſuppoſe the Baptiſm of Infants to be, in caſe it had been the will of our Lord Chriſt they ſhould not be baptized.
2. Conſider how the Holy Ghoſt doth vary his manner of expreſſion, when he ſpeaks of the Baptiſm of Houſholds, and when he ſpeaks of the Baptiſm of others. When he ſpeaks of the Baptiſm of Houſholds, he tells us of their Baptiſm together with the chief Heads and Governors, not taking the leaſt notice of the Faith of any in or of thoſe Houſholds, as the Ground of their Baptiſm; but when he ſpeaks of the Baptiſm of others, he ſpeaks more diſtinguiſhingly, So many as gladly received the Word, were baptized. And why the Holy Ghoſt ſhould not expreſs himſelf after the ſame manner, when he ſpeaks of the Baptiſm of Houſholds, no rational account can be given, ſave only this, that it is to ſhew, that as the Covenant with the Promiſe thereof is continued to the Infant-Seed of Believers; ſo that the preſent Token, which is Baptiſm, ſhould be applied unto them.
But to have done with this: From all that hath been ſaid, our three foregoing Propoſitions are ſufficiently evident, and from all our main Concluſion, viz. That it is the Will of our Lord Chriſt, that the Infant-Seed of his People ſhould be baptized, fully eſtabliſhed.