Apostolical Baptism, Part 2
As first,
Hereby the matter of the Churches will be right, whiles none but Saints in profession will be admitted members, and without a right matter, there will never be a comfortable reformation: to which Mr. BLAKE saith. The experiment of the present and former age, hath found it far otherwise.
Reply. Compare the matter of the Churche, throughout all the Parishes in England, where infants baptisme is received, with the matter of those Churches where it is ejected, and the experiment will appeare just as I have layd it downe.
Against the 2. Benefit viz. That Persons being delayd, would be carefull to get knowledge, that so they may partake of church priviledges, and without which, they cannot partake of them; and to addresse their lives according to the rule ef Christianity; Mr. BLAKE saith, that it would rather provoke them to despise knowledge, and persecute them, who against the free charter of heaven, aod prescription of all ages, deny them the right of priviledge.
Reply. Though they have their infant baptisme, yet multitudes that have it do, both despise knowledge, and persecute the Saints of God, yea even those that members with them in the same Church: and they would do no more, if they were kept off from baptism.
Against the 3. Benefit, viz. That Christians would have a more perfect understanding of baptisme, which being administred to infants, seemes be under a cloud: To this Mr. BLAKE saith, that this known, and were it not for the cloudes I draw over, it would be more cleere.
Reply. When the Scripture maketh baptisme a signe of our fellowship with Christ in his death, buriall, and resurrection, that as our bodyes are buried or washt in water, so our sinns are buried in Christs death, or washt in his blood. Rom. 6.3.4. Col. 2.12. 1 Pet. 3.21. Heb. 10.22.
Now you shall make it a charter, whereby all infants of believers are christianised by their fathers Christianity; is not this a clouding of baptisme, a signe of Covenant, holinesse of beleevers and their issue, Page 62. an hereditary priviledge of birth, conveyed from ancestors to posterity, Page 74. A holinesse which the parents transmits to the Child, the ancesstor to posterity, Page 81. An intitlement to outward priviledges. Birth-Privil. Page 14. And elsewhere expressing it, as if it were a signe or seale of the Covenant wherein salvation is promised.
Against the 5. Benefit, viz. Deferring of baptisme would take off Scruples from Godly Ministers, who scruple the giving of the Lords supper to ungodly civill persons, and not without cause. Being,
1. They beare false witnesse to them, asserting the body of Christ to be given for them.
2. Give them a knife, wherewith they know they will out their own thoats, now if these should professe the faith in words, and not deny it in deeds, before they were baptized, by vertue of the same profession, they might be admitted to the supper, with out any more adoe.
To this Mr. BLAKE saith, if the deliver of the Sacrament to any that unworthily receive it, rises to the guilt which your language expresses; all ministeriall dispensation of it, in a Church that is most right in the world, will prove the greatest of snares, Page 46.
Reply. I know no tye from Christ, to bind Ministers so to give the bread and cup; muchlesse to use any such words, as to say the body or blood of Christ, which was given for thee M.N. And how so deliveri…g, it will arise to a lesse degree of guilt unto them, I should be glad to be informed, we have no example of Christ or the Apostles, that so delivered the bread or wine; Christ only said, take, eat, 1 Cor. 11.23. Which they might do after the blessing, without any delivery of it to them: and in my apprehension. Ministers have a great snare in so delivering it, which is the greater, if they use such words, viz. The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for them. For its possible for a person to have a Church right to Ordinances, and yet have no true union with Christ; yea, the Minister may greatly, suspect so much by him, and therefore cannot he comfortably say such words, viz. The body of our Lord, &c.
For your saying, Paul was baptized by a Minister, it is rather presumed. then proved.
Whereas Mr. BLAKE adds, Page 47. We read of single persons of fami…yes of thousands, baptized upon the first profession to beleeve; we read not of one of them denyed, nor an interrogatory put to them, concerning their personall qual…fication.
R p y. We contend for no more but a profession of word and life, we meddle not with internall qualifications, knowne only to God; howbeit chari…y teaches us to judge persons who make a godly profession, to be so inwardly qualified, till we know the contrary.
Next, Mr. BLAKE sets upon my tenth Argument viz. That Infants baptisme was taken up, upon unsound and erronous principles, as that it did wash away originall sin, which I proved from Origen.
Mr. BLAKE to this saith: I pray did Origen speake by way of prophesy, upon what ground baptisme of Infants, many yeares after his time should be received? In the nex… page but one. You say some Christians out of worldly wisdome, and a wearinesse to suffer, you doubt not about the time of Austin, or a little befor…, brought the baptisme of infants into the Church: now Origen was 200. yeares Austins ancient, I pray you lay your hand upon your heart, whether you contend not more for an opinion, then for truth. Origen with you is a competent witnesse, that baptisme of inf…nts was brought into the Church upon corrupt grounds, but he must be no witnesse, that it was at all in being in his time.
Reply. I have layd my hand upon my heart, and assure you, …hat I contend o…ly for truth, for b…ptisme of infants b…ing in Oregens time. I grant it as a tradition, but what is this to your pract…c…, who con…end for it as a d…v…ne birth-priviledges, and part of Christ possession, which he houlds in his heri…ag… of infants, as in your title Page: I reconcile that seming contradition you would make, v…z. That abou… Austins time, or a little before, some would have gone ab…ut to have brought it in by divine right, when in Origens time it was esteemed only a tradition. I cite corruptions comparatively, so long as they are acknowledged humane; but when once they come to b… of divine right, i…s time then to oppose them I count it not to have been, till it was urged by divine right, yet you your selfe confesse, Page 51. That Austin saith The custome of the Church in the baptisme of infants, is by no meanes to be despised; and call it a tradition of the Apostles. It was but the other day we cast out unwritten traditions, and now must we ressume them, because we find them in some speeches of Augustin or*Espec…ally, seeing that orig…all of Origen is lost, and …he translator confesseth, he added many things of his own; so …hat Era…mus, in his censures of his hou…e on …eviticus, saith; a man cannot be certaine w et…er he read Ruffinus or Origen; the learned puts his comm…ntary on the Romans where he calls Infants baptism a tradition, amongst his counterfeit works; as being much sophisticated by Ruffinus. M.S. of Mr. T. Origen, and yet whether the phrase of calling infants baptisme a tradition of the Apostles, hath not crept into the writeing of the fathers by the Romanists, I much question: seeing it is so like their tenent at this day; and for your authority of Austin, which you seem so much to magnifie, Lod. Vives, a man well skild in Austin, beleeves no such matter; for in his annotations upon the 27. Chap. of the first booke, de civ. Dei (as Mr. Den cites him against Dr. Featly) he hath these words, viz. That of old it was the custome to baptize unlesse they were of full age, and did desire baptisme in their owne persons, and did understand what it was to be baptized.
Further, Mr. BLAKE P. 50. bringeth in 5. Benefits upon Infants baptisme: as first, as soone as capacity serves, they are taught to know even by their baptism, to whom they belong, what master they are to serve, and in what scoole they are to be trained.
Reply. How can this bee, seeing there is no visible signe to teach them, unlesse opinion or traditionary relation can so teach; and yet few have both of these, some not one; and if their infants baptisme teach them what master to serve, the greatest part of baptized persons are little bettered hereby, in that assoone as they come to understanding, they chuse to serve the devill and their lust.
For Mr. BLAKES 2d. Benifit, viz. A necessity is seen to get the knowledge of Christ, and walke in his wayes.
Reply. Nay many persons can see no necessity of getting knowledge, being they are Christians already; and will your divinity teach you to baptize persons into a faith, they are ignorant of; and for the necessity of persons from their infant baptisme to walke in Christs wayes, we see the cleane contrary; in that multitudes whom you deeme baptized in infancy, live such unholy lives, nay they being taken into covenant with their parents, and this Covenant being the Covenant of Grace, they are apt to be carelesse of holinesse, being they are from their infancy in Covenant.
Mr. BLAKES 3d. Benefit is; A delight is wrought in those, in whose communion they are bred; being debard from society with Christians, it is the way to bring them to maligne them; but being taken into them, It must needs occasion delight in them.
Reply. When God workes a new nature, then do we delight in the company of Christians, and this we do whether baptized or not; Association with Christians, doth not simply breed delight, for Christ saith, five shall be divided in one house, three against two, and two against three; outward communion can never be delightfull, till there be first a communion of spirits.
Mr. BLAKES fourth benefit is, the aggravation of their sin in the Ministery, by reason of the favour they receive from God, the society in…o which they are incorporated, and the reall Covenant into which they are entred, in case their conversation answer not their profession.
Reply. As deep aggravations may be against them, in case they go on in sin, and remain unbaptised, Eph. 2.12. sorely did John threaten unbaptized persons, Matth. 3.7.
Mr. Blakes fifth benefit is; Parents see a strong engagement to bring them up for Christ, when they have dedicated them to him, and put them into the fellowship of those that are his Saints and members.
Reply. The cursed condition wherein children are by nature, in that they are children of wrath, is engagement enough for godly parents to bring up their children for Christ, and those Parents upon whom this motive worketh not, nothing will work; that doth perswade so much, that nothing can seem to make an addition.
Next, Mr. Blake pag. 52. comes to set upon my last argument, drawn from antiquity, wherein he goes about to weaken my authority, drawn from the ancient Fathers; As Iustin Martyr, Tertullian, &c. Where I shall desire the Reader, onelyonly to compare what I have written, with Mr. Blakes answer thereto. And for his excuse of Mr. M. in that he alledged a spurious book of Iustin Martyrs, I suppose Mr. M. is of more conscience then to justifie it, yet will Mr. Blake seem to face out Mr. M. his mistake. And whereas I desired a proof for Infants baptisme out of Iustin Martyr, Ireneus, Origen, Clemens Alexandrinus, or Tertullian, Mr. Blake hath nothing to say, saying; That Origen called it a Tradition. I have plentifully proved the practice of believers, from the most ancient Fathers, Storm. of Antich. p. 27. part. 2. And there being nothing brought by Mr. Blake, nor any others truly, for the baptisme of Infants, I will not tyre my self or Reader, in a further producement of humane authority, having done it so largely in my former book, and the same remaining still unanswered for substance: As the Reader may see if he compare what I have there alledged, and Mr. Blake his answer thereto. By examining his Exceptions, the Treatise would swell too big.
A REPLY to the Second Part. INTITULED, A Vindication of the Birth-Priviledge.
First, Mr. BLAKE makes a digressions, and contends from a small occasion to make a long discourse, to prove an universall visible Church: (and being offended with me, that I explode it as a Monster) he goes about to prove it by reasons. As first, the confession of the Churches called Anabaptists. Secondly, that many p…rticulars make up a generall; many particular men make up a multitude of men. Thirdly, in that God sets forth in the Church, first Apostles, secondarily Prophets, 1 Cor 12.28. This is not each particular Church, but the Church universall. Fourthly, 1 Cor. 15.9. from the Apostles speech, when he saith, He persecuted the Church of God: his spleen was not carried against one particular Church, but the whole Church. Fifthly, from 1 Cor. 10.32. Give no offence to the Church of God: no one particular Church is there deciphered, but under the notion of Church, universally all Churches.
Reply. First, to your first: Its a wonder you will confirm your Position, from the confession of Churches, or persons; elsewhere in your Book so stigmatized. But I suppose, the confession speakes of that spirituall Kingdome and Church Synechdochichally, onelyonly as it is part of the body of Christ.
2. To your second, viz. That many particulars make up a generall, many particular men make up a multitude of men; therefore many visible Churches make up one visible Church. You may as well reason, many women make up one woman; and with more probability, many Ministers make up one Bishop.
To your third, 1 Cor. 12.28. God hath set forth in the Church, first Apostles; that is, not in each particular Church, but the Church universall.
Reply. Its a Sinechdoche of the species, the singular for the plurall, in the Church, for in the Churches; So Eph. 3.21. Unto him be glory, in the Church. i. e. in the Churches. So Jam. 5.14. Let him send for the Elders of the Church.
To your fourth, 1 Cor. 15.9. I persecuted the Church; which was not one particular Church, but the whole.
Reply. PAUL meanes that part of the church, or of the body of Christ, which was here on earth, which is called foreign, church, or a company called out, in opposition to them that were yet in the state of nature, weltring in sin. He speakes not of churches, as visible; of which the question is.
To your fifth, 1 Cor. 10.32. Give no offence to the Church of God. The answer to the third and fourth may serve here: though there be some hypocrites, yet may they be said to be of the church, as a glasse eye, a woodden leg, or wen on the face, may be said to be the body.
These things being so, and you declaring pag. 65. that you enter not upon the controversie concerning an universall church politicall, and yet maintaining, that there is a church abstracted from all consideration of single congregations, that receives Ministeriall gifts, and such an universall church; into the priviledges of which, Believers are received. You disclaiming an universall church politicall, and no other church being possibly assigneable, save the company of Believers, from Adam to the end of the world; your church is a meer Chymera, or Monster, concerning which the Word is silent.
Concerning Presbyters being called, the Church, if any such thing be (though divers of the learned oppose) it is only as they have a power from the Church, delegated to them, or representatively, as the Parliament are called the Kingdome, because they have the power of the kingdom cōmitted into their hands.