The Covenant Sealed, Treatise · Chapter 7 · Section 9
SECT. IX. The ſeventh Propoſition enlarged.
AS for thoſe that are of years,Admiſſion of men of years examined. though we are not much concerned, ſcarce one unbaptized Perſon in an age, being tendred to us, yet it is not meet wholly to omit it; when any in the Primitive times upon the Preaching of the Apoſtles was ready to profeſſe, and willing to engage in a way of Chriſtianity, he was ſtreight (according to the order of Chriſt) to be admitted by Baptiſme: the Commiſſion it ſelf ſpeaks thus much: Diſciple all Nations, baptizing them is the charge; being diſcipled there needs no further enquiry, and accordingly was the practice; the Eunuch upon profeſſion of faith, and water at hand was preſently baptized by Philip, Act. 8. and the Jaylour the ſelf ſame hour that he was converted, was baptized by Paul and Silas, Act. 16. Thoſe that limit Baptiſme to years of diſcretion, appear to be wholly of this mind; Mr. Tombes, Examen. Pag. 159. is clear, that profeſſion of faith, and holineſſe is ſufficient warrant to baptize. And for their practice, let their Proſelytes whereſoever they prevail ſpeak, when ſuch as we ſee are admitted, we may well conclude, that in their judgement none are to be refuſed. There are others that ſet up a new Church-door, having diſcipled any in their way, they do not (as Chriſt enjoyned concerning unbaptized Heathens, or as others, concerning baptized Chriſtians) baptize them, but they tender a Covenant of Church-fellowſhip unto them, and that is their way of Church entrance, when yet their infants keep the old rode of Baptiſme.
Theſe at leaſt ſome of them, are exceeding ſtrict, and will have none admitted but thoſe that the quickeſt ſighthed,Admiſſion unto a Church-Covenant and memberſhip looked into. Eagle-eyed Chriſtians judge (ſo farre as they are able to apprehend) to have both name, and thing of Chriſtianity. And to add honour to this way, the world muſt be born in hand, and that with atteſtation of no mean ones, that the converſion of the Gentiles, and Jewes, in that infinite number as we read in the Acts of the Apoſtles, was all in reality, and that the whole Church of Hieruſalem, (conſiſting at leaſt of eight thouſand members) was an homogeneal body, under the ſame light, conſcience and tenderneſſe; Of a more noble homogeneity, and more pure conſtitution ſure then ever came into Chriſts thoughts, to ſee his Kingdom attain unto upon earth: He compares it to a field made up of a mixture of Tares and Wheat, Matth. 13.24. to a Draw-net caſt into the Sea, which taketh fiſhes of all kinds, both good and bad, Matth. 13.47. And in the cloſe o… two other Parables inferres, that many are called but few are choſen, Matth. 20.16. Matth. 22.14. This he ſpake in the ears of his Diſciples; and we may wonder if they ſhould live to ſee it contradicted. He tells his hearers, Luk. 9.27. Matth. 16.18. There be ſome ſtanding here, which ſhall not taſte of death till they ſee the Kingdom of God. And can we think, that he underſtood a Kingdom in that reſplendent glory, which he had ever denyed, when he made it his buſineſs to decipher and hold it forth unto them? When they heare of it, they hear of a field with tares and wheat, of a draw-net with fiſh of all ſorts; They live to ſee flouriſhing fields of pure wheat, full nets of fiſhes that are onelyonly good; being told that many are called but few choſen, they yet ſee myriads of thouſands called and all choſen. Yea, Paul after he had ſeen the contrary, and gained fellowſhip (according to theſe men in ſuch an homogeneal pure body) ſtill ſymbolizes in like Parables, of a great houſe that had veſſels, ſome to honour, and ſome to diſhonour, 2 Tim. 2.20. applying it to the Elect and Reprobate in the Church of God. We are told that the complexion of a viſible Church under the Goſpel is converſion; the conſtituted matter, converted ones; and that this ſoul-complexion is the ſame in the whole body, members having received the ſame Spirit of Adoption, owning and experiencing the ſame grace of God. But it is plain that Chriſt did neither ſee, nor foreſee any ſuch purity of complexion, nor can they that look upon Primitive Churches in the glaſſe of Scriptures ſee any more then Chriſt did diſcover. Thoſe words of Luke, Act. 15.3. And being brought on their way by the Church, they paſſed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the converſion of the Gentiles, and they cauſed great joy unto all the brethren, is made a fundamental ground-work of this building of ſuch glory, as though all converſion by the Word were attended by the changing work of the Spirit; which happy gloſſe (in caſe it would hold) would turne all the grounds in the parable into good ground, and a cōnvert or proſelyte in an hiſtorical narrative, would ever be the ſame with elect or regenerate. But the words going before, and following theſe (if they may be but taken in) will ſerve to ſpoil all this ſuppoſed glory and purity. A ſect riſeth up and teacheth the Brethren, that except they be circumciſed after the manner of Moſes they cannot be ſaved, and what manner of men they were, and how their Doctrine took, we may read in Pauls Epiſtles to the Philippians, Coloſſians, and eſpecially in that to the Churches of Galatia; it almoſt wrought to the apoſtatizing of thoſe Churches from the faith of Chriſt to another Goſpel, If ever theſe were one homogeneal body, reſpective to ſoul complexion; an abundant proof is given in againſt the Saints perſeverance and for their falling from grace, Paul was not ſo enamoured with their beauty, when he tells them that he is afraid of them, and travells again in birth of them. And whether he had ſuch high thoughts of the Corinthians, let ſundry paſſages in his Epiſtles to them witneſſe. Great complexion ſpots may be ſeen, 1 Cor. Chap. 3.3. Chap. 6.8. Chap. 11.18, 19, 21. Chap. 15.12, 34. 2 Cor. 12.20, 21. So that it is plain, that in primitive times Jewes and Pagans, being wrought upon (by the Word heard, and miracles ſeen) to make profeſſion of, and engage to a Chriſtian faith and life, were upon that account received: of which, as ſome had hearts ſincere towards Chriſt, ſo many were otherwiſe. Through the whole Scripture there is no demurre put to the Baptiſme of any who made profeſſion of the Name of Chriſt, ſave Saul, concerning whom Ananias, (being warned of God to go to him, and conferre ſight upon him, being ſtruck blind) objects, the evil that he had done to the Saints at Hieruſalem; and that he had at preſent, authority from the Chief Prieſts, to bind all that called on the Name of Chriſt, Acts 9.13, 14. And when he afterwards aſſayed to joyn himſelf to the diſciples that were at Hieruſalem, they were all (upon that account) afraid of him. Neither Ananias at Damaſcus, nor the Church at Hieruſalem, did put his ſincerity in grace to the queſtion, upon that account they might have challenged thouſands of others; But they feared, that he onelyonly pretended converſion, upon a deſign to advance his way of perſecution. Let Mr. Cobbet from New England in this particular be heard, who laies down this concluſion, That the Church in dispenſing an enjoyned initiatory ſeal of the Covenant of grace, looketh into viſibility of interest in the Covenant to guide her in the application thereof, nor is the ſaving intereſt of the perſons her rule by which ſhe is to proceed. There, we find in the affirmative, what that is that muſt lead, viz. viſibility of intereſt in the Covenant, and in the negative, what muſt not lead, and that is, ſaving intereſt in the Covenant. And viſibility of intereſt is certainly theirs, who profeſſe Chriſt, engage for Chriſt, and avouch themſelves to be for him, unleſſe we will utterly confound Covenant entring, and Covenant keeping, which Scripture ſo carefully diſtinguiſhes. I know Mr. Firmin in his reply to Mr. Caudry ſpeaking of Scandalous perſons,Mr. F. appendix as to the admiſſion of men of years examined. pag. 4. ſaith, According to our Congregational principles, that which gives a man the firſt right to a Sacrament, viz. his intereſt in the Covenant of the Goſpel, this man hath not; for he doth viſibly declare to the Churches, that he hath no intereſt in the Covenant. That intereſt in the Covenant of the Goſpell gives a man the firſt right to a Sacrament, we willingly imbrace; but that cenſure of ſcandalous perſons, that they viſibly declare to the Churches, that they have no intereſt in the Covenant, we muſt reject, as evidently contrary to Scripture principles. Iſrael, of whom Moſes gave that teſtimony, that the Lord had not given them an heart to perceive, and eyes to ſee, or eares to hear, ſpeaking of the generality of them, had ſome that might have been judged ſcandalous, yet they all of them even then entred Covenant with God, Captaines of their tribes, Elders, Officers, even all the men of Iſrael, from the hewer of wood, to the drawer of water, Deut. 29.10, 11. Thoſe that God owns as his people in Covenant, and calls by the name of his people, I ſhall take to have intereſt in the Covenant, though thouſands ſay the contrary: But God ownes theſe as his people, reſpective to Covenant intereſt; they that did ſteal, murder, commit adultery, ſweare falſely, burne incenſe to other gods, and walk after other gods, all men would judge to be ſcandalous, yet ſuch come, and ſtand before the Lord in his houſe, and profeſſe themſelves to be his people in Covenant, and whether or no God doth not ſo eſteem them, let his own mouth ſpeak, Jer. 7.12. Chap. 6.26. Chap. 8.11. The Vineyard of the Lord conſiſts of a people in viſible Covenant, yet with theſe we find not a few ſcandals and ſcandalous ones, as Iſay 5. is manifeſt; ſee, Hoſ. 4.6, 12. My people are deſtroyed for lack of knowledg: my people aske counſel at their ſtockes and their ſtaffe, declareth unto them, for the ſpirit of whoredome hath cauſed them to erre, and they have gone a whoring from under their God. Shall we ſay they were not Gods people, or ſhall we ſay that theſe were no ſcandals? to put all out of queſtion, the Apoſtle tells us, Rom. 9.2, 3. that intereſt in the Covenant pertaines to all Iſrael after the fleſh, neither is it any otherwiſe in Goſpel times, 1 Cor. 5.11. If any man that is called a brother, be a fornicator, or Covetous, or an Idolater, or a rayler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, &c. he that is called a brother is viſibly in Covenant, but ſuch a one (we ſee) may be ſcandalous. The ſeven Golden Candleſticks are the ſeven Churches, amidſt which Chriſt walkes, and whether there were not ſcandals among theſe, read the Epiſtles to them. If viſible intereſt in Covenant give a firſt right, then theſe undoubtedly may claime it, their firſt right (according to the forementioned principle) is undoubted; and for actuall admiſſion (as well as the firſt right) to the Sacrament of initiation, let the ſame Mr. Cobbet ſpeak; John Baptiſt did, and lawfully might baptize thoſe multitudes, albeit in the general he knew that many, yea, moſt of them would prove falſe, and frothy quoting, Matth. 3.5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. and afterward, Albeit, we may think in the general that to be ſure in all viſible Churches there will be ſome veſſels of diſhonour ſometimes, yet Miniſters which are the Churches as well as Chriſts ſervants, are not therefore to refuſe to diſpenſe Church ordinances ſince, they are in the face of the Church ſuch utenſills as the Lord may have and hath need of. Hence the Apoſtles (which are extraordinary perſons knew the guile of perſons ſecret from the Church, witneſſe, that act againſt Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5.1; &c.) yet in adminiſtring the Church ſeal of Baptiſme they refuſed not Ananias and Sapphira no, nor Simon Magnus, Acts 8. Nor thouſands of other of the Jewes, amongſt whom how many proved falſe? Acts 2.41. and 4.1, 2, 3, 4. compared. 21.20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 28, 30, 31, 36. and 22.20, 22 and 23.12, 13. witneſſe. So that we ſee Scripture gives precedents (if we judge them ſafe to follow) of a very facile admiſſion of thoſe that profeſſe and manifeſt their willingneſſe to engage in Chriſtian waies.
Mr. Firmin ſaies, If a bare profeſſion of faith in Chriſt be ſufficicient to make a member of a Church, then no perſon can be juſtly excommunicated out of a Church, for the vileſt ſinnes or hereſies, provided he doth but hold this profeſſion of his faith: The conſequence is cleere, the perſon is the ſame now, which he was when you took him into the Church. To this I have anſwered, pag. 449. The conſequence is cleerly erroneous, for he made a profeſſion of his faith and not of his ſin. To this Mr. Firmin replyes, Then it ſeemes the man muſt profeſſe his ſin with his own mouth, as his faith, though Mr. Blake knowes he is a ranter, &c. The members of the Church witneſſe it, yet becauſe the mans own mouth doth not profeſſe it, you admit him. I deſire to know where witneſſes were called in for this purpoſe to ſpeake what they had to ſay againſt ſuch and ſuch a mans admiſſion to Baptiſme, as now by an inſtrument affixt on the door of the publique place of meeting men are called to except, (in caſe they have any thing to ſpeak) againſt Miniſters ordination. Had Paul and Silas nothing againſt the Jaylour at Philippi? who was ſo ſerviceable to thoſe in power, that he thruſt them into the inward priſon, and made their feet faſt in the ſtockes, Acts 16.24. And wheras our author ſaies elſewhere, that there was a legal work on his conſcience, ſo there is many a time on mariners in a ſea ſtorm, which a calme will ſuddenly quiet. Can he imagine that the lives of all the people, even the Publicanes and harlots that John baptized (Matth. 21.31. Luke 7.29. compared) were ſo inoffenſive, that none could ſay black to their eye? whatſoever John knew (in caſe they had been called in and heard,) ſome could have ſaid ſomewhat againſt theſe Publicanes and harlots, and yet even theſe were admitted. As to that which followes, Then, Sir, though you know the ſame abominations afterwards, and your members teſtifie it, witneſſes come in you muſt not cast him out, unleſſe he will profeſſe it. Though he is pleaſed to ſay that this argument will coſt me more then two lines, before it be anſwered, yet a few words will ſhew that it is a meer non ſequitur. If a man make it his requeſt, upon the fame that he hath heard, and the good that he hath ſeen in Mr. Firmins Family, to be admitted to ſerve him in it, confeſſing his wayes to have been bad, but now profeſſes that he is reſolved upon a new way, and in order to it, deſires to be received into ſuch a Society, where godlineſſe may be learnt, may not he now admit him? and may he not afterwards upon breach of this engagement diſmiſſe him? I will averre my ſimilitude to be fit, yet I confeſſe it is not full; for when Mr. Firmin hath diſmiſſed this ſervant, and put him out of doores, he hath now no more relation to him. But when a man upon profeſſion to be for God, is once in Covenant, though his wickedneſſe deſerves that the priviledges of the family ſhould be denyed, yet he is ſtill in Covenant, though under breach of Covenant, and ſtands related to the Church of God in title, otherwiſe, upon his repentance he muſt have a new admiſſion by Baptiſme. The Church, I ſay, may receive a man upon engagement of amendment, (which muſt be done in baptiſme) to be baptized, and upon his return to wickedneſſe Excommunicate him: His profeſſion gives him right to Baptiſme, and his ſin deſerves excommunication. He tells us, Though we read not that Philip required repentance, yet others did: But did they ſo require it, as in reality to precede baptiſme? Or were they ſatisfied with a profeſſion of it? If they ſo required it as in reality to precede, they then muſt give a day over to give evidence of it; and whether this was the manner in Johns baptiſme, in Philips, or the Apoſtles, let adverſaries be Judges.
I cannot tell what ſhould move Mr. F. when he had given me thanks, pag. 54. for my courteous handling of him without ſcorn, to adde in the next page, Sir, I thought Chriſtianity had taken in the heart, and outward converſation as well as the head; a real Chriſtian is one united to Chriſt, ſound in the doctrine concerning Chriſt, and walking as Chriſt did [we ſuppoſe an old Adam]. Let him who is a nominal Chriſtian appear like one, though he be not real. And I do think that it is little below a ſcorn, to bear the world in hand that I think otherwiſe; what have I ſaid for him to Sir me in this particular? perhaps becauſe I ſomewhere ſpeak of a profeſſion of faith, not mentioning repentance; ſo he may challenge Philip to be defective, who when the Eunuch demanded, What doth hinder me to be baptized? anſwered, If thou believeſt with all thine heart thou mayeſt, Act. 8.37. And Paul and Silas likewiſe, who when the Jaylour ask'd, What ſhall I do to be ſaved? anſwered as we know, Believe in the Lord Jeſus, and thou ſhalt be ſaved, and thine houſhold; Nay, will not the ſame charge fall upon the head of our Saviour himſelf, who in his Commiſſion to the Apoſtles, ſaith, He that believeth and is baptized, ſhall be ſaved? None of theſe mention repentance; what can be ſaid for them, will excuſe me: I am ſo far from being againſt repentance in a Chriſtian, that I expect ſome will think that I have ſaid too much for the neceſſity of it, and put too high an honour upon it. He proceeds farther, and ſaith, Let us view the Scripture in adminiſtration of Baptiſme, Mar. 4. Baptiſme of Repentance, that is more then Faith. More explicitely, but no more implicitely. Faith takes Chriſt to give repentance, as well as a Saviour to give remiſſion of ſins. They confeſſed their ſins, ſaith he. 1. Some will have it to imply no verbal confeſſion, but virtual, coming for baptiſme for remiſſion of ſins, it was an acknowledgment that they were guilty; which gloſſe carries ſtrong probability with it, in regard of the multitude, that in ſo ſhort a ſpace were baptized. 2. I require more, an engagement to leave ſin, which their taking upon them the Name of Chriſt doth imply, 2 Tim. 2.19. Let every one that nameth the Name of Christ depart from iniquity. He goes on, Acts 2.37, 38. Firſt Jewes ſo had knowledge not ſo ignorant as ours I believe. The Reader may believe the contrary, till he ſee ſome proof. Secondly, having a legal work by the power of the Word: They that had crucified Chriſt as a blaſphemer, deceiver, muſt needs have ſome work upon them before they would take him profeſſedly for a Saviour. Thirdly, Receiving the Word; That implies no more then giving credit to what the Apoſtle ſpake, that Jeſus whom they had crucified was Lord and Chriſt. Fourthly, Repenting they are baptized, this is more ſtill. And more then is expreſt in the Text. Baptiſme in his Name doth indeed imply, that now they repented that they had crucified him, otherwiſe, we read not of their repentance: Acts 8. (ſaith he) though there is not mention made of the Samaritans repentance, who were apoſtatized from the Jewes, but laid claim to the Patriarchs, Joh. 4.20. expected Chriſt, verſe 25. worſhipped God, Ezra 4.2. yet that Philip ſhould know them to be ſo abominable in converſation, and yet baptize them, that is to be proved, ſince that others required repentance. He may adde to theſe Elogies of the Samaritanes, that they worſhipped they knew not what, Joh 4.22. and that they bore that good will to the people of the Jewes, that when they perceived Chriſt with his Diſciples to be for Hieruſalem at the time of the Paſſeover, they would not let them have meat for money, Luk. 9.51, 52. And I confeſſe, as much of repentance in them, as was required in any to the acceptation of Baptiſme, namely, a renuntiation of their falſe way, and a profeſſed acceptation of the tender of the Goſpel. There yet followes, If this be not a giving of holy things to dogs, (which Tertullian and Auſtin give warning of even in baptizing) I know not what is; Let a man be a notorious Ranter, Sodomite, Scoffer at godlineſſe, drunkard, no matter what; this is known and proved, yet a Chriſtian nomine tenus, therefore you muſt baptize him. Where I pray do I ſpeak of baptizing any that is nomine tenus a Chriſtian? My opinion is, that ſuch that have the name Chriſtian, are baptized already, I hope ſuch contradictions ſeldom come from my pen. That theſe are no words of mine, my adverſary will acknowledge, and that any ſuch conſequence can be gathered from any thing that I have ſaid, that I muſt baptize perſons of this quality already baptized, the Reader can ſcarce imagine; this I impute to haſte or paſſion preventing or obſtructing the uſe of reaſon. He muſt then blot out Chriſtian nomine tenus, and inſert inſtead of it, an Heathen, Jew or Pagan (otherwiſe he is already a baptized perſon, and in incapacity for baptiſme) by the power of the Word preached, brought to renounce his way of Paganiſme, Judaiſme: and to profeſſe and engage to a Chriſtian faith and converſation. Theſe are the men that I would have baptized, and if we muſt account them to be dogs, and ſwine, all Scripture-baptizers are within the laſh, they have given baptiſme to them. That repentance as well as faith was required in baptiſme, appeares (ſaith he) by the ages following the Apoſtles, yea, and in the Apoſtles time likewiſe. A profeſſion of both was indeed required, they that renounced heathen worſhip, renounced heathen converſation with it; They engaged to a Chriſtian faith, and they engaged to a Chriſtian converſation. Mr. F. addes, For thoſe who would live in their luſts, they deferred their baptiſme, knowing what that required. I have read of the deferring of baptiſme in thoſe times, and the reaſons aſſigned, why they put it off: But I have not met with this reaſon. Mr. Marſhall in his defence of Infant-Baptiſme hath given many reaſons, why ſome put off baptiſme. Some to be baptized at the age that Chriſt was baptized; Some to be baptized in the river where he was baptized; Some to be baptized by ſome ſpecial Biſhop of eminent place; Some, (which it ſeems was moſt common) becauſe they conceived, that it takes away all ſin, and therefore they would have it delayed, till ſin was well over, for which he quotes many authorities: Tertullian (it appears) would have it delayed upon this ground, ſeeing he would not have unmarried perſons baptized, but to ſtay till luſt were extinguiſhed; and diſſwading from baptiſme in younger years, he hath theſe words, Quid feſtinat innocens aetas ad remiſſionem peccatorum? de baptiſ. cap. 18. Yet perhaps ſome might delay it upon the account that he mentions, though he quotes no authority for it, but that Tertullian and Nazianzen intimate it, one of whom was for delaying of baptiſme in the place quoted, the other againſt it, as I find him cited. But in caſe any did delay it upon the grounds by him mentioned, might it not be their fault that did adminiſter it? in keeping the door too narrow, as well as their ſin who put off the time of it, ſeeing Mr. F. himſelf complains of the rigour of ſome in New-England, in holding men off from entrance into Church-fellowſhip, by that door which is ſet up in the room and place of baptiſme.
Mr. Firmin, as well in his Serious queſtion ſtated, as in his Appendix againſt me, vouches many authorities, firſt Presbyterians, inſtancing in his margine Lond. Min. Jus Div pag. 115. But in my book that page hath no ſuch thing; Gilleſpies Aarons Rod quoting many pages, I can recompence him in ſetting up ſome of the Congregational way againſt him. Mr. Gilleſp. will not have a known unregenerate man baptized; But Mr. Cobbet ſaith, John did and might lawfully baptize thoſe multitudes, albeit in the general he knew that many, yea, moſt of them would prove falſe and frothy; And makes viſibility of intereſt in the Covenant the Churches guide in application of Baptiſme, pag. 52. And how large a viſibility of intereſt is, is cleer, and I have already ſhewen, Let his words before quoted be conſidered; and to theſe adde that which he hath, pag. 54, 55. The initiatory ſeal is not primarily and properly the ſeal of mans faith, or repentance, or obedience, but of Gods Covenant rather: The ſeal is to the Covenant, even Abrahams Circumciſion was not primarily a ſeal to his faith of righteouſneſſe; but to the righteouſneſſe of faith exhibited and offered in the Covenant; yea, to the Covenant it ſelf, or promiſe, which he had believed unto righteouſneſſe: hence the Covenant of grace is called the righteouſneſſe of faith, Rom. 10. Hence, Acts 2.38, 39. the ſeal of baptiſme is put to the promiſe, as the choyce matter and foundation in view, and as that was a ground of repentance it ſelf, Repent and be baptized, for the promiſe is to you: Not, for you have repented, as if that were the thing to be firſtly ſealed by baptiſme, but the promiſe rather.
Appendix, pag. 57. Mr. Firmin quotes in the Lump the Fathers, Councels, School-men, out of Gregory de Val. as if all were of that mind. In his Serious queſtion he quotes, Auſtin, Alexander Hales, Aquinas, Gregory de Valen. In his appendix, Juſtin Martyr, Concil. Naeoceſar. Concil. Nic. Concil. Elib. as ſtrict in admiſſion of their Catechumeni, concerning which I might have much to ſay.
Firſt, How would he like it in other things, to leave the clear rode and track of Scriptures, to hunt after humane authorities? If we can but ſay, From the beginning it was not ſo, In caſe the authorities were more in number, more eminent in honour, we have ſufficient. The Scripture-way taking in thoſe that the Word had brought to a profeſſion of Chriſtianity upon engagement to it, is as clear as though it were written with a ray of the Sun.
Secondly, For Fathers and Schoolmen, their opinion about Baptiſme, on which they ground the neceſſity of praerequiſites to it, is known; and as he may quote them againſt me, ſo I can quote them againſt him, and thoſe of his party. They maintain (and as unanimouſly as they do the thing in debate) that Sacraments confer grace on the receiver, in caſe he put no obſtacle, on which account they expect not grace in the perſon for baptiſme, (which they believe not to be poſſible, ſeeing the Sacrament is to work it) but a convenient diſpoſition to grace, which they call merit ex congruo. Let Suarez ſpeak in the name of the reſt, having laid down this Propoſition,dUt alicui digne detur baptiſmus, praeter voluntatem ſuſcipiendi Sacramentum neceſſaria eſt diſpoſitio conveniens ſanctitati Sacramenti. That Baptiſme may be worthily adminiſtred; beſides a willingneſſe to receive the Sacrament, a diſpoſition ſuitable to the holineſſe of the Sacrament is required. And then anſwering the queſtion, What this diſpoſition is, he anſwers,eReſp. Eam ſufficere & neceſſariam eſſe quae ad conſequendum effectum Baptiſmi fuerit ſufficiens ac neceſſaria: quia cum per baptiſmum detur gratia, ſi aliquis eſt recte diſpoſitus ad effectum baptiſmi conſequendum in inſtanti, quo receperit baptiſmum perfectum, recipiet gratiam: Ergo cum ſufficienti dignitate & ſanctitate recipit Sacramentum: Quia cum hoc ſit Sacramentum mortuorum non eſt ad illud digne ſuſcipi…ndum prae exigenda gratia ad quam conferendam ipſum eſt conſtitutum: Ergo ſufficiet illa diſpoſitio, cum qua Sacramentum conferet talem effectum. That is neceſſary and ſufficient, which is neceſſary and ſufficient to attain the effect of the Sacrament, and gives his reaſon, ſeeing by baptiſme grace is given; If any one be rightly diſpoſed to receive the effect of baptiſme, in the inſtant that he receives perfect Baptiſme, he ſhall receive grace; therefore he receives the Sacrament with ſufficient dignity and ſanctity; further adding, Seeing this is a Sacrament of the dead, grace is not praerequired for the receiving of it, being ordained to confer grace, that diſpoſition is ſufficient upon which the Sacrament confers ſuch an effect, Suarez in tertiam partem Thom. Tom. 3. Q. 68. Diſ. 24. art. 4. Sec. 2. p. 250. Our opinion being otherwiſe of the work of baptiſme, it is otherwiſe concerning admiſſion to baptiſme, when men are willing to be received into the number of Chriſtians, and will engage for Chriſtian wayes, (which neceſſarily implies a profeſſion of repentance of all unchriſtian practices) we judge them to have right of admiſſion.
Thirdly, How far rules laid down by ſome Fathers, and Councils for the way of diſcipline did exceed in rigour, hath been the complaint of many; not admitting thoſe that had been overtaken by temptation, to Church-fellowſhip: notwithſtanding any evidence of repentance, till after many years ſpace of humiliation; In which time how much advantage might be given to Satan, let men of experience judge. Mr. F. himſelf diſlikes their long deferring of their Catechumeni from baptiſme, and may not others have liberty to manifeſt their diſlike as well as he?
Fourthly, Let it be taken into due conſideration, whether ſuch rigour in holding converts off ſo long a ſpace; and requiring ſuch an height in preparatory graces, were not a great remora to the progreſſe of the Goſpel? and gaining in men to Chriſtian profeſſion? How ſpeedy a progreſſe the Goſpel made in the Apoſtles times we may ſee in the Acts of the Apoſtles, and Eccleſiaſtical Story. Dr. Andrewes in his Preface to his Work on the Commandements, quotes a teſtimony of Egeſippus, That by the diligent inſtructing of the Church, there was no known Common-Wealth of any part of the world inhabited, but within 40 years after Chriſts Paſſion received a great ſhaking off of heatheniſh Religion. But how ſlowly it proceeded after ſome time, is overplain: May not the difference of their way, that thus ſwerved from the Apoſtles, and men in Apoſtolique times, be aſſigned as a great reaſon? We find them facile in admiſſion, but in the mean time exceeding plain in making known what was required of them in order to the end of their profeſſed faith, their everlaſting ſalvation that were admitted.
Fifthly, If it may be granted, (which according to Scripture rules can never be denied) that men wrought off from Turciſme, Paganiſme, Judaiſme, and brought to a profeſſion of Chriſtianity, and a profeſſed engagement to Chriſtian wayes, have their right, and ſtand in title to baptiſme; If then upon obſervation of inconveniences ariſing, (as jealouſies conceived that they may offer themſelves out of deſign to work themſelves into a fairer opportunity of perſecution, as was ſuſpected in Paul) the Church in Prudence, for ſome ſpace ſhall delay their admiſſion, I ſhall not contend; OnelyOnly I aſſert their right, and juſtifie their practice, that proceed accordingly, and unleſſe ſome great cauſe appear to the Churches prejudice, tendring themſelves they are actually to be received.