Answer to a Treatise Entitled The Vanity of Childish Baptism, Tract · Answer to tract · Part 3 – Part 4
The third Argument, or Conſideration againſt our Baptiſme, taken from the Miniſters (by whom adminiſtred) examined.
YOur third Conſideration againſt baptizing of infants amongſt us, is taken from the Calling, Office, Power, and Authoritie of the Miniſters, by whom they are baptized. Which ſubject becauſe it hath been largely handled by others, ſhall be lightly paſſed over. Yet we will try what you ſay to it with ſhew of truth, or weight.
A. R.Whereas you ſay, That our Miniſters power and authoritie was received from Biſhops, who received their power from the Antichriſtian State of Rome, as they confeſſe; ſo that the baptiſme is from Antichriſt, not from Chriſt.
Anſwer. 1 I anſwer. Firſt, our Miniſters have their authoritie, and office, from Ieſus Chriſt; as many as being fitted for that function, upon due triall, and approbation of Miniſters, (though a Biſhop, or Biſhops have had an hand; yea, a chiefe ſtroke therein) and the choyce or acceptation of Gods people; have ſet upon the worke of the Miniſtery.
Anſwer. 2 Secondly, a thing is not therefore forthwith unwarrantable, or Antichriſtian, becauſe it comes from a Biſhop, or from the Pope; or authoritie derived from them. Is the doctrine of the unitie of Gods Eſſence, Trinitie of Perſons, Creation of the world, &c. therefore unlawfull, or Antichriſtian, becauſe holden by them? If the Scriptures of the Old and New Teſtament have been in the cuſtodie of the Papiſts, as the Old Teſtament in the cuſtodie of the Iewes; ſo that we have no Bibles now, but what came ſucceſſively from the Iewes and Papiſts: Muſt we therefore reject the Scripture as Antichriſtian, or Iewiſh, and look for immediate revelations? Or if the Biſhops had a hand in the Tranſlation of our Bibles; muſt they therefore be caſt away as Antichriſtian: ſo that neither you nor your diſciples may meddle with them, becauſe they have paſſed through the hands of the Biſhops? If any of you have heard any Sacred truths from Miniſters (which have beene ordained by Biſhops) which you ſeemed to beleeve for a time: muſt you of neceſſitie caſt them away as falſhoods, and Antichriſtian Tenents, falſe doctrines or nullities? as you will make their baptiſme Antichriſtian baptiſme, the reaſon is the ſame. Take heed leſt in ſo doing you caſt away your ſoules.
Anſwer. 3 Thirdly, many things that Antichriſt, and they that are held under Antichriſts tyranny, hold and profeſſe, are not Antichriſtian, but truly Chriſtian. As that the Canonicall Scriptures are the word of God, that God is one in Eſſence, yet three in Perſons; that Chriſt is the Sonne of God, &c. And many things taught by them, many acts done by them, are not Antichriſtian, but Chriſtian. For Antichriſt was foretold to ſit in the Temple of God;2 Theſſ. 2.4. which he would never have beene ſuffered to do, had he not profeſſed and practiſed ſome things that for their ſubſtance were of God. And as for the faithfull over whom he did tyrannize, while he ſate in the Temple of God: though they were abuſed and cheated by him, with many ſuperſtitions and errours, that he impoſed upon them: yet there were ſome ſaving truths that they profeſſed, and holy and acceptable worſhip, and practiſe which they did performe, which in Chriſt God was pleaſed to accept; ſo that it is fond to reaſon; Baptiſme, Ordination and the Scriptures were received from Antichriſt, therefore Antichriſtian.
Anſwer. 4 Fourthly, the power and authoritie of the Miniſters doth not depend on the qualitie or ſtation (eſpecially in reſpect of the worſt part) of the perſon or perſons, chuſing or ordaining them. Elſe men could never be aſſured of their owne or others miniſtrie, whether it be true or falſe: (for the qualitie of men is onelyonly knowne unto God, and in the ſtation of the beſt there may be ſomewhat irregular and wanting exact perfection) but principally on Chriſts inward call, diſcerned by the gifts, propenſitie, and ſincerity of the parties undertaking that office; al which are requiſite, if they will, to their own comfort, and with Gods approbation exerciſe their miniſterie; although the want of ſome of theſe hinder not, but that he which by Gods providence is called to the miniſterie, may have power and authoritie ſufficient from God to be an inſtrument of God, for the good of others, though he were weake and unfound himſelfe;Mat. 10.4. and 40. as we may ſee in Iudas: (who was one of thoſe to whom Chriſt ſaith, He that receiveth you, receiveth me, &c.) the Scribes and Phariſees, (concerning whom Chriſt gave a charge that they ſhould be heard and obeyed in thoſe things which they taught ſitting in Moſes chaire:Matth. 23.2, 3. Phil. 1.15, 16.18. Act. 6.5. Rev. 2.6. vide Brightman, in locum. though their lives were not exemplary) the envious, contentious, and unſincere Preachers of Chriſt (in whoſe preaching yet Paul rejoyced;) in Demas, and Nicolas the Deacon, who as Interpreters hold, proved afterward the ring-leader of the Nicolaitanes.) This (I ſay) Chriſts inward call either of approbation, as in the firſt; or of providence, as in the later, is the principall thing, whereon the power and the authoritie of the Miniſter doth depend. And then the leſſe principall are the ordination and choyce of them, by ſuch as are the Miniſters and people of God, by profeſſion (though ſomething Antichriſtian, or otherwiſe ſinfull may cleave unto them, in regard of their qualities or ſtations.) And laſtly, the expreſſion of the end for which they were ordained, viz. to adminiſter the holy things of God. By which two latter, viz. the outward calling, and the manifeſtation of the end, the hearts of Gods people may be aſſured of Chriſts inward calling, ſo farre as that they may be confident, that whiles they diſcharge the duties of Miniſters, it ſhall not be without efficacie for their good, if they be not wanting to themſelves.
Anſwer. 5 Fifthly, as Paul proveth his Apoſtleſhip (when it was queſtioned amongſt the Corinthians by occaſion of the whiſperings of the falſe apoſtles, who could not otherwiſe inſinuate themſelves into the favour of the Corinthians, but by traducing Paul and bringing him out of favour with them, as no Apoſtle of Chriſt, which hath beene ever the guiſe of falſe Teachers (which practiſe is too rife now adayes) As I ſay, Paul proves his Apoſtleſhip amongſt other arguments from Gods bleſſing upon his miniſtery (Are not you my worke in the Lord?2 Cor. 9.1, 2. If I be not an Apoſtle unto others; yet doubtleſſe I am unto you: for the ſeale of mine Apoſtleſhip are ye in the Lord;) Which muſt needs be a good argument, both becauſe the Apoſtle uſed it, who would not bring a weake and non-concluding argument; and alſo becauſe as God will not bleſſe any Ordinances but his owne, to work repentance, faith, and holineſſe; ſo neither will he bleſſe any Miniſtery but his owne Miniſtery: ſo through the mercy of God our Miniſters have a ſufficient anſwer for all that ſhall examine them concerning their miniſtery. The Converſion, Humiliation, Reformation, Faith, Conſolation, heavenly Ioy, and Holineſſe, which God thereby hath wrought in thouſands of ſoules (to his everlaſting glory be it ſpoken) evince them to be the Miniſters of Chriſt, whoſe worke and ſeale ſo many faithfull ſoules are, and prove that all thoſe which goe about to perſwade the people that they are Antichriſtian miniſters are ſlanderers:2 Cor. 9.13, 14, 15. Like thoſe falſe Apoſtles of which Paul ſpeaks, deceitfull workers, transforming themſelves into the Apoſtles of Chriſt; and no marvell, for Satan himſelfe is transformed into an Angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his miniſters alſo be transformed into the Miniſters of righteouſneſſe, whoſe end ſhall be according to their workes. Or like thoſe deceivers which had ſo bewitched the Galatians, Gal. 4.14, 15, 16, 17, 18.that whereas they had received the Apoſtle as an Angel of God, even as Chriſt Ieſus, &c. yet after a while accounted him their enemie, becauſe he told them the truth, whom they zealouſly affected but not well, deſiring to ſeparate thoſe Galatians from the Apoſtles, that they might have all their affection. But I will leave ſuch deceivers and thoſe which are deceived by them (if they doe not truely repent) to the judgement of him on whoſe Miniſters they raile; knowing that he who hath ſo farre honoured their faithfull labours, will vindicate them in his due time, from all thoſe contumelious aſperſions, wherewith on all ſides they are laden: if they continue faithfully and reſolutely doing his worke, notwithſtanding all oppoſitions.
Your reaſoning that you falſely ſay, the Non-conformiſts have taught you, is idle. Did the Non-conformiſts ever call midwives Antichriſtian miniſters? midwives were never capable of miniſterial functions, nor called to the miniſterie by the ordination of Miniſters, nor choyce or acceptation of the people; neither have they any miniſteriall power from Chriſt. But our Miniſters have, although there have beene ſome diſorder or defect, in the externall exhibition of this power, through the fault of men, which yet probably was nothing ſo great, as was the diſorder among the Iewes in calling the Scribes and Phariſees, whoſe miniſterie notwithſtanding our Saviour enjoynes the people to uſe.
To an Objection which you bring in of our Miniſters: That they received their office of Biſhops as Elders: not as Lord Biſhops. You anſwer: That if our Biſhops be lawfull Elders, they muſt be Elders choſen by a true Church, which is a Congregation conſtituted of beleevers and Saints by calling, Act. 2.41. 1 Cor. 1.2. Phil. 1.7. Rom. 1.7, 8. To which your Anſwer, I reply.
Firſt, If you ſpeake of Biſhops being lawfull Elders, ſo as to be right Miniſters in all circumſtances, and particulars of their ſtation and calling, ſo that there needs no reformation: we doe not plead for them as lawfull Elders in that ſenſe; as knowing that ſome evill adhereth unto their Miniſtery, which being removed, they become lawfull Miniſters. But ſo farre we hold them lawfull Elders, as that their calling of Miniſters, Preaching, adminiſtring of Sacraments, (when done for the ſubſtance according to the rule of Gods word) are not meere nullities, nor prophanations of Gods Ordinances to Gods people or Miniſters that make uſe of them; but may be, and oft are, effectuall for their good; ſo that if theſe Biſhops will caſt away that which being Antichriſtian adhereth unto them;Act. 20.28. 1 Pet. 5.2. and faithfully diſcharge the office of Elders and Miniſters of Ieſus Chriſt, faithfully feeding the flock of God, they are to be imbraced as Chriſts Miniſters, and that without any new Ordination;Rev. 2.3. as may appeare, Revel. 2. and 3. Chapters: where the Angels or Miniſters which had left their firſt love,Rev. 2.13, 14. had them which held the doctrine of Balaam, which taught Balak to caſt a ſtumbling-block before the children of Iſrael, Rev. 2.20.to eate things offered to idols, and to commit fornication, and had them which held the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which Chriſt hated; yea which ſuffered the woman Iezabel, which called her ſelfe a Propheteſſe, to teach and deceive Chriſts ſervants, &c.Rev. 3.15. Thoſe which had a name to live, and yet were dead, whoſe workes were not perfect, ſuch as were neither hot, nor cold, but luke-warme. Such, I ſay, are ſtill called Angels, bidden repent and doe their firſt workes; with a promiſe at laſt implied, that they ſhall keep their ſtations of Angels. And this is ſufficient to warrant unto us,Matth. 23.1, 2, 3, &c. per totum. the acts which they doe as Miniſters. The Scribes and Phariſees had many corruptions (in Chriſts time, and ſo had the Prieſts both before, and in Chriſts time) adhering to their function, and thoſe very groſſe; yet was not their miniſtery vaine to thoſe which according to Chriſts appointment made uſe of it.
Now to your poſition; That, they muſt be Elders choſen by a true Church, which is a congregation of beleevers. That I may know your meaning: I would demand of you,
Firſt, Whether you mean that of neceſſitie the whole Church and every particular member therof, muſt be preſent at the chooſing of a Miniſter, and give their voice expreſſely therein. If this be your meaning, it is neither proved in the Scriptures you bring, nor any other. Or whether by being choſen by a Church, you meane no more then to be choſen by ſome ſpeciall perſons in a Church, that repreſent the whole Church. If this be your meaning, I will concurre with you in that particular, as knowing that women and children have no voyce, though members. Nor is it neceſſary that every particular member of the reſt ſhould give his vote: ſith at ſuch times oft ſome are occaſioned to be abſent, and if preſent, they yet may be ſo many, that they cannot well give particularly their voices, and though many refuſe to give their votes, yet if the greater part vote for him it is ſufficient.
Secondly, Whereas you ſay. Conſtitute of Saints and beleevers by calling. I aske, whether you meane thoſe that are ſo effectually called, that they are really and truly become Saints and beleevers, ſo that there is not a wicked man or hypocrite among them, and that the mixture of wicked men or hypocrites among them which call the Elders, cauſeth them not to be true Elders. If this be your meaning, looke over that place which you brought for proofe of your opinion, and you ſhall finde it clearely confuted; 1 Cor. 1.2. if you compare that verſe with Chap. 3. v. 3. and Chap. 5. and 6. throughout. Chap. 8. and 10. and 11. and 15. and 2 Cor. 12.20, 21. and almoſt throughout both Epiſtles. By comparing which places you ſhall ſee, that theſe beleevers and Saints by calling, did not ſo walke, either in regard of ſoundneſſe of judgement, puritie of worſhip, or holineſſe of life, as to give cleare evidence of their effectuall calling or ſound ſanctification. So compare, Phil. 1.7. with Chap. 3.18, 19. and Rom. 1.7, 8. with Chap. 16. v. 17, 18. and then ſpeake your conſcience, whether you can judge all theſe down right beleevers effectually called, really Saints. But if by beleevers, or Saints by calling, you meane ſuch as are called to faith and holineſſe, and withall make a profeſſion by externally giving their names up to Chriſt, and accepting outwardly the covenant, promiſing faith and obedience unto Gods word; though there may be hypocrites and wicked livers: we concurre with you, as knowing that they muſt be Chriſtians by profeſſion, and partakers of the heavenly calling (not Iews, Pagans or other Infidels) that goe to the making up of a viſible Church; and ſuch are our Churches, whereby the Elders of whom we ſpeak have been choſen or accepted.
Thirdly, whether your meaning be the Congregation or people only, without the precedency, concurrence, examination, direction, and Ordination of Miniſters, muſt chuſe their Governours or Officers, or elſe they are not true Governours or Officers: If you meane ſo, looke backe on the Scripture cited by you Acts 14.23. with other places, Act. 6.3.6. 1 Tim. 4.14. and 5.22. where it appeareth, that Miniſters had the chiefe hand in making Miniſters.
Now theſe things propounded: I anſwer to your poſition, that we can eaſily ſhew, that our people in England, in regard of their generall and unanimous conſent to (and profeſſion of faith in) the ſame truth, contained in the book of God, acceptation of the covenant, and giving up of their names unto Chriſt, are a Church or Congregation of faithfull people or Saints by calling, though many doe not walke anſwerably to their calling (the greater is their ſinne, and ſhame, and ſhall be their condemnation unleſſe they repent.) And in regard of the many ſeverall companies of the faithfull, by whom Gods worſhip is performed apart one from another; there are many Churches or Congregations of Saints by calling in our Land. We can ſhew alſo, that although our Elders of whom we ſpeake, have not been choſen by the whole Congregations, in reſpect of every particular member; yet by ſome ſpeciall perſons (in behalfe of the whole Congregation) to whom that charge was committed by them, (or (which was their ſinne) uſurped from them) and that the people at leaſt by accepting them ſo choſen, did make choice of them in their own perſons. And that whatſoever diſorders or defects have been in the choice, do not nullifie their miniſtery. As for ſuch as have acknowledged the unlawfulneſſe of their miniſtery, or plead meere qualifications (of whom you ſpeake) let them anſwer for themſelves, how they can, we are not bound to ſtand to their principles, or maintain their opinions.
As for the ſeven next Objections, into the Anſwer whereof you digreſſe (moſt of them being belike fained of your ſelf, that you may finde ſomewhat to ſay) beſide extravagant impertinencies, malicious and maſter-like cenſures, and ſome unqueſtioned truths, which are yeelded by us, but do nothing profit your cauſe, nor hurt ours: I ſee nothing that it is worth while to anſwer, but what may be ſufficiently anſwered unto, by what hath been ſaid before. Neither do I intend to follow you in your idle roving. OnelyOnly it is to be obſerved, that this A. R. cannot endure to heare of a Synode, though a ſpeciall and maine ordinance of God, to compoſe differences, and quiet the hearts of Gods people, which have been diſquieted by trouble-Churches. See Acts 15. the whole Chapter.
Becauſe (ſaith he) a Synod cannot make a Laſt to ſuit every ones foot, which in plain Engliſh is this, they will not ſuffer Ieſuits, Papiſts, Arminians, idle Miniſters, Anabaptiſts, Antinomians, and Familiſts to have their own way in practiſe, worſhip, opinion, &c. Neither will they ſuffer every man to abuſe the Scripture after his owne fancie, and vent abroad his poyſonous conceipts among the ſimple, to draw diſciples after them. As if it were better to let every man follow his owne deviſes, and labour to draw others into his opinions (ſo that whoſoever is moſt cunning, pragmaticall and able to conform his doctrin to the humours of men, ſhall goe away with moſt diſciples, to the overthrow of thouſands of ſoules,) than that there ſhould be a conſultation of godly, learned, & conſcientious Miniſters, about the eſtabliſhment of religion. And here it is further to be noted, that the children of darkeneſſe, though in ſome particulars they be oppoſite one to another, as Papiſts, Arminians, ignorant, lazy and malignant Miniſters and licentious Atheiſts on the one ſide, and Anabaptiſts with Antinomians and Familiſts on the other ſide, doe differ from, yea directly oppoſe one another in ſome particulars; yet they agree together, as in oppoſing Gods faithfull Miniſters and people, ſo in hating the light, and refuſing to be brought unto the triall of Gods word, and to be tyed unto the Rules thereof, as they ſhall be found out and applyed by an Aſſembly of faithfull Miniſters.
Again, it is to be obſerved, That theſe men take it in high indignation, that any ſhould go about to reſtrain them from abuſing the Scripture, and carrying about the ſimple people with every wind of doctrin, by whom they may be had in admiration, while they are ſuffered to go on in their bold preſumption, and confident venting of their ignorant conceits, and malicious rayling againſt authoritie; which may appeare by this Authours abuſe of Scripture, for a colour of accuſation of thoſe that would reſtraine them, and by his tale of a Miniſter in the Weſt. But I come to the fourth Conſideration.
The fourth Argument Anſwered.
YOur fourth Conſideration then is taken from the ground of baptizing children; which as you are ſhort in urging, I will be ſhort in anſwering.A. R. Whereas therefore you ſay, The faith and repentance of the Sureties, is the ground of our baptizing, as you would prove from the queſtions propounded at the baptizing, and out of the Catechiſme. Whence you conclude, that it is not true Baptiſme; becauſe in true Baptiſme, the faith and repentance of the partie baptized is the ground.
Anſwer. I Anſwer. Not the faith and repentance of the Sureties as you pretend, is the ground of our Baptiſme, (neither do we ſay ſo) but Gods gracious Covenant which he hath made with the parents and their children; (of which hereafter) Which Covenant that parents may publiquely profeſſe themſelves to have intereſt in, and with them their children, it is convenient that they (and other Sureties, if they ſee it good, to joyne ſuch with themſelves, to undertake what they promiſe in the behalfe of their children, in caſe parents ſhould be negligent, ignorant, or by ſpeedy death, or otherwiſe diſabled to bring up their children religiouſly) I ſay it is convenient, that they ſhould make a profeſſion of their faith and repentance, which yet doth not at all prove that their faith and repentance is the ground of the childrens Baptiſme. But the tenour of Gods gracious covenant, under which they profeſſe themſelves (and with them their children) to be, is the ground of this act. Now though there may be ſome unjuſtifiable or unfit paſſages, in the Catechiſme or manner of Baptiſme, whence you fetch your Argument, (ſeeing that it is apparent, that our ground of baptizing Infants, is the Covenant of God made with the parents, or thoſe which are in ſtead of parents, which Covenant that they are in, they teſtifie by profeſſing their faith and repentance, and conſidering that the anſwering of Sureties, and the Catechizing of Children, doth nothing touch the eſſence of Baptiſme) thoſe paſſages nothing prejudice the truth of Childrens Baptiſme. But concerning this matter, viz. the ground of Childrens Baptiſme more hereafter.