An Answer to Mr Tombes Examination of Infant Baptism, Response (3 of 3)

An Answer to Mr Tombes Examination of Infant Baptism · Response (3 of 3)

p. 48The third argument is taken from the practice of the Apoſtles and John the Baptiſt, which ſaith he, are the beſt Expoſitors of the Inſtitution, but I deny it, the expoſition cannot goe before the text, John the Baptiſt that never lived to ſee the inſtitution could not expound the words he never heard of: but he affirmeth that baptiſme cannot be adminiſtred to Infants after the ſame manner as the Apoſtles and John the Baptiſt did adminiſter it; for confirmation whereof he affirmeth that the Jewes did confeſſe their ſinnes before Baptiſme, and the Apoſtles before Baptiſme, did require ſhews of faith and repentance.

Firſt, that they did confeſſe ſins before Baptiſme, he proveth out of Mat. 3.6. they were baptized of John in Jordan confeſſing their ſins: but doth this prove that every particular perſon did confeſſe his ſinnes to John the Baptiſt, and that this confeſſion was before Baptiſme, or that it was an orall confeſſion? none of all theſe things are neceſſarily drawne out of the words; the words are, Jeruſalem p. 49and all Judea, and the region round about Jordan were baptized confeſſing their ſinnes. Now I have formerly ſhewed that a Nation, or Country, or City may be ſaid to doe a thing, though the organicall part principall men only doe it. Again, the text ſaith, that they were baptized confeſſing their ſinnes, implying that the act of Baptiſme was a confeſſion of ſinne, as a man that waſheth doth by waſhing confeſſe (though he ſay nothing) that he was defiled, but if an orall confeſſion which the words do not yeeld, yet whether they made their confeſſion before or after baptiſme, is not ſaid, nor can be proved out of the Text; neither can a precept be drawn from an hiſtoricall narration, that theſe men did confeſſe their ſins, it is as much as it can prove, that it is lawfull for thoſe that can confeſſe their ſins ſo to do; but all that may be baptized muſt confeſſe their ſins, will no way follow: For the ſecond place, Luke 3.10. that is, ſome miſtaken place.

He further affirmeth, that the Apoſtles did require before baptiſme, ſhewes of faith, and repentance, and citeth many places out of the Acts; whereas not one place that he citeth, proveth any ſuch thing, that the Apoſtles did require any man to make any ſhew of his faith, or repentance before baptiſme; it is true, they teach men to believe and repent, but not take any account, or require them, or any perſon to give any account to any Miniſter before they were baptized, let that be proved, and the buſineſſe is ended, to uſe his phraſe; but, to give a full anſwer to all that can be alledged of that kinde from Scripture, I ſay, that the Apoſtles did indeed preach faith, repentance, and baptiſme altogether, but whatſoever was ſaid of faith and repentance, in reference to baptiſme, was either doctrinall, or hiſtoricall; what was doctrinall, was without any implication of account of it: what is hiſtorically related of faith, and repentance, cannot imply any confeſſion or manifeſtation, otherwiſe then in the very act of baptiſme it ſelf, ſeeing it was impoſſible for the Apoſtles to baptize nations, and countries, and cities, if no credence had been given to the doctrine of baptiſme; ſo that their declaration that they believed and were baptized, might well be related by the Hiſtorian, though nothing were intended but that, that they were baptized: For, when Hiſtorians relate any fact done, they take liberty to obſerve the neceſſary motives and circumſtances of the fact, without any other implication, then that the fact was done; nay, had not the Holy Ghoſt mentioned any beleeving at all, but only ſaid that they were baptized, we might have inferred from the fact, without raſhneſſe, that if Peter, or Paul, or any of the Apoſtles did baptize, them that Judea, Jeruſalem, that is, the prevailing party did beleeve, that there was ſome kinde of credit given to their doctrine, that they did believe there was ſome kinde of good or benefit that was like to come of baptiſme, or otherwiſe they would not have endured one or two men to have baptized them, but that a pro…ſſion of faith in a catecheticall way, whereof the Apoſtles did, and of duty ought p. 50to take account, that is not ſaid; I hope, to make appear on juſt occaſion was not done.

The fourth argument is taken from the next age immediately ſucceding the Apoſtles; what is ſaid concerning that point, is not argumentative, it dependeth only upon humane teſtimony, and men that give teſtimony thereto, are partially related where their teſtimony is agreed upon, that they did ſay ſo, as they are reported, yet their credit is queſtioned by him that diſliketh their ſaying; ſometimes that part of the work, out of which any thing is alledged, is proclaimed ſpurious, and that very author that we are content to alledge, with honour, when he ſpeaketh for us, him we beſpatter and vilifie, when againſt us; ſo that what can be ſaid of this kind, ſavoreth rather of affection, oſtentation of reading, then of argument, and yeeldeth matter of concertation, rather then ſatisfaction; and therefore I leave the Reader that deſireth to know more of this matter, to Dr. Holmes, and others, that may wreſtle with Mr. Tombes in this point, my reſolution being only to deal with him in ſuch things as may carry ſhews of argument out of Scripture, and ſo I come to the next argument.

The firſt argument is of the ſame nature with this, that the ages that did uſe baptiſme, took it upon wrong principles, as a tradition and imitation of Jewiſh circumciſion, without univerſall practice, mixed with other errors. Among Apoſtolicall traditions, many were vainly reported and taken up to countenance ſeverall errors, as delivered from the Apoſtles; if ſome have diſclaimed the proof of Scripture for childrens baptiſme, and held it notwithſtanding lawfull from weaker grounds, that doth not any way weaken the authority of Scripture, and ſtrength of reaſon taken from thence. If any one hath proved baptiſme lawfull from Apoſtolicall tradition, that doth not hinder me, or any other from proving it lawfull by Scripture, neither doth the mixing it with errors in the ſame perſon, make the baptiſme of Infants erroneous, if ſo, all truths would quickly be turned into errors, ſeeing few men have been without their ſlips, which yet have not only held, but defended and propagated with admiration many pretious truths: Mr. Tombes would be loth, if his Anabaptiſme be convicted erroneous, that all that he hath, or ſhall hereafter ſpeak, ſhould be therefore reputed erroneous: by the ſame reaſon, all the truths that were taught among Papiſts, are eo nomine erroneous, becauſe they taught them: and ſo not only the doctrine of the Trinity, but the incarnation of Chriſt, th… … of the dead, were therefore erroneous, becauſe thoſe that held …, held likewiſe many other hereſies, and ſo his tenth argument … …wered.

His 6, 7, 8, and 9. … neer alike, and all to little purpoſe, that I had thought wholly to … them, but that men would have given ſome other conſtruction then … were weak, and therefore omitted, I ſhall therefore ſay ſomething of …, le…t men willing to be deceived, ſhould place ſtrength, where indeed there is none.

p. 51He telleth us in his ſixth argument, that Infants baptiſme hath cauſed many inventions to ſupport it, and hath occaſioned defect in Church policy, but proveth none of that which he ſaith: he only affirmeth, that Infants-baptiſime was ſupported by ſureties and Epiſcopall confirmation: and that it brought in Church-covenant as a preparation to the Lords Supper, for abuſes that may creep in with any duty, they do not take away the goodneſſe or lawfulneſſe of the duty it ſelf.

His ſeventh argument accuſeth baptiſme of Infants, with four errors: Firſt, that baptiſme conferreth grace by the work done: The ſecond is regeneration: The third, Infants dying are ſaved by the faith done: The fourth, regenerate perſons may fall from grace.

To theſe two arguments, I plainly ſay, that none of all theſe things are occaſioned by Infants baptiſme, or if ſo, men may not doubt of the goodneſſe of all ſuch things as wicked men may, or will take occaſion to be offended at: for then Chriſt and the Goſpel ſhould be principally queſtioned, the great ſtumbling ſtone and rock of offence; ſo that occaſion of offence is an argument, rather of goodneſſe then of fault, Satan being moſt ready to entice us to corrupt our beſt actions.

What, doth baptizing Infants imply the conferring of grace by the work done? nay, we ſay of Baptiſme, as Saint Paul of circumciſion, that is, not baptiſme that is outward in the ceremony, but that which is of the heart; but the praiſe of that is not of man, but of God: we cannot praiſe men for baptiſme of the heart, God baptizeth, ſeeth, judgeth the heart, we baptiſe the body, but leave the reſidue to God only; in ſteed of Chriſt, we teach thoſe children that by their parents are brought to be enrolled the diſciples of Chriſt, the things that Chriſt hath commmanded us, and tell the baptized, when they come to be catechiſed, that they muſt have the effect of their baptiſme by faith in Chriſt, and not by the work done. What Mr. Tombes, are all Pedobaptiſts Papiſts? theſe are ſtrange calumnies, and why muſt Infants baptiſme neceſſarily imply, that the regenerate may fall away from grace? can none of your baptized perſons that are baptized being of full yeers fall away from the effect and benefit of their baptiſme? if that be not an hereſie, that ſuch men as are judged believers by your Miniſters, and ſo adjudged fit for baptiſme, and baptized, cannot ever after fall away from grace, I know not what is. I hope Religion and knowledge of God, is not brought to that outward formality that all ſhould conſiſt in your humane judicature▪ it ſeems, Mr. Tombes, when he baptizeth any he will promiſe the parties he baptizeth, that they ſhall never fall from grace. I have heard many ignorant people uſe this argument, but that Mr. Tombes, a man cried up for learning, ſhould uſe ſuch an argument, is admirable and ſtrange to me; and certainly, by this Mr. Tombes doth plainly confute himſelf guilty of that opinion, that baptiſme doth conferre grace by the work done: For he inferreth, that if children may be baptized in Infancy, then men may fall away from grace, becauſe many, not withſtanding their p. 52baptiſme, become wicked afterward, doth not this imply, that if they were baptized, they were gracious? if baptiſme do not conferre grace by the work done, how can it be inferred, that ſuch men, as after baptiſme turn wicked, do fall away from grace? Saint Paul, ſpeaking of falſe teachers, 1 Joh. 2.19. ſaith of them, they went from us, becauſe they were not of us: not that they fell away from grace, but they deſerted the profeſſion, becauſe they were not gracious: but, ſaith Mr. Tombes, if baptiſme be adminiſtred to Infants, and they walk not according to their profeſſion, they fall from grace, no ſuch matter unleſſe Mr. Tombes will ſay, baptiſme cannot be adminiſtred but to the gracious, they fall from baptiſme, and ſo will many that Mr. Tombes, or any the moſt diſcerning of them all, notwithſtanding all the caution that can be taken, or elſe it were a moſt happy caſe to come under their hands which cannot be imagined, unleſſe it flow from the oper… tion of the work done, ſome of them that paſſe their examination will undoubtedly be unfaithull, or at leaſt may be ſuch, for ought they can do to prevent it; ſo that if they do deceive them and obtain baptiſme, then baptiſme muſt conferre the grace, or they may remain ungracious ſtill; and ſo notwithſtanding their baptiſme, they cannot be ſaid to fall away from grace which they never had, though they ſhould renounce their baptiſme, muchleſſe by not walking anſwerable to the profeſſion into which they are baptized, or not behaving themſelves as Diſciples ought to do.

The eighth Argument is taken from this, That baptiſme of Infants hath cauſed many faults and abuſes in diſcipline, worſhip, and converſation; this is likewiſe only ſaid, nothing proved in it, he reckoneth ten of theſe: Firſt, private baptiſme: Secondly, baptiſme by women: Thirdly, of unborn Infants: Fourthly, Baptizing Infants of uncertain progeny: Fifthly, they that are baptized in the the name of the Lord, know not the Lord: Sixthly, it hath brought in the admiſſion of ignorant and prophane perſons into the Church, and unto the Lords Supper; for who can deny rightly the right of the Church to the baptized? Seventhly, it p…rverteth the order of diſcipline; that firſt a man be baptized, and after among the catechiſed: Eighthly, the ſacrament of baptiſme is turned into a prophane meeting to feaſt together. Ninthly, men forget baptiſme; ſo that it hath the force of a carnall right, and not a ſpirituall inſtitution: Tenthly, it taketh away, or at leaſt diminiſheth the zeal and induſtry of knowing the Goſpell: But, be all theſe faults? and are all of theſe flowing from Infants baptiſme?

Firſt, I ſhall ſhew, that many of theſe have no affinity at all with Infants baptiſme. Firſt, private baptiſme hath nothing to do with Infants baptiſme; for that Infants may be baptized publikely; nay, Lawes may be made, requiring their publike baptiſme, though Infants; nay, the Directory is at this time ſo penned, and in all times publike baptiſme was principally aimed at and deſired; and for the moſt part ſo performed; what he meaneth by private baptiſme, I do p. 53not know; baptiſme in an houſe among ſo many as make a congregation, I cannot diſcerne how that can well be accounted any ſuch fault: I am ſure he hath not proved it.

2. He telleth us that baptizing of Infants hath brought in the baptizing by women, as though Miniſters may not baptize children as well as women.

3. The baptizing of Infants hath brought in the baptizing of children not brought to light: for my part, I can ſay nothing, but wonder at ſuch an inference.

4. As for baptizing of children of uncertaine progenie; I know nothing of it, but that if any man that is a Chriſtian himſelfe will undertake to bring him up a Diſciple of Chriſts, ſuch a childe may be baptized.

5. They are baptized in the name of the Lord that know not the Lord: what inconvenience from that? It is true, St. Paul ſaith, No man can call upon him of whom he hath not heard: It would indeed put on the forme of ſome probablity (if it were referred unto the perſon that did call on the name of the Lord) that it were ſomething abſurd: but doth it follow, becauſe no man can call on him of whom he hath not heard; therefore he cannot call on the name of God in the behalfe of any but ſuch as have heard of God? none can pray but thoſe that have faith: but may not a faithfull man pray for an Infidell? may not a Chriſtian parent pray for his childe, becauſe the childe doth not know the Lord? this were very ſtrange: as for the childs conſent, I ſay ſo farre as concernes the Covenant between God and man which is ſealed in Baptiſme, conſent is not required on our part to the obligation: we are bound to obedience, and are under the ſanction of condemnation if we conſent not: and this is the very reaſon why circumciſion which had as great a reſpect to the circumciſion of the heart as baptiſme, was as vaine, and nothing without faith as baptiſme was, yet ſtamped on the infants of the Jewes, wherein the Scripture is not ſilent; therefore this argument is not of any force that baptiſme is not to be adminiſtred to Infants, becauſe they doe not conſent, unleſſe the conſent of the party to be baptized were required to the obligation: if the childe were free from thoſe duties unto which he is tyed by his baptiſme untill he had conſented thereunto, it were a great wrong to baptize him and thereby lay a yoke upon him without his conſent, from which he were otherwiſe free; but whether he conſent or not, the obligation of obedience and faith lyeth on him, and the ſanction of wrath and condemnation attendeth on the Infidell and diſobedient whether they conſent or not, whether they are baptized or not, ſo that conſent both to obedience, and faith, and baptiſme; whether baptiſme be repreſented to them as already done, or to be done, is required of him that is adultus or of yeares, as a duty, not as liberty; … …fuſing to conſent is a ſinne and puniſhable both by God and man, though theſe conſiſt much in internalls, of which only God can judge and puniſh: faith and obedience p. 54of the heart; but as for the externalls of Gods worſhip, ſuch as are the externall rite of baptiſme that is to be performed in the ſight of men, and men may require him that is of yeares to conſent to his baptiſme, laying the neglect on him as a ſinne, and puniſhing him for it as for adultery, fornication, or any other publike offence, leaving the matter of faith which is private, to the judgement of God: ſo likewiſe may the Nations receive baptiſme for the whole, as all other externalls, requiring parents to bring their children as before: I have thought good to ſpeake ſomething to this point, becauſe it ſeemeth to carry ſome ſhew of reaſon with it, that no man ſhould be tyed to a Covenant unto which hee never gave any conſent, which in free covenants is true, though in publike covenants we are tyed by the covenants of our Anceſtors, and are bound by thoſe lawes wee are borne under, made by the conſent of our parents; but in the caſe between God and us, he made us, and giveth lawes to us, under which we muſt live or dye (I take Lawes here in a generall ſenſe to ſignifie direction for faith and repentance, as well as any other rules of life) not by vertue of our owne conſent, but Gods abſolute right and authority.

6. Mr. Tombs telleth us, that baptizing of Infants hath brought the admiſſion of ignorant and prophane perſons unto the communion of the Church, and to the Lords Supper; for who can deny rightly the rite of the Church to the baptized? ſo he.

To this I anſwer, that the engagement of the parent, to inſtruct his childe (which is but his duty) will certainly be a great meanes to ſet men upon the performance of their duty therein, when men ſhall ſolemnly in the preſence of God before a congregation be charged with the bringing up of their children in the feare of God, that they muſt looke to their owne converſation that it be exemplary to their children; if this be not performed by the parents, yet the charging it upon them out of Gods word, cannot but be a meanes rather to keep out ignorance and prophaneneſſe then to bring them in; can any means be uſed by man more available then to inſtruct children in their tender years in the knowledge of God? Certainly God hath informed us, that this is the moſt laſting knowledge that wee learned in tender yeares, and our experience doth abundantly confirme this. Now what greater care can bee had by the Church then in ſuch a ſolemne and ſacramentall manner for a man to bee charged with the education of his childe as a Scholler of Chriſt, as ſoon as he is able to learne any thing? if this be a way to introduce prophaneneſſe and ignorance, I know not what can keep it out; but he implyeth as a great ſinne, that ignorant perſons ſhould be admitted into communion of the Church, and the Lords Supper; for this admittance into the communion of the Church, if any thing may be argued from thence touching the unlawfulneſſe of Infants baptiſme, a juſt and due tract ought to be inſtituted, wherein the whole queſtion muſt be ſtated; what is meant by p. 55communion of the Church, whether he underſtand the viſible or inviſible Church, whoſe office it is to admit, and whoſe to ſhut out of the Churches communion? what be the rites of a viſible and what of an inviſible Church? how can the Infant come and demand the Lords Supper, which he diſtinguiſheth from the communion of the Church (but how I cannot tell) untill they be inſtructed to know the Lords body to remember the death of Chriſt, and examine themſelves, which they are commanded to doe, and then eat? but where is the Miniſter commanded to give the Sacrament to all that are in the Church, or elſe to turne them out of the Church? theſe things muſt be proved plainly, or elſe otherwiſe the argument drawne from hence againſt childrens baptiſme is abignotioribus: Chriſt giveth you a charge to baptize all Nations: you ſay nay: we ſhall then let in ignorant and prophane perſons into the Church; you will not baptize any untill they be fit to receive the Sacrament: you were as good ſay, you will make commiſſions your ſelves: Chriſt bids baptize and teach: you ſay there is more in the matter then ſo: you will baptize when you pleaſe, and whom you pleaſe, they that will bee baptized muſt paſſe your cenſure, and ſtay your leaſure.

Chriſt hids you teach, and ſo much examination as is needfull for teaching may be deduced from thence: but did God give you in charge to admit and refuſe, and give you any rules by which ye might walke in the diſcharge of this duty? if ſo, ye might then juſtly plead this right, and make that an argument to remove all that ſtandeth in its way. But I wonder extremely at the in temperate zeale of thoſe that plead the duty of admitting and refuſing of men ex officio from and to Baptiſme, and the Lords Supper; and herein the Lords Supper is the moſt cryed up priviledge which you here fall upon (whether out of your owne opinion as it ſeems by ſome is ſuſpected, or to confute your adverſaries) and make this as a medium to prove that Infants may not be baptized, becauſe none may be admitted to the Lords Supper that are wicked; though for my part I doe not underſtand the conſequence how baptizing infants and charging their parents to bring them up in the fear of God would be a means to cheriſh and foſter up ignorance and ſin. But here men cry out againſt liberty to come to the Lords Supper, as if that would pollute the Sacrament, and countenance ſin; as though men might not have liberty to come to the Lords Supper upon their own examination, and yet might juſtly be puniſhed for their ſins when they can be proved againſt them: may not men make choice of their owne habitations and drinke when they pleaſe, and yet be juſtly puniſhed for adultery and drunkenneſſe? I do not know but the Magiſtrate may ſuppreſſe and puniſh ſin, though men may be allowed their liberty to receive Sacraments: For my part, I wiſh ſome ſtricter courſe were taken with ſin.

The ſeventh fault laid to the charge of Infants baptiſme, is that, it perverts the order of diſcipline, that firſt a man be baptized, and after among the catechized; but who I pray you, Mr. Tombes did lay downe this for an order of Diſcipline? it p. 56ſeems Sacraments are ſubſervient principally to Diſcipline: I had thought the uſe of Sacraments had been for confirmation of doctrine.

But let us once heare where this diſcipline is, what footſteps in the doctrine or practice of Chriſt and his Apoſtles: As for the practice of the Apoſtles, there is nothing found but converſion, and baptizing, without any interpoſition of time: that of Matth. 3.5, 6. there Jeruſalem, Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, came to John the Baptiſt, and were baptized of him; as like Acts 2. no catechiſing either of theſe perſons: if ever they meant to know Chriſt, muſt be catechiſed after their baptiſme, or not at all; I underſtand not any ſuch duty of catechiſing, if not comprehended in the duty of teaching; and doth this ſeem a thing ſo ſtrange to you, that men ſhould be taught after they are baptized? What? may not men be taught after they have bargained to be diſciples? This is all one, as if a man ſhould bargain with a School-maſter, that his ſon ſhould be his ſcholler, and from that day forward, the School-maſter ſhould never teach him; but this rather dependeth upon the uſe of the Ancients, then authority of the Word.

The three laſt confute themſelves; as for recrimination, I ſee the Anabaptiſts ſo ſoundly paid with abuſes and faults, that have been laid to their charges by others, that I ſhall not meddle with them in this point, uſus per ſe, abuſus per accidens.

The ninth Reaſon, that which cauſeth unneceſſary diſputes, that cannot be determined by any certain rule, that is deſervedly doubtfull: but the tenet of Infants baptiſme is ſuch. All theſe diſputes are determined by a certain rule; when the commiſſion plainly chargeth the Miniſters to baptize all the world, ſo as they can make them diſciples, if any will undertake to bring them up in the fear of God, and inſtruction of the Goſpel: or they of yeers do undertake for themſelves ſubmiſſion to the Goſpel, they may be baptized, this is the rule of the Word: Abraham had not only right to circumciſe his own children, but he might buy a childe and circumciſe it; nay, if he bought it, he muſt circumciſe it.

But grant that they muſt be taught firſt, tell me how will Mr. Tombes ſatisfie the doubts that may ariſe from hence? how much they muſt learn firſt, how long they muſt be catechumeni? ſecondly, who muſt judge of their ſufficiency? thirdly, what if any ſhould baptize them before they were fit? whether that muſt be accounted a void act, and the party put again among the catechumeni? fourthly, whether, if this accounted valid, whether the party that was baptized before he were ſufficiently catechized, muſt for ever after remain ignorant? together with many other of the like nature, which I ſhall put among my reaſons for childrens baptiſme.

The tenth Reaſon is the ſame with the firſt, only there he handleth accidens ſine ſubjecto, here in ſubjecto; there he ſaith, it was mixed with other errors: here, that thoſe that held Infants baptiſme, held other errors; therefore I conceive that already anſwered.

p. 57The eleventh, Pedobaptiſts agree not among themſelves, when Anabaptiſts do this, may be an Argument, not till then; and yet anſwerable, that men may ſooner agree in evill then good, as ariſing from a more common principle.

And now I am at laſt come to his laſt Reaſon, and that a weighty one, ſaith Mr. Tombes: But it is taken only from a ſeeming effect of Infants baptiſme; if there be any weight in an Argument, from an effect, that is, ab effectu, proximo, & per ſe; but this doth but ſeem to take away one end, and, perhaps, the primary end of baptiſme; that it ſhould be a ſigne the baptized ſheweth himſelf a diſciple, and confeſſeth the faith. Mr. Tombes telleth us, that many things argue, that it ſhould be ſuch a ſigne, but keepeth his arguments to himſelf; for my part, I know none, I know nothing charged upon the party to be baptized, as a preparation to his baptiſme: as for profeſſion of faith, that is no where required; its true, Philip did teach the Eunuch baptiſme, and faith, but profeſſion of faith he taught him not: It is likewiſe true that St. Luke doth hiſtorically relate, that the Eunuch did confeſſe his faith, but of this before.

But Mr. Tombes doth prove that men muſt confeſſe their faith before baptiſme, becauſe baptiſme is a ſigne that the baptized ſheweth himſelf a diſciple, and confeſſeth himſelf a diſciple. To this, I firſt ſay, that baptiſme may be a ſigne of profeſſion, but not a ſacramentall ſigne: A ſacramentall ſigne is to ſignifie what Chriſt hath ſet it to ſignifie, namely, food and nouriſhment; this is the end of a ſacrament, to lead our infirmities to the apprehenſion of the great things of God; to comprehend the vertue and efficacy of the body and blood of Chriſt, the participation of the fulneſſe of Chriſt, to lead our faith by the authority of God, to the apprehenſion of the things of God. It is true, our duty is annexed to receiving of ſacraments, whereunto we are bound by vertue of the command of Chriſt; but the ſignification of the ſacrament is not in our duty, but in Gods mercy; were not our duty converſant about an incomprehenſible object, we ſhould have had no need of ſacraments: But, for Mr. Tombes to deny ſacraments to be viſible ſignes of grace, without giving any reaſon for it, when St. Luke doth plainly tell us, that baptiſme doth waſh away ſin, Acts 22, 16. ariſe and be baptized, and waſh away thy ſin: and St. Paul doth tell us plainly, that the bread which we break, is the communion of the body of Chriſt, ſhewing that it is a diſtribution of the body of Chriſt; communication is properly, ſuperiorum ad inferiorae; I remember I have read in Ariſt. Topic. lib. 4. cap. 1. Partic. 6. Keck. lib. 1.72. that participare eſt ſuſcipere ejus quod communicatur definitionem; and Keckerman in the quoted place ſaith, effective individua, multa communicant: ut ignis cal…r… aquae; where you ſee, that communication is ſtill rendred by giving the whole nature and definitions as in univerſali, or in exciting qualitatem ſimilarem, a like quality in another body; whereby it muſt appear, that Chriſt in the ſacrament, doth communicate or diſtribute ſome grace among us: as for our duties, that … p. 58vertue of the command are annexed to the receiving of the ſacrament, thoſe are externall to the nature of the ſacrament, though neceſſary to the efficacy thereof unto us: This muſt needs be a declining cauſe, that enforceth the ſtrongeſt patron of it in its defence, to deny the nature of a ſacrament.

But ſee further: Mr. Tombes ſaith, that baptiſme is a ſigne of profeſſion. Profeſſion is taken popularly and materially for the Art or Trade that is profeſſed, and then men may be ſaid to wear ſome badge or ſigne of his profeſſion; otherwiſe, in a proper and ſtrict ſenſe, Profeſſion is nothing elſe, but a ſigne of ſomething in the heart or minde of him that doth profeſſe; ſo that profeſſion of our faith is but a ſigne of our faith, and a ſigne of that profeſsion is but a ſigne of a ſigne; nay, profeſſion it ſelf is more manifeſt then any ſacrament can be, and therefore needeth no ſigne; but grant it were the ſigne of our profeſſion, what were that to prove that profeſsion muſt be before baptiſme? ſure, ſignum & ſignatum be ſimul natura, the ſigne and thing ſignified, are of the ſame continuance, one cannot be before another: Here is in this argument another circumſtance; that baptiſme is frequently put for doctrine: therefore doctrine muſt go before baptiſme, nay rather, then baptiſme doth teach: for that which is any where tranſlated metaphorically, muſt have reſemblance with the primitive ſignification: as if a man ſhall call his ſon the ſtaf…e of his age, the ſon muſt ſuſtain his father in his feeble condition: though I do not know how any of theſe places do prove any ſuch thing, that baptiſme is taken for doctrine, otherwiſe then materially, as in Acts 10.37. John is ſaid to preach baptiſme: ſo is he ſaid to preach repentance. As for Mr. Tombes Argument from witchcraft, which he confuteth, I leave every judicious Reader to think what he pleaſeth, as not being worthy the conſideration of a Divine; and thus I conceive Mr. Tombs Argument anſwered. I come now at laſt, to mine own Arguments for Infants baptiſme.

Thoſe that in mans judgement ought to be eſteemed fit for the kingdome of God, are by man to be admitted to the priviledges of the kingdome, viz. baptiſme; but all Infants in mans judgement are to be eſteemed fit for the kingdome of God, therefore all Infants muſt be admitted to the priviledges of the kingdome, Matth. 19.13.

I have already diſcuſſed this point, Chriſt findeth fault with his Diſciples, for not ſuffering little children to come, and ſaith not, I know theſe are of the kingdome of God; but telleth his Diſciples, not only they, that were brought, but ſuch as they, and that not only ſuch as they in his eſtimation, but their view, otherwiſe there had been no ground of a rebuke, but commendation; rebukes be inſtructions for the time to come, at leaſt, it is not well done; do ſo no more; when you ſee any ſuch as theſe are, ſuffer them, and forbid them not. You ſee the precept for the future is generall, men do not uſe to reprove but to the purpoſe, that the thing reproved be no more done; therefore the Diſciples were to eſtimate p. 59not them only, but ſuch as they were (and that in an aſſigned likneſſe, namely, in that they were little children) as fit for the kingdome of God, and upon that ground ſuffer them to come to Chriſt. If theſe and the like had only been fit for the kingdome of God in the eſtimation of Chriſt by his omniſcience, here had not been matter of reproof, but commendation: Chriſt would then have ſaid rather, ye did well to forbid the little children to come to me, for you did not know whether the kingdome of God did belong to them; neither can I give you any direction concerning other children for the time to come, becauſe you cannot tell to whom the kingdome of heaven doth belong; however, let theſe come; for I know the kingdome of heaven doth belong to them, and ſuch elect children as theſe are; but ye ſee Chriſt doth rebuke them, and thereby giveth them directions for the time to come, which he could not have done, if the likeneſſe had been in ſecret, and things only known to God.

But here Mr. Tombes and Mr. Blackwell, and others, will tell me, by this rule, Turks children, and Infidels may be brought to baptiſme. If any will bring them, and aſſume the inſtruction of them in the doctrine of the Goſpel, I know not but they may: and if Turks would part with their children to Chriſtians, I think it were a very charitable thing ſo to do: For, the promiſe was never ſo tied to Abrahams loynes, neither for ought I know, to any believers, but to education in the family of Abraham, or any other believing family.

But they will further ſay then, by the ſame reaſon are they to be admitted to other benefits, namely, to hearing of the Word, and the other ſacrament: Anſw. I ſay, they are admitted to the reſidue of the Oracles of God, as ſoon as nature or grace do make them fit for them, they may have right before they can uſe them: they are firſt admitted to come to Chriſt for a bleſſing, before they are capable of inſtruction: and preparation for the ſacrament of the Lords Supper, is charged as a duty, which is no where charged on the parties to be baptized.

2. That Sacrament, that requireth no preparation in the ſubject, is to be adminiſtred to every ſubject; but baptiſme is a ſacrament to be adminiſtred without any preparation in the ſubject, therefore baptiſme is to be adminſtred to every ſubject, every perſon, all nations.

That Sacrament that in the ſigne and ſignification, is preparative to all other grace that is to be adminiſtred without any preparation of the ſubject: but baptiſme in the ſigne and ſignification is preparative to all other grace, therefore it is to be adminiſtred without any preparation: the major is true, or otherwiſe there would a proceſſe in infinitum; if that which were preparative to all other graces ſhould have preparations to that, and that muſt have other preparations; and ſo in infinitum. The minor I ſhall prove out of Scripture, and plain reaſon drawn from then: Gal. 3.27. as many as are baptized into Chriſt, have put on Chriſt: This doth probably prove, that men that are baptized, are baptized p. 60into Chriſt, which could not be affirmed, if they were in Chriſt before baptiſme; they could not be ſaid to be baptized into Chiſt, if they had been in Chriſt before, which, if faith and repentance muſt be manifeſt before baptiſme muſt be affirmed, he that believeth and is penitent is in Chriſt without doubt.

Object. But ſome men will ſay, may not man believe before baptiſme?

Reply. I anſwer no, he cannot, untill Chriſt baptiſe him with the Holy Ghoſt. Now, Chriſt baptizeth when he pleaſeth, either before, in, or after miniſteriall baptiſme.

Object. But, if Chriſt hath baptized him before, what need the Miniſter baptize him?

Reply. Chriſts baptiſme is not known to the Miniſter, whatſoever confeſſion of faith is made, he muſt therefore baptize, in obedience to the command of Chriſt, and leave the baptiſme of Chriſt to him.

How would the Anabaptiſts inſult in the cleerneſſe of ſuch a text? And here I cannot but note a notable ſubtilty of the Anabaptiſts, I will not ſay how common with other heretiques, when they have cited a Text, and put a gloſſe upon it without any reſpect to the argument of the place, they preſently cry the Scripture is all ours, crying down all the labours of the learned that is ſpent, though never ſo truly and piouſly. For the cleering of the Text, that is, Tongues, that is Art: gives us Scripture; we have the Scripture, and then we can carry away the people, take heed that no man ſpoile you through Philoſophy and vain deceit, and this ſhall ſerve their turn, to anſwer all they underſtand not. If a man tell them that Philoſophy is converſant about nature, and ſuch things of reaſon as are too low for the things of faith, and therefore have principles contrary to doctrine of faith, as out of nothing, nothing is made; and therefore make the firſt matter eternall, contrary to the doctrine of the creation, from a privation to an habite, no return, that which is dead cannot live again, contrary to the reſurrection: but Logick is without any matter of its own, but teacheth men only how to find out the truth of any diſcourſe, written or ſpoken. Oh, then Logick is nothing but falacies, and herein many ſchollers concurre with them to hide their own ignorance, whereas indeed, falacies be no part of Logick, unleſſe you will ſay, no reaſon is reaſon: it is true, Logicians do mention falacies, as a man may teach a young workman what faults he may commit, whence ſome ignorant man may affirm, that the skill of ſuch a trade was only in faults, as theſe do, who only count Logick falacies; and here they have ſuch fooleries, to make the world believe, that reaſon was an Aſſe to their fancy, that men may wonder at them, they can ſhew how fooliſh a thing Logick is, they can prove a ſheep have eight legs, two before, and two behind; two on the right ſide, and two on the left. My Logick can do more then his, and yet we ſhall be both fools if we want Logick, to know this is no Logick: Firſt, I can prove a ſheep hath ſixteen legs, by ſetting him between four men, one p. 61before the ſheep, the other behinde him, and on each ſide one; this ſheep will have four legs before one man, and four behinde, &c. which make ſixteen, for relatives have no abſolute nature: before and behind, may be the ſame thing in different reſpects, the ſame foot is before, and on the right or left ſide: this Logick can diſcover well enough, without the help of a fool to flout at that he knoweth not. I impute not this to Mr. Tombes, but to the ignorant, that cry, all is their own by ſuch a wile as this, as though none did regard Scripture but they, and all the Scriptures were cleerly theirs, what was ſpoken againſt them, was againſt Scripture, ſet by humane authority and tradition.

Firſt, in the ſigne it is preparative to all purity, it is waſhing ſo much faith as muſt cauſe men of yeares to ſubmit to baptiſme is neceſſary, without which the Apoſtles could not have baptized; but faith and repentance whereby the heart ſhould be purged, that thoſe muſt be had before the party may be baptized, is an evacuation of the ſigne, and fruſtrateth the ſignification: it cannot be denyed that faith and repentance are required to the efficacie of baptiſme, but ſubſequent to the Sacrament, the water doth ſacramentally waſh away ſinnes: ſo Ananias Act. 22.16. ſaith to Paul, Why tarrieſt thou, ariſe and be baptized, and waſh away thy ſinnes? Now waſhing doth ſuppoſe nothing in the ſubject but foulneſſe, the bloud of Chriſt cleanſeth us from all ſinne, 1 John 1.7. all the vertue of the purgation is in the bloud of Chriſt. Now can any man ſay that the bloud of Chriſt cannot purge unleſſe the party be purged before? if faith and repentance were required before baptiſme, then baptiſme could not offer the bloud of Chriſt to purge ſinne, becauſe the party were cleanſed before baptiſme, then Ananias could not have ſaid, Be baptized and waſh away thy ſinne; but waſh thy ſinne firſt, and then be baptized. Act. 15.9. St. Peter ſheweth that faith doth purifie the heart. Now it is true, faith doth receive the Word and Sacraments, and maketh one and the other effectuall; but both Word and Sacrament doe propoſe Chriſt, the Word to the eare, Sacrament to other ſenſes: Baptiſme doth repreſent the bloud of Chriſt waſhing, and ſenſe doth looke on the waſhing of water, and faith on the promiſe annexed. Now as the word is propoſed to the eare, ſo water is tendred, and the body waſhed with water; whence faith doth collect the purgation of the ſoul from the teſtimony of God; water is no more the immediate object of faith then the word; it is the authority of God in the word that is the object of faith, as likewiſe the bloud of Chriſt in baptiſme; they that beleeve, and they that beleeve not, heare the word, and it is no prophanation of the word to preach it to an Infidell, neither is it any prophanation of baptiſme to baptize an Infidell; yet it is hard to make him heare patiently that in no meaſure doth beleeve unleſſe miracles, or in defect of them ſome aſſiſtance of the Civill Magiſtrate doe concurre; ſo that baptiſme is but an offering of the purgation by the bloud of Chriſt to the eye and the body, as the word doth to the eare, and may be tendered as the p. 62word to all Nations, the power of the one and the other is by faith in Chriſt conveyed unto us in the ſacrament of baptiſme or the word: baptiſme cannot worke as baptiſme till after adminiſtration, whatſoever is ſaid of it before is but the operation of the word; the waſhing of water doth ſacramentally ſtrengthen our faith: no duty of preparation charged on any, no man ever reprehended for receiving baptiſme unworthily; though the Miniſter hath baptiſme charged on him as part of his duty, yet never any caution given to Miniſters in generall, or to Titus or Timothy to take heed that they baptize no unworthy perſons; nor any ſinne or puniſhment charged on any Miniſter for baptizing any raſhly or without due examination; no precept concerning any difference, but baptize and teach all Nations to the end that they may become the Diſciples of Chriſt. Now where no Law is, there is no tranſgreſſion; where God doth not charge ſinne, how dare any mortall man ſay this or that is ſinfull? if any preparation be required let the Scripture bee ſhewed where that was taught, where baptiſme was deferred till any competent preparation were manifeſt? what Scripture is directed to the catechumeni; nay what one ſentence of Scripture is applicable to them, that is not applicable to Chriſtians at all times, as well after as before baptiſme? Baptiſme is a religious rite which men are eaſily perſwaded out of principles of nature to embrace, as may be ſeen in all Idolatrous worſhips; they have their religious rites which they are perſwaded come from the appointment of their gods, upon which ground they receive them. Now that God did appoint baptiſme is no abuſe, and ſo we muſt tender it to Nations by the appointment of Chriſt, which though they receive but as an Infidell doth the word; yet when faith commeth they make uſe of it. Therefore the Apoſtles argue to move newneſſe of life from baptiſme already received. So Romans 6.3.4, 5. St. Paul argueth what uſe wee ſhould make of our baptiſme; namely, that wee ſhould riſe with Chriſt; but though the moſt noble way of arguing be from cauſes, and therefore in the Sacrament of the Lords ſupper, where the worthy receiving of that doth depend on an antecedent cauſe; there faith is ſaid to obtaine the whole vertue of the worke. Joh. 6.35. I am the bread, he that commeth to me ſhall never hunger, and he that beleeveth on me ſhall never thirſt, v. 47. He that beleeveth hath everlaſting life, 51. Hee that eateth of this bread ſhall live for ever: Whereby he plainly ſaith, That he that beleeveth eateth my fleſh, this bread which is my fleſh ſacramentally, and made ſuch to me by faith. Never any ſuch doctrine as this, he that beleeveth is baptized, becauſe no doctrine is extant precedent to baptiſme in reference to the Gentiles. See all the Epiſtles to the Rom. Corinthians, and the reſidue, all are written to Churches already baptized. Paul declared the whole counſell of God, and yet not one word what ſhould be the carriage of the Catechumeni, or the Miniſters towards them, as if he ſhould ſuppoſe none under the right of the Goſpell that will not firſt bee baptized, and received by the commandement of p. 63Chriſt: ſo he that will teach any thing in St. Pauls Epiſtles, they muſt teach them to the baptized to whom they are directed; as for the Catechumeni, nothing is written or directed either to them or concerning them. As for thoſe hiſtories of the Acts, the greater part were Jews in Covenant with God already; unto whom Peter did indeed preach repentance in reference to that bloud that they were guilty of in killing the Lord of glory; not as preparation to baptiſme, but repentance and baptiſme are both exhorted unto as precedent to the gift of the Holy Ghoſt; whereas if ſuch preparation had been needfull to baptiſme, Peter ſhould have ſtayed for the gift of the Holy Ghoſt to manifeſt their fitneſſe, or at leaſt given them ſome directions by which they might manifeſt their fitneſſe, or ſhew their repentance and faith, which he never did. St. Luke doth indeed ſay, They that gladly received the word were baptized; but that they manifeſted it any way but by receiving baptiſme gladly doth not appeare; and this was ground enough for an Hiſtorian to ſay they gladly received the word, wherein they were exhorted to be baptized when they were gladly baptized.

As for that ſtory of Cornelius that was indeed a pure Gentile. Though Peter had commiſſion enough to have gone to him by the command of Chriſt, Mat. 28.19. and to have baptized him and taught him the commands of Chriſt, yet it is plaine Peter did not underſtand the Commiſſion, therefore God for Peters owne ſatisfaction, and the ſatisfaction of them of the circumciſion, was pleaſed in all that ſtory to goe before Peter in a miraculous way; Peter was ſo farre from baptizing of Cornelius, that he was hardly perſwaded to goe to him or preach to him, but as God did go before him by miracles, which when they of the circumciſion ſaw, the text ſaith, they were aſtoniſhed: And of this very ſtory St. Peter, Act. 15. and other places maketh uſe of to ſatisfie the Jewes touching the calling of the Gentiles: but this was the mercy of God during the infancie of the Church to uſe ſuch extraordinary meanes for the drawing off the Jewes from that ceremoniall diſtinction that God himſelfe had put between Jewes and Gentiles, but in the orderly adminiſtration God ſent the Holy Ghoſt, though by extraordinary manifeſtations, yet in a ſeaſonable time when firſt he had tendered the meanes of grace: As for the falling of the Holy Choſt upon the Apoſtles in cloven tongues, Act. 2. that came ſeaſonably upon them when they had occaſion to uſe them, and after had been baptized; but the Holy Ghoſt promiſed in v. 28. is promiſed after Peter had preached repentance and baptiſme; nay on many after they were baptized, Repent and be baptized, and ye ſhall receive the holy Ghoſt: ſhewing that preaching and baptizing are but the tenders of grace, neither the one nor the other of any force unleſſe the Holy Ghoſt come. Now though the manner of the giving the Holy Ghoſt be different, yet the ſeaſon is according to the way of Gods diſpenſation, God will have outward means firſt tendered, and after he will bleſſe it where he pleaſeth, among which outward meanes theſe are chiefe, if not all can p. 64or ought to be uſed by way of tender baptiſme, and teaching, which is all that is tendred in the commiſſion, whatſoever is is babbled to the contrary: baptiſing is ſet before teaching the commands of Chriſt, as I have formerly manifeſted; and indeed, it were a ſtrange thing for the ſacrament of baptiſme to be tendered to men that were already clean, and approved, declared and manifeſted to be clean; it is true, it may be tendered to men that profeſſe their faith, becauſe man cannot judge them faithfull, notwithſtanding any profeſſion, and therefore baptiſe them; but if they could know and judge them faithfull, they might give them the Lords ſupper, in which all Chriſt is communicated, and baptiſme ſhould not be needfull; baptiſme is the ſeal of the tender of Chriſt, and of the purging power of his blood, not of our communion or partaking of Chriſt, that is ſealed in the other ſacrament.

Now to come to the ſignification, it is preparative to all other graces, it ſignifieth regeneration; and therefore it is called regeneration, John 3.5. Except ye be regenerate by water and the Spirit, ye cannot enter into the kingdome of heaven. Now, certainly the Holy Ghoſt would not ſet forth the grace of baptiſme by regeneration, or newbirth, if any grace had been preparative to it, it is not poſſible that any life or motion ſhould be imagined before regeneration: It is true, in John 3.5. Except ye be born by water and the Spirit, unleſſe ye be by water and the Spirit; that which we tranſlate born, is foreign, be, and Tit. 3.5. Baptiſme is called foreign, the laver of regeneration. Leſt men may vulgarly imagine, that men are ſpiritually begotten by the Word, and were to remain ſome time in their mothers belly, the church, before they were brought forth by baptiſme: during which time, they were to be catechumens, and made fit to be received into the Church: that word which is tranſlated born, John 3. in 1 Cor. 4.15. is tranſlated begotten, I have begotten you through the Goſpel: For, there it is foreign, and indeed, there can be no imagination of life before there is a being, before begetting; it is true, adultus muſt have faith, ſuch as it is, naturall, humane: before he can be baptized, he muſt be willing by ſome inclination or other: it were barbarous to baptize a grown man againſt his will, which could not be gotten but by ſome kinde of credence, though it might be juſt with man to puniſh him with death that ſhould refuſe, as it is with God to puniſh with eternall death, ſuch as deſpiſe baptiſme; yet that Miniſters ſhould refuſe to baptiſe any man that ſhall deſire baptiſme, untill he hath ſaving faith, is to require actions of life, and reaſon from a man before he were begotten, or cleanneſſe and purity before he were waſhed. Again, that ſacrament that was adminiſtred unto all the churches of the Gentiles in the Scripture mentioned, without any mention in the Scripture, of any preparative grace that muſt it ſelf be the ſymbol of the firſt grace, and preparative of all other graces: But baptiſme is ſuch, therefore baptiſm is preparative to all other graces. Let all the Epiſtles of the Apoſtles be ſearched, p. 65and ye ſhall finde they were all written to baptized perſons, that they are full of exhortations to faith, and ſometimes arguments drawn from baptiſme paſt, to move them to repentance and newneſſe of life, Rom. 6.4. St. Paul doth indeed tell them that they were buried by baptiſm with Chriſt, but what doth he collect out of that? therefore repent and believe, but doth he at any time, ſpeaking of faith, and repentance, argue from thence to baptiſme, and tell any of them, if they would believe and repent, they ſhould be baptized? which the right method of handling the doctrine of the Goſpel would have required, if faith and repentance had been preparatives; but I am confident, if any man ſhall take on him to teach faith, and repentance, as preparatives to baptiſme, he muſt either make his Text, or draw that out of it that will not come: he that will teach any doctrine other then ſo much as may make them willing to be baptized, and repute them diſciples, and teach them as diſciples of Chriſt unbaptized, muſt follow no Apoſtolicall Precept or Example. That which is drawn out of the commiſsion, is without ground, that teaching muſt go before baptizing, becauſe foreign, is ſet firſt: For, firſt the phraſe of the words is changed, foreign, whereas had there been a methodicall enumeration of things that ought to have been performed in order one before another, the ſtile ought not to have been altered; it ſhould have been, foreign, Go, teach and baptize; and therefore thoſe that would gather any thing out of the order of the words, muſt be enforced to read them ſo, which the Text will not permit. Again, the word foreign is a… …riſt. in the Imperative mood, which ſtandeth for a Future, whereas the words, baptizing and teaching what I command, are both Preſent. Again, this foreign, ye ſhall make diſciples, is the end, and ought to be the firſt ſet down, and declared to thoſe that ſhall be imployed about the means, as I have formerly proved, and ſo the ſtile doth clearely manifeſt, ye ſhall make all the world diſciples, baptizing them, and teaching them whatſoever I command, which is as much as by ſo doing, ye ſhall make them diſciples: as if a man ſhould ſay ſowing in ſeaſon, and making good choice of your ſeed and land, ye ſhall have a good crop; here is plainly intended, that theſe Participiall expreſsions, this ſowing and making good choice ſhall be taken up for the mean, and the crop is to be expected after, as the ſucceſſe and event of them: as for foreign, from foreign, to learn, and therefore ſome collect, that it doth imply a learning with profit, that is nothing to the preparation; if there be any thing in that, it is in the ſucceſſe, and it hath the vertue of a promiſe, and is eſtimated by God, limited and extended according to the good pleaſure of God, Iſai. 48.17. I am the Lord thy God, that teacheth thee to profit: Paul plants, Apollo watereth, it is God that giveth the ſucceſſe; and if it ſhould ſtand in that ſenſe as a preparation to baptiſme in the commiſsion, it muſt contain a manifeſt falſhood, or prove undeniably univerſall grace, if they ſhall teach with profit all nations, and baptize them; or at leaſt, an univerſall nationall acceptation p. 66of the Goſpell, teaching with profit can admit of no milder ſenſe then that; and if every perſon muſt be taught with profit before he be baptized, then none ought to be baptized but the elect of God; and it were a ſin for any Miniſter to baptize any other but ſuch as received profit by the word, the word worketh to the hurt of the reprobate whatſoever ſhew of profit it may ſeem to have.

3. Reaſon, That doctrine that taketh away the diſtinction of the two Sacraments, that is a falſe doctrine; but Anabaptiſme doth take away the diſtinction of the two Sacraments, ergo, the doctrine of the Anabaptiſts is a falſe doctrine. That doctrine that requireth preparation to both Sacraments, taketh away the difference of the Sacraments; but Anabaptiſts require preparation to both Sacraments, therefore Anabaptiſts take away the difference of the Sacraments.

The difference doth conſiſt in this, that the Sacrament of baptiſme is preparative to the Lords Supper, ſacramentally giving that to us which we ſtand in need of, to make us fit for the Lords Supper: I ſay, ſacramentally, not that God cannot or doth not take his owne time of calling ſometime before we are partaker of either Sacrament, ſometimes after we have both Sacraments; yea and after we have ſinfully prophaned the Lords Supper: but Sacraments have their proper uſe and ſignification, and are as all other duties lyable to abuſe. Wee muſt behave our ſelves as men under the meanes: we have our duties charged upon us of God, whereof ſome are officiall, ſome perſonall belonging to every mans perſon, about the performance of all which, we may ſinne either by omiſſion or miſuſe; but all the good that we receive by word or ſacraments is of God: what we doe by way of office that lyeth charged on us by the rule that we receive from God, which is to baptize all Nations and teach them; the ſucceſſe is of God, and the account of faith muſt be given to God; we can take ſome account of ſome workes, to wit, thoſe that are externall; but of faith and of ſuch workes as are imminent the thoughts of the heart, we can ſay nothing to them. Now the communion that is between Chriſt and us, is ſet downe in Scripture by Chriſts being or dwelling in us, and we in him; we muſt firſt be in Chriſt before he can be in us: we were in Chriſt by election before the foundation of the world, and therefore may bee received into Chriſt before we can have faith; nay we are ſaid to be baptized into Chriſt, Rom. 6.3. ſo many of you are baptized into Chriſt Jeſus, and the grace of baptiſme is ſaid to be wrought by the Spirit, by the Spirit ye are baptized into one body, 1 Cor. 12.13. and Gal. 3.27. As many as are baptized into Chriſt have put on Chriſt: Chriſt is never ſaid to be conveyed into us by baptiſme, but by faith. Epheſ. 3.17. That Chriſt may dwell in your hearts by faith: what is inſtrumentally ours by faith, is ſacramentally ours by the Lords ſupper: he therefore that eateh Chriſt in the Lords ſupper, Chriſt is in him. Iohn. 6.56. Hee that eateth my fleſh dwelleth in me, and I in him: but Chriſt is never laid to be in us by baptiſme, but we are baptiſed into Chriſt; he is not baptized into us, but he is communicated p. 67into us in the Lords ſupper, for which faith is required as a preparation, and the habitation of Chriſt in us is aſcribed to faith as a meanes as before, that Chriſt may dwell in your hearts by faith; but our birth in Chriſt, or regeneraion is not at all aſcribed to faith, but to the Spirit and water, John 3.5. Except a man be born by water and the Spirit: and to the Word, 1 Cor. 4.15. I have begotten you through the Word, but never are we ſaid, either to be born or begotten by faith: the acts of faith, are growth, life, and fruits of ſanctification, Joh. 6.35. Thoſe that believe and come to Chriſt, are ſaid to eat and drink Chriſt: For, he that cometh unto Chriſt, is promiſed he ſhall never hunger; and he that believeth in him, ſhall never thirſt. And this vertue is aſcribed to the body and blood of Chriſt, from whence Divines do juſtly gather, that he that believeth, doth eat the fleſh, and drink the blood of Chriſt, but no intimation in Scripture from whence any man can collect, that he that believeth is baptized, unleſſe it be à poſteriori: For, he that doth believe, muſt firſt be baptized by the Spirit, before he can believe; and thus are the graces offered in the ſacraments, kept diſtinct, which otherwiſe would be the ſame: that the grace of baptiſme is initiall, that of the Lords ſupper is perfective, which may further be maniſted thus: our calling hath two parts, the proffer of grace, and the acceptance of grace proffered: The firſt is by the Word, the Spirit, and Baptiſme; the other is by the Word, Spirit, Faith, and the Lords ſupper. I have here added faith, becauſe the Scripture doth ſo, making faith an inſtrument by which we receive Chriſt: but Chriſt muſt be proffered to us by his Spirit and Word, before we can receive him, which is expreſſed in the word calling, as diſtinct from juſtification, and goeth before juſtification, in which we have the firſt act of faith, Rom. 8.30. Whom he predeſtinateth, them he alſo called, whom he called, them he alſo juſtified; we are not called by faith, but we are juſtified by faith, Rom. 2.28. and 5.1. Baptiſme is the ſeal and ſacrament of Gods work in us, which had need to be moſt cleerly manifeſted, and confirmed unto us, as having moſt of God, and leaſt of us, that we might ſubmit to it, wherunto we are moſt averſe; therefore what hath moſt of us in it, that pleaſeth us beſt: as works better then faith, and faith, as we look on it in our ſelves, as a qualification is more delightfull to us then as it is in its own nature, working humiliation, teaching us to deny our ſelves, and reſt on God: men do uſe to magnifie faith, but too many under a falſe apprehenſion, even of ſecrecie and liberty before … faith is not a boaſting quality, nor to be pleaded before men, but God; and this …, cap. 2. doth handle at large, ſhewing, that men are very inclinable to … …o…ſt of faith before men, and rely on works before God; and herein the deceitfulneſſe of our hearts is very great, when we conceive we deal with an …-power, then we finde the things of faith apprehended moſt weakly of any thing, we can pleaſe our ſelves better in the opinion of our works then of faith, but when we come to deal with man, we are ſure we treat of colours before blind p. 68men: there we can boldly talk, we may ſpeak as freely as travellers, we cannot be diſproved, whereby it cometh to paſſe, often times, that heart that is leaſt upright, is moſt bold; faith is indeed, in time of need, very heroick in her exploits, in that ſhe acteth by the power of God, but aſcribeth little of her beſt actions to her ſelf; ſhe is alwayes converſant with God, and therefore cannot but be conſcious of much weakneſſe and infirmity; faith is ſo always loaden with difficulties, that ſhe hath very little to ſay of her ſelf; there muſt be great preparation on Gods part, before there can be any ſenſe or feeling in man of the things of faith; there muſt be the mighty operation of the Word and Spirit, and God is pleaſed to adde baptiſm too, for faith to work upon: theſe things are of mighty operation, and ſo they had need, conſidering the ſloth of heart that is in us to believe: it is well, if after the Word and ſacrament of baptiſme, faith do come. God layeth it as a ground and foundation for faith to work upon, and accordingly all the arguments of Scripture are to raiſe us to walk worthy of amendment of life, and to riſe with Chriſt, Rom. 6. as if it ſhould be ſaid, God hath offered you grace in baptiſme, therefore accept of it; ye are born anew in baptiſme, let it appear in your converſation.

Argum. 4. That which maketh the admiſſion into the Church meerly arbitrary, that is a falſe doctrine; but the doctrine of Anabaptiſts maketh admiſſion into the Church meerly arbitrary, Ergo, the major is plain; for, that nothing is more directly contrary to the ſervice of God then will-worſhip, but denying any that are tendred according to the mind of Chriſt in the Word, and requiring ſuch diſpoſition in the party to be baptized, as the Miniſter pleaſeth, without any rule from Gods Word, is to make the publike ſervice of God, or at leaſt a great part of it, wholly arbytrary; and this doth appear to flow from their doctrine: not yet any man durſt affirm what was the meaſure of faith to be required how much he muſt believe that muſt be baptized, by means whereof the whole matter dependeth on the will of the Baptizer, a thing moſt contrary to the nature of Religion; it cannot be imagined that the Holy Ghoſt would have been ſo ſilent in giving rules for the Miniſters to walk by in the triall of the faith of the perſon to be baptized, if any ſuch charge had lain upon his office. He muſt baptize believers only, ſaith Mr. Tombes, and the Anabaptiſts, but no Scripture directeth what, or how much he muſt believe; muſt it be as much as the Miniſter ſhall think fit, then ſome Miniſters will baptize with very ſmall triall, others will be very hardly ſatisfied: ſome will baptize as ſoon as the childe can be taught to ſay he believeth in Chriſt, others not till ten or twelve, others twenty yeers of age; wherein no man can either ſatisfie his own conſcience, or any reaſonable man; for that he walketh without rules, neither doth this difficulty from this doctrine come from accidental miſconſtructions or phanſies, but inevitable neceſſity from the doctrine it ſelf, that the Miniſter muſt baptize none but believers; yet cannot tell how much, or what he muſt believe before he be fit for baptiſme, unleſſe he walk by rules of mans making, without any intimation from Scripture.

p. 695. That doctrine that giveth man that power which is divine, that doctrine is blaſphemous and falſe; but the doctrine of the Anabaptiſts giveth man that power which is divine, therefore the doctrine of Anabaptiſts is blaſphemous and falſe.

That doctrine that giveth man power to judge of faith in another, that doctrine giveth man that power that is divine; but the Anabaptiſt giveth men power to judge of faith in another; therefore the Anabaptiſt, that power that is divine.

Faith is in the heart: with the heart man beleeveth to righteouſneſſe, and with the mouth he confeſſeth to ſalvation, Rom. 10.10. He therefore that judgeth of faith, muſt judge the heart which is proper to God. I the Lord try the heart, Jer. 17.10. Neither will it ſerve his turne to ſay, that he judgeth by rules of charity if this charge lay upon his office; to judge charitably it is one thing, another to judge ex officio; for the judgement of charity can never pronounce the perſon ſo judged to be ſuch as he is judged by charity to be: judgements of charity are not alwaies true, if it be poſſible we have warrant enough to judge it ſo by charity: if children may poſſibly be ſuch as the Kingdome of heaven doe belong too, wee may in charity judge them ſuch: but if we are tyed by our office to baptize none but beleevers, it will not ſerve turne to ſay we judge them ſuch by charity, to prove that we muſt baptize none but ſuch as are beleevers, ſeeing we may by charity judge many beleevers which yet are not beleevers: againe judgement of faith is denied to belong to the Apoſtles themſelves, not that we have dominion of your faith, 2 Cor. 1.24. If God had appointed Miniſters to have judged of mens faith before they had baptized them, he would have given them ſome rules by which they ſhould have been able to walke, which he hath not done; he hath annexed baptiſme to the Miniſters calling to let men know that the grace of baptiſme commeth immediatly from Chriſt; therefore he ſent the ſeale of it by that calling that came immediately from him, but hath promiſed thoſe officers of his no ſpeciall qualifications whereby they ſhall have abilities to diſcern the faith of men more then other men have; the judgement of charity, is not a Miniſteriall qualification that belongeth to every man, and is no Miniſteriall qualification.

6. That doctrine that denieth the interpretation of the promiſe made to Abraham which S. Paul maketh that is a falſe doctrine; but the doctrine of Anabaptiſts denieth the interpretation of the promiſe made to Abraham wch St. Paul maketh: therfore the doctrine of the Anabaptiſts is falſe. Thoſe that deny the bleſſing of Abraham, and in him of all the Nations of the earth to be the Goſpel preached to Abraham in reference to the Gentiles after their call, deny the interpretation that S. Paul maketh of the promiſe made to Abraham: but the Anabaptiſts deny the bleſſing of Abraham, and in him of all the Nations of the earth, to be the Goſpell preached to Abraham in reference to the Gentiles after their call; therefore the Anabaptiſts deny the interpretation made to Abraham which S. Paul maketh; the words of S. Paul p. 70are plain, Gal. 3.8. the Scripture foreſeeing that God would juſtifie the heathen through faith, preached before the Goſpel unto Abraham, ſaying, In thee ſhall all Nations be bleſſed; where ye ſee plainly S. Paul affirmeth the promiſe to Abraham to be the Goſpel, and the Nations to be converted Gentiles, and that in the promiſe made to Abraham, there was a Propheſie of the converſion of the Gentiles; and the Gentiles under the Goſpell had Abrahams bleſſing, that is a bleſſing to them and their ſeed, as Abraham had to him and his ſeed: ſo that it is apparent that thoſe which deny the bleſſing to the ſeed of the Gentiles, the bleſſing of the promiſe, deny Abrahams bleſſing to the Gentiles; which is directly to deny the interpretation of St. Paul concerning Abrahams bleſſing, and to deny that the bleſſing to Abraham was the Goſpell, or that the promiſe was a Propheſie of the converſion of the Gentiles under the Goſpell; all which things are plainly affirmed by St. Paul.

7. That doctrine that denieth the benefit or grace of circumciſion to be offered in baptiſme, that doctrine is falſe: but the doctrine of Anabaptiſts is a doctrine that denieth the benefit and grace of circumciſion to be offered in baptiſme; therefore the doctrine of the Anabaptiſts is falſe. That doctrine which denieth what St. Paul affirmeth, is a falſe doctrine: but that doctrine that denieth the benefit or grace of circumciſion to be offered in baptiſme, that doctrine denieth what St. Paul affirmeth; therefore that doctrine denieth the benefit and grace of circumciſion to be offered in baptiſme, is a falſe doctrine.

The place wherein St. Paul doth affirme that we have the benefit of circumciſion by baptiſme, is Colloſſ. 2.11, 12. Let the argument be weighed, I have ſpoken to it in my anſwer to Mr. Tombes. In the which verſe St. Paul affirmeth they were circumciſed, that was not literally true; therefore he affirmeth in a figurative or metonymicall ſenſe, ſigni pro ſignato, the thing ſignified by circumciſion: and he further ſheweth, how the benefit they were partakers of had reſemblance with circumciſion; circumciſion did cut off the body by a ſynecdoche, part for the whole, but they put off the whole body, but it was the body of ſin. Now this is done by the circumciſion of Chriſt; it was this circumciſion of Chriſt that made the circumciſion of our fathers of any vertue: this had been as true of the Patriarches, that they were circumciſed in putting off the body of the ſinnes of the fleſh by the circumciſion of Chriſt; whereof their legall circumciſion was but a type, and Chriſts circumciſion did put an end to that circumciſion; yet the Colloſſians were circumciſed in Chriſt: how could that be? the text plainly ſaith, they put off the body of the ſinnes of the fleſh, and that was their circumciſion in the circumciſion of Chriſt; it was the benefit of circumciſion to the Jewes, which they had though they wanted the ceremony? Now all this benefit commeth unto you by being in Chriſt, get but into Chriſt and all is done; to put off the body is to dye; Chriſt dyed, if ye be in him, all that he did you did; he was circumciſed, ye p. 71are circumciſed; he died, ye die; if in him; thus were your fathers in Chriſt by circumciſion: ſo are ye in Chriſt by baptiſme, buried with him in baptiſme: nothing can be plainer then the grace and benefit of circumciſion was offered to the Coloſſians in baptiſme.

That doctrine that refuſeth to hear and obey the rationall and manly phraſe of the doctrine of the Goſpell, and reduce all to the ſenſitive and childiſh delivery of the Law, that is an unfaithfull and diſobedient doctrine; but the doctrine of Anabaptiſts refuſeth to heare and obey the rationall and manly phraſe of the doctrine of the Goſpell, and reduce all to the ſenſitive and childiſh delivery of the Law, therefore the doctrine of the Anabaptiſts is an unfaithfull and diſobedient doctrine; God was pleaſed to deliver the ſervice, which conſiſted in ceremonies and outward performances in ſuch manner, that every externall was directed to them the length, heighth of their Temple, and of every thing that was contained therein, to ſhew that God would be the author of all things in his worſhip: The colour, length of the curtains, of their altars, and every carved thing, were directed immediatly by God; the place where the Temple ſhould ſtand: If we ſhould rigorouſly look for particular rules in this kinde, as thoſe Anabaptiſts do in point of baptiſme look for the like direction for adminiſtration of baptiſme, as of circumciſion; and for want thereof, to neglect what the Holy Ghoſt hath ſaid concerning the nature of baptiſme, and giving direction to have it adminiſtred to all nations, thereby leaving the precept or duty of baptiſme without any lawfull uſe, for want of ſuch ſenſitive and particular direction as they had under the Law, we might be condemned for will-worſhip, for building Churches without a pattern and direction from God, how high, or how long they ſhould be, together with many things of the like nature; refuſe to pray publikely or meet to ſerve God becauſe he had appointed no place: the truth is, what they ſay againſt baptizing of Infants doth conclude againſt any baptizing at all: For, if the particular aſſignation of the perſons to be baptized muſt be dinſtiguiſhed by any qualification, for want of any ſuch direction, we ſhall be enforced to leave all unbaptized: Baptize all nations, ſaith Chriſt, and Acts 2.41. three thouſand ſouls were added: Act. 8.12. men and women; theſe may comprehend all, male and female, without neceſſary inference, that they were grown men and women.

Now, if we leave this ſenſitive and childiſh way, and walk by the reaſonable ſenſe of Scripture, how cleerly doth the Scripture give ſatisfaction in this point, I pray you obſerve? Firſt, Chriſt doth command to baptize all nations: Secondly, he telleth, that the promiſe belonging to any, doth entitle him to baptiſme, Acts 2.39. Thirdly, that the promiſe is the ſame to Abraham, and the Goſpel preached to the Gentiles, Gal. 3.8. that the promiſe was to Abraham and his ſeed; that baptiſme doth circumciſe us by ingrafting us into Chriſt, Col. 2.11, 12. p. 72By what rational excuſes can we excuſe our ſelves for diſobediences to the commands of Chriſt, commanding us to baptize all nations, if we refuſe any, that by a nationall covenant are brought unto us?

8. That doctrine, which under pretence of walking by Scripture, ſupport all their doctrine by falacies, and falſe arguments, that doctrine is erroneous and falſe; but the doctrine of Anabaptiſts is ſuch, I do challenge all the Anabaptiſts, and in particular Mr. Tombes, to produce any argument againſt Infants baptiſme from Scripture, or ſound reaſon, that ſhall reaſonably conclude from the words without any addition or ſubſtraction, or may agree with the ſenſe and argument of the words produced, then I ſhall account Mr. Tombes his ſceptiques more tolerable; in the mean time, I wiſh he might receive ſatisfaction, and ſpend his time in confirmation of his weaker brethern.

FINIS.

End of the text · William Hussey, An Answer to Mr Tombes Examination of Infant Baptism (1646)