Of Baptism, Chapter 13
CHAP. XIII.
Wherein is handled the fifth and laſt queſtion in anſwer to the argument drawn from circumciſion, ſcil. whether Infants not prooving the ſubject of Baptiſme, the priviledges of Christians and their ſtate, may not juſtly be ſaid to be as great as the priviledges of the Iewes and their ſtate.
QVeſtion 5. Though infants ſhould not proove to be the ſubject of Baptiſme, yet whether the priviledges of Chriſtians and their ſtate, may not juſtly be ſaid to be as great and greater then the priviledges of the Iewes and their ſtate.
No man is willing to looſe by change, and our children are ſo great a peece of us, as that what they looſe, wee feele.
It muſt firſt be affirmed that the Iewes had this peculiar honour proper both to their perſons, and the land of their habitation and dwelling, their Temple alſo & other ordinances, that they were types of thinges to come, and in that reſpect were many thinges performed by them, and many thinges predicated of them, which elſe would not have beene, as the land was holy but typically, and the Temple holy but typically, and all the inhabitants of all ages and degrees, unleſſe under a particular defilement and uncleanneſſe, were denominated holy, but typically alſo.
Now what ever was a type in that wherein it was a type, whether perſons or ordinances, &c. of all ſuch things as types, it may be affirmed.
Firſt that they are inferiour to their antitypes, that is, to the thing figured, or ſhewed by them.
Secondly that they are not true in themſelves, being a ſhadow of thinges to come, but in the body or truth, which they figure or type out.
Thirdly that when the antitype, or truth is fullfilled, or performed, the type ceaſeth; now it ſeemes to be agreed by all hands, that not onelyonly places and perſons, ceremonies and events, were types, but the Sacraments of the Iewes and former times, were types and ſhadowes of our Sacraments, not to inſtance in any but in circumciſion, as relating to & typiſing out Baptiſme, which is agreed on all ſides to be a type of our baptiſme, yea, ſo far ſome urge it as a type, that they would therefore have infants baptized, becauſe infants were circumciſed, the antitype being to anſwer the type; but upō how great a mis-take they ſo urge it, we ſhall ſhew hereafter, when wee ſhall make that manifeſt, that a great reaſon of the difference and not baptizing infants of beleevers, ariſeth from the conſideration of the typicalnes of circumciſion: for the preſent though it be generally graunted, yet wee further make it manifeſt to be a type of Baptiſme by examining that place Coll. 2.11.12. In vvhom alſo yee are circumciſed vvith the circumciſion made vvithout hands, in putting of the body of the ſinnes of the fleſh, by the circumciſion of Chriſt, buried vvith him in baptiſme, vvherein alſo you are riſen vvith him through the faith of the operation of God, vvho hath rayſed him from the dead. In this ſecond chapt. Paul ſeemes to contend with divers impugners of Chriſtian religion, vſus. 1. For I vvould that you knovv vvhat great conflict I have for you; and firſt verſ. 4. hee contends againſt oratory and inticing words, by which their hearts might be led away and ſeduced; And this I ſay, leaſt any man ſhould beguile you vvith inticing vvords, &c. then verſ. 8. hee argues againſt Philoſophers, as a vayne deceit; who would judge of the thinges of Chriſt by the elements or rudiments of the world, for none of thoſe things extend themſelves to the myſteries of Chriſt, which wee hold by faith, and therefore Philoſophicall demonſtrations any farther then they are proportionable to the analogie of faith, are extreamely deceitfull, and to be bewar'de of.
In the third place hee contends againſt thoſe who laboured to retaine Iewiſh ceremonies and types, verſ. 10.11.12. And yee are compleat in him vvhichwhich is the head of all principalities and povver, in vvhom alſo yee are circumciſed vvith the circumciſion made vvithout hands, in putting of the body of the ſinnes of the fleſh by the circumciſion of Chriſt, buried vvith him in baptiſme, vvherein alſo you are riſen vvith him, &c. For here hee ſhewes that circumciſiō, which was the profeſſion of the whole Law, was fullfilled as a type or figure to Chriſtians by Chriſt in Baptiſme, and therefore that was to vaniſh away, as types ought to doe, when they were fullfilled; therefore hee ſhewes how wee are circumciſed in Chriſt, which is ſealed and effected by Baptiſme; firſt it is without hands, which the legall circumciſion was not, as Baptiſme in ſome ſence may be ſaid alſo to be, God being the great Baptizer.
Secondly this circumciſion doth not deprive you onelyonly of a little ſkin of the fleſh, which was typicall, but of the whole body of ſinne.
Thirdly this is not the circumciſion of Moſes, or of the fathers, but of Chriſt, for onelyonly Chriſt can effect this.
Laſtly all this is ſealed to us and made ours by Baptiſme, by Baptiſme is effected this circumciſion, in which we are aſſimulated to Chriſt, buried & riſen againe, and are ſealed one with him in our death to ſinne and life to holynes, ſo as Baptiſme is Chriſtian circumciſion, and then we are ſaid to be circumciſed with the circumciſion of Chriſt, when wee are rightly baptized.
Now therefore if circumciſion be a type of Baptiſme, as it is acknowledged and prooved, then examine it by the former properties of a type.
And firſt if circumciſion be a type of Baptiſme, then it is inferior to Baptiſme, as types are to their antitypes, of which they are ſhadowes and figures; But if Baptiſme be to be adminiſtred for a ſeale and ſigne in infancy, as circumciſion was to teach and inſtruct hereafter, then on the other hand their priviledge was far above ours, who carryed a marke in the fleſh, viſible and ſenſible, by which they knew aſſuredly they were circumciſed, whereas that any of us have bene ſprinkled or dipt in infancy, we muſt receive by a humane faith, having never our ſelves ſeene it, nor no markes to ſhew it us, or convince us of it; and it may well fall out, that no body may be able to aſſure us of it neither; ſo as that ceremony may well not worke upon us with any power, of which wee have ſo little aſſurance, whether it have bene adminiſtred to us or no.
Beſides that a man had a Iew to his father, was the aſſured qualification for circumciſion, which a man might know as well as his owne father; but for Baptiſme I muſt beleeve my parents was godly, if I will be aſſured of my qualification, which ariſeth from the faith (as they ſay) of one parent, (for it will not now goe downe ſo eaſily as it hath done, that a profeſſion of Chriſtianity onelyonly at large will qualify for deriving right to Baptiſme) now this is a thing which poſſibly may be very hard for me to aſcertain from my owne knowledge, or the knowledge of any others, but perhaps I muſt be put to diſpute as well my right to baptiſme, as the matter of fact that I had it, which yet according to the right notion of that ordinance, is to be the riſe of much comfort and inſtruction to me.
After all this conſider how weakely will the operation of ſuch a ceremony or ſigne fall upon me, where in there will be need of faith to beleeve that I had right to it, or that I had it at all. Now then if the type be inferior to the antitype, wee muſt never allow it great and eſſentiall ſuperiorities, as it would certainly have, if infants were to be baptized, as formerly they were circumciſed; this therefore according to what hath bene ſaid, not being poſſibly to be avoyded, that if infants be to be baptized, they will fall below in ſuch Baptiſme the priviledges and advantages of circumciſiō, which is contrary to the nature of a type, it muſt then follow that therefore they are not to be baptized, and therefore baptiſme was never intēded them; this being moſt aſſured, that it farre excells that of the Iewes, as the antitype doth that which typifies it, and figures it out.
Secondly it is affirmed of types that they were not true in themſelves, being a ſhadow of thinges to come, but in the body or truth which they figure or type out, ſo the ſcape goate, the Paſcall lambe, &c. apply this from circumciſion of infants the type to the antitype baptiſme, with its ſubject; the infants generally of the Iews no more then the land were not truely and properly holy and ſaintes, but types of ſuch, the adminiſtring it to males of ſuch an age, and to males onelyonly, ſhewes as much, when as it might have bene adminiſtred to women, as Peter Martyr affirmes out of Ambroſe, the Egyptians doe, and the Iacobites, a certain ſect of Chriſtians inhabiting Cyprus, Syria, &c. in great numbers, & others doe to this day; Now had it not bene for the types ſake, what probable reaſon can be given, why women, who muſt be acknowledged within the covenant as well as men, ſhould not be circumciſed, which they were capable of, as appeares by what is recorded of fact, for what is done by whole nations & people, might have bene done by Gods command, or the Lord could have pitcht upon another ceremony, which would have fitted women in the adminiſtration of it, if that would not; But as it is acknowledged that circumciſion typified Baptiſme, ſo the ſubject of the one the ſubject of the other, to wit, a male a beleever, or one who is in Chriſt the ſonne of God: Therefore baptiſme is better thē circumciſion, and our ſtate better then theirs, though infants have it not; nay the betterneſſe lyes in this, that by baptizing beleevers, ſo knowne and received, we have the ſubſtance of what they had but in the ſhadow & type, to wit, a male infant, the ſubject of that ordinance, we a beleever the ſubject of ours.
The third thing predicated of types is, that when the antitype or truth is fullfilled and performed, the type ceaſeth: Apply this to the caſe of circumciſion and baptiſme: The Lord now making up his churches of ſaints really ſo and no other (as farre as we can judge by the rules he gives us to judge by) thoſe who by vertue of their typeſhip were accounted holy, and the ſubject of ordinances, to wit, a certain generation of men and their infants are now no more to be eſteemed ſo, nor is any thing to ſucceed, or come in place of ſuch an adminiſtration, but that which is the truth & ſubſtance of it, to wit, beleevers, and ſuch as in whom Chriſt is formed, which the other ſeemed to typify and ſhadow; and to doe otherwayes, were to bring your ſelves to the beggarly adminiſtrations of types and ſhadows, when you have the ſubſtance and antitype, out of a deſire to goe equall with the Iewes in priviledges, whereas in this way propounded, ye are infinitely above them.
To conclude out of what hath bene ſaid, their ſtate had the honour of the type, ours of the antitype, they of the ſhadow or figure, but we of the body; our childrē no more then our land or temples, hold out ſhadowes of things to come: In the meane time wee have Chriſt amongſt us, and are his temple; wee have the body, Coloſſ. 2.17. others were a ſhadovv of thinges to come, but the body is of Chriſt. And Heb. 10.1. The lavv had a ſhadovv of good thinges to come, and not ſo much as the image of them. And our condition being not to hold out types and figures, our infants have no ſuch adminiſtration uſed to them, as formerly the Iewes had in an age whē it can proffit them noe otherwiſe, but in making them types. And if this be an unhappynes, ye may as well count it an unhappynes that our land is not typicall, or our temples or dayes of worſhip: But wee have Chriſt amongſt us for our ſeede, as well as for our ſelves. And conſider this that by all that is ſayd, wee reject no promiſes made to the children in conſideration of Gods love, or affection to their parents; but we imbrace them, and expect, & pray for the fullfilling of them, onelyonly wee doe not by precipitating the adminiſtration of an ordinance to our children, beyond the inſtitution and before the time of it, render that which is intended for ſo much comfort and uſe, both unproffitable & uncomfortable to them, and aſſimulate them to the pedagogy and ſimilitude of types.
And laſtly that we may looke upon this in the glaſſe of other thinges, no man holds the condition and ſtate of our Miniſters leſſe bleſſed, then that of the Iewiſh church, yet the Prieſts & Levits then had this peculiar, that their ſtate was ſucceſſive, and derived from father to ſonne, which ours we know is not. And not onelyonly ſo, but their church ſtate alſo was ſucceſſive, a man was borne a member of the Iewiſh church, & by his birthright had a title to all church ordinances, as his age made him capable of them, but the children of Chriſtians however they are baptized at aventure, yet not onelyonly many churches we take notice of now a dayes, as pretending to a more ſtrict reformation, require alſo a perſonall & particular admiſſion, for the inſtating them into the Church as members, but others alſo (and thoſe particularly of the united Provinces) doe the like, not onelyonly in relatiō to the children of Chriſtians, ſtrāgers to them, but to thoſe borne of their own members; Since therefore neither our miniſtry, nor our church ſtate ſuffers, in wanting the power of deriving miniſters or members, by way of ſucceſſion, it ſhould leſſe ſtick with any that they cannot derive a right to Baptiſme to their children that way; on the other ſide, wee ſhould glory in our priviledges, and thinke our ſelves more then recompenſed, that in ſteed of the honour of types, which is a thing common to men, with beaſts and countries, we have the body & ſubſtance of that, of which in old time they had but the ſhadow, and not ſo much as the image, Heb. 10.1.