The Baptizing of Infants Justified, Part 3 – Part 4
The Judgement of our Engliſh Modern Divines touching Infants Baptiſme.
IN the very beginning of Regeneration,Dr. Ames. whereof baptiſme is the Seale, a man is mereely paſſive; and hence it is, that of a man that is to be either circumciſed, or baptized, no externall act is required, (as in other Sacraments there is) but onelyonly a capacity paſſive to receive: infants therefore are as capable of this Sacrament, in reſpect even of the chiefe uſe thereof, as men of yeeres themſelves. Ames contra Anab.
Though faith and actuall repentance be required in thoſe that be of yeeres, before they receive the ſigne of the covenant,Dr. Davenant. yet is it not neceſſary in the infants of believing parents; for to be within the covenant is enough to make one capable of the ſigne of the covenant; now infants are in the ſame covenant with their parents, Gen. 17.7. This we ſee in Abraham, who firſt believed and then was circumciſed; but Iſaac was circumciſed before he could declare that he believed: This ſame thing is rightly done in the children of believing parents, by the practiſe of the Apoſtles, who did not baptize any of yeeres till they had profeſſed their faith; but when the parents had imbraced the faith, then their whole families were baptized, Act. 16.15.33. 1 Cor. 1.16. now no man doubts but that children are comprehended under the notion of family. Davenant on Coloſ. 2.
In ſome the Sacraments do effectually worke in proceſſe of time by the helpe of Gods Word, read or preached,Mr Thoj Rogers. which ingendreth faith; ſuch is the eſtate principally of infants elected unto life and ſalvation. Rogers Explication of the 39 Articles.
Infants receive the Divine vertue of the holy Ghoſt in baptiſme,Mr. Hooker. which giveth to the powers of the ſoule their firſt diſpoſition towards future newneſſe of life. Hooker Eccleſ. politic.
Mr. Perkins.The baptiſme of infants hath warrant out of the Word of God, however ſome men be of contrary opinion; for all the Iſraelites were baptized in the Sea, and among them, no doubt, were many children. If it be ſaid, that baptiſme was extraordinary, and therefore is no ground for ours. Anſw. True, it was extraordinary for the manner; but yet herein, the matter, and ſubſtance, and the thing ſignified is ordinary, and the end all one with ours. And therefore the baptiſme of infants in the red Sea, is ſome warrant for the Baptiſme of infants in the Church now adaies. Perkins on Heb. 11.
Mr. Ainſworth.They are but a faithleſſe and crooked generation, that notwithſtanding all that God hath ſpoken and done in this kind, doe deny this grace of Chriſt to the infants of his people, and the ſeale or confirmation of this grace by baptiſme now, as it was by circumciſion of old. Ainſworth, cenſure of a Dialogue of the Anabaptiſts.
Dr. Willet.Every man-child of eight daies old ſhall be circumciſed, &c. From hence the baptiſme of infants, which commeth in the place of circumciſion, is moſt pertinently proved, againſt the groſſe errour of the Anabaptiſts. For as then infants were circumciſed to ſhew the contagion of the nature, from the which they were cleanſed, by the circumciſion of the Spirit: ſo even infants now, being guilty of originall corruption, have need of the Sacrament of Regeneration. Willet on Gen. 17.
Mr. Hilderſham.There is great need that infants ſhould be baptized, for this maketh greatly for the faith and comfort of their parents, for the preſent, and of their owne afterwards; that as they are by nature ſo filthy and loathſome in the ſight of God, ſo the Lord hath in the blood of Jeſus Chriſt (whereof the water in baptiſme is a ſigne and ſeale) provided a laver to waſh and cleanſe them in, even the laver of regeneration, as the Apoſtle calleth it, Tit. 3.5. yea a fountaine opened (as the Prophet calleth it, Zach. 13.1.) for ſin and uncleanneſſe, ſufficient to cleanſe them from all this filthineſſe, and corruption of their nature. Hilderſham on Pſalm 51. Lect. 55.
Dr. Fulk.We doe no otherwiſe affirme Chriſtian mens children to be holy from their mothers wombe, then St. Paul, 1 Cor. 7.14. ſaith; they are holy becauſe they are compriſed in Gods covenant, and have right to be baptized. Fulk on Rhem. Teſt. Rom. 5.
Mr. Hieron.Indeed the Anabaptiſts, who diſpute againſt the baptizing of infants, doe much urge the practice of the Apoſtles, and of Philips baptizing the Eunuch; urging that they baptized none but ſuch as were able to give an account of their faith. To this I anſwer: 1. That it is not ſimply improper to call the infant of believing parents, a believer; becauſe though he doe not now actually believe, yet partly becauſe for his parents ſake, he is within the compaſſe of the covenant; and partly becauſe of that which may well be hoped for hereafter it were hard to terme him an infidell, ſo it were not harſh to call him a believer; And why not a believer as well as a reaſonable creature? though yet there is in him no uſe of reaſon nor any certainty of ability hereafter to enjoy it? 2. The argument is naught from the Apoſtles practiſe; for that courſe which they took with one certaine age of perſons, cannot be ſtretched out to all without exception; In Abrahams perſon, the knowledge of the nature of the Sacrament, and a yeelding himſelfe to live under the Lords obedience, went before the receiving of circumciſion; yet in Iſaac it was not ſo, he was circumciſed firſt, and inſtructed after. 3. As concerning the Apoſtles practiſe it ſelfe, there is no certainty for it, that they baptized none but ſuch as were able to make acknowledgment of their faith; there is more probability on the contrary, that they baptized even ſome infants, as (namely) when they baptized whol families. 4. Be it that none of all theſe things wil ſerve to juſtifie the baptiſme of infants, (yet unable to make confeſſion of their faith) yet their intereſt into the promiſe of God, is a ſufficient plea: that promiſe Acts 2.39. is made to them that believe, and to their children. If then the promiſe belong to infants, why not alſo the ſeale of the promiſe? Hieron in his Sermon of baptizing the Eunuch.
This covenant is contained in the Scripture;Dr. Whitaker. I will be thy God, and the God of thy ſeed, Gen. 17.7. therefore the baptiſme of infants is grounded upon the written Word of God: and certainly, if we had not better authority for the baptizing of infants, then unwritten Traditions, we were in an ill caſe to deale with Anabaptiſts in this matter. Whitaker againſt Bellarmin de perfectione ſcripturae.
We ſay that baptiſme is a Sacrament of the remiſſion of ſins,Dr. Jewell. and of that waſhing, which we have in the blood of Chriſt; and that no perſon, which will profeſſe Chriſts name, ought to be reſtrained or kept backe there from; no not the very babes of Chriſtians: foraſmuch as they be borne in ſin, and doe pertaine unto the people of God. Jewels Apologie, cap. 11. diviſion 3.
D. Mayer.That the children of believing parents ought to be baptized, it is plaine.
1. From the uſe of circumciſion, which was the forerunner hereof, which was appointed to be done upon the eighth day after the birth. Now the Seale of Gods covenant is to be applyed unto the children of Chriſtians, as ſoone as unto the children of the Jewes; but unto the Jews the ſeale was applyed in their infancy; therefore to the children of Chriſtians likewiſe, as circumciſion their ſeale to them, ſo baptiſme our ſeale to us.
2. From the eſtate of infants, the promiſes belong to them, as well as unto their parents, ſaith Peter, Acts 2.39. and theirs is the Kingdome of Heaven, ſaith Chriſt; and they are holy, ſaith Paul, 1 Cor. 7.14. now unto thoſe that are wholly partakers of the promiſes of God, and of the Kingdome of Heaven, the ſigne and ſeale of God is not to be denyed; but children of believing parents are ſuch even in their infancy, therefore the ſeale or ſigne of baptiſme may not be denyed.
3. From the practiſe of the Apoſtles and firſt teachers of the Goſpell: St. Paul baptized the houſhold of Stephanus and Lydia and her houſhold; and the Jaylor was baptized, with all that belonged unto him. And when little children were brought unto Chriſt, ſome diſliking it were reproved, and the bringers of them encouraged: neither hath there beene any time ſince, wherein they have been refuſed, but ſince the ſpringing up of the many headed Hydra of Anabaptiſme. Mayers Catech. of childrens baptiſme.
Mr. WynelThe covenant now, and formerly with the Jewes, is the ſame, in relation to the eternall welfare of the ſoule.
1. The foundation of the covenant is the ſame; as Gods free, eternall, and unchangeable love to his elect.
2. The occaſion of the covenant, the ſame; as mans miſery by his fall in the loynes of Adam: of which this covenant of grace is a pregnant and mercifull remedy.
3. The Author is the ſame; as God, gracious, mercifull, ſlow to anger, pardoning iniquity, &c.
4. The thing promiſed is the ſame; as Chriſt the redeemer and Saviour of mankind.
5. The ſpirituall efficacy of the Ordinances the ſame; as the mortification of the fleſh, and the renewing of the creature to Gods Image in Jeſus Chriſt.
6. The ſubjects the ſame; as a people in covenant with God, to yeeld obedience to the faith.
7. The end, cujus, the ſame; as the glory of Gods mercy to his elect, and the unexcuſe of the reprobate.
8. Finally, the end, cui, the ſame; as good workes here in this life, and the immortality of the ſoule, and eternall bleſſedneſſe in the life to come.
In another place concerning the baptizing of all without difference, he ſaith: That, though divers borne within the Church are reprobates, yet as they come one and one unto us, we cannot ſay that this or that child is a reprobate; he may be an elect veſſell, for ought we know. And the adequate end of baptiſme adminiſtred, is not ſalvation of the baptized: The glory of God is the principall end, namely the glory of Gods ſingular mercy, in the ſalvation of his elect; and the glory of Gods juſtice in the unexcuſe of the reprobate; As all outward miniſtrations in the Church ſerve for the glory of Gods mercy and juſtice. We put them all under the initiall ſeale of the goſpell, that they may be made ſubject to the goſpell, and be judged by the goſpell. Wynells covenants plea for Infants.
Next to the arguments drawne from expreſſe teſtimony of Scripture for the baptizing of children,Dr. Featley. we have a moſt forcible argument drawne from the conſent of the univerſall Church, teſtified by their conſtant practice of admitting children to baptiſme, even from the Apoſtles daies unto this preſent. This argument, if it be well weighed, is of very great moment, and may convince the conſcience of any ingenuous Chriſtian. For no Chriſtian doubteth, but that the Apoſtles were inſpired by the holy Ghoſt, and Chriſt promiſed his Spirit to lead his Church into all truth; which promiſe he hath hitherto made good in ſuch ſort, that it cannot be proved that ever the whole Church of Chriſt univerſally erred; it is true, particular Churches have erred, and may erre, and generall Councels, which the Schooles terme the repreſentative Church, are ſubject to error, and have ſometimes decreed hereſie and falſhood for truth; but the formall Church, as they ſpeake, that is, all the aſſemblies of Chriſtians in the world cannot be impeached with error at any time: whence I thus frame my argument.
That which the Apoſtles in their daies began, and the whole Chriſtian Church ſcattered over the face of the whole earth hath continued in all ages, and all Countries where Chriſtianity hath been, and is profeſſed, cannot be an erroneous practiſe.
But the Catholike Chriſtian Church, in all places and ages, even from the Apoſtles times, hath admitted the children of faithfull parents to holy baptiſme.
Ergo, the practiſe of chriſtening children cannot be erroneous or unwarrantable, as the Anabaptiſts teach. Featly, Diſputation with Anab. pag. 19.
Confeſſions of Reformed Churches for Baptizing of Infants.
Helvetian.WE condemne the Anabaptiſts, who deny young infants born of faithfull parents, to be admitted to baptiſme; for according to the doctrine of the Goſpell, theirs is the Kingdome of God, and they are within the covenant of God, why therefore ſhould not the ſigne of the covenant of God be given unto them? why ſhould they not be initiated by holy baptiſme, that are Gods peculiar and within his Church? The Helvetian confeſſion, cap. 20.
Belgick.Certainly Chriſt ſhed his blood, that he might no leſſe waſh infants of faithfull parents, then thoſe of yeeres; and therefore it is requiſite they ſhould alſo receive the ſigne, or Sacrament, of that thing which Chriſt for their ſakes accompliſhed. The Belgicke confeſſion, Article 34.
French.We acknowledge onelyonly two Sacraments, common to the whole Church; the former whereof is Baptiſme, given unto us to witneſſe our Adoption; becauſe in it, we are engrafted into the body of Chriſt, that being waſhed with his blood, we might alſo be renewed by his Spirit unto holineſſe of life. Confeſſion of France, Articl 37.
AuguſtaneInfants being by Baptiſme commended to God are received into the favour of God, and made his ſonnes; as Chriſt teſtifieth, Matth. 18. ſaying, It is not the will of your Father which is in Heaven, that one of theſe little ones ſhould periſh. Auguſtane confeſſion, Article 9.
Saxon.We retaine the baptiſme of infants alſo, becauſe it is moſt certaine that the promiſe of grace belongs even to infants; nor doe we we judge this a meere idle ceremony, but that then they are truely received by God and ſanctified. The Saxon confeſſion, cap. 14.
I believe and confeſſe that our children (foraſmuch as they alſo are included together with us in the covenant) when they are baptized into the Articles of the ancient Catholique faith,Palatine. are made partakers as wel as we of the death of Chriſt, and of all other good things, &c. Palatinate confeſſion.
Baptiſme is a notable badge of the people of God,Harmony, &c. for it ſerves us to ſhew of what profeſſion we be, and by our baptiſme we declare in the Church what faith we profeſſe; both we, our children, and our families; namely, the Chriſtian Religion. Ex actis concordia inter Lutherum, Bucerum, & Helveticas Eccleſias.