The Government of the Churches of Christ, Book 7 · Chapter 9
CHAP. IX.
Two Cases resolved, whither a person who, is not a Church-member may be the subject of Baptism. Whether a Minister who is not a Pastor, may Administer Baptism.
I Resolve the cases propounded into these two Questions.
1. Whether one that is not a Church-member may be the Subject of Baptism?
2. Whether one that is not a Pastor in a particular Relation to persons that offer themselves to be baptized may baptize them? And if he Administers it, under what consideration he doth it, whether as a Minister, or otherwise as a private person?
Quest. 1. Unto the first Question I say these two Things:
1. The examples in Scripture do clearly hold forth, that persons that were not in Church-Fellowship were yet baptized.
1. The first Instance is of the Eunuch, baptiz'd by Philip, Acts 8. If it be said, that he was a Proselyte, and so of the Jewish Church, and upon that ground a subject capable of Baptism. The reply is, that his being of the Jewish Church did not make him capable of the Gospel-Baptism, of the Ordinance under the Gospel which we call Baptism.
1. For when John Baptist baptized, he bid them say not, they had Abraham for their Father, which yet was a ground for Circumcision, as under the old Covenant Administred, but he requires Repentance and Regeneration, which is the Gospel-Initiation into the Kingdom of Heaven:
2. Again Peter (Acts 2.) being to baptize Jews, baptizeth them, not upon the account they were the Seed of Abraham, but upon Faith and Repentance, which he calls them to. He only tells them, that if they would turn to God, then God would renew the promises unto them and their Children, yet in a Gospel way, namely, by vertue of their being call'd, as the 39 verse hath it; So as the ground upon which men were Members of the Jewish Church, and Circumcised, was not the ground upon which they were baptized; And therefore the Eunuch was not baptiz'd upon any such account. The dispensation of the Covenant was altered, and the application of the Ordinances had accordingly an alteration. So then, if he were not baptized as a Member of the Jewish Church, and when he was baptized, was a Member of no Gospel-Church Instituted, then it necessarily follows, that a person who is not a Member of an Instituted Church, or a particular Congregation, may be the subject of Baptism.
2. The second Instance (which also is an answer to the former Objection) is of the Jaylor, and his houshold, and of those baptized by Paul, 1 Cor. 1. 14. They to be sure were not of the Jewish Church, for the Jaylor was a perfect Heathen before, to the instant of his Conversion, yet he and his Houshold were baptized before Morning.
If it be said that Philip and the Apostles were persons extraordinary. I Answer, That still the extraordinaries of their Office, did only enable them with an extraordinary power over all Churches, and over all persons with an extraordinary Authority, but could not convey a requisite qualification unto an ordinary person, which was still required however in the subject that was to be baptized. They could not administer the Lord's Supper out of a Church, nor never did; and although they had extraordinary power over all Churches, yet that did not make all Churches one Church, but there remained Churches distinct according to that ordinary Capacity of them as Christ had instituted. And so it must be supposed in this Case.
2. The apparent difference that is between Baptism and the Lord's Supper in their several intentions, doth shew that the one is properly the Ordinance of a particular Church, and the other of the Universal.
1. Because Baptism is a baptizing of a single person into Christ, and consequently into the body of Christ (as 1 Cor. 12. 13. imports) and is but an act of a single person unto a single person (as the Instance of Philip and the Eunuch, being alone shews) and it belonging not unto a particular Church, as the former Instances declared, it must necessarily belong unto the Universal Church, as Eph. 4. 4. seems to hold forth, One Lord, One God, One Baptism, One Body.
2. As for the Lord's Supper, it is as evident that it was properly the Ordinance of a particular Church embodied together, 1 Cor. 10. The bread which we break, is it not the Communion of the body of Christ? It is the bread which we break, so that there must be a number of persons to celebrate it. For these we must be many, for, says he, We, being many, are one Bread and one Body, verse 17. It doth not hold forth the Union of single persons with Christ, or any ingrafting into him, as Baptism doth in the first Initiation; but it holds forth a joynt and a common participation. 'Tis the Nature of the Ordinance it self, for the Institution is, Eat ye all of this, and drink ye all of this. Insomuch as the Apostle says, Tarry one for another, 1 Cor. 11. 33. Insomuch also as it had the Denomination from the meeting or gathering together of many, and therefore was called foreign. Therefore to come together into one place, and to eat the Lord's Supper, are put, as it were, mutually one for the other.
Quest. 2. I come now to consider the second Question, whether the Child of a person truly godly, not in fellowship with you, may be baptized by one who is not a Pastor, and under what notion, whether as a Minister or no?
1. I suppose that Infant-baptism of Parents godly is warrantably in its self required.
2. I suppose that the Judgment, whether the person is godly, yea or no, whose Child is baptized, properly belongs to him that baptizes it. There is this difference between Baptism and the Administration of the Lord's Supper; That it is a single act of him that baptizeth to the person baptized: but the act of blessing the Bread and Wine (which we bless) it is a joynt act together with the Church, and the Minister doth give it to the whole as Christ did. And therefore the Judgment of the Church, that a man is godly, may satisfie the Minister's Conscience for his administring the Lord's Supper among them; he not applying it to this or that person, but in the point of Baptism 'tis otherwise, as is clear.
3. If it be (as by reviewing the first question it appears) the right of men out of Church-fellowship, as well as in Church-fellowship to be baptized: This must be done by some body; and the Judgment that is to be past concerning the person is not incumbent upon a whole Church only or chiefly, but upon the single person that is to baptize. So as for a warrant of his Judging such a person to be godly, and the Child to be godly, it is not absolutely necessary that he have the Judgment of a Church for it. And if there were not a lawful way or means by which, after the Apostles times those out of Church-fellowship, which were converted might be baptized; Then Jesus Christ had not made provision for all times of the Gospel as well as for the first, in so great an Ordinance. If therefore it does lye upon some, those must either be Ministers or others, if it lyes upon others, you know the inconveniency that will follow upon that. If it lyes on the Minister, the Question is, whether as a Minister or no? To that I shall give this clear answer, That a man that is set apart by his own vow to God professed by his acceptance of that Calling, when he was called to be a Minister in a Church (and it hath the Nature of a vow on his part, and is so accepted of him by God) by vertue of that publique consecration and dedication of himself unto the service of Christ as a Minister; he is to be lookt upon as a Minister, not only unto them of his own Church, but occasionally also as he shall be call'd to such an act of the Ministry as he singly may perform, as to preach or to baptize, which when he does, he does it as a Minister, and with the blessing of a Minister, and with the promise made to a Minister. If one come to him with a case of Conscience, as to a Minister of Christ, he hath the blessing of a Minister, and the promise of a Minister and the guidance of a Minister to resolve it, and by like reason, if any one come to him and call him to baptize, he hath authority to do it. And this does no way prejudice our Congregational principles: for it is a single Act of the Ministry, and but occasionally put forth as he shall be call'd thereto▪ But the Matter of Ordination and of governing the Church or ruling, it is not a single act, but is to be performed with others; for 'tis an act of authority or power over others, but it is not an act of power above others, or which others have not. Our Presbyterian brethren fail in their practice, and in their argument, in that, they, because they are Ministers, therefore associate themselves together, and take power over the Churches to rule them and govern them whether the Churches do call them or no. And call them to it as Churches they cannot, unless they give away thereby and prejudice that power which is seated within themselves, as in a body, and ought to be exercised among themselves; and not without themselves in a Judicature that is without them. If I were seated in a Parish that had a Church in it gathered out of it, and the rest of the Parish came to hear me, I should not look upon my self to preach as a private man to all these that are not in my Church, and as a Minister only to them that are of the Church, but as one set apart to the work of the Ministry; to preach as a Minister to both, as to the matter of preaching: And that (as I take it) by vertue of what is said, Eph: 4. 12. He gave Pastors and Teachers as well foreign, for the joynting in of the Saints, which is Conversion, as well as for the edifying of the body of Christ.