The Controversy About Infants Church Membership and Baptism, Title page – Preface
THE CONTROVERSIE ABOUT Infants Church-Memberſhip and BAPTISM, Epitomized.
In two TREATISES.
The Firſt, Shewing the certainty of the Salvation of all Dying Infants, againſt the Doctrine of the Paedo-Baptiſts, who deny Salvation to all Infants that die Unbaptized, either directly, or by the natural Conſequence of their Arguments.
The Second, Being a plain Confutation of Mr. J. B. his ſecond Book of more than 60 Queries, about Infants Church-Memberſhip and Baptiſm, by a proportionable number of Antiqueries.
Being an Eſſay towards a more Chriſtian Accommodation between the Paedo-Baptiſts, and the Baptized Believers. Publiſhed for that happy end.
By THOMAS GRANTHAM, Author of The Queriſt Examined: wherein Fifty Queries gathered and propounded by the ſaid J. B. are Redargued.
Mr. Baxter tells us (in his Saints Reſt, p. 179. 3d Edit.) That in the Primitive Times, none were Baptized without an expreſs Covenanting, wherein they renounced the World, the Fleſh, and the Devil, and engaged themſelves to Chriſt, and promiſed to obey Him.
LONDON, Printed in the Year, 1680.
To Mr. J. B. Collector of the Queries, &c.
SIR,
I Shall here requite your Thanks you gave me in your laſt, by returning Thanks to you for your endeavours for Peace among differing Chriſtians, and particularly for the terms propounded for an Accommodation; and I find the ſame delivered lately by Mr. Baxter himſelf, for which I return him thanks alſo; For methinks there wants but a little more than is offered towards the obtaining ſo much Union between the Baptiſts, and Paedo-Baptiſts, as might make them a great Bleſſing one to another.
But Sir, now give me leave to blame you (and Mr. Baxter alſo) for miſrepreſenting your Friends, the Baptized Churches: Whilſt you in your Epiſtle, and he in his Books, do repreſent us to the World, as a People who exclude Infants from Goſpel Grace; deny them to be capable of Pardon by a gracious Covenant; as if we left all Infants in the Kingdom of the Devil, took away all Comfort from Parents concerning their dying Infants. When yet it is moſt certain, all theſe things are utterly untrue; and it is alſo certain, that our Doctrine concerning dying Infants, is far more comfortable than yours, as I am perſuaded will appear to ſuch as read the enſuing Treatiſes.
And I am alſo perſuaded, could there be once a free and friendly Debate between the Baptiſts and Pedo Baptiſts, about Infants intereſt in the Covenant of Grace, and the certainty of their Salvation by Chriſt; without incumbring that Diſcourſe with Baptiſm, it were eaſie to compoſe their Difference in that Point. Which done, it's hoped might be no impoſſible thing to accommodate their difference in the caſe of Baptiſm it ſelf. But whilſt theſe two things are confounded, Diſputes are Perplexed, in ſo much as that a right underſtanding can hardly be attained on either ſide. Nor do many Readers underſtand what Mr. B. means, when he would have Infants admitted Members of the Viſible Church by the Law of Infants Church-Memberſhip unrepealed, any more than they know what is intended on Mr. T's. part, by their being taken to be Members by a Tranſient Fact; both paſſages being too occult for every Reader.
Sir, let me ſay this farther, Could but the Reformed Christians once get over this stumbling-block of Paedo-Rantiſm, and reſolve upon the way of Believers Baptiſm, which is ſo perſpicuous in the Scripture, and in the mean time take the most ſolemn way (which might be warrantable) to dedicate their Infants to God in the Name of Christ; It would certainly prove the best Expedient to bring down the Papal Confidence: for as they know (and acknowledg) that uſage to stand upon the authority of Tradition, and not upon the Scripture Warrant, ſo they glory over the Proteſtant for his Inconstancy, in denying unwritten Tradition, and yet their very Baptiſm hath no other Foundation: But were the Doctrine of Baptiſm purged from this Leven, and restored to its Primitive Purity, it would find all the Univerſities of the Papiſts as much buſineſs to defend their Infant Sprinkling, as ever they were at to defend their Tranſubstantiation.
What you write concerning my Queriſt Examined, I ſhall take little Notice of, eſpecially for that I find it attended with overmuch Levity; and at the most is but a kind of Carping at Words, rather than a ſolid Anſwer; and there ſeems to me an unwillingneſs in you to understand what you flirt at, about the Meſſenger's Office, and about Impoſition of Hands, which being no Scriptureleſs Matters (as your Paedo-Rantiſm is) requires your more ſerious thoughts, whether you understand, or like my Sentiments there or not. I am your Real Friend,
THO. GRANTHAM.