<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2007-10-11</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Elspeth Healey</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Proofed text and corrected markup.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="A85408">
<STC T="W">G1189</STC>
<STC T="T">E702_7</STC>
<BIBNO T="umi">99866180</BIBNO>
<VID>118444</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P><HI>PHILADELPHIA:</HI> OR, XL.
QUERIES Peaceably and inoffen&s;ively propounded For the Di&s;covery of Truth in this Que&s;tion, or Ca&s;e of Con&s;cience; <HI>Whether Per&s;ons Baptized (as them&s;elves call Bapti&s;m) after a profe&s;sion of Faith, may, or may not, lawfully, and with a good Con&s;cience, hold Communion with &s;uch Churches, who judg them&s;elves truly Baptized, though in Infancy, and before &s;uch a Profe&s;sion?</HI></P>
<P>Together with &s;ome few brief Touches about Infant, and after-Bapti&s;m.</P>
<P>By <HI>J. G.</HI> a Mini&s;ter of the Go&s;pel of <HI>Je&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>I thank God that I baptized none of you, but</HI> Cri&s;pus <HI>and</HI> Gaius.<HI>&mdash;And I baptized al&s;o the bou&s;hold of</HI> Stephanas: <HI>be&s;ides, I know not whether I baptized any other. For</HI> Chri&s;t <HI>&s;ent me not to baptize, but to preach the Go&s;pel.</HI> 1 Cor. 1. 14, 16, 17.</P>
<Q>For ye are all the children of God by Faith in Chri&s;t Je&s;us.</Q>
<BIBL>Gal. 4. 26.</BIBL>
<Q>For in Je&s;us Chri&s;t, neither circumci&s;ion availeth any thing, nor uncircumci&s;ion, but Faith which worketh by love.</Q>
<BIBL>Gal. 5. 6.</BIBL>
<Q>Circumci&s;ion is nothing, nor uncircumci&s;ion is nothing; but the keeping of the Commandments of God.</Q>
<BIBL>1 Cor. 7. 19.</BIBL>
<Q>Deus nobis imperavit congregationem: &s;ibi &s;ervavit &s;eparationem.</Q>
<BIBL>August. in Mat. 13. 47.</BIBL>
<Q>Infantibus minime negandus Bapti&s;mus, quos Deus adoptat, &amp; filii &s;ui &s;anguine abluit.</Q>
<BIBL>Calvin. Harm. p. 253.</BIBL>
<P><HI>London,</HI> Printed by <HI>J. M.</HI> for <HI>Henry Cripps,</HI> and <HI>Lodowick Lloyd,</HI> and are to be &s;old at their Shop in <HI>Popes-head</HI> Alley. 1653.</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="discourse">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2" MS="y">
<HEAD>QUERIES ABOUT Lawfulne&s;s of Communion, with Churches deemed unbaptized; As al&s;o about <HI>Infant and after-Bapti&s;m.</HI></HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>I.</HEAD>
<P>WHether is there any Precept, or Example in the Go&s;p<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="missing" EXTENT="1 letter">l, of any per&s;on, how duly &s;oever bap|tized, who di&s;claimed <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Communion, either in Church fellow&s;hip, or in any the Or|dinances of the Go&s;pel, with tho&s;e, whom he judged true Beleevers, upon an account only of their not having been baptized, e&s;pecially af|ter &s;uch a manner, as he judged nece&s;&s;ary for them to have been? Or in ca&s;e there be neither precept, nor example found in the Scriptures to warrant &s;uch a practi&s;e, upon what ground are the Con&s;ciences of &s;uch men, who practi&s;e it, &s;atisfied or emboldened, in their way? Or if it be replyed, that there were no Beleevers in the Apo&s;tles days, who were not baptized, and that truly, and con&s;equently, that there was no occa&s;ion of &s;crupuling communion with any Beleever in the&s;e days; 1. How can this ever be proved, <HI>(viz.</HI> that there were no Beleevers unbaptized in the Apo&s;tles days,) the contrary being apparant (as may be touched hereafter?) 2. Be it granted, that there were no Beleevers unbaptized, or unduly baptized, in the Apo&s;tles days, upon what ground notwith&s;tanding can the practi&s;e now queried, be ju&s;tified, or maintained, unle&s;s the Practi|&s;ers certainly know, and can &s;atisfie them&s;elves, that in ca&s;e there had been &s;uch Beleevers in the&s;e times (I mean, who had been un-baptized, or unduly baptized) tho&s;e duly Baptized would have declined &s;uch communion with them, as that &s;pecified; e&s;pecially
<PB N="4" REF="3">
con&s;idering that po&s;itive actions (&s;uch is a declining, or withdraw|ing from, communion with the Saints in Church-fellow&s;hip) can|not be ju&s;tified upon negative grounds, at lea&s;t not further then in point of meer lawfulne&s;s, or indifferency, no nor thus far, in ca&s;e of &s;candal; which is the ca&s;e of tho&s;e, who withdraw from Church-communion to the offence, both of that Church from which they withdraw, and of many others?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>II.</HEAD>
<P>Whether can it be proved from the Scriptures, or by any Argu|ment, like, or meet, to &s;atisfie the Con&s;cience of any tender and con|&s;idering <HI>Chri&s;tian,</HI> that the Apo&s;tles or other <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> in their days, would have declined Church-communion with, or denyed Church-communion unto, &s;uch per&s;ons, whom they judged true Beleevers in <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and Partakers of like precious Faith with them|&s;elves, only becau&s;e they had not been Baptized or dipped in wa|ter, after a profe&s;&s;ion of their beleeving; e&s;pecially in ca&s;e they had been baptized, and &s;olemnly con&s;ecrated by wa&s;hing with water, unto the &s;ervice of <HI>Je&s;us Chri&s;t</HI> before, con&s;idering that the Apo|&s;tle <HI>Paul</HI> expre&s;ly &s;aith, that <HI>in Je&s;us Chri&s;t [i. e.</HI> under the Go|&s;pel, or profe&s;&s;ion of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> in the world] <HI>neither Circumci&s;ion availeth any thing, nor &V;ncircumci&s;ion,</HI> BUT FAITH <HI>which worketh by love</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Gal&punc; 5. 6.</NOTE>: And again; That <HI>Circumci&s;ion is nothing, nor &V;ncircumci&s;ion is nothing, but the keeping of the Command|ments of God</HI> <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">1 Cor. 7. 19.</NOTE>? meaning, that under the Go&s;pel, and profe&s;&s;ion thereof, neither did the ob&s;ervation of any external Rite or Cere|mony [Circumci&s;ion, by a <HI>&s;ynecdoche &s;peciei,</HI> being put for all kind of external Rites, or Ceremonies] avail or contribute any thing to|wards the commending of any per&s;on unto God; nor yet the want of any &s;uch ob&s;ervation, di&s;commend any man unto God, or prejudice his acceptation with him: but that which was all in all unto men, and which availed any thing, in, and under the Go&s;pel, that which being &s;ound in men, rendered them accepted and ap|proved of God, and the want of it, di&s;approved, was &s;uch a kind of Faith [not &s;uch, or &s;uch, a kind of Ceremony, or &s;uch or &s;uch a kind of <HI>Bapti&s;m]</HI> which by the mediation or interveening of that heavenly affection of love, uttereth and expre&s;&s;eth it &s;elf in <HI>keeping the Commandments of God, [viz.</HI> &s;o far as they are made known unto them, and as humane infirmity will well bear and admit.] Or
<PB N="5" REF="3">
is it to be beleeved, that either the Apo&s;tles, or other <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> taught by them, would have rejected tho&s;e from their communion, who were weak in the Faith, and were not convinced of every thing that was in any degree nece&s;&s;ary for them to know, and to do, only for want of &s;uch an external ob&s;ervance, of the lawfulne&s;s whereof they were unconvinced, and which, had they &s;ubmitted unto it, would have <HI>availed</HI> them little or nothing?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>III.</HEAD>
<P>Whether can it be proved by any text, or pa&s;&s;age of Scripture, either directly, or by any tolerable con&s;equence, that Chri&s;tian Churches were (in the Apo&s;tles days) con&s;tituted by Bapti&s;m, or that none were reputed members of Churches, or admitted into <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Communion with tho&s;e who were Baptized, but only &s;uch who were Baptized likewi&s;e; con&s;idering that that text <HI>Acts</HI> 2. 41. [commonly, and only, as far as I know, pretended for proof of &s;uch a thing] doth not &s;o much as colour, much le&s;s cotton, with &s;uch a &s;uppo&s;al, or conclu&s;ion; the tenor of the place being only this, <HI>Then they that gladly received his word, were baptized: and the &s;ame day there were added unto</HI> [them] <HI>about three thou|&s;and Souls?</HI> For, 1. It is not here &s;aid, that all they that gladly received the Word, were baptized; but indefinitely only, <HI>They that gladly received, &amp;c.</HI> Now indefinite expre&s;&s;ions in Scrip|ture are not always equipollent to univer&s;als, but &s;ometimes to partitives, or particulars. When the Apo&s;tle, &s;peaking of Belee|vers under the Old Te&s;tament, &s;aith, that THEY <HI>&s;topped the mouths of Lions, quenched the violence of fire, &amp;c. [Hebr.</HI> 11. 33, 34.] he doth not mean, that they all did either of the&s;e; nor indeed that many of them did either. See <HI>Mat.</HI> 27. 34. compared with <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 48. (to omit an hundred in&s;tances more of like import.) Yea many times univer&s;al expre&s;&s;ions them&s;elves are to be under&s;tood with limita|tion and re&s;traine. The&s;e things are &s;ufficiently known to per&s;ons any thing conver&s;ant in the Scriptures. 2. Neither is it here &s;aid, nor is it a thing in it &s;elf much probable, that ONLY they who were baptized, were added unto them, <HI>[i. e.</HI> to the pre-ex<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;tent number of Di&s;ciples,] but only and &s;imply that there were the number of three thou&s;and added the &s;ame day. Within which number it is the probable opinion of &s;ome, that the children, and families, of tho&s;e, who are &s;aid to have gladly received the Word,
<PB N="6" REF="4">
are comprehended; it being no ways likely, &s;carce po&s;&s;ible, that 3000 men &s;hould di&s;tinctly hear the voyce of a man &s;peaking: e&s;pecially unle&s;s we &s;hall &s;uppo&s;e, that the&s;e 3000 &s;tood neare&s;t un|to him that &s;pake, and with the be&s;t advantage to hear, there being many thou&s;ands more pre&s;ent; which can hardly be the &s;uppo&s;i|tion of any con&s;idering man in the ca&s;e in hand. Nor, 3. Is it &s;aid, or &s;o much as intimated or hinted in the lea&s;t, that any of the whole number of the three thou&s;and who were added unto them, were added by means, or upon the account, of their being baptized, although this addition be not mentioned till after their baptizing. It is ten degrees more probable, that their beleeving, or di&s;ciple|&s;hip, which according to the principles of tho&s;e Brethren them|&s;elves with whom we now argue, were precedent to their bapti|zing, and not their being baptized, were the rea&s;on and ground of <HI>Luke</HI>'s &s;aying, they <HI>were added unto the Church,</HI> or former number of Di&s;ciples; con&s;idering, 1. That the original, main and princi|pal foundation of the holy brotherhood among&s;t the Saints, and that which makes them fellow-members, or members one of ano|ther, is, not the Ceremony of their external Bapti&s;m, but their fel|low&s;hip and communion in the divine Nature, and inward relation unto the &s;ame <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> by one and the &s;ame precious Faith. 2. That it cannot be demon&s;tratively proved from the Scriptures, that tho&s;e hundred and twenty Di&s;ciples <HI>[Act.</HI> 1. 15.] unto which it is here &s;aid that three thou&s;and were added, were, or had been, all of them baptized, in as much as (as will pre&s;ently appear) there were divers members of Churches in the Apo&s;tles days, who were unbaptized; no, nor can it any whit more be proved from Scripture, that the Apo&s;tles them&s;elves mentioned <HI>Act.</HI> 1. 13. had been baptized, then that <HI>John</HI> the <HI>Bapti&s;t</HI> was baptized. 3. (And la&s;tly,) That had the Church, or per&s;ons, unto whom the&s;e three thou&s;and are &s;aid to have been added, been e&s;timated by their having been baptized, (which mu&s;t be &s;uppo&s;ed, if tho&s;e who are added to them, are &s;aid to have been added upon the account of their being baptized,) their number mu&s;t needs have far exceeded <HI>an hundred and twenty,</HI> con&s;idering the great numbers and va&s;t multitudes of per&s;ons, that had been baptized by <HI>John, Mat.</HI> 3. 5, 6. compared with <HI>Mark 1. 5. Luk.</HI> 3. 7, 21. as al&s;o by Chri&s;t him&s;elf and his Di&s;ciples, <HI>Joh.</HI> 3. 22 26. Yea had the Church been e&s;timated, or con&s;tituted, by Bap|ti&s;m,
<PB N="7" REF="4">
the Evangeli&s;t <HI>Luke,</HI> intending (que&s;tionle&s;s, <HI>Act.</HI> 4. 4.) to re|port the increa&s;e of the Church and progre&s;s of the Go&s;pel, with as much advantage as truth would afford, had prevaricated with the cau&s;e, which he intended to promote, in reporting their number to have been <HI>about five thou&s;and</HI> only; when as, upon the &s;aid &s;up|po&s;ition, and the tenor of the late premi&s;&s;es, he might with as much Truth have reported them about forty thou&s;and, yea and many more. <HI>Howbeit many of them which heard the Word,</HI> BELEE|VED: <HI>and the number of the men were about five thou&s;and.</HI> In which pa&s;&s;age, the increa&s;e of the Church, or addition unto the for|mer Saints, is with much more pregnancy of intimation a&s;cribed unto their <HI>beleeving,</HI> then in the other place it is unto their being <HI>baptized.</HI> Therefore both men and women, who are indeed ten|der of Con&s;cience in things appertaining unto God, had need have a better foundation to bear them out in their practi&s;e of rending and tearing Churches [or, if this name will not pa&s;s, of rending and tearing holy Societies and fellow&s;hips of Saints] then any thing that can be &s;o much as tolerably inferred from the Text now ar|gued, <HI>Act.</HI> 2. 41.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>IV.</HEAD>
<P>Whether did not the Church of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> at <HI>Rome</HI> in the Apo&s;tles days, and &s;o al&s;o the Churches in <HI>Galatia,</HI> hold Church-communion with &s;ome, who were not baptized, con&s;idering, 1. That the Apo&s;tle to the former writeth thus: <HI>Know ye not, that</HI> SO MANY OF US <HI>as were baptized into Je&s;us Chri&s;t, were baptized into his death? Rom.</HI> 6. 3. and to the latter (after the &s;ame manner) thus: <HI>For</HI> AS MANY OF YOU <HI>as have been baptized into Chri&s;t. Gal.</HI> 3. 27. 2. That this particle, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>as many as</HI> (u&s;ed in both places) is, in &s;uch con&s;tructions as the&s;e, always partitive, di&s;tin|gui&s;hing or dividing the entire number of per&s;ons &s;poken of, &s;ome from others, by the character or property &s;pecified, or at lea&s;t &s;up|po&s;eth a po&s;&s;ibility of &s;uch a di&s;tinction. <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>as many as touched</HI> [the hem of his garment] <HI>were made whole, (Mat.</HI> 14. 36.) This clearly &s;uppo&s;eth, either that there were &s;ome, or at lea&s;t that there might be &s;ome, who did not thus touch. So again: <HI>They brought in all</HI> AS MANY AS <HI>they found,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Mat.</HI> 22. 10. So, AS MANY <HI>[i. e.</HI> as many men and women] <HI>as are of the works of the Law, are under the cur&s;e. Gal.</HI> 3. 10. See al&s;o <HI>Mark 3. 10. &amp;</HI>
<PB N="8" REF="5">
6. 11, 56. <HI>Luk. 4 40. Ioh. 1. 12. Act.</HI> 3. 24 (with others more of like tenor and import, almo&s;t without number.) Therefore is it not without controver&s;ie and di&s;pute, that the Apo&s;tle &s;aying to the Church at <HI>Rome,</HI> and to tho&s;e in <HI>Galatia,</HI> As MANY OF You <HI>as have been baptized, &amp;c.</HI> &s;uppo&s;eth, either that there actu|ally were, or at lea&s;t that (for ought he knew to the contrary) there might be, &s;undry of their members, who had not been bap|tized? And if he had either known, or &s;o much as by conjecture &s;uppo&s;ed, that all the members of the&s;e Churches had without ex|ception been baptized, is it credible that he would have expre&s;&s;ed him&s;elf thus unto them (re&s;pectively,) As MANY OF You As <HI>have been baptized,</HI> and not rather, <HI>You having all been baptized,</HI> or the like?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="5" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>V.</HEAD>
<P>Whether did not the Church at <HI>Corinth</HI> (in the Apo&s;tles days) entertain members, and hold communion with tho&s;e, who had not been baptized; con&s;idering that he demandeth thus of this Church: <HI>El&s;e what &s;hall</HI> [or, what will] <HI>they do, which are baptized for the dead, if the dead ri&s;e not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead</HI> <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">1 Cor. 5. 29. <HI>V<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">. Cameron. Myroth.</HI> p. 229. <HI>&amp; Ambro&s;s<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">m in locum.</HI> I know the place is much vexed with In|terpreters and interpretati|ons, but cer|tain I am that the &s;ence here &s;uppo&s;ed and argued upon, is the m<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;t grammatical, and be&s;t com|porting with the propriety of he words and phra&s;e<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">.</NOTE>? Or doth not this imply, that there was a corrupt and &s;uper&s;titious practi&s;e on foot in this Church, to baptize one or o|ther of the &s;urviving kindred, or Friends, in the name of &s;uch per|&s;ons (re&s;pectively) who dyed unbaptized, and that this Church thought and &s;uppo&s;ed, that &s;uch Bapti&s;m was available for good unto the decea&s;ed in &s;uch a ca&s;e; which practi&s;e and opinion of theirs the Apo&s;tle here in&s;i&s;teth on as incon&s;i&s;tent with that mo&s;t dangerous and pernicious Error of denying the Re&s;urrection of the dead, which had now gotten head among&s;t them? And if there were &s;uch a practi&s;e as this in this Church, I mean to baptize &s;ome of the living members, in the name and &s;tead of &s;ome that were dead, is it not a plain ca&s;e that there were &s;ome of the&s;e members, who lived and dyed unbaptized?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="6" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>VI.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, when <HI>Paul,</HI> &s;oon after his conver&s;ion, a&s;&s;ayed to joyn him&s;elf to the Church and Di&s;ciples at <HI>Jeru&s;alem (Act.</HI> 9. 26.) did this Church make any enquiry after his Bapti&s;m, as whether he had been baptized, or no, in order to his reception among&s;t them; or did they know that he had been baptized? Or did <HI>Barnabas,</HI> in
<PB N="9" REF="5">
giving &s;atisfaction to the Apo&s;tles and Church concerning his meetne&s;s to be admitted into communion with them, &s;o much as mention his being Baptized, but only <HI>declared unto them how he had &s;een the Lord in the way, and that he had &s;poken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Dama&s;cus in the Name of Je&s;us? Acts</HI> 9. 27.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="7" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>VII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, upon a &s;uppo&s;al, that it cannot be proved from the Scriptures, that any unbaptized, or unduly baptized per&s;on, was ever admitted into Church-communion by <HI>Christians</HI> in the Apo|&s;tles days, or that any duly baptized per&s;on held communion with a Church, the greate&s;t part of who&s;e members he deemed either unbaptized, or unduly Baptized, is &s;uch a defect of proof &s;uffici|ent to ju&s;tifie a withdrawing of communion by a per&s;on, who conceiveth him&s;elf duly baptized, from &s;uch a Church, the genera|lity of who&s;e members he &s;uppo&s;eth are either not baptized, or unduly Baptized; con&s;idering that very many things may be mat|ter of duty, and nece&s;&s;ary to be done, which are not warranted for &s;o much as lawful, by any example in the Scriptures of like action in all circum&s;tances? It is the duty of Churches, and of every member re&s;pectively, to admit their women-members to the Lords Table; yet cannot this practice be warranted by any ex|ample recorded in the Scriptures. Yea in ca&s;e at the time of this Sacramental Admini&s;tration in a Church, all the men-members &s;hould occa&s;ionally be ab&s;ent, except only the Admini&s;trator, and (it may be) a Deacon or two, and only the women-members pre|&s;ent, there is little que&s;tion to be made, but that the Admini&s;tra|tion ought to proceed notwith&s;tanding, and the elements be admini|&s;tred unto this female Congregation, though there be no example of &s;uch an Admini&s;tration as this in the Scriptures. There is no ex|ample in Scripture of any per&s;on wor&s;hiping the Holy Gho&s;t: yet it is a great duty lying upon <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> to wor&s;hip him. When <HI>David,</HI> and the men with him, entred into the Hou&s;e of God, and did eat the &s;hew-bread <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">1 Sam. 21. 6</NOTE>, he had no Scripture-example to ju&s;tifie his action; no more had the Di&s;ciples to ju&s;tifie theirs, when they plucked the ears of Corn as they pa&s;&s;ed through the Fields on a Sabbath day: yet were both the&s;e actions lawful, and (to a degree) nece&s;&s;ary. The reading of the Scriptures tran&s;lated out of the
<PB N="10" REF="6">
Original Languages into <HI>Engli&s;h, Welch, Dutch, French, &amp;c.</HI> is not only lawful, but nece&s;&s;ary, in the Chri&s;tian Churches in the&s;e Nations; yet is there no example extant in Scripture of any &s;uch practice in the primitive Times, no nor &s;o much as of any Tran&s;la|tion of the Scriptures at all. It were ea&s;ie to add more in&s;tances of like con&s;ideration.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="8" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>VIII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether is an action or practice, &s;uppo&s;e in matters relating to the &s;ervice or wor&s;hip of God, upon this account evicted to be unlawful, becau&s;e it hath neither precept [I mean, no particular or expre&s;s precept, and wherein the action or practice it &s;elf, with all the circum&s;tances under which it becomes lawful, is named,] nor example, to warrant the lawfulne&s;s of it? Or hath the practice of admitting women to the Lords Table, any &s;uch, either precept, or example, to ju&s;tifie it? Or in ca&s;e a Mini&s;ter &s;hall preach to a Congregation con&s;i&s;ting of young men only, and from <HI>Rev.</HI> 22. 3, or 4&punc; &amp;c. would &s;uch an act as this be unlawful? or is there any &s;uch precept, as that mentioned, or example in Scripture, for the warrant of it? Or when <HI>David,</HI> and tho&s;e that were with him, went into the Hou&s;e of God, and, contrary to the letter of an In|&s;titution, <HI>eat the &s;hew-bread,</HI> had they either &s;uch a precept, as that mentioned, or any example, to bear them out in &s;uch a practi&s;e? Or doth not our Saviour in the Go&s;pel ju&s;tifie that action of theirs notwith&s;tanding? Or if the ca&s;e, or law of nece&s;&s;ity, or of peril, either of health, or life, be pleadable for the ju&s;tification thereof; is not the &s;ame Law altogether as, yea &amp; much more, pleadable, on the behalf of &s;uch per&s;ons, who being of tender, weak, and &s;ickly con|&s;titutions, dare not tempt God, or expo&s;e them&s;elves to the immi|nent hazard of health or life, by being dou&s;ed in their apparel over head and ears in the water; e&s;pecially con&s;idering that God hath te&s;tified from Heaven his di&s;-approbation of the practice, by &s;uf|fering &s;ome to be grievou&s;ly afflicted in their bodies, and &s;ome al&s;o to mi&s;carry in life it &s;elf, by means (in all likelyhood) of the temptation? Or hath not God &s;ufficiently and plainly enough de|clared his mind and plea&s;ure in all &s;uch ca&s;es as this, in &s;aying, <HI>I will have mercy, and not &s;acrifice</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Matt. 12. 7</NOTE>? Or if it be pleaded, that all danger of mi&s;carrying in either kind, may be prevented, by chu&s;ing a warm room, and warm water, for the tran&s;acting of the Bapti&s;|mal
<PB N="11" REF="6">
Dipping, is it not queryable hereupon, whether this be not to alter and change, to new-mold, &s;hape, and transform the Ordi|nance of God, as men plea&s;e, and this under a pretext of ob&s;erving it? Or is there not as much difference between hot water, and cold, as is between a child, and a man?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="9" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>IX.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, when God hath by Faith purified the hearts of a people walking in a <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Brotherhood and Fellow&s;hip toge|ther, hath he not &s;anctified them? And in ca&s;e any per&s;on &s;hall now de&s;pi&s;e, or decline their fellow&s;hip, as unholy, doth he not &s;in again&s;t that heavenly Admonition delivered by &s;pecial Revelation unto <HI>Peter; What God hath clean&s;ed</HI> [<GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>i. e.</HI> &s;ancti|fied, or purified] <HI>call not thou</HI> [or, make not thou] <HI>common</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Acts 10. 15</NOTE>? Or can a man (lightly) call, or make, that <HI>common,</HI> which God hath <HI>&s;anctified,</HI> in a more opprobrious and contumelious way, then by fleeing from it, as polluted or unholy?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="10" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>X.</HEAD>
<P>Whether doth, or needs, a man contract any guilt of &s;in before God, by walking in &s;uch a &s;ociety of men, who being otherwi&s;e confe&s;&s;edly <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> and holy, have only &s;ome practice among&s;t them in the judgment and con&s;cience of this man not approvable, in ca&s;e, 1. he &s;hall at any time openly declare his di&s;like of this practice; and, 2. Be no ways con&s;trained, or &s;olicited to com|municate in this practice? Or, when men may &s;eparate that which is precious from that which is vile, and enjoy it thus &s;eparated, and apart, without &s;uffering any inconvenience by that which is vile, is it a point of wi&s;dom in them to deprive them&s;elves of the en|joyment of what is precious, becau&s;e there is &s;omewhat, which they &s;uppo&s;e to be vile, near to it?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="11" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XI.</HEAD>
<P>Whether may per&s;ons, who are weak in the Faith, be rejected by a Church from communion with them, in ca&s;e they de&s;ire it, only becau&s;e they que&s;tion, or di&s;&s;ent from, the &s;ence of the gene|rality of this Church, in &s;ome one point <HI>of doubtful disputation?</HI> Or is not the practice of a man, who pretends to be &s;trong in the Faith, in renouncing communion with a Church (or, which is the &s;ame, in rejecting a Church from his communion) which he judg|eth weak in the Faith, only becau&s;e they more generally di&s;&s;ent
<PB N="12" REF="7">
from him in a matter of doubtful di&s;putation, a practice much more unchri&s;tian and unwarrantable, then the former? Or is not the practice, e&s;pecially the nece&s;&s;ity, of dipping, after Infant-ablu|tion, or Infant-Bapti&s;m, a matter <HI>of doubtful disputation;</HI> unle&s;s (haply) by matters <HI>of doubtful disputation,</HI> we mean, not what|&s;oever is que&s;tioned, oppo&s;ed, or denyed by any man, or any &s;ort of men, being a&s;&s;erted and held by others; but only &s;uch things, which are controverted and di&s;puted with good probability on either &s;ide, by men of gravity, worth, &s;oberne&s;s of judgment, throughly ver&s;ed and expert in the Scriptures? &amp;c. And whether, in this &s;ence or notion of matters <HI>of doubtful disputation,</HI> is the nece&s;&s;ity of the &s;aid practice of after-Bapti&s;m &s;o much as matter <HI>of doubtful disputation,</HI> the generality of <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> &s;o qualified, as hath been expre&s;&s;ed, unanimou&s;ly agreeing in the non-nece&s;&s;ity, yea and (which is &s;omewhat more) in the irregularity of it?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="12" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether did the Lord <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> pointing to any river, or water, &s;ay, <HI>&V;pon</HI> this water <HI>will I build my Church?</HI> Or did he not, &s;peaking either of him&s;elf, or of that great Truth, <HI>viz.</HI> that He was <HI>the Son of the living God,</HI> which <HI>Peter</HI> had confe&s;&s;ed, &s;ay, <HI>&V;pon this Rock will I build my Church</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Matt. 16. 18</NOTE>? Or is there the &s;ofte&s;t whi&s;per, or gentle&s;t breathing in the Scripture, of any &s;uch noti|on, or opinion, as this, that a true Church of Chri&s;t cannot be con&s;tituted, or made, no not of the true&s;t and &s;ounde&s;t Believers in the world, unle&s;s they have been baptized after their believing, how, or after what manner &s;oever, they have been baptized be|fore?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="13" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XIII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether is an error, or mi&s;take, about the adequate or appro|priate &s;ubject of Bapti&s;m, of any wor&s;e con&s;equence, or greater danger, then an error or mi&s;take about <HI>Melchi&s;edec's</HI> Father, as <HI>viz.</HI> in ca&s;e a man &s;hould &s;uppo&s;e him to have been <HI>Noah</HI> (which he mu&s;t be, in ca&s;e <HI>Melchi&s;edec</HI> were the &s;ame Per&s;on with <HI>Sem)</HI> when as he was &s;ome other man? If &s;o, how, or wherein doth the exce&s;s of the danger, or evil of the con&s;equence appear? If not, whether is it <HI>Chri&s;tian,</HI> or any ways becoming the Spirit of the Go&s;pel, to abandon communion with &s;uch Churches, which (be|ing interpreted) is to proclaim them polluted, hated and abhorred
<PB N="13" REF="7">
by <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> only becau&s;e a man &s;uppo&s;eth them to lie under the guilt of &s;uch an error, or mi&s;take?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="14" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XIV.</HEAD>
<P>Whether may not the importune conte&s;t, or que&s;tion, about the appropriate &s;ubject of Bapti&s;m, as it is &s;tated by the Brethren of New Bapti&s;m, in oppo&s;ition to the judgment and practice (almo&s;t) of the whole Chri&s;tian World, ju&s;tly be numbered among&s;t tho&s;e que&s;tions, which the Apo&s;tle calls <HI>fooli&s;h,</HI> and <HI>unlearned,</HI> and ad|vi&s;eth both <HI>Timothy</HI> and <HI>Titus</HI> to <HI>avoyd,</HI> as being que&s;tions which <HI>ingender &s;trife</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">2 Tim. 2. 23</NOTE>, <HI>and are unprofitable and vain</HI> <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Tit. 3. 9.</NOTE>; con&s;idering, 1. That the experience of many years in the Reformed Churches abroad, and of &s;ome years among&s;t our &s;elves at home, hath abun|dantly taught and informed us, that the &s;aid que&s;tion hath yielded little other fruit unto tho&s;e that have &s;et their hearts to it, yea and unto others al&s;o, but contention, &s;trife, emulations, evil &s;urmi|zings, di&s;tractions, confu&s;ions, alienations of mind and affections among&s;t <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Brethren, evil &s;peakings, vilifyings, revilings, needle&s;s and wa&s;tful expence of time, lo&s;s of many precious op|portunities for matters of greate&s;t con&s;equence, unprofitable di|&s;turbings and turmoylings of weak Con&s;ciences, &s;hatterings, &s;cat|terings, rendings, and teerings of &s;uch Churches, and <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Societies, who, till this root of bitterne&s;s &s;prang up among&s;t them, walked in love, and with the light of Gods countenance &s;hining on them, holding the unity of the Spirit in the band of peace, edi|fying one another in their mo&s;t holy Faith, &amp;c. 2. That the &s;aid Que&s;tion, in the nature and direct tendency of it, leadeth unto very little that is con&s;iderable, or of much con&s;equence for <HI>Chri|&s;tians</HI> to know; and that what is brought to light (of moment and con&s;equence) by occa&s;ion of the ventilation of it, is nothing but what might arrive at the knowledg of <HI>Chri&s;tians,</HI> in a more peaceable, and le&s;s trouble&s;om way: And, 3. (and la&s;tly) That tho&s;e who are mo&s;t confident that they have found the trea&s;ure of Truth, which the Que&s;tion we &s;peak of, &s;eeketh after, are no ways, as far as any ways appeareth, or can be di&s;cerned, &s;piritually enrich|ed by it, but rather impoveri&s;hed (at lea&s;t the generality of them) lo&s;ing by degrees, that <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> &s;weetne&s;s, meekne&s;s, humility, love, patience, &s;oberne&s;s of mind, fruitfulne&s;s of conver&s;ation, &amp;c. which were ob&s;ervable in them before; as if their new Bapti&s;m
<PB N="14" REF="8">
had been into a new, or another <HI>Je&s;us,</HI> altogether unlike unto him, whom <HI>Paul</HI> preached?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="15" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XV.</HEAD>
<P>Whether is any Member of a Chri&s;tian Church, or Society, at any more liberty, or under any greater nece&s;&s;ity, to excommuni|cate, cut off, or &s;eparate this Church, or all the members of it, from his communion, only upon his private conceit or per&s;wa&s;ion, &s;uppo&s;e according to truth, that they walk not in all things ac|cording to Go&s;pel-rule, then this Church is to excommunicate him, upon a true and certain per&s;wa&s;ion, that he walketh not in every thing according to the rule of the Go&s;pel? Or if Churches either be at liberty, or under an obligation by way of duty, to excommunicate every of their members (re&s;pectively) becau&s;e they judg them not to walk in all things according to the Go&s;pel, are they not at liberty, or bound in duty and con&s;cience, thus to ca&s;t out all their members one after another; con&s;idering, that not in &s;ome things only, but even <HI>in many things</HI> (as the Apo&s;tle <HI>James</HI> &s;peaketh) <HI>we offend all?</HI> Or hath any &s;ingle member of a Church any more liberty, or authority, to adjudg and determine without the Scriptures, upon what grounds or occa&s;ions, his departure from a Church is ju&s;tifiable, then a Church hath to make Laws and Con|&s;titutions of her own for the ejecting of her members? Or is it any where a ca&s;e adjudged in the Scriptures, that if a Church in any part of the world, &s;uppo&s;e under the frozen Zone, &s;hall not practice dipping after &s;prinkling, or other wa&s;hing, in the Name of <HI>Je&s;us Chri&s;t,</HI> every member thereof &s;tands bound in con&s;cience, yea or is &s;o much as at liberty, to rever&s;e, or di&s;oblige him&s;elf from, his &s;olemn and &s;acred engagements to it?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="16" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XVI.</HEAD>
<P>Whether did not <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> hold Chri&s;tian Communi|on with tho&s;e <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Converts which they made at <HI>Antioch, Acts</HI> 13. 43, 48, 52. and with tho&s;e al&s;o, which they made &s;oon after in great numbers at <HI>Iconium, Acts</HI> 14. 1, 4? Or doth it any ways appear from the Scripture, that the&s;e Converts, during the continuance of <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> with them, yea or at any time after, were baptized? If not, is it any ways nece&s;&s;ary that we &s;hould believe, or ought it to be any Article of our Faith to believe, that they were baptized? If it be not nece&s;&s;ary, then we are at
<PB N="15" REF="8">
liberty to believe, that <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> did hold <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Communion with unbaptized <HI>Chri&s;tians;</HI> e&s;pecially con&s;idering, that the tenor of the Hi&s;tory diligently con&s;ulted, e&s;pecially concerning tho&s;e, who were converted to the Faith at <HI>Antioch,</HI> and the &s;hort abode of <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> with them after their Conver&s;ion, to|gether with the trouble&s;om oppo&s;itions which the <HI>Jews</HI> of the place made all the while again&s;t them, makes it probable in the highe&s;t, that they were not baptized, at lea&s;t while&s;t the&s;e men continued with them?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="17" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XVII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, in ca&s;e any member, one or more, of any <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Church, or Society, which he judgeth faithful in the main, and willing and ready to walk up to their light, &s;hall verily think and be per&s;waded, that he hath di&s;covered &s;ome defect, or error in this Church, may &s;uch an one lawfully and with a good con&s;cience give him&s;elf a di&s;charge from all care &amp; &s;ervice otherwi&s;e due from him unto it, by renouncing the communion thereof upon &s;uch a pre|tence, or occa&s;ion; e&s;pecially before, or until, he hath with all long|&s;uffering and meekne&s;s, and with the be&s;t of his under&s;tanding, ende|vored the information of this Church in the Truth, and the rectify|ing the judgments of the members thereof; con&s;idering, that as in the natural body, &s;o in the &s;piritual or Church-body, <HI>the members ought to have the &s;ame care one for another,</HI> and if one <HI>member &s;uffereth, all the members to &s;uffer with it</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">1 Cor. 12. 25</NOTE>, (as the Apo&s;tle &s;peaketh,) and con&s;equently no one member, being healthful and &s;ound, ought to de&s;ert its fellow-members being &s;ickly and weak, e&s;pecially while&s;t there is yet any hope of their cure and heal|ing?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="18" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether ought a company of true Believers, concerning who&s;e lawful Church con&s;titution there can no other thing with rea&s;on and truth be objected, to be vilified, or &s;eparated from, as a fal&s;e Church, or no Church of Chri&s;t at all, only becau&s;e, either, 1. They do not practice contrary to their judgment and con&s;cience, &s;uch things, one, or more, which &s;ome men conceive it meet they &s;hould practice; Or, 2. becau&s;e, either God hath not enlightened them to &s;ee every thing, which &s;ome other men &s;ee; or el&s;e becau&s;e Sa|tan hath not blinded them, &s;o as to make them ignorant of &s;uch
<PB N="16" REF="9">
Truths, one, or more, whereof &s;ome others are ignorant, judging them to be Errors?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="19" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XIX.</HEAD>
<P>Whether is it rea&s;onable or <HI>Chri&s;tian,</HI> that a company of true Believers, who have met together in the &s;implicity of their hearts in the fear of God, in the Name of <HI>Je&s;us Chri&s;t,</HI> mutually en|gaging them&s;elves, as in the pre&s;ence of God, to walk together in all the Ordinances of the Go&s;pel, as far as they &s;hall from time to time be revealed unto them, and walking accordingly, &s;hould be infamou&s;ly &s;tigmatized as no Church, no true Church of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and con&s;equently be e&s;teemed but as a rabble rout of the world only pretending Church&s;hip, and this by &s;ome one, or a few per|&s;ons, only becau&s;e they cannot &s;ee with their eyes, or practice that as nece&s;&s;ary, the nece&s;&s;ity whereof, after much and earne&s;t prayer unto God, after much enquiry and &s;earch, and this with all dili|gence and impartialne&s;s, in order to their conviction and &s;atisfacti|on, doth no ways to them appear?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="20" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XX.</HEAD>
<P>Whether is it <HI>Chri&s;tian,</HI> or meet, for any one per&s;on, man, or woman, to bid defiance unto an whole Church or fellow&s;hip of Saints being many, and who are otherwi&s;e &s;ober, grave, and con|&s;cientiou&s;ly faithful in all their walking, onely becau&s;e they can|not with a good Con&s;cience &s;ay <HI>Amen</HI> to every notion and con|ceit, which the&s;e per&s;ons them&s;elves judg worthy of reverence and honour, and particularly, becau&s;e they cannot, again&s;t the &s;ence, Judgment and practi&s;e, as well of all Chri&s;tian Antiquity, as of all the Reformed Churches (very few, if any, excepted) in the <HI>Chri|&s;tian</HI> world, thus &s;piritually court their private apprehen&s;ions about the time and manner of an external Admini&s;tration; e&s;peci|ally con&s;idering, that they neither have, nor can, either &s;hew pre|cept, example, or any competent ground otherwi&s;e, from the Scriptures, to commend the&s;e their apprehen&s;ions unto the con&s;ci|ence of any man? Or is there any precept, which injoyns baptiz|ing, or dipping, in the name of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> after a baptizing in infan|cy into this name? Or is there any example in Scripture of any baptized after profe&s;&s;ion of Faith, who had been baptized, or who judged them&s;elves, and were generally &s;o judged by others, to have been baptized, before? If neither, is it not a clear ca&s;e, that
<PB N="17" REF="9">
here is neither precept, nor example in Scripture, which reacheth home to the ca&s;e, or which warranteth the practice, of the Chil|dren of after-Bapti&s;m among&s;t us? And as for any competent ground otherwi&s;e to ju&s;tifie the practice, hath &s;uch a thing ever &s;een the light of the Sun hitherto?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="21" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXI</HEAD>
<P>Whether do not they, who magnifie the ceremony or external rite of Bapti&s;m to &s;uch an height, as to e&s;timate <HI>Chri&s;tianity</HI> by it, or to judg them no true or &s;ound <HI>Chri&s;tians,</HI> who are without it, &s;tumble at the &s;ame &s;tone of danger and peril of Soul, at which the Jews &s;tumbled, when they practiced and urged Circumci&s;ion as nece&s;&s;ary for Ju&s;tification; to whom, upon this account, <HI>Paul</HI> te&s;tified; <HI>Behold, I Paul &s;ay unto you, that if ye be circumci&s;ed,</HI> [meaning, with an opinion of a nece&s;&s;ity of your being circum|ci&s;ed for your Ju&s;tification before God,] <HI>Chri&s;t &s;hall profit you nothing</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Gal. 5. 2.</NOTE>? con&s;idering, 1. That Circumci&s;ion was an Ordinance of God, yea as great and &s;olemn an Ordinance, as Bapti&s;m; and 2. That when <HI>Paul</HI> threatened tho&s;e who &s;o magnified it (as was &s;aid) with lofing their part and portion in Chri&s;t, it was as Lawful, though (haply) not &s;o nece&s;&s;ary (and yet in &s;ome ca|&s;es it was nece&s;&s;ary too) as Bapti&s;m it &s;elf; yea and the Apo&s;tle him&s;elf admini&s;tred it, as well as he did Bapti&s;m, yea and pro|nounced it <HI>profitable,</HI> (rightly under&s;tood and practiced?) <HI>Rom.</HI> 3. 1. 2. Or might not the &s;ame threatening (I mean, of lo&s;ing the great ble&s;&s;ing of Ju&s;tification and Salvation by <HI>Chri&s;t)</HI> have been with altogether as much truth and nece&s;&s;ity, admini&s;tred upon a like occa&s;ion and account, unto per&s;ons &s;o opinionated of circumci&s;ion, as the <HI>Galathians</HI> were, even when, and whil&s;t, the u&s;e and practice of it was every whit as nece&s;&s;ary (or rather more nece&s;&s;ary) as the u&s;e of Bapti&s;m now is?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="22" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether is there any precept, or example in the Scriptures, of any per&s;on Baptized after many years profe&s;&s;ion of the Go&s;pel, or after any con&s;iderable mea&s;ure of a&s;&s;urance of the pardon of &s;in obtained, or at any other time, &s;ave at, or about, their fir&s;t entrance upon a profe&s;&s;ion of <HI>Chri&s;t?</HI> Or is there any competent ground, either in Rea&s;on, or Religion, why either &s;uch a thing &s;hould have been practi&s;ed by <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> in the Apo&s;tles days, or why it ought
<PB N="18" REF="10">
to be practi&s;ed by any in the&s;e days; con&s;idering, 1. That it is uncomely, and contrary to the Law, which God hath e&s;tabli&s;hed, both in Nature, and in Grace, to return or fall back from per|fection to imperfection, from that which is more &s;piritual, to that which is more carnal; And, 2. That types and figures, which are not rememorative (as the Pa&s;&s;over was, and the Lords Table now is) but either only &s;ignificative, or ob&s;ignative (as Bapti&s;m is) &s;hould be u&s;ed, after the &s;ub&s;tance of the things typified and figu|red by them, have been of a long time exhibited unto, received, and enjoyed by tho&s;e, who u&s;e them; 3. That a profe&s;&s;ion of the Name and Faith of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> by an holy and blamele&s;s conver&s;a|tion for many years together in the world, by a long continued cour&s;e of mortification, &s;elf-denyal, fruitfulne&s;s in well doing, &amp;c. is the truth and &s;ub&s;tance, the heart, life, and &s;oul of that profe&s;|&s;ion, which is made by being externally Baptized; 4. (And la&s;tly) That that which is a duty at one time, in re&s;pect of &s;uch and &s;uch circum&s;tances, may cea&s;e to be, or may not be, a duty at another time, when circum&s;tances are changed, many in&s;tances whereof might be readily given?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="23" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXIII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether ought not the Law of Edification [1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14. 26.] to over-rule all Laws and Precepts concerning &s;piritual and Church-admini&s;trations, as the Law of <HI>Salus Populi</HI> ought to umpire and over-rule all politique Laws and Con&s;titutions, in their re&s;pective Executions? If &s;o, ought not the Admini&s;tration of Bapti&s;m to be rather appropriated unto Infants, then unto others, con&s;idering, 1. That God him&s;elf adjudged the Admini&s;tration of the Ordinance of Circumci&s;ion (an Ordinance the &s;ame with Bapti&s;m, though not in the &s;hape and form of the letter, yet in &s;trength and &s;ub&s;tance of the Spirit, as evidently appeareth from <HI>Rom.</HI> 4. 11. well under&s;tood, and diligently compared with <HI>Mark 1. 4. Luk.</HI> 3. 3, &amp;c.) unto Infants, to be mo&s;t edifying in the Church of the <HI>Jews;</HI> otherwi&s;e it mu&s;t be &s;aid that he ordered the Admini&s;tration of it to the &s;piritual detriment and lo&s;s of tho&s;e, to whom he gave it; And, 2. That there can no rea&s;on, nor colour of rea&s;on be given, why, or how, the Admini&s;tration of Bapti&s;m unto Infants in <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> Churches, &s;hould not as well be more edifying unto the&s;e, then an after-Admini&s;tration of it would be,
<PB N="19" REF="10">
as the like Admini&s;tration of Circumci&s;ion was unto the <HI>Jews;</HI> 3. (And la&s;tly) That what&s;oever the wi&s;dom of men may pre|tend <NOTE PLACE="marg">u<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">de multi po&s;t Bapti&s;mum pro|ficientes, &amp; maxime qui In|fantes vel pueri baptizati &s;unt, &amp;c. <HI>Aug. de Bapti&s;mo con|tra Donati&s;tas</HI> lib. 4. c. 14.</NOTE> and plead colourably and plau&s;ibly to the contrary, ought to give place to the determination and re&s;olution of God him&s;elf? <HI>Be &s;ilent, O all fle&s;h, before the Lord, Zech. 2. 13. The Lord is in his holy Temple; let all the Earth keep &s;ilence before him, Habak.</HI> 2. 20. although it be demon&s;trable enough, even by clear grounds and principles in rea&s;on, that to Baptize in Infancy, mu&s;t needs be more edifying to the Church, then to transfer the Admi|ni&s;tration to maturity of years.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="24" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXIV.</HEAD>
<P>Whether is not the Baptizing of Children, by the Apo&s;tles and other Bapti&s;ts appointed by them in their days, &s;ufficiently &s;ignified and implyed in tho&s;e pa&s;&s;ages (e&s;pecially in conjunction with the known Law and Cu&s;tom of circumci&s;ing children among&s;t the <HI>Jews)</HI> where they are recorded to have baptized hou&s;holds, or families, without exception of any per&s;on in any one of them? as <HI>Act. 16. 33. 1 Cor. 1. 16. Act. 16. 15. &amp;c.</HI> Or can there any arguments or conjectures be levyed from the Scriptures to prove the contrary, which will balance or hold weight again&s;t the&s;e; con&s;idering, 1. That it is at no hand probable, that God, who had made a Law again&s;t him, that &s;hould <HI>open or dig a pit in his field, and not cover it</HI> <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Exod. 21. 33 34</NOTE>, would, not only have left the precept and per|petual example of circumci&s;ing Infants by the <HI>Jews,</HI> as a pit uncovered for Believers, both <HI>Jews</HI> and <HI>Gentiles</HI> under the Go&s;pel, to fall into, by baptizing their Children, without giving the lea&s;t notice of the alteration of his mind in this behalf, but al&s;o have digged this pit yet broader, deeper, and wider, by cau&s;ing the bap|tizing of &s;everal families to be recorded in the New Te&s;tament, without the lea&s;t mention or intimation of the pa&s;&s;ing by children in the Admini&s;tration; 2. That that which is commonly replyed to di&s;able the&s;e pa&s;&s;ages as to the proof of Infant-Bapti&s;m, is ex|treamly weak, and no ways &s;atisfactory; <HI>viz.</HI> that it is el&s;ewhere &s;aid of whole hou&s;holds and families that they believed, which (&s;ay the Replyers) doth not imply, that children are here included, or that they believed, this (I &s;ay) is un&s;atisfactory; in as much as, 1. Children may in a &s;ence (and this very frequent in the Scrip|tures) be &s;aid to believe, <HI>i. e.</HI> to be in the &s;tate and condition of
<PB N="20" REF="11">
Believers, in re&s;pect of the love and favor of God, in title to the <NOTE PLACE="marg">Similia &s;imili+um occupait nomina. <HI>Hur. Grot.</HI> in <HI>Act.</HI> 13 33. Multa offi<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">|mantur &s;impli|citer &amp; forma|liter, quae per equivalentiam &s;eu comparatio|nem tantum &s;unt intelligen|da: Vid. <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">ai, 66. 3. 1 Tim. 5. 8 Matt. 19. 12 Rom. 11, 15, &amp;c.</HI></NOTE> Kingdom of Heaven, &amp;c. yea and are by <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> him&s;elf (in the&s;e re&s;pects) expre&s;ly &s;aid to believe, <HI>Mat.</HI> 18. 6. And, 2. Were it granted, that children are in no &s;ence capable of believing, and in this re&s;pect cannot be included, when it is &s;aid of whole hou&s;es, that they believed; yet are they as capable of being Baptized, or (as our Brethren will needs have it) of being dipped (yea in &s;ome re&s;pect more capable hereof) as men; and con&s;equently can upon no tolerable account be thought to be excluded, when it is &s;aid of whole hou&s;es or families that they were dipped; as (for in&s;tance) becau&s;e, when <HI>Johns</HI> Di&s;ciples &s;aid, <HI>And all men come unto him, [Joh.</HI> 3. 26.] Children mu&s;t needs be excluded, and not contain|ed in the word, <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>all men,</HI> in as much as they were in no capacity of <HI>coming;</HI> it doth not follow from hence, that therefore when the Apo&s;tle &s;aith, that <HI>Chri&s;t by the grace of God ta&s;ted Death for all men, [Heb.</HI> 2. 9.] and &s;o again, that <HI>it is appoint|ed for men</HI> (meaning, all men) <HI>once to dye, [Heb.</HI> 9. 27.] Chil|dren mu&s;t be here excluded al&s;o, and not be comprehended in the general term, <HI>all men;</HI> in as much as they are as well capable as men, of &s;uch a grace, as <HI>Chri&s;ts dying for them</HI> imports, and &s;o of dying them&s;elves, though they are not capable of coming unto any man to be baptized: 3. Con&s;idering, that men ought not to contend with God, or to reject any part of his Coun&s;el or Will, becau&s;e it is only &s;omewhat &s;paringly, and with &s;ome &s;cant|ne&s;s of evidence, di&s;covered in his Word, but to re&s;t &s;atisfied with that mea&s;ure or degree of revelation of things, which he judgeth meet to vouch&s;afe unto them, until further light &s;hall &s;hine: 4. That they who are di&s;&s;atisfied with that di&s;covery, which learn|ed Paedobapti&s;ts make unto them from the Scriptures, of the will and mind of God for the Baptizing of Infants, do readily embrace and entertain many other notions and opinions upon far weaker, and le&s;s light&s;om grounds of conviction, as <HI>viz.</HI> the common Doctrines or Tenents concerning Original Sin, admi&s;&s;ion of wo|men to the Lords Table, the ob&s;ervation of the Sabbath on the fir&s;t day of the week (yea &s;ome of them on the la&s;t day,) the re|ception of the Soul into Heaven, and happine&s;s, immediately up|on death, (with many other things, which we &s;hall not now men|tion,) not that I mention the&s;e with di&s;like of the common opini|on
<PB N="21" REF="11">
about them all, but only to &s;hew, that as the generality of the <HI>Jews</HI> rejected the true <HI>Me&s;&s;iah</HI> notwith&s;tanding all the true and real Miracles which he wrought among&s;t them, and yet entertain|ed fal&s;e Me&s;&s;iahs one after another, with their counterfeit and ly|ing miracles; &s;o do the generality of Anti-Paedobapti&s;ts reject In|fant-Bapti&s;m, notwith&s;tanding the many real and &s;ub&s;tantial proofs, by which it is commended and confirmed unto them, in the mean time bowing down their Judgments and Con&s;ciences to &s;uch Doctrines, which have little but hay and &s;tubble to &s;upport them. 5. (And la&s;tly) That God doth expect, that men &s;hould dig for the trea&s;ure of Truth, and of his Coun&s;el, even where it lies much deeper under-ground, then Infant-Bapti&s;m doth in &s;everal of tho&s;e Texts of Scripture, which have been argued by learned men of that Judgment, in proof thereof; yea and hath reproved men for their unmanlike o&s;citancy, and neglect in this behalf? Per|u&s;e and con&s;ider diligently the&s;e Texts and Pa&s;&s;ages at your lea&s;ure (becau&s;e it would be too long to argue them,) <HI>Mat. 12 3, 4, 5, 7. Mat. 23. 16, 17, 18, 19, &amp;c. Mat. 22. 29, 31, 32, &amp;c. Luk 24. 25, 26. Acts</HI> 7. 25, 26. (to omit others.)</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="25" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXV.</HEAD>
<P>Whether is the practi&s;e of demanding, or &s;ubmitting unto, a Bapti&s;mal dipping, after a &s;olemn dedication unto the &s;ervice of Je&s;us <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> by a bapti&s;mal &s;prinkling, or ablution, any where countenanced in the Scriptures, or enjoyned, either by particularity, or expre&s;&s;ne&s;s of precept or example? If not, is not the practi&s;e of it traditional, and the product of humane di&s;cour&s;e, as well, and as much, as the Baptizing of Infants? And do not they who practi&s;e it, pre&s;ume every whit as much, or rather far more, upon their own judgments and under&s;tandings, in making Infant-Bapti&s;m to be a meer nullity or nothing, the Scripture no where giving any &s;uch &s;entence, nor any &s;yllable, letter, or tittle of any &s;uch &s;entence, again&s;t it, as they who make it an Ordinance of God, or rather (to &s;peak more properly) a meet and nece&s;&s;ary admini&s;tration of an Ordinance of God? con&s;idering, 1. That Bapti&s;m it &s;elf, <HI>i. e.</HI> the external act of Bapti&s;m, rightly &s;o called, (whether it be dipping, wa&s;hing, or &s;prinkling, is not material to the ca&s;e now in hand, Infants being alike capable of them all) is by expre&s;&s;ne&s;s of Scrip|ture, an Ordinance, or appointment of God; And 2. That Infants
<PB N="22" REF="12">
(at lea&s;t, of Beleevers) not onely, are no where excluded by God from part and fellow&s;hip in the Admini&s;tration, but are in &s;eve|ral places and pa&s;&s;ages more then overtured as the mo&s;t proper and meet Subjects of it?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="26" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXVI.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, was not a <HI>dying the death of the uncircumci&s;ed</HI> <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Ezek. 28. 10. 31, 18. 32. 19. 21.</NOTE> un|der the Law, and &s;o a being puni&s;hed with <HI>the uncircumci&s;ed</HI> <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Jer. 9. 25. Ezek. 32 19. <GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">1 Sam. 17. 26, 36.</NOTE>, matter of threatning, and an intimation of anger and di&s;plea&s;ure in God; importing, that the lives of uncircumci&s;ed per&s;ons in the world, were nothing &s;o precious in his &s;ighte, nor &s;o tenderly watched over, nor &s;o carefully protected and pre&s;erved by him, as the lives of tho&s;e who were circumci&s;ed? yea did not the threatning of the <HI>uncircumci&s;ed man-child, that his &s;oul &s;hould be cut off from his people, becau&s;e he had broken Gods Covenant,</HI> (Gen. 17. 4.) plainly &s;ignifie, that children uncircumci&s;ed, were much more ob|noxious unto the &s;troke of death from the hand of God, then they would have been, or need to have been, if circumci&s;ed? If then it be &s;uppo&s;ed, that Bapti&s;m is altogether as nece&s;&s;ary, or of as high e&s;teem with God, under the Go&s;pel, as Circumci&s;ion was under the Law, can it rea&s;onably be judged, or thought, that he is as ten|der and providentially watchful, over the lives of children or o|thers, unbaptized, as he is over the lives of tho&s;e who are baptiz|ed? And if &s;o, do not they who neglect or refu&s;e, the baptizing of their children, reject the coun&s;el of God again&s;t their lives and pre&s;ervations, depriving them of that Intere&s;t in the &s;peciall Provi|dence of God for their peace and &s;afety, which they might, and ought to, intitle them unto by Baptizing them? And when chil|dren unbaptized are taken away by any &s;udden or &s;trange hand of death, have not the Parents ju&s;t cau&s;e to que&s;tion, whether they were not acce&s;&s;ary to their death, by leaving them among&s;t the unbaptized ones of the world?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="27" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXVII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether were not the children of <HI>I&s;rael,</HI> notwith&s;tanding the expre&s;s and &s;trict In&s;titution and command of God for the cir|cumci&s;ing of the Males among&s;t them on the eight day, blamele&s;s under their non-Circumci&s;ion for forty yeers together, upon the account of that bodily inconvenience and danger, whereunto Cir|cumci&s;ion, during their journying and travel through the wilderne&s;s, would in the eye of Rea&s;on have expo&s;ed them? Or had they
<PB N="23" REF="12">
not &s;inned, by tempting the Providence of God, if under a pre|tence, or plea, of the commandment of God for their circumci&s;e|ing, they had cau&s;ed either them&s;elves, or their children, to be cir|cumci&s;ed, during &s;uch their travel, how long &s;oever it had conti|nued? If &s;o, do not they &s;in by tempting the Providence of God who are Authors, either to them&s;elves or others, of being dipped over head and eares in water, where, and when, and whil&s;t, &s;uch dipping cannot, both according to the principles of Rea&s;on, the natural cour&s;e and operation of &s;econd cau&s;es, yea, and frequent experience it &s;elf, but endanger either their healths, or lives, or both; yea though this be upon a pretext, or plea, that &s;uch dip|ping is the In&s;titution, or command of God?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="28" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether doth the requiring of Faith, or a profe&s;&s;ion of Faith to be made by men and women in order to their being Baptized, by any better con&s;equence prove, that Infants without &s;uch Faith, or Profe&s;&s;ion of Faith, ought not to be baptized, then <HI>Pauls</HI> in|junction, which he commended to the <HI>The&s;&s;alonians,</HI> viz. <HI>That if any would not work, neither &s;hould he eat</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">2 The&s;. 3. 10.</NOTE>, proveth, that nei|ther ought children to eat, unle&s;s they work too, as well as men or women, who are healthfull and &s;trong, and &s;o capable of work|ing? Or then this prohibition of God of old concerning the eat|ing of the Pa&s;chal Lamb, <HI>No uncircumci&s;ed per&s;on &s;hall eat there|of</HI> <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Exod. 12. 48.</NOTE>, proveth, that his intent was, that no per&s;on of woman kind, whether yong, or old, though daughters of <HI>Abraham,</HI> and other|wi&s;e &s;anctified, &s;hould eat thereof?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="29" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXIX.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, if dipping, or a di&s;po&s;ing, or conveying of the whole body under water, be of the e&s;&s;ence and nece&s;&s;ity of Bapti&s;m, are not they rather Se-Bapti&s;ts, or Self-Bapti&s;ers, then Bapti&s;ed (ac|cording to the order of Chri&s;t) by others, who them&s;elves convey or dip under water their whole bodies, leaving onely their heads above the water to be bowed down, forced, or thru&s;t under wa|ter, by the Baptizer? Or is there either <HI>vola</HI> or <HI>ve&s;tigium,</HI> little or much of &s;uch a practi&s;e as this to be found in the Scriptures, where they &s;peak of Bapti&s;m? Or can he in any tolerable &s;ence or con&s;truction be &s;aid to be the Architect, or builder of a Turret, or Steeple, who onely &s;etteth the Weather-cock on the top of it,
<PB N="24" REF="13">
and not rather he, who buildeth the re&s;t of the body and Fabrick hereof?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="30" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXX.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, is there any particular or expre&s;s In&s;titution of Bapti&s;m to be found in the Scriptures; I mean, any &s;uch In&s;titu|tion, as there is of Circumci&s;ion, and the Pa&s;&s;over in the Old Te|&s;tament, or of the Lords Supper in the New; or which pre&s;cri|beth and determineth all circum&s;tances e&s;&s;entiall unto Bapti&s;m, as all the other do pre&s;cribe and determine all circum&s;tances e&s;&s;entially requi&s;ite to their admini&s;trations re&s;pectively? If not, do not they <GAP DESC="foreign">, make them&s;elves wi&s;e above that which is written, &amp; (con&s;tructively) obtrude upon the con&s;ciences of men an In&s;titution of their own, in the Name of the Ordinance and In&s;titution of God, who undertake to pre&s;cribe and determine, either particularity of &s;ubject, or manner of Admini&s;tration, in Bapti&s;m?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="31" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXXI.</HEAD>
<P>Whether did not they among&s;t us, (or at lea&s;t the generality, and far greater part of them) who have accepted and entred into the way of new-Bapti&s;m, and at pre&s;ent walk in it, receive that pre|cious Faith from God, together with all tho&s;e Graces or fruits of the Spirit, whereby they are, what&s;oever they are in <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and towards God; did they not (I &s;ay) receive all this ble&s;&s;edne&s;s from God, under the di&s;pen&s;ation of their Infant-Bapti&s;m? Or is there one of a thou&s;and of tho&s;e ingaged in this new way, who have added &s;o much as the breadth of the lea&s;t hair of their heads un|to their former growth and &s;tature in Chri&s;t, I do not &s;ay, by ver|tue or means of this their new Ingagement, but &s;ince, or after it? Or is there not a vi&s;ible and manife&s;t change for the wor&s;e in very many of them, and this (in all probability) occa&s;ioned by an o|verweening conceit, that by means of their new baptizing, they are more excellent then their Neighbours, and too holy and near unto God to &s;uffer them&s;elves to be numbred among&s;t the mem|bers of other Churches? Or do &s;uch things as the&s;e any way fa|vour or &s;trengthen the claim, which their way of Baptizing makes of being a Divine Ordinance, yea the onely true Bapti&s;m of God?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="32" TYPE="part">
<PB N="25" REF="13">
<HEAD>XXXII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, among&s;t men and women, who&s;e con&s;ciences have at any time been &s;urprized with a Religious conceit of a nece&s;&s;ity of new Bapti&s;m, and have accordingly &s;ubmitted to it, have not the mo&s;t Chri&s;tianly-meek and humble on the one hand, and the mo&s;t Judicious and Learned on the other hand, upon a little experience of this way, grown cool, and very indifferent in their thoughts about it? yea and many of them repented of their &s;urprizal and <NOTE PLACE="marg">Vide Scultet. Annal. Anno 1521, &amp; 1525, &amp;c.</NOTE> weakne&s;s in this kind, as <HI>Johannes O<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">colampadius, Johannes Den|kius, Johannes Ga&s;ter,</HI> men of great learning, worth, and humility, (with &s;everal others) about <HI>Luthers</HI> dayes; yea and &s;ome of like Character, of late among&s;t our &s;elves, who might be named, if it were nece&s;&s;ary or meet?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="33" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXXIII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, becau&s;e Bapti&s;m is termed the <HI>Bapti&s;m of Repentance</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>i. e. for,</HI> or towards, <HI>the remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins, (Mar,</HI> 1. 4.) doth it a whit more follow that children ought not to be Baptized, either becau&s;e they cannot repent, or becau&s;e they have no &s;ins to be remitted unto them, then it doth, that children ought not to have been circumci&s;ed; con&s;idering that <HI>Circumci&s;ion,</HI> the nature of it, and coun&s;ell of God in it, con&s;idered, may as tru|ly be called, the Circumci&s;ion of Repentance, for the remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins, as Bapti&s;m, The Bapti&s;m of Repentance for the Remi&s;&s;i|on of &s;ins; yea, the Apo&s;tle <HI>Paul</HI> him&s;elf giveth a definition of Circumci&s;ion, for &s;ub&s;tance and import of matter, the &s;ame with that of Bapti&s;m, when he calleth it, <HI>the &s;eal of the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith, (Rom.</HI> 4. 11.) and however, Children are altogether as uncapable of Faith, as they are of Repentance; and have no more need of the righteou&s;ne&s;s of Faith, then they have of remi&s;&s;ion of &s;ins, the&s;e being but one and the &s;ame thing?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="34" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXXIV.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, when the Apo&s;tle <HI>Peter</HI> &s;peaketh thus to his new Converts, <HI>Acts 2. 38, 39. Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Je&s;us Chri&s;t for the remi&s;sion of &s;ins, and ye &s;hall receive the gift of the Holy Gho&s;t: For the promi&s;e is to you, and to your children, &amp;c.</HI> Doth he &s;o much enjoyn or exhort them to Repent in order to their being baptized, as encourage them both unto the one duty, and the other, upon the account of
<PB N="26" REF="14">
the Promi&s;e relating both to them, and their children, and the cer|tainty of its being fulfilled and made good unto them both, upon their Repentance, and &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion unto Bapti&s;m, re&s;pectively? And if their title unto, and intere&s;t in, the Promi&s;e, be a ground or motive unto them [the Parents] to be baptized; is not the like title and intere&s;t, in the children, a ground and motive al&s;o why they &s;hould be baptized?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="35" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXXV.</HEAD>
<P>Whether doth God &s;mell the a&s;&s;emblies [or, in the a&s;&s;emblies] of tho&s;e, who judg them&s;elves the onely Baptized per&s;ons under Heaven, with any &s;uch plea&s;ure or delight, as he <HI>&s;melleth</HI> many the a&s;&s;emblies of tho&s;e, who are called Unbaptized, by the other? Or are the Church-meetings of the former filled with the glory and pre&s;ence of God at any &s;uch rate, or to any &s;uch degree, as ma|ny the holy a&s;&s;emblies of the latter are? Or are there any &s;uch ma|nife&s;tations of the Spirit, either in gifts, or in graces, in the taber|nacles of the Baptized, as there are among&s;t tho&s;e, who bear the re|proach of <HI>&V;nbaptized?</HI> Or are <HI>the powers of the world to come</HI> any wayes &s;o bu&s;ie, active and &s;tirring in the Churches, which call them&s;elves Baptized, as they are in many the congregations, which are ca&s;t out to the Gentiles, as unclean and Un-baptized? Or is not that good word of God, (the Scriptures,) as a &s;ealed book in many the a&s;&s;emblies of the former, whereas even the deep things of God contained in it, are by the Holy Gho&s;t revealed in many Churches of the latter? Or are &s;uch differences as the&s;e, of no au|thority, intere&s;t, or import, to umpire or decide the controver&s;ie depending between the two Bapti&s;ms?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="36" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXXVI.</HEAD>
<P>Whether are not children oft-times in Scripture comprehended under, or with, their Parents, men and women, &amp;c. where they are not expre&s;ly mentioned, or named; and particularly <HI>Jo&s;. 25. 26. 1 Cor.</HI> 10. 1, 2 <NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">See al&s;o Mat: 4: 4: &amp; 12: 12: (be&s;ides many others.)</NOTE> even as Subjects are under the names of their Kings, and Families and De&s;cents, under the names of their Heads? &amp;c. Yea, are not both women and children to be under&s;tood, where men only are named? (See <HI>Mark 6. 44. Joh.</HI> 6. 10. compared with <HI>Mat.</HI> 14. 21.) If &s;o, doth not this argument or plea again&s;t Infant-Bapti&s;m, halt right-down; In the Scriptures we find no mention of the Baptizing of Children, either by Chri&s;t, or his A|po&s;tles,
<PB N="27" REF="14">
or any others: therefore no children were Baptized by them? Indeed if we could here find no mention of the Baptizing either men, or women, then the non-finding any mention neither of children baptized, were an argument of &s;ome authority and credit to prove, that there was none of this capacity, or age, bap|tized.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="37" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXXVII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, in ca&s;e it could be proved (which yet hath not been proved, nor, I am full of belief, ever will be, the proofs lying much more &s;trong and pregnant for it, then again&s;t it) that there were no children baptized during the Apo&s;tles days, doth it by any whit better con&s;equence follow from hence, that therefore chil|dren ought not now to be (or might not then, as to point of &s;imple lawfulne&s;s, have been) baptized, then from the non-circumci&s;ing of the <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> children for forty years together <HI>(Jo&s;. 5. 5.) viz,</HI> during the whole time of their journeying through the wilderne&s;s, it follows, that neither ought they to have been circumci&s;ed after|wards, e&s;pecially con&s;idering, 1. That there may be many more, and more weighty, rea&s;ons (though po&s;&s;ibly unknown unto us) why neither <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> nor his Apo&s;tles, &s;hould baptize children in their days, though the lawfulne&s;s, yea and nece&s;&s;ity of their bap|tizing, at other times, and in &s;ome ca&s;es, be &s;uppo&s;ed, then there was why the <HI>I&s;raelites</HI> &s;hould omit the circumci&s;ing of their chil|dren for tho&s;e forty years together, which were &s;pecified; And, 2. That the Apo&s;tle <HI>Paul</HI> &s;aith, that he <HI>was not &s;ent to baptize, but to preach the Gospel;</HI> [meaning, that baptizing, whether per&s;onally, or by commi&s;&s;ioning or delegating others hereunto, was not only not the principal, but not any con&s;iderable end of his &s;ending, but the publi&s;hing and preaching of the Go&s;pel,] for if he was not &s;ent to <HI>baptize</HI> [meaning, neither one age, nor one &s;ex, or other,] neither could he be &s;ent to baptize children; and if he was not &s;ent to baptize, either one, or other, [in the &s;ence de|clared,] neither was the Lord <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> him&s;elf, nor the re&s;t of the Apo&s;tles &s;ent about this work (in &s;uch a &s;ence,) What marvel then is it, that Per&s;ons &s;ent about matters incomparably greater and more weighty, &s;hould not be &s;o throughly intent upon things of a &s;econdary and lighter con&s;equence, as to pro&s;ecute them to the ut|termo&s;t of what they lawfully might, yea and in ca&s;e of a lighter
<PB N="28" REF="15">
burthen upon their &s;houlder in tho&s;e more important affairs, had been bound to do? Or are there not many ca&s;es, wherein a man may <HI>break a Law, [i. e.</HI> a &s;tanding Law, or a Law provided for ordinary ca&s;es] <HI>and yet be blamele&s;s?</HI> yea and &s;ome ca&s;es, where|in he may do it with commendation? See <HI>Mat. 12. 3, 4, 5. 2 Cor. 11. 17, 18, 21. 1 Joh.</HI> 3. 16.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="38" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXXVIII.</HEAD>
<P>Whether is not that principle, or humor, in the children of new Bapti&s;m, of making &s;uch &s;acred trea&s;ure hereof as generally they do, e&s;timating <HI>Chri&s;tianity</HI> it &s;elf, and acceptance with God, by it, counting all per&s;ons unclean and unholy, and not meet for Church-communion, who &s;ubmit not unto it &amp;c. thus making Gods <HI>Nothing,</HI> their <HI>All things;</HI> is not this humor (I &s;ay) the expre&s;s character of &s;uch per&s;ons in all ages, who have unduly, and without cau&s;e, broken the bands of unity, love, and peace, where|in they had been &s;ometimes bound up in a &s;weet bundle of Chri|&s;tianity with other Churches, to walk in &s;ome crooked and by|way of particular choyce by them&s;elves, to the offence, grief, and reproach of tho&s;e Churches, from which, upon &s;uch an account, they rent them&s;elves? Or did not <HI>Eunomius</HI> the Heretique, who maintained this Doctrine (by way of di&s;&s;ent from the Churches of <HI>Chri&s;t) That the Son of God is altogether unlike the Father, and the Holy Gho&s;t unlike the Son,</HI> not|with&s;tanding the groundle&s;&s;ne&s;s and errone|ou&s;ne&s;s of it, yet attribute this high and &s;a|cred priviledg unto it, that who&s;oever belie|ved it could not po&s;&s;ibly peri&s;h, how wicked|ly &s;oever he lived <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>Eunomius</HI>&mdash;defendit hanc haere&s;in, di&s;&s;imilem per omnia Pa<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">r<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter"> a&s;&s;e<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">ens Filium, &amp; Filio Spiritum &s;anctum. Fertur etiam u&s;que adeo fui&s;&s;e bonis moribus inimicus, ut a&s;&s;everaret, quod nihil cuique obe&s;&s;et quorumlibet perpetratio ac per&s;everantia peccator rum, &s;i hujus, quae ab il o docebatur, fidei particeps effet. <HI>Aug.</HI> de Haere&s;. c. 54</NOTE>? Or did not the <HI>Donati&s;ts</HI> a&s;cribe all <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> worth and excellency to their Sect and Opinions, <HI>denying that there was any true Church of Chri&s;t in all the World, but only amongst them, and de|&s;pi&s;ing all other Chri&s;tians, but them&s;elves,</HI> and yet giving entertainment to <HI>mo&s;t vile and wicked men in their Communion</HI> <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Nam illi [Donati&s;tae] dicebant univer&s;um orbem Chri&s;tianum Ec|cle&s;iam non habere&mdash;Deinde, qui prae le omnes alios Chri&s;tianos con|demnabant, &s;everitatem cen&s;urae in &s;uos relaxaverant, &amp; in &s;uis coetibus homines impuri&s;&s;imos, ut Optato<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">, Gildoniano<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">, Primiano&s;que patie|bantur. <HI>P. Mar<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">y<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">,</HI> Loc. Cla&s;&s;. 4. c. 5. &s;ect. 15.</NOTE>, as if the giving of the right hand of fellow|&s;hip unto them in their way, rendered men religious and holy, in the mid&s;t of the
<PB N="29" REF="15">
practice of all wickedne&s;s? Or did not <HI>Theophanes</HI> attribute &s;o much to the u&s;e of Images in Religious Wor&s;hip, that he cen&s;ured <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> the Emperor (by-named, <HI>Copronymus)</HI> as an Apo|&s;tate from God, for oppo&s;ing Images, and Idol-wor&s;hip <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Theophanes Mi&s;cel. <HI>l.</HI> 21. <HI>c.</HI> ult, <HI>&amp;</HI> Jo&s;eph Mede, <HI>Apo&s;ta|cy of latter times.</HI> p. 131</NOTE>? Or did not &s;ome <HI>Jewi&s;h</HI> Teachers labor to po&s;&s;e&s;s men with &s;uch an high opinion of their Tradition and practice of wa&s;hing hands before meat, as that they ought to look upon him, who &s;hould neglect or not ob&s;erve it, <HI>as one that lieth with an Harlot</HI> <NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><HI>Ain&s;worth</HI> in Levit. 15. 12</NOTE>? Or did not the Author and Abettors of that hideous Doctrine, That God &s;eeth no &s;in in per&s;ons ju&s;tified, pronounce all tho&s;e <HI>Traytors to the Blood of Chri&s;t,</HI> that held the contrary <NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg"><HI>P. Gunter,</HI> Sermon of Ju|&s;tification, printed <HI>anno</HI> 1615. Preface to the Reader, p. 3.</NOTE>? Or did not the Monks, who (generally) were the compilers of the Hi&s;tories of this Nation in former times, place &s;o much of the very e&s;&s;ence (as it were) of Religion, in reverencing Bi&s;hops and Monks of the&s;e times, that (as <HI>Daniel,</HI> a late <HI>Engli&s;h</HI> Hi&s;torian ob&s;erveth) <HI>they per&s;onated all their Princes, either Religious, or irreligious, as they humored, or offended, the Bi&s;hops rochet, and the Monks bel|ly</HI> <NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smectymnuus</HI> Vindicat. p 8.</NOTE>? Or did not <HI>Theodore</HI> the Abbot, give this advice to a Monk, who (as him&s;elf informed the &s;aid Abbot) was threatened by the Devil, that he would never cea&s;e vexing and mole&s;ting him by temptations unto fornication, until he left wor&s;hiping the Image of the ble&s;&s;ed Virgin; did not (I &s;ay) this Abbot give this advice to the Monk in his ca&s;e, that <HI>it were better that he frequented all the &s;tews in the City, then not to wor&s;hip Chri&s;t and his Mother in an Image</HI> <NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg"><HI>Mede,</HI> Apo|&s;tacy of latter times, p. 140</NOTE>? Or do not all the&s;e in&s;tances (with many more that might be added unto them, of like con&s;ideration) plainly &s;hew and prove, that to conceit and &s;peak glorious things, of any private opinion, or by-practice, is an argument of very great probability (at lea&s;t) that this, both opinion, and practice, are mens own, or from them&s;elves, and not from God, or agreeable unto his Word? Or are there not &s;everal grounds, and the&s;e near at hand, very ma|terial and weighty, to &s;trengthen this conjecture? yea and when the Apo&s;tle <HI>Peter</HI> &s;aith, that <HI>tho&s;e that are unlearned and un|&s;table, pervert,</HI> or <HI>wre&s;t, the Scriptures, to their own de&s;truction,</HI> doth not this great danger or mi&s;ery ari&s;e from hence, that they who do wre&s;t the Scriptures, are inordinately conceited of, and confidently re&s;t and build upon, &s;uch notions, &s;ences, and opinions,
<PB N="30" REF="16">
which are engendered and begotten in their minds or con&s;ciences, by this <HI>Scripture-wre&s;ting?</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="39" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XXXIX.</HEAD>
<P>Whether, is not the Te&s;timony of that worthy, zealous, and learned Martyr M^r <HI>John Philpot</HI> (recorded in a letter written by him to a freind of his, a pri&s;oner in Newgate at the &s;ame time) wor|thy credit and beliefe, wherein he affirms, that <HI>Auxentius,</HI> an <HI>Arrian heretique, (with his adherents) was</HI> one <HI>of the fir&s;t that de|nyed the Bapti&s;m of children, and next after him, Pelagius the heretique?</HI> Or can Augu&s;tin be &s;u&s;pected, at lea&s;t by tho&s;e who have any Competent knowledg of his unparallel'd candor and in|genuity, to &s;peake any thing but the truth, when he &s;aith that the Baptizing of Infants was a cu&s;tom of the Chri&s;tian Church in his days, <HI>Salubriter firmata, whol&s;omely</HI> ratified and confirmed <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">De peccato|num meritis &amp;c. <HI>lib. 3. c.</HI> 13.</NOTE>: in another place, That <HI>the univer&s;al Church of Chri&s;t always held, or retained the cu&s;tom of Baptizing</HI> children <HI>even from the Apo|&s;tles, and that it was not in&s;tituted by any Council; and that no Chri&s;tian would &s;ay that children were impertinently, or in vain baptized</HI> <NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Quod tradi|tum cenet uni|ver&s;itas Eccle|&s;i<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1+ letters">. Cum par|vuli infantes baptizantur, nullus Chri&s;ti|anorum dixe|rit eos inaniter baptizari. Et &s;i qui&s;quam in hac re authoritatem divinam quaerat, quanquam quod univer&s;a tenet Eccle&s;ia, nec conciliis in&s;titutum, &s;ed &s;emper retentum e&s;t, non ni&s;i authoritate Apo&s;tolica traditum recti&s;&s;i|me creditur, tamen veraciter continere po&s;&s;umus quid valeat in parvulis bapti&s;mi &s;acramen|tum ex circumci&s;ione carnis, quam prior populus accepit, &amp;c. <HI>Aug. de Bapti&s;mo</HI> contra <HI>Donat. l. 4. c.</HI> 23.</NOTE> (with much more to like purpo&s;e.) Or is not the te&s;timo|ny of <HI>Ierome</HI> worthy to be received, who affirmeth, that he (with the Orthodox <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> in his days) <HI>held one Bapti&s;m, which they affirmed ought to be admini&s;tred in the &s;ame Sacramental words unto Infants,</HI> and tho&s;e of riper years. <NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Bapti&s;ma unum tenemus, quod ii&s;dem &s;acramenti verbis in in&s;antibus, quibus etiam in majoribus, a&s;&s;erimus e&s;&s;e celebrandum. <HI>Hieron.</HI> t. 4. Symboli explan. ad <HI>Dama<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">um.</HI></NOTE></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="40" TYPE="part">
<HEAD>XL.</HEAD>
<P>Whether can it proved from the Scriptures, or by any argument what&s;oever, that either Faith, or a profe&s;&s;ion, of Faith, is either the only, or the be&s;t ground, either <HI>divi&s;im</HI> or <HI>conjunctim,</HI> whereon to build a Bapti&s;mal admini&s;tration? Or whether did not the Apo&s;tles and tho&s;e who baptized by their direction and order in their days, in&s;i&s;t upon believing, and profe&s;&s;ion of believing, with men and
<PB N="31" REF="16">
women, who were willing, or de&s;irous, to be baptized, onely for want of better, and of better a&s;&s;ured grounds, whereon to proceed to the baptizing of &s;uch per&s;ons? Or did they in&s;i&s;t upon either of the&s;e qualifications, in reference to the &s;aid Admini&s;tration, &s;imply and meerly, as, or becau&s;e, they were &s;uch, or in re&s;pect of their po&s;itive and ab&s;olute nature, and not rather, in re&s;pect of their relative natures, or properties, <HI>viz.</HI> as they were &s;ignificative, or de|clarative unto them [the Baptizers] and unto others, of the happy e&s;tate of tho&s;e in whome they were found, as being per&s;ons in Grace and favour with God? Otherwi&s;e, how could the Lord <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> him&s;elf, having no &s;uch Faith, as that which the Apo&s;tles and their Bapti&s;ts required (together with the profe&s;&s;ion of it) in tho&s;e, whom they Baptized, be a meet or duly qualified &s;ubject of this Admini&s;tration? Or will any man pre&s;ume to &s;ay, that he was Baptized, either contrary unto, or be&s;ides, the rule, or mind of God, touching per&s;ons meet to be Baptized, e&s;pecially when as him&s;elf renders this account why he &s;ubmitted him&s;elf unto, and de&s;ired, Bipti&s;m, <HI>viz.</HI> that <HI>it became him to fulfil all RIGH|TEO&V;SNES</HI> <NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Mat. 3. 15</NOTE>? And be&s;ides, is it not altogether irrational to imagine or think, that Faith &s;hould be required in order unto Bapti&s;m, &s;imply for Faiths &s;ake? or profe&s;&s;ion of Faith, meerly for this Profe&s;&s;ions &s;ake? Or that God, or <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> &s;hould enjoyn a re|quirement of them upon &s;uch a &s;lender account as this? Or that they would ever have been nominated by them for qualifications unto Bapti&s;m in men and women, unle&s;s they had been &s;o &s;ignifi|cative or declarative, as hath been &s;aid, I mean, of the gracious ac|ceptance of &s;uch per&s;ons, in whom they are, with God? Yea or unle&s;s they had been declarative in this kind, upon the be&s;t terms, whereof per&s;ons newly converted from ways of &s;in unto God, are capable, there being no other way, or means, more effectual or proper for &s;uch per&s;ons to make known their &s;tanding, or being, in the favor of God, unto others, then by a profe&s;&s;ion of their be|lieving in <HI>Je&s;us Chri&s;t;</HI> how ever it be mo&s;t true, that even &s;uch de|clarations as the&s;e, many times deceive tho&s;e, who accept of them, and tru&s;t to them, though without &s;in in tho&s;e, who are &s;o decei|ved? Now then, if Faith, and profe&s;&s;ion of Faith, qualifie for Bapti&s;m, meerly in re&s;pect of their relation, and as they report
<PB N="32" REF="17">
(with &s;uch credit as appertains to them, and is meet to be given them by men) the per&s;ons in whom they are, and from whom they proceed, to be in an e&s;tate of Grace and Favor with God, is it not as evident as the Sun at noon day, that all per&s;ons of mankind, who are, or may be known by more a&s;&s;ured te&s;timonies and decla|rations, then any mans own profe&s;&s;ion of his own Faith amounts unto, to be in the &s;ame, or like grace and favor with God, to be every whit as regularly, and as compleatly qualified for Bapti&s;m, as the greate&s;t and loude&s;t Profe&s;&s;ors of their Faith under Heaven? If &s;o, are not Infants and Children before the commi&s;sion of actual <NOTE PLACE="marg">That Children are in favor with God, and &s;o declared, &s;ee briefly <HI>Redemp. Redeemed,</HI> p. 330, 516, 517.</NOTE> &s;in, to whom God him&s;elf hath given a loud and expre&s;s te&s;timo|ny from Heaven, that they are in grace and favor with him, and that <HI>to them,</HI> and &s;uch as they are, <HI>belongeth the Kingdom of Hea|ven, &amp;c.</HI> are they not (I &s;ay) upon this account fully declared to be, not only or &s;imply, regular and meet &s;ubjects of Bapti&s;m, but &s;ubjects in this kind of the highe&s;t, and mo&s;t unque&s;tionable qualifications?</P>
<Q>For by one Spirit <HI>[not by one, or the &s;ame, water, or dipping]</HI> we are all baptized into one Body.</Q>
<BIBL><HI>1 Cor. 12. 13.</HI></BIBL>
<Q>What therefore God hath joyned together, let no man put a&s;under.</Q>
<BIBL><HI>Matt.</HI> 19. 6.</BIBL>
<Q>Bapti&s;mus &s;ine impietatis &s;celere conte~mni nequit: &amp; gravi&s;&s;i|mam reprehen&s;ionem cor&agrave;m Deo &amp; hominibus merentur, qui tantum beneficium differunt, vel &s;ibi, vel &s;uis liberis accipere.</Q>
<BIBL><HI>B<GAP DESC="illegible" EXTENT="1 letter">za Opu&s;c. p. 334.</HI></BIBL>
<Q>Tingimus pueros, tingimus provectioris aetatis:&mdash;Nullam aeta|tem praecepit Bapti&s;mo Chri&s;tus, &s;ed neque ullam vetuit, Ec|cle&s;iae Norlingen&s;is Pa&s;tores.</Q>
<BIBL><HI>Scultet. Annal. Anno 1525.</HI></BIBL>
</DIV2>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
