THE Paedo-Baptists Apology FOR THE Baptised Churches, Showing The invalidity of the strongest grounds for Infant Baptism out of the works of the learned assertors of that tenant. AND That the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins is a duty incumbent upon all sinners who come orderly to the profession of Christianity.  
ALSO The Promise of the Spirit ●eing the substance of a Sermon on 1 Cor. 12. 1.  
To which is added A POSTSCRIPT. Out of the works of Dr. Jer. Tailor in defence of imposition of hands as a never failing Ministry.  
By Tho. Grantham.  Mr. Perkins on Gal. 3. 27. 
Baptism alone is no mark of God's Child, but Baptism joined with Faith, for so must the text be consideres. All the Galations that believe are baptised into Christ.  
Printed in the Year. 1671.   

To the Reader.  
Friend,  
I Have a few things to say before thou read this ensuing Apology, and first,  
The occasion of it is from the late unkind usages which the Baptised Churches have received from the Paedo-Baptists, by violently dispersing their Assemblies, by defacing and taking away their meeting places, by imprisoning their persons, seizing and wasting their Estates, by injuring them in their Trade by means of excommunications, by Writs de Capiendo and other penal proceedings both confining their Persons and exposing them to great inconveniencies. And all this only (as I conceive for their conscionable observance of the will of God in Preaching the Gospel to sinners ●●r the obedience of faith, and for adhering to that form of Doctrine once delivered to the Saints Heb. 6. 1, 2. In which Doctrine and sufferings being through the mercy of God a partaker with them, I thought I might lawsully write an Apology for them, or at least for the Truth professed by them. And that I might the ●ore effectually do this I chose to speak ●o their adversary's by the learned ●ens of their own Doctors.  
2. My design in writing this Apology, is to abate (if it may be) that great enmity which hath appeared generally between the parties concerned; and more particularly that spirit of opposition and disrespect which too much appears in the more refined sort of the Paedo-Baptists, against such as labour to reform (or rather to restore) the Doctrine of Baptism, to its first integrity and estimation among all that profess the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, under what Epethets or den●minations soever. And me thinks th● truth should prevail with all that do consider the authority and force thereof to be such that men are constrained (as it were to speak for it though to the overthrow of their dearest errors, so that we may say their Rock is net as our Rock, our enemies being judges.  
3. I have not injured the sense of my authors, and where I have added any thing for explycation of any word or passage, I have distinguished the same partly by a different Letter, and partly by this Character [] nor have I said much in the Apology, as indeed it was not necessary, considering the evidence of the word of God for us, and the Record which our opposers do bear in favour of our Cause; and beside they that will may see what may be further said in the case depending, if they please to peruse the Learned works of those of our way, viz. Den his Answer to Dr. Featley, Tombs, his Antipaedo-Baptist, Fisher his Christianismus Rediv●vous, and many others.  
4. The second part entitled Of the Promise of the Spirit, I though fit to be annexed, because Acts 2. 38, 39 such as are Baptised with the Baptism of Repentance for Remission of fins, have the promise of the Spirit made to them, which being sought for in the way ordained of God, shall be received according to his will for he is faithful that promised.  
Thy servant in Christ, Tho. Grantham,   

THE Paedo Baptists apology FOR The Baptised Churches, etc.  
THere is no point of the Christian Faith, of greater importance in order to the composure of Divisions among such as conscientiously profess the Name of Christ, than the Doctrine of holy Baptism, in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; for as many as have been 
Gal. 3. 27. Heb. 6. 2.  Baptixed into Christ have put on Christ. And where this foundation truth hath been neglected or essentially corrupted, there hath ensued great disorder in Religion, because the being of the Church (as visible) is so concerned therein, that there can be no orderly proceeding in any Church Act, nor participation in any Church Privilege, where Sacred Baptism is not Antecedent.  
And though Reformation (or rather the restoration) of this Truth be hard to accomplish, yet must we not be discouraged, but still pursue all lawful and probable ways to effect it in this, as well as in other cases. And the way which I have chosen to help on this needful work at this time is to show, that (notwithstanding the discord in point of practice, yet) there is a very great concord in doctrine, touching the main questions which concern this Heavenly Institution, between the Paedo-Baptists, and the Baptised Churces. The questions are these. 

1. What are the Qualifications required of all such as are to be baptised.  
2. What is the have Act or right Form to be observed and done in this solemn rite of Baptism.    
Touching the first, the doctrine of the Baptised Churches is well known, namely, That Repentance toward God, and Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ be prerequisites to the baptism of every sinner. And to this agrees the holy Scripture with full consent, ●aying, Repent and be baptised every one of you. 
Act. 2. 38. Mark 1. 5. Acts 8. 12, Acts 18, 8.  They were all baptised confessing their sins. When they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God etc. They were baptised both men and women, many of the Corinthians hearing, believeed and were baptised. And hence this holy Ordinance is well called the Laver of Regeneration; the Baptism of repentance, fo●th● remission of sins. Now let us hear the doctrine of the Paedo-Baptists touching this question.  
1. The Church of England both in her Articles and vulgar Catechism, delivers her mind clearly to this purpose, that such repentance whereby sin is forsaken, and such Faith as by which the promises of God are steadfastly believed, is required of persons (meaning all persons) which are to be baptised, and that in Baptism Faith is confirmed etc.  
2. M●. Perkins) a Learned Son of ●he same Church) upon these words, ●each all Nations baptizeing them. saith, I explain the words thus▪ (mark, first of all it is said Teach them, that is make them my Disciples by calling them to believe, and to repent. Here we are to consider, the order which God observes in making with man the Covenant in Baptism, first of all he calls them by his word and commands them to believe and repent, then in the second place God makes his promise of mercy and forgiveness▪ and thirdly he feals his promise by Baptism— they that know not, nor consider this order which God used in Covenanting with them in Baptism deal preprosterously, oversliping the commandment of repenting and believing— this is the cause of of so much profaneness in the world— we see what is done in Baptism, the Covenant of grace is solemnised between God and the Party baptised, and in this Covenant something▪ belongs to God, some to the Party baptised, the actions of the Party baptised is a certain stipulation, or obligation, whereby he bindeth himself to give homage to the Father, Son, and holy Ghost. This homage standeth IN FAITH, whereby all the promises of God are beleieved, and in OBEDIENCE to all his commandments. The sign of this obligation, is that the Party baptised WILLINGLY yields himself to be washed with water.  
3. Diodate on the same Text, teaches that Baptism is a Sacrament of grace in remission and expiation of sins, and regeneration to a new life. And likewise for a token that they are bound on there side (meaning such as are baptised) to consecrate themselves to God, and to give themselves over to the conduct of 〈◊〉 Spirit, and to CONFESS his name PERPETUALLY. [Thus these three witnesses do concur with the truth and therein do hold a concord with the baptised Churches. And one would think there should now be no place for such a conceit, as that Infants are fit subjects for the sacred ordinance of baptism, because wholly uncapable of these qualifications. Now whereas div●r● things are pretended as grounds for Infant Baptism, we shall briefly recount the particulars which are chiefly insisted on, and then show how the same are refelled or made void by some of the most learned Asserters of Paedo-baptism. The grounds pretended are these.  
1. The Covenant which God made with Abraham and his seed, Gen. 17. who were to be circumcised (to wit the makes only) in their Infancy, this is thought to be a Type of baptism, and hence 'tis conceived that Infants ought ●o be baptised.  
2. Christ's permitting Infants to be brought to him, as persons to whom the Kingdom belongs.  
3. They being tainted with original sin, must be cleansed from it, which is supposed to be done by baptism.  
4. Because it is said except a man be born of water etc. he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. John 3.  
5. Because Infants do not ponere obicem, and so are more fit for baptism then adult Persons, as 'tis thought.  
6. Because without baptism Parents can not hope the salvation of dying Infants (as some think.)  
7. The promise of the holy Ghost, Acts 2. 39, is thought to belong to Infants, and so they ought to be baptised because they are said to be holy.  
8. Unless Infants be baptised 'tis thought God is worse to Infants in the Gospel, then in the Law.  
9 Infants are a par● of all Nations, and the command for baptising is of extent to all Nations.  
10. 'Tis thought the Apostles baptised Infants because they baptised whole households, and 'tis said, it hath descended to this very age as a Tradition Apostolical.  
To all which, Doct. Jer. Taylor (and others) in behalf of the baptised Churches, do give answer as followeth.  
That this is a goodly Harangue, which upon strict examination will come to nothing; that it pretends fairly, and signifies little; that some of those allegations are false, some impertinent, and all the rest insufficient. 
Libert. proph●. p, 228. to pag. 246.   
For the argument from circumcision, is invalid (or of no wright) upon infinite considerations, figures and types prove nothing, unless a commandment go along with them, or some express ●o signify such to be their purpose: for the deluge of waters and the ark of Noah were a figure of Baptism s●id Pe●●r: and if therefore the Circumstances of one should be drawn to the other, we should make Baptism a Prodigy, rather than a rite. The Pascal Lamb was a Type of the Eucharist which succeeds the other as Baptism doth Circumcision, but because there was in the manducation of the Pascal Lamb, no prescription of Sacramental drink, shall we thence conclude that the Eucharist is to be ministered but in one kind? and even in the very instance of this argument supposing a correspondence of analogy between Circumcision and Baptism, 
* Which yet the Baptists do not grant.  yet there is no correspondence of Identity: for although it were granted that both of them did consign the Covenant of Faith, yet there is nothing in Circumstance of children's being Circumcised that so concerns that M●stery, but that it might very well be given to Children, and yet Baptism to men of reason; because Circumcision left a Character in the flesh, which being imprinted upon Infants did its work to them when they came to age, and such a Character was necessary, because there was no word added to the sign; but baptism imptints nothing that remains on the body, and if it leaves a Character at all it is upon the soul to which also the word is added, which is as much a part of the Sacrament as the sign itself is 
* It is a saying of Augustin, De trahe verbum quid est aqua etc. Take away the word and what is water, nothing but water join the word to the Element and it is made a Sacrament. This consideration is very concluding against Paedo Baptism, for to the Infant, the word is as it were taken away from the Element, a●d consequently accordirg to Aug. it can be no Sacrament to them at all.  for both which reasons it is very requisite that the Persons baptised should be capable of reason, that they may be capable of both the word of the Sacrament and th● impress made upon the Spirit. Since therefore the reason of this parity does wholly fail, there is nothing left to infer a necessity, of complying in this circumstance of age, any more than in the other anexes of the Type: and the case is clear in the Bishop's question to C●p●iu●, for why should not Infants be baptised just upon the eight day as well as Circumcised, if the correspondence of the rites be an argument to infer one circumstance which is impertninent and accidental to the misteriousness of the rite, why should it not infer all [especially such a material thing as the time of baptism, for if the eight day be not determined, no man is able to assign the day of baptism, which being delayed till the tenth or twentieth day, may by the same reason be deferred till the Child have passed through its infancy, and become capable of erudition] and then also females must not be baptised because they were not circumcised, but it were more proper, if we would understand it aright, to prosecute the analogy of the type to the antitipe by way of letter and spirit, and signification, and as circumcision signifies baptism so also the adjuncts of circumcision shall signify something spiritual in the adherences of baptism. And therefore as Infants were circumcised, so spiritu●l Infants shall be baptised, which (according to some) is spiritual circumcision [which yet is better expounded by St. Paul. Phil. 3. Where he makes the spiritual circumcision to be the mind and spirit renewed, and the putting of the body of the sins of the flesh] for therefore babes had the ministry of the type to signify that we must when we give our names to Christ, become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Children in malice, [for unless you become like one of these little ones you cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven] said our blessed Saviour, and then the ●ye is made complete, and this seems to have been the sense of the p●imative Church, for in the ages next to the Apostles, they gave to all baptised persons mi●k and honey to represent to them their duty, that though in age and understanding they were men, yet they were babes in Christ, and Children in malice. But to infer the sense of the Paedo Baptists, is so weak a manner of arguing, that Augustin whose device it was (and men use to be in love with their own fancies) at the most pretended it but as probable [Lo here the newness of the argument, from Infant circumcision, to Infant baptism.  
[As for the Catholics they hold it an 
Ex manu control under the probation of divers of their Doctors, Professors and Students in Theology. p. 372. to 377.  absurd thing to argue as the Protestants do, from the Covenant made with Abraham and his seed, Gen 17. 7. Thus they speak. That promise's concerns literally pecuculiar pro●●ction, and worldly felicity, not the remission of sins and everlasting Life, neither can we be sons of Abraham by carnal generation, or by our carnal Parents' (we are not Jews but Gentiles) but only by spiritual generation (to wit Baptism) by which we are born to God, and made the brothers of Chr●●t● the Sons of Abraham, th●se (saith St. Paul) are the sons of Abraham, not who are the Sons of the flesh but of Faith Rom. 4. 12. 13.  
Again they deride the Argument drawn 
S. N. Antid.  from Infants being circumcised in order to their being baptised, calling it a cunning argument by which it will follow that Females are not to be baptised, etc.]  
And as ill success will they have with the other Arguments as with this for from the action of Christ's blessing Infants to inser that they are to be baptise, proves nothing so much as that there is a great want of better arguments, The Conclusion would be with more probability derived thus; Christ blessed Children and so dismissed them, but baptised them not, therefore Infants are not to be baptised, but let this be as weak as its enemy, yet that Christ did not baptise them, is an argument sufficient that Christ hath other ways of bringing them to Heaven. He passed his act of Grace upon them by benediction and imposition of hands.  
And therefore though neither Infants nor any man in puris naturalibus can attain to a supernatural end without the addition of some instrument or means of Gods appointing ordinarily, yet where God hath not appointed a rule nor an order, as in the case of Infants, we contend he hath not, this argument is invalid▪ And as we are sure that God hath not commanded Infant's t● be baptised, so we are su●e God will do them no injustice, nor damn them for what they cannot help.  
And therefore let them be pressed with all the inconveniences which a●e consequent to Original sin, yet either it will not be laid to their charge, so as to be sussicient to condemn them; or if it could, yet the mercy and absolute goodness of God will secure them, if he take them away before they can glorify him by a free obedience. Quid ergo fostivat innoceus alis ad remissionem p●ccatorum? Was the question of Tertullian (lib. the bapt.) he knew no such danger from their Original guilt, as to drive them to a laver of which in that age of innocence they had no need, as he conceived▪ and therefore there is no necessity of flying to the help of others, for tongue, and heart, and faith, & predispositions to baptism; for what need all this stir? as Infants without their own consent, without any act of their own. And without any exterior solemnity, contracted the guilt of Adam's sin, and are liable to all the punishment which can with Justice descend upon his posterity who are personally innocent; so Infants shall be restored without any solemnity or act of their own, or any other for them, by the second Adam by the redemption of Jesus Christ by his righteousness and mercies, applied either immediately, or how, or when he pleases to appoint [and to this agrees that saying of the Apostle as in Adam all dye, so in Christ shall all be made alive; and as by the disobedience of one many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous] And so Augustine's argument will come to nothing without any need of Godfathers, or the faith of any body else. And it is too narrow a conception of God Almighty, because he hath tied us to the observation of Ceremonies of his own institution, that therefore he hath tied himself to it. Many thousand ways there are by which God can bring any reasonable soul to himself: but nothing is more unreasonable, then because he hath tied all men of years, and discretion to this way, therefore we of our own heads shall carry Infants to him that way without his direction: the conceit is poor and low, and the action consequent to it, is too bold and venturous, mysterium meum mihi & filiis domus meae. Let him do what he please to Infants we must not.  
Only this is certain, that God hath as great care of Infants as of others, and because they have no capacity of doing such acts, as may be in order to acquiring salvation, God will by his own immediate mercy bring them thither, where he hath intended them; but to say that therefore he will do it by an external act and ministry, and that confined to a particular, viz. This rite & no other, is no good argument unless God could not do it without such means, or that he had said he would not: and why cannot God as well do his mercies to Infants now immediately, as he did before the Institution either of Circumcision or Baptism? [●his query is worthy of serious consideration] however there is no danger that Infants should perish for want of this external Ministry, much less for prevaricating Christ's precept, nisi quis renatus fuerit etc. For first the water and spirit in this place [according to some learnéd expositors] signify the same thing: and by water is meant the ●ff●ct of the spirit cleansing and purifying the soul, as appears in its parralel place of Christ's baptising with the holy Ghost and Fire— (but to let pass this advantage and to suppose it to be meant of external Baptism [as that is the most likely sense] yet this no more infers a necessity of Infant's Baptism, than the other words of Christ infer a necessity to give them the holy Communion, nisi comediritis carnem filii hominis, & brberitis sanguinem non introibitis in regnum ●aelorum; and yet we do not think these words sufficient Argument to communicate them; if men therefore will do us justice, either let them give both Sacraments to Infants as some Ages of the Church did, or neither, for the wit of man is not able to show a desparity in the sanction, or in the evergie of its expression; and therefore they were honest, that understood the obligation to be parralel, and performed it accordingly, and yet because we say they were deceived in one instance, and yet the obligation (all the world cannot reasonably say but) is the same: they are as honest and as reasonable that do neither. And since the antient-Church did with an equal opinion of necessity give them Communion, and yet men now adays do not, why shall men be mor● burdened with a prejudice and nam● of obloquy for not giving the Infant● one Sacrament, more than they ar● disliked for not affording them the other. If Anabaptist shall be ● name of disgrace, why shall not som● other name be invented for them that deny to communicate Infants, which shall be equally disgraceful, or else both the Opinions signified by such names, be accounted no disparagement, but receive their estimate according to their truth?  
Of which truth since we are now taking account from pretences of Scripture, it is considerable the discourse of St. Peter which is pretended for the intitleing Infants to the promise of the holy Ghost, and by consequence to Baptism, which is supposed to be its instrument of conveyance, 'tis wholly a fancy, and hath nothing in it of certainty or demonstration and not much probability. For besides that the thing itself is unreasonable and the holy Ghost works by the heighting and improveing our natural faculties, and therefore is a promise that so concerns them, as they are reasonable Creatures, and may have a tittle to it, in proportion to their nature, but no possession or reception of it, till their faculties come into act, besides this, I say, the words mentioned in S. P●t●rs ●rmon (which are the only record of the promise are interpreted upon a w●a● mistake; the promise belongs to you and to your Children therefore Infants are actually receptive o● it in that capacity, that's the argument: but the reason of it is not yet discovered nor never will [For indeed it is without reason] To you and your Children, i●s you and your posterity, to you and your children when they are of the same capacity in which you are effectually receptive o● the promise. [Beside the promise of the Spirit in this place is referred to the gifts of the holy Ghost, an● is therefore made t● those who had already 
See Diod te. in act 2.  received it in the quickening, or illuminating operation of it, an● is the portion of beleivers as such, and i● consequent to baptism. Acts 2 38, 39▪ and is therefore wrongfully made an argument for the baptising of Infants, wh● (what ever they may have of the graces' of the spirit 
* a thing wholly unknown that they have any such receipt of the Spirit.  yet) have neither need of, nor any capacity to use the gifts of the spirit and therefore evident it is that this promise of the Spirit belongs not to Infants at all]  
And for the Allegation of St. Paul, that Infants are holy if their Parents be faithful, it signify nothing, bu● that they are holy by designation, — [or according to Erasmus they (to wit Infants 
Eras. parrap. ●n 1 Cor. 7.  born of such Parents as the o●e being a Christian the other not) are holy legitimately; for the conversion of either wife or ●●sband d●th not dissolve the marriage which was made when both were in u●b●●eif. And however it is true, that Au●tin was a great stickler for Paedo-Bap●ism, yet he denys that any such thing can ●e deduced from the text in hand, his words ●re these. lib. 3 De pec. mer. remi●. It is to be held without doubling, whatsoever that sanctification was, it was not of power to make Christians and remit sins. He might well say so considering that the holiness of the child is derived from the sanctity of the unbeleiver, as the word else being rightly referred doth evince, 1 Co. 7. 14.]  
And as the promise appertains not (for aught appears) to Infants in that capacity and consistence,— yet Baptism is not the means of conveying the holy Ghost, for that which Peter says be baeptized and ye shall receive the holy Ghost, signifies no more than this; first be baptised and then by imposition of the Apostles hands, (which was another mystery and rite) 〈◊〉 shall receive the promise of the Father and this is nothing but an insinuation of the rite of Confirmation, a● to this sense expounded by diver● ancient Authors; and in ordinary Ministry, the effect of it is not bestowed upon any unbaptised persons, for it is in order next after baptism: and upon this ground Peter's argument in the case of Cornelius was concluding enough, a mojori ad minus, thus the holy Ghost was bestowed upon him and his Family, which gift by ordinary ministry was consequent to baptism, not as the effect is to the cause, or to the proper instrument, but as a consequent is to an antecedent, in a chain of c●uses accidentally, and by positive institution depending upon each o●her) God by that miracle did give Testimony that the persons of the men were in great dispositions towards Heaven, and therefore were to be admitted to these rites which are the ordinary inlets into the kingdom of Heaven. But then from hence to argue that where ever there is a capacity of receiving the same grace, there also the same sign is to be administered, and from ●ence to infer Paedo-Baptism, is an argument very fallatious upon several grounds; first because Baptism is not the sign of the holy Ghost, but by another mystery it was conveyed ordinarily, and extraordinarily, it was conveyed independently from any mystery, and so the argument goes upon a wrong supposition. 2. If the supposition were true, yet the proposition built upon it is false, for they that are capable of the same grace, are not always capable of the same sign, for women under the law of Moses although they were capable of the righteousness of Faith, yet they were not capable of the sign of Circumcision, for God does not always convey his graces in the same manner, but to some mediately, to some immediately; and there is no better instance in the the World of it, than the gift of the holy Ghost (which is the thing now instanced in, in this contestation.)  
And after all this least these arguments should not ascertain their cause, they fall on complaining against God, and will not be content with God, unless they may baptise their children but take exceptions that G●d did more for the children of the Jews, But why so? because God made a Covenant with their children actually as Infants, and concined it by circumcision: well so he did with our children too in their proportion. He made a Convenant of spiritual promises on his part, and spiritual and real services on ours; and this pertains to children when capable, but made with them as soon as they are alive, and yet not so as with the Jews babe's, for as they rite consigned them actually, so it was a national and temporal blessing and covenant, and a separation of them from the portion of the Nations, a marking them for a peculiar people, and therefore while they were in the Wilderness and sep●rate from the commixture of all people they were not at all circumcised but as that ri●e did seal the righteousness of Faith, [Which whether it did any such thing to an● s●ve to ●braham only ●n m●ch doubten] so by virtue of i●'s 〈…〉, and remanem●y in their fl●sh, it did that work when the 〈◊〉 came to age, But in Christian Infants t●e case is otherwise, for the new Covenant being established upon better promises, is not only to be●ter purposes, but also in a distinct manner to be understood, when their spirits are as receptive of a spiritual act or impress as the bodies of jewish children were of the sign of circumcision than it is to be consigned; but the business is quickly at an end by saying that God hath done no less for ours, then for their children, for he will do the mercies of a Father and Creator to them, and he did no more to the other, but he hath done more to ours, for he hath made a Covenant with them and built it upon promises of the greatest concernment. — [And note further we have as much ground of comfort concerning our dying Infants, as the faithful had for the first two thousand years, during all which time, the Covenant of grace reached to Infants, though there was no external ceremony to consign it to Infants.] — For the insinuation of the precept of Baptising all Nation, of which children are a part, does as little advantage as any of the rest, because other parallel expressions of the Scripture do determine and expound themselves to a sense that includes not all persons absolutely, but of a capable condition as adorate ●um omnes gentes, & persallirae Deo omnes Nationes terra. [And Nation shall rise against Nation, where Infants are excluded] and divers more. [But Erasmus hath well expounded this text, where he restrains 
Eraz. par. on Math. 28.  the baptising to such as are repentant of their former life.  
As for the Conjecture concerning the Family of Stephan●s, at the best it is but a conjecture, and besides that it is not proved that there were children in the Family; yet if that were granted it follows not that they were baptised, because by [whole Families] in Scripture is meant all Persons of reason and age within the Family, for it is said of the Ruler at Capernaum, that he believed a●d all his house. Now you may also suppose that in his house were little babes, that is like enough, and you may suppose that they did believe too, before they could understand, but that's not so likely; and then the argument from baptising Stephen's Family may be allowed just as probable: but this is unmanlike to build upon such slight and airy conjectures.  
But tradition by all means must supply the place of Scripture, and there is pretended a Tradition apostolical that Infants were baptised: but at this we are not much moved, for we who rely upon the written word of God, as sufficient to establish all true Religion, do not value the allegations of Traditions; and however the World goes none of the reformed Churches can pretend this argument against this opinion, because they who reject Tradition when 'tis against them, must not pre●end it at al● for them. But if we should allow the Topick to be good, yet how will it be verified? for so far as it can yet appear, it relies wholly upon the Testimony of Origen, for from him Austin had it. Now a Tradition apostolical if it be not consigned with a fuller testimony then of one person, whom all after ages have condemned of many errors, will obtain so little reputation among those that kn●w that thing, have upon greater authority pretended to derive from the Apostles, and yet falsely, that it will be a great argument that he is credulous and weak, that shall be determined by so weak probation, in matters of so great concernment. And the truth of the business is, as there was no command of Scripture to obliedge children to the susception of it, so necessity of ●ae●o-baptism was not determined in the Church till the eight age after Christ, but in the year 418. in the Mileritan cou●cel (a principal of A●r●ca, there was a Cannon made for Paedo Bapt▪ never till then, I grant it was practised in Africa before that time, and they or some of them thought well of it, and though that be no Argument for us to think so, yet none of them did ever before, pretend it to be necessary, none to have been a precept of the Gospel, St. Austin was the first that ever preached it to be absolutely necessary, and it was in his heat and anger against Pelag●us who had warmed and chafed him so in that question; that it made him innovate in other doctrines, possibly of greater concernment than th●s, And that although this was practised anciently in Africa yet that it was without an opinion of necessity, and not often there, nor at all in other places, we have the testimony of a learned Paedo Baptist Ludovicus 
Ludovicus Vives.  Vives who in his annotations upon Augustin De Civit. Dei. l. 1. c. 27. afirms. Neminem nisi adultum antiquitus sol●re baptizari. [And because th●s Testimony is of great import I will set down the very words of Augustine and Ludovicus Vives, as I find them in the English Edition of the said book of the City of God, cap. 26. Where Augustine puts forth this question. What is the reason then that we do spend so much time in our exhortations, endeavouring to animate th●se whom we have baptised, ei●her unto Virginity, or c●●st widowhood or honest and honourable marriage; Now upon these words [●hose whom we have baptised] Vives comments t●us, Lest any man should mistake this place, understand tha● in times of old, no man was brought unto baptism, but he was of sufficient years, to know what that mystical water meant, and to require his baptism, and that sundry times.— I hear that in some Cities of Italy they do for the most part observe the ancient Custom as yet. And it is to be observed that in the Margin are two Notes, the 1. is that this is the old manner of baptising. The 2, That all this is left out in the Paris Edition, whence we may note how the writings of the Ancients are abused, and how ingeniously it is confessed, Paedo-Baptism is not the old manner of baptising.  
And here we will insert some other testimonies from the learned Paedo-Baptists, touching the Novelty of Infant baptism. The first is out of Robertus Fabianus his Chron. 4. 
Fabian.  part in fol. 107. where he brings in Augustine the Monk speaking thus to the Britain Bishops▪ Since ye will not assent to my H●sts generally assent ye to me specially in three things, the first is that ye keep Easter-day in due form and time as it is ordained The second, THAT YE GIVE CHRIS●ENDOM TO CHILDREN, etc. But THEY WOULD NOT THEREOF. This was about the fifth Age after Christ whence its remarkable that Infant baptism was then opposed by ●he joint consent of the Brita●n Bishops' which were sent to the Assembly to consul● the affairs of Religion at that time. Our next testimony is from the Learned Casuist Hugo Grotius 
Hugo Grotius  who tells us, To defer baptism till ripe years was in old time left at liberty, now the observation is otherwise. Plainly giving the case that Paedo-baptism is not the old way but a new observation. But here we will again give place to Doctor Taylor, who saith.  
That besides that the tradition cannot be proved to be Apostolical, we have very good evidence from antiquity that it was the opinion of the primitive Church that INFAN●S AUGHT NOT TO BE 
Anno 315.  BAPTISED. And this is clear in the 
Con Ne●caes.  six●h Cannon of the Counsel of Ne●●aesarea. The words 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  have this sense. A woman 〈…〉 may be baptised when she please; for her baptism concerns not the Child. The reason of the connection of the parts of that Cannon is in the following words. Because every one in that confession is to give a demonstration of his own choice and election, meaning plainly, that if the baptism of the mother did pass upon the Child, it were not fit for a pregnant woman to receive baptism, because in that Sacrament, there being a confession of faith which confession supposes understanding, and free choice, it is not reasonable the child should be consigned with such a mystery, since it cannot do any act of choice or understanding. The Cannon speaks reason, and it intimates a practice which was absolutely universal in the Church of interrogating the catechumen concerning the Articles of the Creed, which is one argument that either they did not admit Infants to baptism, or that they did prevaricate egregiously, in ask questions of them, who themselves knew were not capable of giving answer.  
and to supply their incapacity by the answer of a Godfather, is but the same unreasonableness acted with a worse circumstance; and there is no sensible 
Tertul. lib. de Bap. cap. 18.  account can be given of it, for that which some imperfectly murmur concerning stipulations civil performed by tutors in the name of their pupils is an absolute vanity; for what if by positive constitutions of the Romans such solemnities of Law are required in all stipulations, and by indulgence are permitted in the case of a notable benefit acruing to Minors. Must God be tied, and Christian Religion transact her mysteries by proportion and compliance with the Law of the Romans? I know God might if he would have appointed Godfathers to give answer in behalf of Children, and to be F●de-jussors for them, but we cannot find any authority o● ground that he hath and if he had then it is to be supposed he would have given them commission to have transacted the solemnity with better circumstances, and given answers with more truth▪ and if the Godfathers answer in the Name of the Child [I do believe] it is notorious they speak false and ridiculously: for the Infant is not capble of believing, and if he were, he were a so capable of dissenting, and how then do they know 
Tertull. lib. de baptis. cap. 18.  his mind And therefore Tertullian gives advice that the baptism of Infant's 〈◊〉 be deferred till they could 〈◊〉 an account of their faith, and the same also is the counsel of 
* 〈◊〉. to quest. in ●. Baptisma.  Gregory bishop of Naziazum, although he allows them to hasten it in case of necessity, for though his reason taught him what was fit, [Namely that none should b● baptised till they were of understanding yet he was overborne with the practi●● and opinion of his Age which began to bear too violently upon him, and yet in another place he makes mention of some to whom baptism was not administered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of infancy.  
To which if we add that the Parents of St. Austin, St. Jerome, and St. Ambrose, although they were Christian, yet did not baptise their Children before they were thirty years of age it will be very considerable in the example, and of great efficacy for destroying the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles [and for further evidence we may well allege in this place, that of Theodosius the Emperor born in Spain his Parents being both Christians, and he from his youth educated in th● Christian Faith, who falling sick at Thess●onica, was baptised and recovered of his sickness.  
but however (Paedo baptism) it is against the perpetual analogy of Christ's Doctrine to baptise Infants, for besides that Christ never gave any precept to baptise them, nor never himself nor his Apostles (that appears) did baptise any of them, all that either he or his Apostles said concerning baptism, requires such precious dispositions to it, of which Infants are not capable, and these are faith and repentance, and not to instance in those innumerable places that require faith before baptism, there needs no more but this one saying, he that believeth and is baptised shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned. Plainly thus, faith 
Mark 6.  and baptism in conjunction 
Perseverence in Faith must here be understood, with the Fruits of Faith also.  will bring a Man to Heaven, but if he have not faith baptism shall do him no good. So that if baptism be necessary, then so is faith, and much more; for want of Faith damns absolutely, it is not said so of the want of baptism.  
Now if this decretory sense be to be understood of persons of age, and if Children by such an answer (which indeed is reasonable enough) be excused from the necessity of Faith, the want of which regularly does damn, than it is sottish to say the same incapacity of reason and Faith, shall not excuse them from the actual susception of baptism which as less necessary, and to which faith and many other acts are necessary predispositions when it is reasonably and humanely ●eceived. The conclusion is that bap●sm is also to be deferred till the time of ●aith, and whether Infants have faith or no, is a question to be disputed by person's that care not how much they 〈◊〉▪ nor how little they prove.  
1. Personal and actual faith they have none, for they have no acts of ●nderstanding, and besides how can ●ny man understand that they have, since he never saw any sign of i● neither was he told so by any o●● that could tell.  
2. Some s●y they have imputative Faith, but then so let the Sacrament be too, that is, if they have the Parent faith or the Churches, than so le● baptism be imputed by derivation from them also.— For since faith 〈◊〉 necessary to the susception of baptis● (and they themselves confess it b● striving to find out new kinds of fait● to daub the matter up) such as th● faith is, such must be the Sacrament for there is no proportion between an actual Sacramen, and an imputative faith, this being in immedia●● and necessary order to that, an● whatsoever can be said to take o● from the necessity of actual Faith, a● that and much more may be said t● excuse from the actual susception 〈◊〉 baptism.  
3. The first of these devices wa● that of Luther and his Schol ar● the 2 of Calvin and his; And yet there is a third device which the Church of Rome teaches, and that is, that Infants have habitual faith, but who told them so? how can they prove it? what Revelation, or reason teaches such a thing? Are they by this habit so much as disposed to an actual belief without a new Master? ●an an Infant sent into a Mahometan Province be more confident for Christianity when he comes to be a, Man, then if he had not been baptised, are there any acts precedent Concomitant, or consequent to this pretended habit? this strange invention, is absolutely without Art, without Scripture, Reason or Authority. But if there were such a thing as this abitual Faith, then either all Infants have ● or some only if all why do they deny baptism to the Infants which are horn of unbe●evers? must the child bear the unbelief of 〈◊〉 Parents? 
* For they do ●●t only deny such Infants the Act, but the ●ight to baptism because the children of unbelievers.  if s●me only have it, how know they these from 〈◊〉 rest, sith when they come to years, there found a like barrenness of this grace 〈◊〉 means be used to beget it? but third where doth the Scripture make an habit●● Faith that which entitles any person to baptism? Surely according to these conc●●● no man can ever tell to whom, or when 〈◊〉 dispense baptism.] But the men are ●● be excused unless there were bett●● grounds; but for all these stratagem the Argument now alleged again Infant baptism is demonstrable a● unanswerable.  
To which also this considerati●● may be added, that if baptism be ●●cessary to the Salvation of Infant upon whom is the imposition lai● To whom is the command give● To Parents or to the Children, not 〈◊〉 the Children, for they are not capable of a Law; not to the parents, 〈◊〉 than God hath put the salvation 〈◊〉 innocent babe● into the power of uthers, and Infants may then be damn●● for their Parent's carelessness or m●lice. It follows that it is not necessary at all to be done to them, to whom it cannot be prescribed by a Law, and in whose behalf it cannot be reasonably entrusted to others with the appendent necessity, and if it be not necessary, it is certain it is not reasonable, and most certain it is no where in terms prescribed, and therefore it is to be presumed, that it ought to be understood and administered according as other precepts are with reference to the capacity of the subject, and the reasonableness of the thing.  
For I consider that the baptising of Infants does rush upon such inconveniences, which in other questions we avoid like Rocks which will appear if we discourse thus.  
Either baptism produces spiritual effects, or it produces them not: If it produces not any, why is such contention about it?— But if (as without all peradventure all the Paedobaptists will say) Baptism does a work upon the soul, producing spiritual benefits and advantages; These advantages are produced by the external work of the Sacrament alone, or b● that as it is helped by the co-operation and predispositions of the suscipient.  
If by the external work of th● Sacrament alone, how does this diffe● from the opus o●eratum of the Papists save that it is worse? For they sa● the Sacrament does not produce in effect, but in a suscipient disposed b● all requisites and due preparatives 〈◊〉 piety, faith, and repentance, though in a subject so disposed they say th● Sacrament by its own virtue does i● but this opinion says it does it of 〈◊〉 self without the help, or so much 〈◊〉 the coexistence of any condition bu● mere reception.  
But if the Sacrament does not d● its work alone, but per modum recipien●es according to the predispofition● of the suscipient, then because Infant can neither hinder it, nor do an● thing to further it, it does them no benesit at all. And if any man runs for succour to that, exploded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Infants have faith or any other inspired habit of I know not what how, we desire no more advantage in the world then that they are constrained to an answer without Revelation, against reason, common sense and all experience in the world.  
The sum of the argument in short, is this though under another representment. Either baptism is a mere Ceremony or it employs a duty on our part, if it be a Ceremony only, how does it sanctify us or make the comers thereunto perfect? If it imploy● a duty on our part how then can Children receive it who cannot do duty at all.  
And indeed this way of Ministration makes baptism to be wholly an outward duty, a work of the Law, a carnal ordinance it makes us adhere to the Letter, without regard of the spirit, to be satisfied with the shadows, to return to bondage. To relinquish the misteriousnes, the substance and spirituality of the Gospel, which argument is of so much the more consequence, because under the spiritual Covenant, or the Gospel of grace, 〈◊〉 the mystery goes not before the Symbol (which it does when the Symbols are seals and consignations of th● grace, as it is said the Sacraments are) yet it always accompanies it, bu● never follows in order of time, an● this is clear in the perpetual analogy of holy Scripture.  
For Baptism is never propounded mentioned or enjoined as a mean of remission of sins, or of eternal life, but something of duty choice or sanctity is joined with it, in order production of the end so mentione● know you not that s● many as are Baptis● in●o ●hr●st Jesus an● Baptised into his death? There i● the mystery and the Symbol together and declared to be perpetually united 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. All of us who were Baptised into one▪ were Baptised into the other, not only in the name of Christ, but into his death also; but the meaning of this, as it is explained in the following words of St. Paul, makes much for our purpose: for to be baptised into his death, signifies, to 
Verse. 4.  be buried with him in baptism, that as Christ rose from the dead; we also should walk in newness of life, That's the full mystery of Baptism; for being baptised into his death, or which is all one in the next words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into the likeness of his death, cannot go alone; if we be so planted into Christ we shall be partakers of his resurrection, and that is not here instanced in precise reward but in exact duty for all this is nothing but Cruc fiction of the old man, a destroying the body of sin, that we no longer serve sin.  
This indeed is truly to be baptised both in the Symbol and the Mystery what is less than this, is but the Symbol only, a mere Ceremony, an opus operatum, a dead Letter, an empty shadow, an instrument, without an agent to manage; or force to actuate it.  
Plainer yet whosoever are baptised into Christ have put on Christ, have put on the new Man. But to put on the new Man, is to be form in Righteousness, holiness, and truth. This whole argument is the very words of St. Paul. The major proposition is dogmatically determined, Gal. 3. 27. The minor in Ephes. 4. 24. The conclusion than is obvious. That they who are not form a new in Righteousness, holiness and truth, they who remaining in the present in incapacities, cannot walk in newness of life, they have not been baptised into Christ, and then they have but one member of the distinction used by St. Peter, they have that baptism which is a putting away the fi●th of the flesh [if yet an human institute may be so called] but they have not that baptism which is the answer of a good Conscience towards God, which is the only baptism which saveth us, and this is the case of Children and then the case is thus.  
As Infants by the force of nature cannot put themselves into a supernatural condition (and therefore say the Paedo baptists they need baptism to put them into it [as if the ●●re ●e●e●ony of which only they are capa●'le could put them into a supernatural con●ition] so if they be baptised before the use of reason, before the works of the Spirit, before the operations of grace, before they can throw of the works of darkness, and live in righteousness and newness of life, they are never the nearer; from the pains of Hell they shall be saved by the mercy of God and their o●● innocence though they die in puris naturalibus, and baptism will carry them no further for that baptism that saves us, is not the only washing with water, of which only Infant are capable, but the answer of a good Conscience towards God, of which they are not capable till the use o● reason, till they know to choose the good and refuse the evil.  
And from thence I consider a new that all vows made by persons unde● others names stipulations made b● minors▪ are not valid till they by ● supervening act, after they are of sufficient age do ratify the same, wh● then may not Infants as well mak● the vow de novo as de novo ratify th●● which was made for them ab antique when they come to years of choice▪ If the Infant vow be invalid till th● manly confirmation, why were it 〈◊〉 as good they stayed to make it till th● time, before which if they do ma●● it, it is to no purpose, this would 〈◊〉 considered.  
And in conclusion our way is the surer way, for not to baptise Children till they can give an account of their faith is the most proportionable to an act of reason and humanity, and it can have no danger in it: for to say that Infants may be damned for want of baptism (a thing which is not in their power to acquire they being yet persons not capable of a Law) is to afirm that of God which we dare not say of any wise and good man. Certainly it is very much derogatory to God's justi●e and a plain defiance to the infinite reputation of his goodness.  
And therefore who ever will pertinatiously persist in this opinion of the paedobaptists, and practise it accordingly they pollute the blood of the everlasting Testament. They dishonour and make a pageantry of the Sacrament. They Ineffectually represent a sepulture into the death of Christ, and please themselves in a sign without effect, making baptism like the Figtree full-of Leaves but no fruit, etc.  
Thus far the Anabaptists may argue, and men have disputed against them with so much weakness and confidence's, that they have been eucouraged in their error [alias in th● truth] more by accidentiall [alia● real] advantages we have given them by our weak arguings, then by any truth of their cause or excellency o● of their wit [so the Dr. is pleased t● say but the evidences of our side sp●ak otherwise] but the use I make of it as to our ppesent question (saith the Dr.) is this, that since there is no● direct impiety in the opinion no● any that is apparently consequent to it, and they which so much probability, do or may pretend to true persuasion they are with all means, Christian, fair, and human, to b● redargued, or instructed, but if they cannot be persuaded they must be left to God, who knows every degree of every man's understanding, all his weaknesses and strength's what impress each argument makes upon his spirit. and how unresistable every reason is, and he alone judges his innocency and sincerity: And for the question, I think there is so much to be petended [he might say really urged] against that which I believe to be truth that there is much more truth than evidence on our side [a strange saying of so wi●e a man as if the truth in this case doth not wh●lly depend upon evidence, sith its a positive and no moral precept] and therefore we may be confident as for our own particulars but not too forward premtorily to prescribe to others muchless damn, or kill or to persecute them that only in this particular disagree. Thus far Doctor Taylor, for our appollogie.  
To whom to add any more witnesses (though more might be brought) would be superfluous. I therefore proceed to the next question, viz.  
What is the due act, or outward form to be used in this solemn rite of holy baptism?  
It may well be the admiration of every wise and good man how it should come into the mind of such as pretend to be followers of Christ that holy baptism should be performed by aspersion, or casting a few drops of Water upon the subject, by the fingers of the administrator. The scriptures every where teaching us that the original form was by imversion in Rivers or places of much Water, Ma●●. 1. John. 3. Christ himself who surely would do nothing superfluous or in vain, was baptised in the River, by John the first baptist, who had his direction from Heaven, and his approbation from on high in that very action Mall. 3. and chuss who were under the immediate direction of the holy spirit the leader into all truth, found it necessary for the administrator and subject to go both into the Water, for the due performance of this holy Ordinance. Add thereunto that the proper signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when used to express the action done in this service, is to dip or immerge the party in the Element as is confessed by the learned Paedobaptists themselves as we shall see in the sequel.  
And here we will still prefer the Church 
Litturgy.  of England who teacheth us that the outward Sign or Form in baptism, is Water wherein the party baptised is dipped, etc. And though she add [or sprinkled with it] yet that her Conscience tells her that is not the right way appeareth, in that she only assigns that by indulgence to such Infants as are in danger of death, &c,  
The Church of Rome also confesseth 
Marq. of Worcest. Certam. Relig.  by a learned Pen, that she changed dipping the party baptised over the head and Ears to a little sprinkling upon the Face.  
Erasmus paraphrasing on the words, baptising them, Mat. 28. saith thus, if they believe that which you teach them and begin to be repentant of their former Life, etc. Then dip them in Water, etc. Walfridus Strabo de rebus Eccl●s●●c 26. tells us, that we must know at ●h● fi●st believers were baptised simply in Floods and Fountains.  
The learned Grotius tells us in his judgement on Infant baptism, That the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to dip over the head and ears.  
To whom we will join T●lenus whose Testimony is in these words 
* Secundum▪ Fisher.  Baptism is the first Sacrament of the new Testament instituted by Christ, in which with a most pat and exact analogy between the sign and the thing signified, those that are in Covenant are by the Minister washed in Water. The outward Rite in baptism is threefold immersion into the Water, abiding under the water, and resurruction out of the water, the form of baptism, to wit internal and essential▪ is no other than that analogical proportion, which the signs keep with the things signified thereby, for as the properties of the water in washing away the defilements of the body, do in a most suitable similitude, set forth the efficacy of Christ's blood in blotting out of sins, so dipping into the Water doth in a most lively similitude set forth the mortification of the old man, and rising out of the water the virification of the new.— That same plunging into the water holds forth to us that horrible gulf of divine Justice in which Christ for our sins sake, which he took upon him, was for a while in a manner swallowed up. Abode under the water how little a while soever, denotes his descent into Hell, even the very deepest degree of livelesness, while lying in the sealed and guarded sepulchre he was accounted as one truly dead, rising out of the water holds out to us a lively similitude of that conquest, which this dead man got ●ver death, which he vanquished in his own Den, as it were, that is the grave. In like manner therefore it is meet that we being baptised into his death, and buried with him, should rise also with him and so go on in a new Life, Rom. 6. 3. 4. Col. ●. 12. Th●● far Tile●●s.  
Bishop Jewel in his defence, Appol. ●. 5. p. 308. brings the council of Worms determining the manner of baptism; thus, In aquas demersio in 〈◊〉, & ●u●sus ab aquis ●emersio R●surrectio est.  
The dipping into the water is the going down into Hell [i. e. the grave] The coming out from of the water is the Resurrection. From all which Testimonies (and many more that might be brought) it is evident beyond all doubt our opposers being Judges) that whether we respect the signification of the word baptizor the signification of the ordinance itself, or the consent of the primitive. Churches in their practice of holy baptism, dipping the subject (or party baptised) in the Element Water, is the due form of baptism, and therefore sprinkling or crossing the face; is an humane innovation. Or,  
Upon the whole matter these ten particulars are very apparent. First,  
That Infant baptism was innovated, after the holy Scriptures were written which appeareth both from the deep silence of the Scripture in that case, and the confession of learned Paedobaptists themselves.  
2. That it came in stealing (as it were) being for a considerable time left at liberty (a sign it was not from Heaven) 
* for God's ways are not to be left to man's will be commands and 'tis man's duty to obey.  and was disliked by the Ancients who therefore dissuaded from it.  
3. That which gave it its great advantage for a more general reception, was this false opinion, that without baptism none could be saved. This saith Mr. Perkins doth St. Augustine every where assirm.  
4. That the Lords Supper was as eagerly pressed, to be necessary for Infants as baptism, and they continued in use together about 
Ex opp. Perk. S●e the Scholast. discourse against Symbol with Antichrist.  the space of six hundred years, this conceit was confirmed (saith Mr. Perkins) by the council of Toledo, Can. 11. And Augustine was so earnest for this also that he boldly says in vain do we promise Infant's salvation without it. Aug ep: 23. & ep. 107. & contra ep. pelag. l. 1. c. 22. & contra. 〈◊〉. l. 7. c. 2. l. 3. c. 12.  
5. That divers in the Greek Church have all along to this day refused Infant baptism. Gro●ius his words are these (as Mr. T●mbs quotes them) In every age many of the Greeks unto this day keep the custom of deferring baptism to little ones till they could themselves make a confession of their Faith. And the Armenians are confessed by Heylin in his Macrocos. p. 575. To defer baptism to their Children till they be grown to years of knowledge.  
6. Those foolish and sinful adjuncts, which the Authors and promoters of Infant baptism, were constrained to invent to make it look like baptism (for example their device of Godfathers, etc.) do sufficiently declare it to be of an infirm and humane Original.  
7. The grounds upon which Paedo-baptism was at first urged, are now in a manner wholly declined, and new grounds daily invented whereon to built it. which are no sooner laid, but razed again by some of its own favourites.  
8. That the stoutest assertors of Infant baptism, hath ever met with as stout opposers; Thus Agustine, met with the Donatists and Pelagius whose arguments he could not avoid but by running into greater absurdity, and though they are blamed (and perhaps justly) for holding some errors, so also is Augustine and that not undeservedly.  
9 That many of the Learne● have much abused this age in telling them the Anabaptists (i. e. the baptised Churches) are of late edition a new sect, etc. When from their own writings the clean contrary is so evident.  
Tenthly and Lastly. Observe how the baptism of repentance for remission of Sins, which is that one and only baptism commanded in holy Scripture hath been neglected, traduced; and its affertors frequently abused, and that chiefly by thi● device of Paedo-baptism which now hath so lost it's first form, that it cannot with any show of truth o● good sense be called baptism, and aught therefore to cease with its follow errors, viz. the giving the ●ords Supper to Infants, etc. That God may be justified in the submission of all sinners to the baptism of repentance for remission of sins, Luke 7. 39   

The Second Part Of the Promise of the Spirit.  
Delivered in a Sermon upon 1. Cor. 12. 1. To which is added A postscript out of the works 〈◊〉 Dr. Jer. Taylor, touching the laying on of Hands, chiefly declaring ho● Religiously it was observed by th● Ancient Christians, as it is now revived by divers of the baptize● Christians of this age.  1 Cor. 12. 1. Now concerning spiritual gifts brethren I would not have you ignorant. 
THere was never more need for th● Church of God to seek and searc● for all those things which God hat● promised for her strength and encouragement then now partly for that her ●pposers are men of exquisite parts by ●eans of all Arts and Sciences which ●●e not more profitable when used in 〈◊〉 way of subserviency to the truth, ●●en pernicious when used in opposition to it (as it often falleth out they ●re) and partly for that ignorance of ●hat God hath promised for his Churches comfortable subsistence, ●roves a great occasion and temptati●● to Christians to trust to failing and ●●comfortable helps in the great bu●●ness of the Ministry of the word and ●rayer, etc.  
Now in the words which we have ●●osen the Apostle shows his care for ●●e Church at Corinthus (and in them 〈◊〉 all Churches) that they should not 〈◊〉 ignorant concerning spiritual gifts ●●d labours in three Chapters together to instruct them fully in that point ●●der several considerations, and ●●●st,  
1. By giving them a definition of those gifts, or showing what they are, verse 8. 9 10. viz. A word of Wisdom, a word of knowledge, faith, the gifts of healing, the working of miracles, prophesy, discerning of spirits, divers kinds of Tongues, interpretation of tongues, which definition or enumeration of gifts he seems to enlarge, Chap, 13. 26. a Psalm, a Doctrine, etc.  
2. By showing that the Church hath a perpetual right to, and interest in all these gifts, Chap. 14. 1. Desire sor be zealous after spiritual gifts, Chap. 12▪ 31. Covet earnestly the best gifts Chap. 14. 39 Covet to prophesy and forbid not to speak with tongues.  
3. By showing whereto these gifts deserve, or to what end they were given▪ Chap. 14. 12. Forasmuch as ye are zealous of the spiritual gifts, seek tha● ye may excel to the edification of th● Church, ver. 31. that all may learn, and all be comforted, Eph. 4 12. fo● the perfecting the Saints for the wor● of the Ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.  
4. By distinguishing of gifts as they are more or less necessary and accordingly gives direction which to prefer in our ask them (yet so as not to forbid the use of any of them, so it might be done with edification) Chap. 14. 1. Desire spiritual gifts but rather that ye may prophesy. Ver. 5. I would have ye all speak with tongues but rather that ye prophesied, for greater is he that prophesieth, than he that speaketh with tongues. Ver. 5. He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifyeth himself, but he that prophesieth edifyeth the Church.  
5. By showing that all these gifts, how excellently soever any are endowed with them, yet therein he is not to rest satisfied because there is yet a far more excellent way of receiving the spirit, without which all gifts are as nothing. This more excellent way he refers to the fruit of the Spirit, which he both distinguisheth by its several branches, 1 Cor. 13. 4, 5, 6, 7. compared with Gal. 5. 22. 23. and also comprehends the whole in that excelling grace of Charity follow after Charity, Chap. 4. 1. The greatest of these is Charity.  
6. By giving a notable Rule to know who are indeed spiritual Christians from such as only pretend to be so, Chap. 14. 35. If any man think himself to be a Prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge the things I write unto you are the commands of the Lord. Those than are not truly spiritual, or true Prophets who (as many on the right hand) do not only lay aside the commands of the Lord, but prescribe to others their own Traditions, neither those on the other hand, who prefer their poor conceits and Notions, as if the word of God came out from them, when though (perhaps) it came to them, yet it came not to them only, ver. 36.  
Thus much briefly to show what the Apostle means in this place by spiritual gifts, and in what respects he would not have the Church to be ignorant concerning them.  
Nor shall I insist upon all those particulars now, but only that which may be most needful to be demonstrated, and that is the second particular. For I find, it is not only a general conceit among the National Churches, that the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit were only Temporary, and now ceased, but also very many in the baptised Churches are doubtful (at the least) in this matter, as if that glorious promise of pouring out of the Spirit according to the prophecy of Joel, and the reception thereof by the primitive Churches, were taken away long since from the Churches which succeed them, and not to be so much as looked for in these days!  
But that this is a very great mistake, and 
The point to be proved.  that the contrary, even that, that very promise of the spirit and every part of it, from the time of its first effusion upon the day of Pentecost, Acts 2. belongs to the Church throughout all Ages to the end of the World. I hope to evince to the satisfaction such as desire to see the Truth in this matter.  
And First from the scope of the Apostle, 
1 From the Apostles scope.  in these three Chapters. Where as it is his designed subject to discourse of the gifts of the Spirit, so he informs us that God hath set them there, namely in his Church, that is, he hath placed, settled or fixed, that one spirit in that one body, nor for a few days only, and then to leave her as a body without a spirit for ever after, in respect of spiritual gifts, but to abide there as in his temple 
* 1 Cor. 3. 16. 2 Cor. 6. 16.  both by gifts and graces, even the same which Christ by virtue of his ascension obtained when he ascended on high, which gifts are given to the Church for the work of the Ministry, for the edification of the body till the whole be completed. See to this purpose Ephes. 4. from verse▪ 4. to 16.  
Again, The promise of the holy spirit 
2. From the extent of the promise.  is made by our Lord himself to the Church for ever. John 14. 16. I will pray the Father and he shall give you another Comforter that he may abide with you for ever etc. I say with the Church, for it were a strange exposition to restrain this for ever to the age of the Apostles (as some do) for sith the Apostles and first Churches could neither pray nor prophysie as they ought, but as that spirit did help their infirmity, it were strange the subsequent should be able to do it though destitute of that distance, seeing prophysie is expressly one of those spiritual gifts, as before we have showed.  
That great Apostle Peter, dates the promise of the holy spirit very largely, Acts, 2. 38. etc. As descending to the very Skirt, or last age of the Church of God, even to as many as the Lord our God shall call, and he here takes the promise in t●at sense wher● in Jo●l meant it, and the Church had then received it, which clearly intends both the gifts and graces of the Spirit, for as 'tis sure they received then very great gifts, so 'tis said great grace was upon them all. Act●. _____ This very promise's of the Father is by this Apostle appropriated to all the called of the Lord, even the servants and hand maids in th●se days.  
Now these days must either be a few days at the beginning of the Gospel, or it must be referred to the whole time of that glorious dispensation if the first, then how shall all the called of the Lord receive it? Or who will tell us when these days expired? But we know that These days the latter days last time, and last days are used with some frequency in Scripture, to point out the time of the Gospel as it succeeded the time of the Law.  
During all which time we are sure that 
3. From the Nature of the duties of the Church.  the duties in general (and perhaps some difficult duties which were not formerly known) which were imposed upon the first Churches, are laid upon the Churches to the end of the World, Mat. 28. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, etc. Must the Churches now contend earnestly for the faith (and that both against old and new errors) must she be the Salt of the Earth, the Light of the World must she strive to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom to all Nations, must she keep herself in the Love of God building up herself in her most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost? Surely, if these duties remain, and the Lord requires that she should glorify him in the faithful and constant discharge hereof as also in suffering for his sake; It cannot reasonably be imagined that he should recall his holy spirit, in the gifts thereof from her who when she had them all, had nothing that was superfluous, but stood in need of all to furnish her for the work she stood engaged to do, in these forementioned and other like considerations, sith then our God doth require the same service of his Churches now, which he required of his Churches in the first ages of the Gospel, let us not imagine he will require the same Brick, and not allow the same Straw.  
That the gifts of the spirit here intendby 
4. From the nature and perpetuity of the exhortations to seek for the spirit.  our Apostle are the portion of the Church in every age (as her right) appeareth, from the nature of these exhortations she is under to ask them. Luk. 11. 13. How much more shall your Heavenly Father give his holy spirit to them that ask it— ask and it shall be given unto you. vers, 10. How frequent is our Apostle in these 3. Chapters in his exhortations to this Church (and in them to all others) to desire spiritual gifts, to covet earnestly the best gifts, to covet to prophesy, wishing that they may speak with tongues, and warning them not to prohibet that gift. Now to what purpose is all this if these gifts be ceased and that the Church may not now expect them? I hope no man will say these exhortations are now out of date lest in so doing he deprive us of the exhortation to Charity, for they are so linked together as the one cannot cease as 'tis an exhortation) before the other. Follow after Charity and desire spiritual gifts and rather that ye may prophesy. Thus we see the Church being under perpetual exhortations, to seek for spiritual gifts without any restirction, necessarily infers her perpetual right to them and every of them, which consideration alone is sufficient (as I conceive) to satisfy any Christian, that the promise of the Spirit (even the same that was given to the first Churches) in respect of gifts as well as graces belongs to the Church of Christ throughout all ages.  
Let us now consider, whether the 
5. From the continuation of spiritual gifts in the Church to this day.  Church of God do not even now enjoy the promised spirit in the gifts and graces of it at this day, for the latter, I think there is none do●h question it, and yet should the graces or fruits of the spirit which now appear, be strictly considered by what did formerly shine forth in the Churches, it might peradventure put us to some pause, yet not thence to conclude that we have not that spirit of grace, or that the graces thereof are ceased, but it would surely become a provocation, to cry mightily to God for an enlargement of what we have received in that behalf.  
And as I intent not to boast of the gifts of any, so I may safely presume that the gifts received in these days are far more than I can set down, or give you account of because the Church is diffused through many Nations, and her gifts there unknown to me; I will then restrain my observations to the Churches in this poor Island, who may not vie with all Churches, but rather in humility conclude themselves to be short of many concerning spiritual gifts. And yet, shall we say she hath none (or may we not rather say she hath many that are endowed with a word of knowledge and that merely by a gift from God, having otherwise, no capacity or faculty more than others, but therein far short of many of their brethren; only the gift of God, and no natural faculty hath made the differance: How have men of knowledge in this world, been found to have no skill, and the foolish to attain knowledge, and some to excel so far, as to confound the wisdom of the wise and to bring to nought the understanding of the prudent, yet out of the mouth of Babes hath our God ordained strength, and thereby hath sometimes stilled the enemy.  
And as Wisdom is useful to direct, so hath God given it to such as fear him; who if we respect their education etc. could never have acquired it; some by a word of wisdom here understand, the well ordering of affairs in the Church, others the right or useful application of the word etc. surely according to these expositions the Church hath some, even by the gift of the spirit of God to go before here in these respects.  
Neither is the gift of Healings so abnegated, but that something of it hath appeared, as many living witness by experience have testified, and how far faith (over and beside the common faith) hath therein appeared, as also in some other memorable undertake against Satan himself, or against his designs, with some good success, becomes others to consider more than it doth me to write! as for me I rest satisfied, that miracles are not ceased as a gift to the Church of God, though perhaps they are but rarely found, as being (in the wisdom of God) not so necessary now in many places as in times past.  
Now for the gift of prophesy, which the Apostle here intends, 'tis certain the Church enjoys it very graciously in these days sith she hath them that by the gift of God's spirit (and not by acquired Arts) do minister to her the word of life, by exhortation, to her edification and comfort; which yet she could not have if the gifts were ceased seeing prophecy is not only one of the spiritual gifts but the very best of them, and the greatest of them all.  
Nor is the spirit of our God removed in the gift of discerning of spirits; for if it had false spirits had by their subtlety ere this day made havoc of the Churches, but through the grace of God, notwithstanding all their cunning craftiness they have been discerned, and their designs prevented; and though perhaps charity for some time hath born with such, in hope of the best, yet this is no other thing than ought to be, as may be seen by the carriage of our Lord toward Judas, and his Apostles towards foam others.  
The gifts of Doctrine and praising our God with a Psalm is not yet removed, our Teachers (as taught of God) remaining in every Church; where also are some that are skilful in praisiing the Lord to the edification of the Church;  
As for Revelations, there might perhaps sometimes be strange or hidden things made known by some special gift of God and why may not God do such things now? However it is not unsafe to understand the revelations here meant, by Chap. 14. 30. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by let the first hold his peace etc. which cannot so well be understood of a new Oracle as of some further subject or more full explication of the matter treated on by him that spoke first; according to which interpretation we may say the Church hath yet the gift of revelations. And thus far we seem to be got safe, not any thing so material intervening, as to conclude against the continuance of these spiritual gifts in the Church to this day, so that the present repairers of the House or City of God may comfort themselves by the consideration of the words of the Prophet, Hagg. 2. 5. According to the word which I covenanted with you when you came out of Egypt, so my SPIRIT REMAINETH among you, fear ye not.  
But now the gift of Tongues and interpretation of Tongues, these! where shall we find them. Doubtless these gifts are rarely if at all found in these days, and in this Nation, so as to suit with those who frequently in some Churches at first received those gifts; the reasons are many (but none such as conclude the Church from under the promise of these gifts) as first these gifts differ much from the rest, chiefly in this that they may be supplied another way, for the conversion of persons of all Languages, or such as can speak other Languages and interpret the same to others, doth supply the absence of those gifts; 2. The Church (in this and I suppose other Nations) 
It is probable that Paul made use of his education in speaking divers Languages, as may be perceived by his discourses in the acts of the Apostles, and by the Epistles which he wrote to several Churches, useing therein (as 'tis confessed) frequently the Greek Tongue.  have very little need of these gifts, and therefore considering that they are not so necessary as the rest, the Apostle leaves these with a forbid them not, whilst the rest he wills us to c●v●t earnestly. But 3? one great cause (as I conceive) why these gifts are so much absent, and the other no more received, i● because we either ask them not at all, or else we ask them amiss. For many have been so ●ar from a king these gifts of the spirit, that in truth they have been arguing that these gifts are not attainable, and then 'tis no wonder they have not been received.  
Again where there hath been some understanding of the interest we have in those gifts, there faith in ask hath been and is very low, and atended (perhaps) with great wavering, and then little can be expected at the hand of the Almighty Jam. 1. And here let me premonish you of one thing which (by my little reading) I perceive to have been a great provocation to the Lord to withdraw his gifts in times p●st (and I fear it again) And that was ●and and I doubt is) an over curious performance, of that which God gave spiritual gifts for, to wit the ministering of the word, when the Churches grew populous, and great personages came to her communion, the unwary pastors, let go the simplicity of th● Gospel inclining so much to curiosities that some Counsels decreed tha● a B●shop should not read Heathen Authors and Gra●ian is said to have this passage viz. Doth not he seem to wa●k in vanit● and da●kness of mind, who vexing himself day a●d night in the studies of Logic in the pursuit of physical speculation one while elevates himself above the highest Heavens and afterward throws himself below the nethermost part of the Earth True, the use that may be made o● reading is one thing, and the abuse another; however let the least gift o● God be preferred in the ministry o● the word, above the greatest of human Arts, otherwise we are in danger to incur the guilt of despising Prophysyings▪  
Lastly the truth in hand appeareth from 
6. From the silence of the Scriptures, as to the privation of the gifts of the Spirit &c,  the silence of Scriptures, touching th● privation of any of the gifts of the spirit till that which is perfect become, 1. ●or. 13. 8. 9 Charity never faileth but whether there be prophesies they shall fail, whether there be tongues they shall cease, whether there be knowledge it shall vanish away, for we know in part and we prophe●●e in part. But when that which is perfect is come THAN that which is in part shall be done away.  
Hence observe a final determination of the matter in question, If any ask when the gifts of prophysie, knowledge and tongues etc. Shall cease? The Apostles answer is, even THAN, when that which is perfect is come, or when we come to see face to face, or as we are seen. So then seeing the gifts of the spirit do yet remain to the Church, and every of them (as her need requires) are attainable, it remains that we humbly consider our wants, and desire spiritual gifts, you ●ove● earnestly the best gifts.  
From these considerations I conclude, that howsoever it is too true that the gifts received by the present Churches are but low (and truly so are her graces) yet thence we may not, we ought not to infer, that the gifts promised are ceased, or that the Church hath now no interest therein. But contrariwise as the promise of gifts (as well as graces) pertains to us as we are the called of God, we ought to stir one another up, to seek with all 
1. Cor. 2. 4.  diligence and full assurance for the spirit of promise, which being received, will abundantly supply our wants, help our infirmities, convince the contrary minded by its powerful evidence and demonstration in the ministry of the word and prayer.  
There be two things objected against that which is said, the first.  
Ob: If the promise of the spirit do thus belong to the Church, than this will follow, that the doctrines delivered by such gifted men must pass for Oracles of God being the effects ●f the spirit of truth whose property it 〈◊〉 to lead into all truth. And hence ●ome have conceived the decrees ●f their Counsels to be infallible, and others have given out of their private ●tters or books that they were as infallibly the word of God as the Scripture etc.  
Ans. 1. Those gifts do not argue ●he infallibillity of him that hath them, ●or than all the gifted brethren at Co●inth had been infallible which yet they ●ere not, witness their great want of Wisdom how to use their gifts to edification, as also the Apostles referring what they delivered to Trial, telling ●s of gifted person in general (and as ●uch not excluding himself) that they ●ee but darkly, prophesy but in part, know but in part, so that perfection ●erein is not to be pretended.  
2. That the Apostles did deliver infallible and undoubted verities for all to submit to, as the very word of God etc. proceeded not hence, viz. because they were gifted men. But as being the chosen witnesses of God, purposely ordained to that very end, for which cause they saw that just one, heard the words of his mouth, and by infallible proves were assured of the Resurrection of our Lord and of his will concerning his Kingdom, John 15▪ 16. Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and ordained you that you should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my Name he may give it you, see Acts 10. 40. 41. and Acts 22. 14. 15. The God of o●r Fathers hath chosen thee that thou should kn●w his will, and see that just one, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. FOR thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast SEEN AND HEARD.  
These are the Fathers of the Churches, the Foundation layers, the Master-builders in such an elevated consideration, as that the authority of one is to be valued above the authority of ten thousand subsequent teachers, which is a greater number than ever yet convened in a general council, 1. Cor. 4. 15. 16. These were such Fathers as laid up such a stock of doctrine for their Children, as whoso bringeth not along with them is not to be received. 2. John. 8. 9, 10. And whosoever corrupteth by adding taking away or perverting is to be held accursed, to be nameless in the City of God and the book of Life, The conclusion is this, gifted persons, on whom the Holy Ghost fell as it did on the Apostles, were not thereby impowered, to propose new Oracles, or to be the Apostles Competitors, and if any presume to these things (as some did in the Apostles days) they shall fulfil that sentence, 2. Tim. 3. 9 They shall proceed no further for their folly shall be made manifest to all men as theirs also was.  
Ob. 2. If the gifts of the spirit, 1. Cor. 12. Have continued in the Church as you teach, 'tis strange we have no account of them since their days, unless we regard the papacy who have claimed the gift of Miracles in every age, which they urge as an undoubted proof that they only are the Church of Christ.  
Ans. 1. It is true that people do pretend, as 'tis said in the objection and it is now my business to examine the goodness of that pretence, only this I say they cannot find their Church to have had a being in every age since Christ, and therefore very unlikely to prove what they say in the case of Miracles. But put case that since they have had a being in the world, some signs or wonders have been done among them, yet hence to infer the truth of their Church state is very unsafe, sith before an equal judge others will be found to have as clear a claim to Miracles as themselves. 
* Which yet shall avail them nothing, because they wanted truth with their gifts.  Mat. 7. 22. Many w●ll say unto me in that day have we not prophesied in thy Name, and in thy name have we cast out Devils and in thy name have done many wondrous works. And then will I profess un●o them I never knew you, depart from me ye workers of iniquity,  
And though our Saviour saith, no man can do a miracle in his Name and lightly speak evil of him, yet that very speech supposes the thing possible. It doth not follow therefore that wheresoever miraculous gifts are there is the true Church, but she is only known by her Conformity to the Doctrine of God our Saviour, chiefly in the principles of Religion, Heb. 6. 1. 2. For we are his House if built upon that foundation of Repentance, faith, &c▪ and partakers of him, IF we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end otherwise not. Heb. 3. 6. 14. If any come unto you and bring not this doctrine receive him not to house, no, though he work miracles, for thus saith the lord If there arise among you a Prophet or a Dreamer of Dreams, and giveth thee asign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spoke unto thee [now note if he do this] saying let us go after other Gods (which thou hast not koown) and let us serve them, thou shalt not hearken to the words of that Prophet— For the Lord your God proveth you to know whether you love the Lord your God, with all your heart, and with all your Soul. And hence learn this one thing that God's Truth is not to give place to any gifts, but all gifts are to subserve to the furtherance of his Truth.  
To conclude as we ought not to be ignorant of the gifts of the spirit, so neither of the means ordained of God to obtain those gifts. The primitive Churches are herein our best guide as the word directs. 'tis well known (and I think granted on all hand●) that they used the solemn Ordinance of prayer and imposition of hands for obtaining the promised Spirit, at least with respect to these gifts. Now be it so (though I say for the Graces or Fruits also) then seeing these gifts are promised to us as well as unto them, and are attainable, and in part (at least) attained by many, what should hinder the Churches, but that now they should tread in this path, with faith and full assurance that a blessing is in it? As in holy baptism we are placed (as it were) among those whose sins are washed away in the blood of the Lamb. So in this Holy Ordinance of prayer and imposition of hands we are in a solemn manner ushered, into the promise of the holy spirit, and as the pardon of our sins signified in baptism doth not prevent, but better capaciate us to pray daily forgive us our ●●espasses, so imposition of hands doth put us into a better capacity to seek daily for the gifts and graces of the spiri●, b●cause now solemnly intercessed in the promise, by that very way the primitive Saints were intercessed therein, Acts 8. 15, 17. Acts 19 2. 6. 2 Tim. 1. 6. Heb. 6. 12. Who when they were down prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost, than laid they their hands on them and they receithe Holy Ghost.  
Have they received of the Holy Ghost since the believed? And when Paul had laid his hand is on them, the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 on them.  
Wherefore I put th●e in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the putting o● of my hands.— The foundation of Repentance, and of faith towards God of the Doctrine of baptism and of laying on of hands, of the resurrection of the dead, and of Eternal Judgement.  
What shall I 〈◊〉, the Scriptures are evidence sufficient that this Ordinance is of divine institution, is from Heaven; the promise which it leads to ●s perpetual, and Universal, it belong, to the whole body. There is one body and one Spirit even as ye are called i● 〈◊〉 hope of your calling.   

A POSTSCRIPT. Taken out of the Works of Dr. Jer. Taylor, in defence of laying on of Hands, as a neverfailing Ministry.  
WE have seen the Original [of laying on of hands] from Christ the practice and exercise of it in the Apostles, and the first converts in Christianity, that which I shall now remark is, that this is established and passed into a Christian Doctrine. The Waranty for what I say is the words of St. Paul where the holy Rite of confirmation, so called from the effect of this Ministration, and expressed by the Ritual part of it, imposition of hands is reckoned a Foundamental point 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not laying again the foundation of Repentance from Deas works, and of faith towards God, of the Doctrine of baptism, and of laying on of hands, of Resurrection from the dead and of Eternal Judgement; Here are six foundamental points of St. Paul's Catechism which he said as t●e foundation or beginning of the institution of the Christian Church, and amongst these imposition of hands is reckoned as a p●rt of the foundation and therefore they who deny it, dig up foundations. Now that this imposition of hands is that which the Apostles used in confirming the baptised and invocating the Holy G●ost upon them remains to be pro●●●.— Absolution of penitents cannot be meant here, not only b●cause we never read that the Apostles did use that Ceremony in their absolutions, but because the Apostle speaking of the foundation in which baptism is.— There need●d no absolution but baptismal; for they and we believing gone baptism for the remission of sins, this is all the absolution that can be at the first and in the foundation. The 
* Me●ning that laying on of hands used by some at the absolving penetents.  other was secunda post 〈◊〉 frag●●m tabula. 〈◊〉 me in after when men had m●de Shipwreck of their good Conscienscience and were as St. Peter saith— unmindful of the former cleansing.  
2. It cannot be meant of Ordination and this is also evident. 1. Because the Apostle saves he would thence forth leave to speak of the foundation and go on to perfection, that is to higher mysteries. Now in Ri●uals of which he speaks, there is none higher than Ordination. 2. The Apostle saying he would speak no more of laying on of hands goes presently to discourse, of the misteriousness of the Evangelical Priesthood, and the honour of that vocation, by which it is evident he spoke nothing of Ordination in the Catechism, or Narrative of Foundamentals. 3. This also appears from t●e context, not only because laying on of hands is Immediately set after baptism but also because in the very next words of this discourse, he does enumerate and apportion to baptism, and [imposition of hands] their proper and proportioned effects. To baptism il●umira●ion,— And to Confirmation he reckons tasting the Heavenly gift and being made partakers of the Holy Ghost▪ By the thing signified declaring the sign, and by ●he mystery the 〈◊〉▪  
Upon these words ●t Chrisostom● discoursing says, That all these are foundamental Articles: that it that ●e aught to repent from dead works; to be baptised ●●to the Faith of Christ, and be made worthy of the gift of the spirit, who is given by imposition of hands and we are to be taught the mysteries of the Resurrection and Eternal Judgement. This Catechism (says he) is perfect, so that if any Man have Faith in God, and being baptised is also confirmed and so tastes the Heavenly gift, and partakes of the Holy Ghost, by hope of the resurrection tastes of the good things of the World to come, if he falls away from this state— digging down and turning up these foundations he shall never be built again, he can never be baptised again— Confirmed again. God will not begin again, etc. He cannot be made a Christian twice.— This is the full explication of this excellent place, and any other ways it cannot be reasonably explicated.— I shall observe one thing more out of this Testimony of St. Paul He cal●s it the Doctrine of baptism and laying on of hands, by which it does not only appear to be a lasting Ministry, because no part of the Christian Doctrine could change or be abolished but hence also it appears to be divine Institution. For it were not St. Paul had been guilty of that which our blessed Saviour reproves in the Scribes and pharisees, and should have taught for doctrines the Commandments of Men. Which because it cannot be supposed, it must follow that this doctrine of confirmation, or imposition of hands is Apostolical and divine. The argument is clear, and not easily to be reproved.  
Yea but what is this to us? it belonged to the days of wonder and extraordinary. The Holy Ghost breathed upon the Apostles and Apostolical men, but then he breathed his last; vecendente gratiae recessit disiplina; when the grace departed we had no further need of the ceremony.  
In Answer to this I shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by divers particulars evince plainly, that this Ministry— was not temporary and relative only to the Acts of the Apostles, but was to descend to the Church for ever. This indeed is done already in the proceeding Sect in which it is clearly manifested, that Christ himself made the baptism of the spirit necessary to the Church▪ He declared the fruits of this baptism, and did particularly relate it to the descent of the holy spirit upon the Church at and after that glorious Pe●tie●st. He sanctified it and commended it b● hi● example; just as he sanctified the flood Jordan, and all other waters to the mystical washing away of sin, viz. by his great example, and fulfilling this righteousness also. This doctrine the Apostles first found in their own persons, and experience, and practised to all their Converts, by a solemn, and external rite; And all this p●ssed into an Evangelicall, doctrine the whole mystery being signified by the external rite in the words of the Apostle, as before it was by Christ expressing only the internal. So that there needs n● more strength to this argument. But that there may be wanting no moments to this truth which the holy scripture affords, I shall add more weight to it; And,  
1. The perpetuity of this rite appears, because this great gift of the Holy Ghost was promised to abide with the Church's for ever. And when the Je●s hea●d the Apostles speak with tongues at the first and miraculous d●s●ent of the spirit in Pen●●c●st, to take of the strangeness of the wonder, and the envy of the power. St. Pe●er at that very time tells them plainly. Re●●nt and be baptised every one of you— and 〈◊〉 shall rece●●e the gift of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not the meanest person among you all, but shall receive this great thing, which ye observe us to have received and not only you, but your Children too, not of this ●eneration only, sed nati natorum et q●i n●centur ab illis, but your Children for ever. For the promise is to you and to your Children and to all that are affar off, even to as many as the Lord your God shall call▪ now then let it be considered.  
1. This gift is by promise, by a promise not made to the Apostles alone, but to all; to all for ever.  
2. Consider here at the very first as there is a verbum, a word of promise, so there is a sacramentum too I use the word—— in a large sense only, and according to the stile of the primitive Church) It is a rite partly moral; and partly cerimoniall, the first is prayer, the other is laying on of the hands: and to an effect that is but transient and extraordinary, and of a little abode, it is not easily to be supposed that such a solemnity should be appointed. I say such a solemnity; that is, it not imaginable that a solemn rite, annexed to a perpetual promise should be transient and temporary for by the nature of relatives they may be of equal abode, the ceremony or rite was annexed to the promise, and therefore also must be for ever. 
* [I think this will abide trial, sith we may not expect a change of the dispensation we are under; otherwise the promise might continue under some other rite or else without it]   
3: This is attested by St. Paul who reduces this argument to this mystery saying, In home after that you believed— ye were sealed with the holy spirit of promise. He spoke it to the Ephesians who well understood his meaning, by remembering what was done to themselves by the Apostle, Act. 19 6. But a while before, who after he had baptised them did lay his hands upon them, and so they received the holy spirit of promise; for here the very matter of fact is the clearest commentary on St. Paul's words—— But fourthly.  
What hinders any man from a quick consent at the first representation of these plain reasonings and authorityes? is it because there were extraordinary effects accompanying this ministration, and because now there are not, that we will suppose the whole oeconomy must cease? if this be it, and indeed this is all that can be pretended in opposition to it, it is infinitely vain.  
1. Because these extraordinary effect, did continue even after the death of all the Apostles. St. Frenoeus says they did continue even to his time, even the greatest instance of miraculous power. et infraternitate, sap●ssimc propter aliquid necessarium, etc. When God saw it necessary, and the Church prayed and fasted much, they did miraculous things, even of reducing the Spirit to a dead Man.  
2. In the days of the Apostles the spirit did produce miraculous effects, but neither always, nor at all in all men, are all workers of miracles, etc. No, the spirit bloweth where it listeth, and as he listeth he gives gifts to all, but to some after this manner, and some after that.  
3. These gifts were not necessary at, all times any more than to all persons, but the promise did belong to all and was made to all, and was performed to all.— And therefore if the grace be given to all, there is no reason that the ritual ministration of that grace should cease upon pretence that the spirit is not given extraordinarily.  
Other arguments he hath (many) to the same purpose, and a● I conceive well worthy the consideration of all Christians 
* Who know how to read men without being scandi ized if they meet with phrases, and some nothing which are doubtful as its the case of most that write.  specially those that are doubtful in this principle of religion but I shall sh●t up all with a few of his citations out of the works of ancient writers, in behalf of this point of faith. And first noting How that originally it came from the Apostles.  
In the second Century he brings Thophilus, Antiochenus and ●ertullian, the latter saith thus, D● hinc manus imponitur, etc. After baptism the hand is imposed by blessing, calling, and inviting the holy spirit.— Being cleansed by baptismal water, we are disposed for the holy spirit under the hand of the Angel of the Church, and to this effect the rest, etc. For the third Century he brings Origen, Cyprian, Dionis, and Eusebius, The first Testimony set down is out of Cyprian who Writing upon the passage in Acts 8. 14. saith, which custom is also descended to us, that they who are baptised might be brought by the rulers of the Church and by prayer and imposition of hands receive the Lords signature, etc.  
For the Fourth hundred he brings Melchiades, Optatus, Civil, and others speaking very highly of the use of this ministration and then brings Urba● the first, as more plainly setting down what the rest delivered more siguratively, in these words Omnes Fideles, etc. All faithful people ought to receive the holy spirit by imposition of the Bishop's hands after baptism. And having added yet more witnesses of this kind, he alleadges six Counsels, to evince the same thing, 
● Con. Arles. c. 8.  viz. That this Ordinance of prayer, laying on of hands were received together with the other principles by Christians generally. The decree of one of these Counsels (concerning such as had received baptism in a regular form) is in these words manus ●antum eiis imponatur ut accipiant spiritum sanctum. Let there be imposition of hands that they may receive the Holy Ghost. Afterwards the Dr. concludes thus.  
So many Father's testifying the practice of the Church and teaching this Doctrine, and so many more Fathers as it were assembled in six Counsels, all giving witness to this holy Rite AND THAT IN PURSUANCE OF SCRIPTURE are too great a blood of witnesses to be despised by any man that calls himself a Christian.  
FINIS.