Anabaptism Routed: OR, A SURVEY of the Controverted Points: Concerning 

1. Infant-Baptisme.  
2. Pretended Necessity of Dipping.  
3. The dangerous practice of Re-baptising.   Together, With a particular Answer to all that is alleged in favour of the Anabaptists, by Dr. Jer. Taylor, in his Book, called, The Liberty of Prophesying.  
By John Reading, B. D. and sometimes Student of Magdalen-Hall in Oxford.  
LONDON; Printed for Thomas Johnson, at the Golden Key, in Saint Paul's Churchyard, 1655.   

To the Right Worshipful Sir WILLIAM BROCKMAN KNIGHT; And to his truly virtuous Lady The LADY ANNE BROCKMAN.  
THIS Antiphrastical age perverting terms to contrary meanings, calling Truth Falshood, Falshood Truth, Virtue Vice, and Vice Virtue, etc. not only minds us of Ephesian Wolves and speakers of ●perverse things, 
a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act, 20. 30.  but evidently shows, that the time of which the Apostle warned, is not instant but extant. The deaf Adders will not be charmed, or hearing 
b 2 Tim. 4. 3, 4  endure sound doctrine (
c Amara sunt vitiosis ac malèviventibus praecepta justitiae, Lactant. l. 1. c. ●  that's bitter to the wicked) but after their own lusts heap up to themselves Teachers (like Jeroboams 
d 1 Kng. 12. 31  Priests of the lowest of the people) having itching ears. 
e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Oecum. in 2 Tim.  
f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Tim. 4. 3.  We have so much experience hereof, that we cannot but know that for the loud-crying sms of this Nation proceeding from contempt of his Word and Ministry, the Lord hath smitten many tongues and ears with a worse than 
g Deut. 28. 27.  Egyptian plague, a spiritual 
h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  botch, scab, incurable itch, madness, blindness and astonishment of heart, so that they 
i Joh. 3. 3, 20.  hate the light and learning, 
k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Nazianz. orate 20.  because they would have all like themselves, that their ignorance might lie hid in one common darkness, unreproved, undiscovered; all which like a shrill Trumpet from the clouds of heaven, sounding louder and louder, gives the alarm to all faithful Ministers to 
l Act. 20. 28.  take heed to themselves and to all the stock over which the H. Ghost hath made them overseers: spiritually furnished, like those repairers of the Temple, both for 
m Nehem. 4. 17  building and defence, taking to them the whole 
n Eph. 6. 13.  armour of God, that they may be able to stand. I may safely say, no one age ever felt such various oppositions of truth; Satan seeming in former times but to skirmish, but now to storm the 
o Rev. 20. 9  beloved City and Tents of the Saints with all his Legions of errors drawn up into one body: of all which none more infested or hinder our work, than those Moabites and Ammonites; 
p Deur. 23. 3.  who contrary to God's ordinance, have intruded into the work of the Temple, pretending to build with us; saying with those enemies of Israel, 
q Ezra 4. 2.  We seek your God as ye do. Now the noon-tide Devil is on the Stage in his last scene, whose part is (if it 
r Mar, 24. 24.  were possible) to deceive the very Elect. To which no ordinary dress can now fit him or his Ministers; it must be (and so is) some close semblance of sanctimony, in which the Saint's delight; without which Satan could not easily take them, with which he often doth; whilst 
s Incau●è creduli circumveniuntur ab iis quos bonos putabant. Minuc Fel. Oct.  incautiously credulous, they are deceived by those whom they esteemed 
t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Strab. l. 16.  good. The hunters of Ostriches used to dress themselves up with their feathers, imitate their motions, and scatter grains of seeds before them; so the false 
u 2 Cor. 11. 13, 15.  Apostles, deceitful workers, seduce by transforming themselves into Apostles of Christ, Ministers of righteousness; scattering out of their delightful bags, seeds of dangerous Heresies and Schisms.  
Why I undertook this polemical task, you know who were present at my first embarking in this controversy; as also many of my reverend brethren, who afterwards importuned me to the first part hereof. If any ask, why it comes out so late to public view? let the false 
v 2 Sam. 16. 3. 2 Sam. 19 25, etc.  Zibaes' answer; I can conjecture but not resolve; it is now about two years since it was much desired, fairly promised, and accordingly sent to one Press; where the 
x Vid. Isa. 37. 3  children were come to the birth and there was no strength to bring forth. Why I write after so many, so much more able to defend the truth, might possibly put me to the Orators quaeree 
y Quae sunt igitur meae parts, etc. Cic. orat. pro L. Cornel. Balb●. init.  What is left for me to do? but new adversaries arising, giving fresh assaults, and impudently affronting and challenging me in my public charge to answer them; what could I have answered the Lord, if seeing the Wolf coming into the fold, I had withdrawn or betrayed the soul of my● Auditors; who might possibly have thought our cause deserted, for which none durst plead. All lovers of truth owe it respective defence: and too much caution cannot be in things of so great moment as salvation of 
z Similiter facis, ae si me rogues, cur te duebus contuear oculis, & non altero tantum, cum idem uno assequi possim. Cic. denat. dear. l. 3.  souls. No man rationally asketh, What need we two eyes who can see with one? I am far from pleading universality for defence, or multitudes for Patronage of truth: let our adversaries reckon themselves many, and think that— Ills  Defendit numerus, junctaeque umbone Phalanges: 
They have many Writers; but if the cause be weighed by Scripture and solid reason, then as 
a 2 King. 6. 16.  Elisha said, they are more with us then with them: yet I heartily wish that many more would show themselves on our part, and neither betray the truth by their silence, who can seasonably and ably speak in its defence, nor encourage the adversaries thereof by such a Laodicea-like lukewarmness as shows a dangerous symptom of neutrality. For my part I cannot but be conscious of much disability, yet dare not but endeavour to defend the 
b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Nazianz. Orat. 13.  truth: for this, let whoso will condemn or acquit me; God is all-sufficient. Such as these endeavours are, I submit to the judgement of the 
c 1 Tim. 3. 15.  Church of God, the pillar of truth, and dedicate them to you who love the truth; and by God's assistance: 
d 2 Pet. 2. 12, ●●.  will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though you know them, and be established in the present truth; yea, I think it meet, as long as I am in this Tabernacle. God alone gives the 
e Cor. 3. 5, 7.  increase: To him be 
f L●c. 2. 14  glory in the highest, and on earth peace, good will towards men: to you and yours, constancy in the truth, and happiness temporal and eternal; which is the daily prayer of  
Decemb. 8. 1653. Your faithful and affectionate Servant in the Lord Jesus JO. READING.   

The Preface to the Christian and Candid Reader.  
GGood Reader know, that as I was addressing myself to discharge a public Engagement, 
Made with Mr● Fisher at Folksten in Kent, Mar. 10, 1650.  for writing something in answer to certain Objections made against Paedobaptism, there came to my hand from a friend, a Treatise under this Title, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Liberty of Prophesying, etc. in the 18 section whereof, I find, A particular consideration of the opinion of the Anabaptists; In which part of this Florelegie, or flowers and selected points of Divinity, are not only some stingy expressions, but also such a wilful or incautious collection of wild Vines, as may cause the children of the Prophets not unjustly to cry, Mors est in ollâ. 
2 King 4. 39, 40  It was truly reported by some judicious Divines, who had perused the same, that there are many dangerous stumbling-blocks to weak Christians, and subtle arguments for defence and animation of the Anabaptists, being clothed with so much wit, sophistry and learning, as indeed make the Piece a very shrewd bugbear, formidable to many; yet in truth 'tis not much unlike that Cuman-beast, which going up and down in a Lion's skin, frighted many, which being pulled off, the silly Animal appeared more ridiculous than dangerous. Being therefore exhorted by sundry of my reverend brethren, to answer the Arguments herein laid down by way of Plea (I hope rather tentatively, then dogmatically) and being persuaded, that in so doing I might in a great part satisfy my engagement, the learned Author having said much more, or in more plausible terms, than ever the Anabaptists, for aught that I have ever seen or heard have yet alleged for their own opinion, I have adventured so to do.  
And now concerning my learned Antagonist, 
Judg. 2. 16.  although I hope he let fall these things, as Boaz Reapers, on purpose that some might for good advantage to the truth of Christ glean after him; yet seeing he hath so sharply and strenuously pleaded against the same; that Religion may say of her hurts on some less armed parts, 
Zach. 13. 6  Thus was I wounded in the house of my friends: And we may say in these giddy times, as Joshua to him whom he spied with his drawn sword by Jericho, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries? 
josh. 5. 13.:  and seeing that they who for private ends and interests carry arms and ammunition to any known and professed enemies, are justly made lawful prize, at least, if taken; we must lay by all personal interests, with a magis amica veritas; and he ought to be patient if he meet with any more rough and unpleasing language than he useth to receive, or I love to give.  
Concerning this whole piece, I have no more to say, then that of Venerable Beda, 
Ita carpat botrum, ut & spinam caveat. i.e. in dictis ejus sanos sensus scrutetur & eligat, ut non minus vitet insanos. Bed. in Caut. exp. l. 1. exord.  concerning the Book of Bishop Julian to the Reader, let him so gather the grapes, that he may beware of the thorn; that is, let him in his sayings, search and choose out the wholesome sense, so as with no less care he may avoid the unwholesome. He doth but plead, and so pretend to a lawfulness of biting us, from the privilege of custom; and so in reason must expect the like returns: If he that dresseth himself up in a Bear's skin, to make others or himself sport, be seriously baited, whom hath he to blame but himself? What this Authors council was, thus to write that which himself condemns, and of which he saith, it is A Doctrine justly condemned by the most sorts of Christians— I know not; 
●. 23. 1. N. 2.  but do heartily wish, that if he have not yet repent of digging this pit, whereinto divers are fallen, not without great and apparent hazard to their souls, he timely may; if he have come to some second better thoughts, he may do commendably to cover it with some seasonable endeavour, that no more may fall by the stumbling-block which he hath laid before them: I wish he would revise his own writings with some judiciary severity, as St. Augustine 
Qua●●●r jud●● a●●â severita●e Aug. retract. ●●● prol●g.  speaks, so that those things which his self liketh not in his plea, he might mark and censure: he need not be informed, but may be remembered, that true repentance is inseparably united to a sincere desire, & faithful endeavour to satisfy and make a mends; neither is he to learn what that great light of the Western Church saith:— No man, 
〈…〉  (saith he) that's wise, will therefore presume to reprove me, because I reprehend my own errors: but if he shall say, I ought not to have said such things which should afterward even displease myself, he saith true, and doth as I do; for he reprehends those very things which I also do; for neither aught I to reprove them, if I ought to have said them: What he did in his Retractations, many good and learned men have done, because they loved God's truth and honour more than their own reputations: and whosoever can truly say with S Peter, Thou knowest that I love thee, ought no more to be ashamed of the fruits of Repentance, than Peter was: It is no dishonour to amend, and turn to better, and therefore it cannot but be safe to give God his due honour, and security to those souls who have strayed, been misled, or scandaled by this Patronage of untruth, by acknowledging the truth, and disavowing a known error. He denyeth Christ, who is silent for fear or favour of men, when and where he ought to speak in defence of his truth; how much more he that doth omnes nerves intendere, in the opposition thereof? possibly the Author had some better intention and aim than appears to the Vulgar; but 'tis true, it skilleth not with what intention one doth that which is evil, and ought not to be done; because facts are seen, but the mind is not. 
Atqui nihil interest quo animo facias, quod fecisse vitiosum est quia facta cernuntur, animus non videtur. Lactant. l. 3. c. 3. p. 221.  Let the good Reader take notice, that in the conclusion of this Plea, the advocate saith, That men have disputed against them (the Anabaptists) with so much weakness and confidence, that they have been encouraged in their error more by the accidental advantages we have given them by our weak arguings, then by any truth of their cause, or excellency of their wit: And I conceive that he will think with me, that it should be a motive to him, to whom God hath given more excellency of art and nature to defend the truth which he hath opposed, lest otherwise he sacrilegiously eclipse God's honour, by a kind of Interposition of that body which shineth by no other light than that which God lent. If he that hid his Master's talon, so that it did neither good nor harm, yet heard his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, what (except in case of timely repentance) may they expect, who with those many talents which their Master entrusted to them, have assisted and furnished the known enemy with arms against their Master? Consider what I say, and the Lord give you a right understanding in all things. Lastly, I have to entreat the well-affected Reader, not to misdeem some repetitions of the same things (in cases of such conflicts unavoidable) wherein the adversaries often striking at the same parts, requires the same or the like wards for defence of the truth: And now the God of all grace, who hath called us into his eternal glory by Christ Jesus— make you perfect, establish, strengthen, settle you: To him be glory and dominion for ever and ever.  
AMEN.   

AN Antidote against Anabaptism: OR, Animadversions on that part of the liberty of Prophesying, which sect. 18. pag. 223. beareth this Title, A particular Consideration of the opinion of the ANABAPTISTS:  
— Their denying Baptism to Infants, although it be a Doctrine justly condemned by the most sort of Christians, upon great grounds of Reason] 
Pag. 223. Num. 2.   
WE say, That denying Baptism to Infants, is justly condemned by all true Christians; we cannot understand them to be such, who renounce their Saviour Christ by a pretended Baptism in their rebaptising never warranted by precept, or example in holy Scripture, or those who by their Doctrine annul and make void their Baptism by a kind of self-excommunication.  
Again we say, Th●t to condemn the Doctrine of Anabaptists upon great grounds of Reason, seems to lay too narrow a ground, and possibly too unsound a foundation for our profession; specially, if we consider what is here said, 
Page 165.  Sect. 10. Num. 2. concerning the pretended authority of Reason, and following his guide so far as his Reason goes along with him,— Or, which is all one, he that follows his own Reason, etc. which guidance by Divine Revelation, and I know not, what other good means he meaneth, he saith, hath great advantages— But to leave ambiguities of words, 
— regula Catholicae fidei certa, notaque esse debet; nam si nota non fit, regula nobis non erit, si certa non sit, ne regula quidem erit.  and confusion of senses; we affirm, That the word of God is our ground and guide in matters of Faith and Religion (which even the greatest pretenders to humane authority, and undervaluers of holy Scriptures, do acknowledge in their soberer fits) and that the Spirit of God illuminateth the elect whom he calleth, guideth, and enableth to obedience, against the dictates of carnal reason, and the corrupt affections of●flesh and blood. 
— quare cum sacra Scriptura ●regula credendi certissima, tutissimaque sit, sanus profecto non erit, qui ea neglecta, spiritus interni saepe ●allacis, & semper incert judicio se commiserit, etc. Bellarm. tom. 1. de verb. Dei, l. 1. c. 2.  If he mean any other Divine Revelation then that which is consonant to the known and invariable Rule of God's word, I know not what greater advantage Satan could desire for leading beguiled souls to hell blindfold, then to find them following their own reason, and putting their salvations upon pretended revelations; our faith is on God's truth, not humane Reason; which, in this life, is not so absolutely purged from the contagion of sin, ignorance and error, since the Apostles being furnished with infallibility of Spirit, but that it is subject to some errors: and therefore though we disclaim all blind obedience to man in acts of Religion, yet we submit to God in believing every thing which he saith; adoring his Truth, which we cannot by any strength of humane Reason examine. 
... fidei non potest subesse aliquod falsum. 22. q. 1. 3. c. fides mnititur veritati divinae quae est in fallibilis: & ita non potest ei subesse falsum. ib. q. 4. a. 5. 2.  Moreover we say, seeing that only may, and can be the ground of our Faith, which cannot err, or be false; and seeing that we are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief Cornerstone, Ephes. 2. 20. we cannot consent to be taken off from that infallible certainty, and to be set upon the movable and loose sand of only Great grounds of Reason, or any thing less known, certain, and infallible than the holy word of God, which we know cannot deceive us.  It will neither be unpleasant nor unprofitable to draw a short Scheme of plea for each party, the result of which possibly may be, that though they be deceived, yet they have so great excuse on their side, etc.] 
Page 223. Numb. 2.  
Surely unpleasing to God it is to make sport with matters of so high concernment, and to play with holy things (for so this plea must be, except you are in earnest for the Anabaptists) or for fear or favour of men, so to temporize, as thereby to endanger (as much as you can) the Cause and Truth of Christ. And how it can be either pleasing to any good Christian, which displeaseth God, or profitable which causeth any to err from the truth in pleading for that which you acknowledge to be a Doctrine justly condemned— I confess I understand not. Possibly Joash would here have replied to such a short Scheme of plea,— will ye plead for Baal? 
Judge 6. 31.   That their error is not impudent or vincible.] 
See Joh. Cloppenburg. Gangrene. of Anabap. etc.  
To say an impudent error, is but an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and impropriety of speech, which in more exact expression I suppose you would render, they are not impudent in defence of their error; If so, I only appeal to experience. As for that which you say— They have so great excuse on their side, that their error is not— vincible, seems a contradiction in the adject; who believes any error to be invincible, who believeth that Christ (the Truth. John 14. 6.) hath sufficiently delivered that heavenly light in the Gospel, which (though God permit it sometimes to be clouded) shall shine clear, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it; but it shall put to flight and overcome every darkness of error, specially in things pernicious, and about the foundation. I say not, to the sense of those whom God justly giveth over to strong delusions, that they may perish who receive not the love of the truth that they might be saved; but to the Goshen and Israel of God, appointed to salvation: How else should it be, that our faith should be the Victory that overcometh the world, 
1 Joh. 5. 4.  except it be in the invincible truth and faith in him who hath overcome the world? John 16. 33. For by World, Christ here meaneth and comprehendeth all that which is contrary to the salvation of the Elect, specially those falsehoods and errors, which Satan by any means broacheth to corrupt and overthrow the true Faith. See Heb. 11. 1, etc. Mat. 16. 8.  The Baptism of Infants rests wholly on this Discourse.] 
Page 223.  
If that were true, your plea for Anabaptists were less condemnable; but the contrary will appear in due place.  But whether they have original sin or no—] 
Page 224. Num. 5.  
Indeed the Pelagians (an old Sect of Heretics) denied that Infants were born in original sin: And Celestius affirmed, That Adam's sin hurt only himself, but not mankind. 
Prosper de vocat. Gent. lib. 1. c. 22. Negant parvulos trahere originale peccatum omnes qui fine ullo vitio, natos esse ●nten lunt.  And others, that Infants are born in the same state in which Adam was before his transgression: But the holy Scripture plainly condemns this Heresy. See Job. 14. 4- Psalm 51. 5. John 3. 5. 1 Cor. 15 50. Rom. ●. 12. 1 Cor. 15. 22. Eph. 2. 3. So do all the Reformed Churches, and Papists too, vid. Bellar. l. 4. de amissione gratie, & stat. peccati. Besides woeful experience teaching us, 
Et Celes●ius, etc. Augustin tom. 7. de peccato orig. contra Pelag. & Celest. lib. 2. c. 2. & 3. & 4.  that children die; demonstrateth, that they brought that guilt into the world with them which subjected them to the sentence of death, and participation of the punishment of Adam's sin, which could not be, except they were partakers of his guilt, because God is just. That they have contracted the guilt of Adam's sin, you confess, pag 230, Num 16. 
Credimus totam Adami sobolem bac contagione infectan, quam peccatum originale vocamus, vitium videlicet ex propagatione m●nans non autem ex imitatione duntaxat, sicut Pelagiani senserunt, etc. Confess. Eccles. Gal. Art. 10. 11. Idem d●cent omnes reformatarum Ecclesiarum confessiones, ut videre est 4. Sect. Harmoniae, etc. Andr. Rivet. Sum. Controvers. q. 3. P. 32.   — Infant's cannot by any act of their own, promote the hope of their own salvation, which men of reason and choice may, by acts of virtue and election. 
Pag. 225. Num. 6.  
Faith and hope of salvation are not of ourselves, but the gift of God, Eph. ●. 8. 
Cur in Adam omnis homo moritur si originalis peccati vinculis non tenetur. Greg. lib. 7. Epist. 53. Secundin●.  And what hope infants have or acts of reason, how God applieth the merit of Christ to Infants, who became an infant that he might also save them; is a secret unknown to me; and therefore I do neither anxiously inquire, nor rashly determine.  
That men of reason and choice may promote their hope of salvation by acts of Virtue and Election, must cautiously be understood; seeing they neither can do any thing hereto, as they have reason or election; both which are natural, and so corrupted, that they are utterly inactive to any moral good, without the help of Gods preventing and quickening grace supervenient. The Scripture is express: You hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins,— and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others, etc. 
Eph 2. 1, 3.  It is neither of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.— And where he said, Work out, or finish your salvation,— we may not think it dependeth on our works, or of our own ability; for, saith he, it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do, of his good pleasure. 
Rom. 9 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 At ver● numb á nostris operibus pende● sa●●is nestra? Minime id ●●idem, etc. Be● in Phil. 2. 12, 13.  Lest we should think ourselves excused from our uttermost endeavour, whom he hath made voluntary agents, and in some part repaired in our regeneration, he requireth that we work, that we receive not that grace in vain, that we so run that we may attain; yet that we may not think that this is, or can be by any choice or ability of our own, he telleth us presently, it is God which worketh in us, all which he requireth of us; and so good works which follow the justified person, being fruits of our calling and election, give us a comfortable hope thereof. Yet is it most true that God alone according to his abundant mercy (not our merit). bathe begotten us again to a lively hope, 1 Pet. 1. 3. and that if we do these things, we shall never fall. 
2 Pet. 1. 10.   You say again, That God requires nothing on man's part, but that its efficacy be not hindered.] 
Pag. 225. Num. 6.  
This Proposition, though plausible, yet is unsound, as may appear by that which hath been said: to which I add; It is indeed required, that we do not ponere obicem, by unbelief impenitency, contempt of God's ordinance, etc. but he that saith, Cease to do evil, saith also, Learn to do well. 
Isa. 1. 16, ●● 2 Pet. 1 ●●  So the Apostle exhorteth— To give all diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things ye shall never fall. And indeed this is the end of our implantation into Christ by Baptism, that we should walk in newness of life; and no doubt but God requireth of his Israel, 
Rom. 6. 4.  that they should not quench the Spirit, or ponere obicem, in that he said, Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and harden your necks no more, Deut. 10. 16. Yet he requireth them to fear the Lord their God, to walk in all his ways,— to keep all the commandments of the Lord— v. 12. 13. And into the same covenant are children admitted by baptism, which bindeth them on their first abilities to perform the same, though for the present they are no more active than circumcised Infants were, who were received and sealed into the present covenant of future faith and obedience.  Then (you say) there is a necessity that they should be brought to baptism, there being an absolute exclusion of all persons unbaptised.] 
Pag. 226. Num. 6.  
There is a necessity of Baptism in respect of God's ordinance, which bindeth us to administer it: but we affirm not such a necessitatem medii, 
●. Lombard l. 4 dist. 1. l.  that all they should be absolutely excluded from the Kingdom of Heaven, who die without baptism, as many infants do. 
Concil. Trident. Sess. 6. c. 3. &. Sess. 7. c. 3.  That uncharitable opinion we leave to the maintainers thereof, we have no warrant so to judge: and therefore we say, 
Bellarm. de Sacrament. Baptis, l. 1. c. 4.  that not the bare privation, but the contempt of the Sacrament condemneth; of which Infants cannot be guilty. So that if you clearly mean a necessitatem medii in respect of the external ministry of man, your Proposition is not true, nor owned by us: but if you mean a necessity in respect of our duty in baptising infants, or their spiritual baptism by regeneration, we so far consent; but then we cannot excuse your medium for an homonomia, which concludeth not an absolute exclusion of all persons unbaptised; is apparently falls, in the example of the penitent Thief, saved but not baptised, and in charity to be concluded so, in elect children dying before they are baptised: so that if our Arguments for baptising children were no better, you might confidently say as you do in the Epilogue of your Plea, 
Pag. 245.  They have been encouraged in their error more by— our weak arguings, then by any truth of their cause, or excellency of their wit.  
You say— Internal (means of bringing them to an eternal happiness) they have none: for grace being an improvement and heightening the faculties of Nature, in order to an heightened and supernatural end, grace hath no influence, or efficacy upon their faculties, who can do no natural acts of understanding—] 
Page 225. Num. 8.   
What acts of understanding elect Infants dying have, I cannot determine, but I am confident all considering Readers will abominate and loath this bold and uncharitable censure. Who admitted you into the secret of God's council, concerning thestate of Infants, whom either he preserveth to age, or taketh away before they could be baptised? It is better resolved, to a worse end, by yourself, p. 231. Num. 16. Many thousand ways there are by which God can bring any reasonable soul unto himself.— And here in the very next place you affirm, That God hath made a promise of the holy Ghost to Infants as well as to men.— Reconcile these two, and yourself to yourself, if you can. First, you say,— Grace hath no influence or efficacy upon their faculties, who can do no natural acts of understanding: And next you affirm, that God hath made a promise of the holy Ghost to Infants as well as to men. I demand, Doth God perform every one of his promises? Do you mean by the Holy Ghost, the gifts and graces of Gods holy Spirit regenerating the elect to the Kingdom of Heaven? Can any be saved without such grace? can the holy Ghost be inactive, and without effectual influence in any soul? Doth God give in his good time, and measure, his grace of Regeneration to all the elect, that is, a powerful influence on them to regenerate, sanctify, and finally save them? Doth God save any Infants? These things being concluded on, I would fain learn how it can be true, that children have no internal means of salvation: or that God's Spirit hath no influence upon their faculties? Doth the reasonable soul of an Infant express an admirable influence on the bodily faculties, by a natural instinct for its preservation; and shall not the Creator, the Spirit of Almighty God, have much more active influence on the soul of the elect to save it, though there appear none, or very slender acts of understanding to the judgement and sense of man.  
This your Proposition will appear false, if we consider infants circumcision; those could do as few acts of understanding, as infants now can: neither can any man without high impiety affirm, that God's grace had no influence or efficacy on them whom he did not in vain command to be sealed into his covenant. It is well observed by our party, that the Sacraments are not bare resemblances, or memorial of things past, neither naked signs or testimonies of grace received; but also Canales gratiae, 
Ursin Catech. part. 2. de Bap. Conclus. 9  whereby God ordinarily deriveth to us those Rivers of living Water, Joh. 7. 38. and both delivereth and sealeth unto us the grace which they represent; so that these holy signs are not empty, void of, or without the things signified, although the things are received after one manner, and the signs after another; one is given by God alone, without the observation and knowledge of man, and the other only by the ministry of man, and before men: As at first John Baptist baptised with water, and Christ baptised with the holy Ghost, though he baptised not with water, but his Disciples and substitutes; neither did John baptise with the holy Ghost, but Christ: So is it now, Christ baptizeth elect infants by the secret influence of his holy Spirit, the fruits whereof appear in their season, and his Ministers, according to his appointment, baptise with water.  To all this (you say) the Anabaptists give a soft and gentle answer:] 
Pag. 228. Num. 12.  
Sure you do but, herein, landando praecipere, and by saying they do so, rather show them what they should do, then us, what they do. 
July 27. 1649.  M. Fisher in his Position at the Disputation at Ashford in Kent, styled the maintainers of Pedobaptism, an evil and adulterous generation, this is one of their soft and gentle answers. Mr. Francis Cornwell in his Sermon at Crambrock in Kent, called Pedobaptism an Antichristian Innovation, a humane Tradition etc. 
Preface p. 1.  Mr. Cham Blackwood, Title-page, calleth his Pamphlet against us, The storming of Antichrist. John Spislbury 
J. Spilsbury treat concerning the subject of Baptism, p. 31.  calleth Pedobaptism, Baptism administered and received in a false Antichristian estate, and by the power of Antichrist. Edward Barber calleth it Antichristian and abominable. And before he saith, conterning Mark 10. 14. This place is put in to be read at the sprinkling of children, for the Whore hath sweet words, etc. 
Ed. Barber, pag. 30. and p. 13.  Is this, as you say for your Clients, to give a soft and gentle answer? or a Boyish manner of contest, to call Whore, and all ill names, where they have not other power to prevail? Let all judge who have any sense of humanity, whether this be a soft and gentle answer, to call his mother Whore, and the worst of such, Antichristian: whereas in spite of calumnies, with other reformed Churches, the Church of England hath excluded Popery, and what she could, banished that mystical Whore out of her communion. But this is their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to conclude their Scene where they have no evicting reason against that which they dislike, to pronounce it Antichristian. 
Deus è machind Suid. Er●sm. adag child. 1. cent: 1.  And who is so ready to cast this odious Livery upon others, as the most Antichristian? 
— Baptismum infantum, esse idolatricum— esse ex Draccne & Bestid, nec aliud quam ceremoniam Antichristi. Memno Simonis. f. 40, 50, etc.  I might hereto add many more the like instances of Railers at Infant-baptism, calling it Idolatrous, of the Dragon and Beast, none other than a ceremony of Antichrist, a Satanical Institution, etc. but that we have too much of our own at home. It is the quality of the Beast to open his mouth unto blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his Name and his Tabernacle, and them that dwell in Heaven: But we like not our cause the worse, because such rail at it; but wish them to consider where the Railers place shall be, 1 Cor. 6. 1. 
Lucas Sternberg. de quitus Joh. Gerhard. loc. theol. to. 4 de bapt. fol. 568. Rev. 13. 6.   You say— The Argument from Circumcision is invalid upon infinite Considerations.] 
Pag. 228. Num. 13.  
It will, I doubt not at last prove so strong, that neither you, nor any other Advocates shall ever be able to overthrow it: for that which circumcision was in the Old Testament, Baptism is in the New, which succeeded it, and hath the same end and use, that is, to be a seal of the Righteousness of Faith, Rome 4. 11. the same Faith in the same Christ: and therefore the Apostle tells the Colossians 
Coloss. 2. 11.  that they were Circumcised in Christ,— in that they were buried with him in Baptism: so that Baptism is our Circumcision, 
Ursin quo sup.  or Sacrament, whereby the same things are conferred and confirmed: an inlet for us into the visible Church of Christ, a Seal of the Covenant of Grace, and free remission of sins by Faith in him into whom it implanteth us. 
Rom. 6.  But you say,  Figures and Types prove nothing, unless a Commandment go along with them, or some express to signify such to be their purpose.] 
Page 228. Num. 13.  
We answer, 1. They signify something which is their end; and the argument à type ad veritatem, holds good from the signs in the Law, to the things signified in the Gospel: as Children were typically baptised under the law, under the Cloud, and in the red Sea, 1 Cor. 10. 1, etc. and their washing with rain from the cloud, prefigured our washing in Baptism, and by the Spirit. 
Dr. Featly child. bapt. justified. Arg. 6. p. 45. f.  And the red Sea, in which the Egyptians were drowned, and Israel saved, was an Emblem of Christ's blood, in which all our ghostly enemies are drowned, and we saved.  
2. Here is a mere ignoratie elenchi, and mistake of the question in hand, which is not whether Circumcision were a type and figure of Baptism, but whether Baptism so succeed Circumcision, as a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith. That such sorts of persons (to wit, young and old) within the covenants, as had right to the one, have the like right to the other, which we affirm.  
3. Where you say, Unless a Commandment go along with them, etc. First, we say, that where the question is mistaken, we are not in reason bound to answer until it be rightly stated, and so may wave all that you infer concerning the Deluge & Paschal Lamb, etc. as merely impertinent to our present controversy. Secondly, concerning a command for baptising, you doubt not, nor we for baptising of Infants; seeing that where the Reason and Equity of the Law remains, there the Law, for substance, is still in force, though not for every circumstance: Now nothing can reasonably be alleged, why children have less use of Reason now, than they who then lived, had under the Law; or why they should for present want of the use of reason, be now less capable of the Seal of the Righteousness of Faith, than they were who lived under the Law? But you say further,  — Supposing a correspondence of Analogy between Circumcision and Baptism, yet there is no correspondence of Identity. 
Ib. Pag. 228.  
This Bull deserves some baiting, were we not treating of sacred things; therefore I only say, If correspondence import answering unto, in some similitude and likeness, there can be no correspondence of identity, for no like is identically the same with that to which it is like.  For although it were granted that both of them (Circumcision and Baptism) did consign the Covernant of Faith.] 
Ibid.  
Speak you this as a matter doubtful? Is not the Scripture evident? Do you also call the truth thereof in question? See Rom. 4. 11.  There is nothing in the circumstance of children's being circumcised, that so concerns that mystery, but that is might very well be given to children, and yet baptism to men of reason.] 
Ibid.  
This Argument is a childish caption: 
Fallacia condentis  We say that Baptism succeeded Circumcision in substance, not in circumstance; in the end and use, as hath been said, and whereof we shall say more anon: To what purpose do you argue from the circumstance? But you say,  Circumcision left a Character in the flesh, which being imprinted upon Infants, did it work upon them when they came to age?] 
Ib. Pag. 228.  
We answer: 1. That the word Character 
Von character is potest accipi proqualibet nota vel signo, rem unam ab aliis distinguente, Andr, Rivet, Su●. Contr●●. tract. 3. q. 6.  may be taken for any sign, or note distinguishing one thing from another: so Baptism may be also said to be a character, distinguishing Christians from unbelievers, not as an absolute quality, but as a relative thing: as a tessera militaris, by which God will own his who fight under the Banner of Christ, and by which the baptised have a comfortable assurance that they are marked for the children of God when they believe in Christ, according as it is written,— In whom also after that ye believed, 
Eph. 1. 13, 14,  ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise; which is the earnest of our Inheritance.— a. Your instance importeth only a circumstantial, not a substantial difference: Now the variety of signs vary not the thing signified: It is the same Christ, the same Faith, under the Gospel and under the Law; though the Sacraments by God appointed for the one and for the other, were much different: And the ends of Circumcision and Baptism are the same; to implant us into Christ's visible Church; to be an inlet and door to the same, to seal up the admitted to faith, repentance, mortification, and newness of life: which work is as truly done to the baptised Christian when he cometh to age as it was to the Israelite circumcised, to wit, to and in them that believed and repent; to others the work was so far from being done, that that very seal of God's Covenant which they bore in their flesh, served for a witness against the soul of the Covenant-breaker to his greater condemnation: and so it is proportionably with the baptised Apostate: which may be a warning to your Clients, to repent before it be too late. You say again,  
— It is requisite that the persons baptised should be capable of Reason, that they may be capable both of the word of the Sacrament, and the impress made upon the Spirit.] 
Pag. 229.  
We answer: 1. This weakly follows from unsound premises; was there no word added to Circumcision? How doth that appear? Was there not a word of Institution? Genes. 17. 10, 11, 12. Was not the reason of the Covenant declared to Abraham? 
See Gen. 18. 19  Did not he, and others, preach the same to all of age to be circumcised, as Proselytes, and to the circumcised infants when they came to age capable of Doctrine? so do we to the baptised: but to persons of years we preach the Gospel first, and then baptise them; infants we baptise first, and instruct them when they come to be capable.  2. That it is requisite that the persons baptised should be capable of Reason, that they may be capable both of the word, etc.] 
We say so also, they must be capable of Reason, either in act, that they may presently understand those things; or in habit, that they may afterward understand the same; to what end else should we baptise infants, or why were they circumcised into future faith, repentance, and newness of life? 
Durand. ●●●●●●. l. 1. c. 7. n. 12, etc.  We utterly dislike Popish baptising of Bells, Churches, Altars, etc.  
3. We say further, That Covenants between man and man, require that both parties expressly understand & know the tenor, substance, and particulars of the same; but in Covenants between God and his Creatures, that Rule doth not universally hold; for here God stipulateth and principally transacteth with the creature according to that which he will have done, or do in, or by them. So he established his Covenant with Noah and his seed after him, and with every living creature, the Fowl, Cattell, Beasts, etc. Gen. 9 10. How much more rationally may he make covenant with infants, though yet without the actual use of reason? Again, sometimes such covenants are made between men, as that the parent or parent's covenant for, or in stead of their children, because they are not yet of age to understand the words and purport of the covenant, and it standeth good. How much rather may God covenant with an infant, whose mouth and Advocate, Christ Jesus, said expressly, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven, Mark 10. 14. Luke 18. 16. I demand, quojure, by what right is the Kingdom of Heaven theirs? What, by descent from natural parents? Nay, but that which is born of the flesh, is flesh, John 3. 6. And flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, 1 Cor. 15. 50. It must therefore be by the free covenant of God with them, out of which it can belong to none by right of any infant-innocency, seeing all are conceived and born in sin, the children of wrath, 
Psal. 51  but for the grace and covenant of God with them, 
Ephes 2●  which they yet understand not, yet is it valid and effectual to their salvation, as we may also understand in case of Circumcision, in which the circumcised Child understood as little what was said, or done, as the baptised infant now doth, and yet it was God's covenant with them, Gen. 17. 7, 10, 11, 12. and effectual for them. To conclude, if you mean that it is requisite that none should be admitted to baptism, but those that have the actual use of reason, that is, men and women of years, you beg the question.   
— of the Sacrament, and the impress made upon the Spirit.] 
Page 229.  
Concerning a Character or impress set upon the baptised, the Schoolmen and Jesuits have moved sundry questions: whether it be an absolute or relative quality, which yet they say, sticks fast upon them also that are in hell? Whether it be an ens rationis, or a relatio realis? Whether a quality, action, or passion? And if a quality, of what kind it is? Whether the subject thereof be the soul, or some active or passive faculty thereof? Whether it be a figure or form? Whether the Sacraments of the old Testament made the like impress? etc. In all which, and the like vain speculations, we may not unprofitably note the just judgement of God, giving them over to unfruitful delusions, who forsaking the true and constant light of his holy word, give themselves ●ver to follow the ignes fatuos of their own fancies. I hope you are not of their sense, though you mention this impress. Concerning the seal of our implantation into Christ, I have spoken a little before; and only add, that we receive grace, and the obsignation thereof, but are not sensible of all, until we receive a greater measure,— that we might know the things that are freely given unto us of God. 
1. Cor. 2. 12.    
Since therefore (say you) 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 annexes of the type.] 
Page 229.  
It wholly holds in substance for aught you have said to the contrary: and therefore your following instances are frivolous. 
Calv. Instit. lib. 4. c. 16.  As concerning baptising the eighth day, we answer, 1. That, whereas God appointed no set day for baptism, we have the greater liberty to do it at the most convenient season, on the first, second, third, fourth, etc. or on any day, so that we neither contemn God's ordinance, nor unnecessarily delay it. 
Ursin. Cat. part. 2. de Baptism.  2. As hath been noted, baptism succeeded circumcision, not in every circumstance, but in the thing signified, in the end and use. 3. This your argument is a fallacious and childish caption: à fallacia accidentis, from the subject to the accident, from the substance to the circumstance, as the learned Dr. Featly observeth, 
Fallacia accidentis est, cum quid●is rei, & accidenti: ●. c. subjects & ejus attributo, similiter attribuitur, Arist. l. 1. Elench. c. 4. Dr. Featly child. Bap. justified. pag. 72. m.  such a fallacy is this.  
What the Jews were commanded in the fourth Commandment, that we Christians are bound to perform: But the Jews were commanded to keep holy the seventh day from the creation; Therefore we Christians are bound to keep that day. Such is this Paralogism.  
If Baptism succeeded Circumcision, than children ought to be baptised the eight day: it no more followeth, than that children ought to be baptised in the same part where they were circumcised: it will follow rather, That because Circumcision was administered to the infant as soon as it was capable thereof, or could receive the Sacrament without danger, therefore children ought to be baptised as soon as conveniently they may. 
Non a bs re ●. diem praeteriisse expectabant Judaei, quod is Plutar. in Problem, & Fest● testificantibus, maxim periculosus sit infantibus, si ve●entur, nec ante cum terminunt, umbilicus resolvatur, ante quem homo proprior est pāltae quam animali, etc. rer.l. 4. c. 4.  But you say,  The case is clear in the Bishop's question to Cyprian, for why shall not infants be baptised just upon the eighth day, as well as circumcised? If the correspondence of the Rites be an Argument to infer one circumstance which is impertinent and accidental to the mysteriousness of the Rite, why shall it not infer all?] 
The case is as clear in the Question of Fidus the Presbyter, (whom you call Bishop) as it is in your objecting it. Fidus made a query, or rather affirmed, that Infants ought not to be baptised on the second or third day, 

Esse apud omnes, sive infants, sive majores natu, unam Divini muneris aequalitatem.—. nam Deus ut personam non accipit, sic nec aetatem, cum se omnibus ad coelestis gratiae consecutionem aequalitate librata praebeat parem— si etiam gravissimis delictoribus, & in Deum multum ante peccantibus,— & à baptismo atque gratia nemo prohibetur; quantomagis prehiberi non debet infans, qui recens natus nihil peccavit, nisi quod secundum Adam— contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate contraxit. Cyprian. l. g. ep. 8. Fido.  
Quantum vero ad causam infantium pertinet, quos dixisti intra secundum vel tertium diem qu● nati sunt, constitutos, baptizare non opartere, & considerandam legem esse circumcisionis antiquae, ut intra octavum diem, cum qui natus est baptizandum & sanctificandum non putares; long aliud in concilio nostro omnibus visum est. In hoc enim quod ●● puta●as esse faciendum, nem● consensit: sed universi potius judicavi●nus, nulli hominum nat●, misericordiam Dei & gratiam esse denegandem. Cyprian. q. s.   but that the law of ancient circumcision ought to be considered; so that he thought the newborn infant might not be baptised within, or before the eighth day: Cyprian answereth: There is one equality of the Divine gift to all, whether they are infants or old men: for as God is no accepter of persons, so neither is he of ages, but he shows himself in an even-ballanced equality, alike to all, as to their attaining heavenly grace— if to grievous offenders, and to those who have before that much sinned against God— and no man is prohibited baptism and grace, how much less ought the infant to be prohibited, who being newborn, hath committed no sin, only that in Adam.— He hath in his first nativity been infected with the contagion of ancient death. But concerning the cause of infants who you say are not to be baptised at two or three days old, and that we are to consider the law of ancient circumcision, so that you think that a child born may not be baptised before the eighth day; all that were in our Council are of a far different judgement; for no man consenteth to that which you thought was to be done: but we all rather judged, that the mercy and grace of God is to be denied to no man born. Let the Reader judge how clear the case is in the Bishop's question to Cyprian. To the rest of your Arguments we say you dispute ex non concessis: We do not say that the correspondence of Rites infer the circumstances, but the substance: but errors are fruitful, and one absurdity granted, many easily follow. For that you say from your own fancy, which you run away witha●.   
And then also females must not be baptised, because they were not circumcised.] 
We answer, 1. As we have said before, baptism succeeded circumcision not in every circumstance (which yourselves justify in that you baptise women) but in the substance, the thing signified, the end and use: or as others say, in the inward mystery, in the promises, in use, in effects. 
Calv. Instit. l 4. c. ●●. sect. 10. fin.   
2. God expressly restrained circumcision to males, Gen. 17. 10, 12, 14. yet the females were comprehended in the males: and to be born of circumcised parents, was to them in stead of circumcision, and so were they born to God, and in his account Daughters of Abraham, Luke 13. 16. and so within his covenant of grace and mercy: and the sealing of males was then limited to the eighth day; but now in baptism the circumstances of sex, age, and a fixed day, are not expressly mentioned, but we have a general commandment to baptise all, without exception to any time, sex, or age.  
3. Though women were not capable of circumcision, and therefore it was not enjoined them, yet the female is as capable of baptism as the male, and therefore without exception to sex, they who are all one in Christ's account, must equally be baptised into him. 4. Circumcision and Baptism agreeing in substance, did yet differ in many circumstances. First, in the Rite or Ceremony. Secondly, in the manner of signifying: For Circumcision held out grace in the Messias then to come; but baptism presenteth it in Christ exhibited. Thirdly, in the particular testimony annexed to make good the promise: for then God promised, not only a covenant with his Church, but a peculiar place for the same, the land of Cavaan, until the coming of the promised Seed: but baptism hath no particular promise of this, or that fixed place. Fourthly, in the manner of binding; Circumcision did oblige the circumcised to the observation of the whole Law, Moral, Ceremonial, 
Gal. 5. 3.  and Judicial: but baptism bindeth us only to the observation of the Moral Law; that is, faith, repentance, and newness of life, according to the holy Rule of Gods will revealed in the Moral Law, from the curse whereof, in respect of non-performance, 
Gal. 3. 13.  we are delivered in Christ, into whom we are baptised. Fifthly, in their appointed continuance; Circumcision was appointed only for Abraham's posterity; and to● continue only unto the coming of Christ: but baptism was instituted for all Nations and times unto the world's end. 
Gal. 3. 19  Lastly, 
Gal. 5. 2.  in circumstance of sex and age, 
Matth. 28. 19 20.  so far as circumcision was limited to males and the eighth day. So that to argue, as you do, from the substance to the circumstance, or that which is accidental, is fallations, 
Fallacia accidentis.  and captions, as hath been showed.   
You say— Therefore as Infants were circumcised, so spiritual Infants shall be baptised etc.] 
This you think a right understanding of the business; after your shuffling together many strange impertinencies, to tell us of baptising spiritual Infants. To which we answer: If you mean by Spiritual Infants, such as are born again of water and the holy Ghost, than you would have them twice regenerate or born: If you mean Believers only, (for in reason you cannot call an unbeliever or wicked person a spiritual infant) than I would fain learn by what discerning spirit you can know when, and whom to baptise, and whom to put by; or which infant, according to the flesh, is not a spiritual infant, by the spirit of regeneration: If you say that those who are of years, profess faith and repentance, and therefore are to be baptised, it is easily rejoined; what ere they profess they may be hypocrites; and then no more spiritual Infants than Judas or Simon Magus were: If you say that in charity you take them for spiritual. I answer, That an opinion that may be so easily false, and in which any man without special revelation may be deceived, is a very unproportionable ground of so sharp a controversy, as causeth your Clients to forsake the Church of Christ. Next, I say, had you but as much charity towards infants, whom no actual sins have yet stained, you would as freely judge them spiritual infants, and so, by your own Principle, to be baptised, as those of years, of whom possibly you may know much evil, without all controversy they have many sins to be repent of; and why should you not afford harmless Infants who cannot dissemble, as much charity as you do to many hypocrites, of whose spiritual regeneration, or being spiritual Infants, you cannot be certain?   
And this seems to have been the sense of the primitive Church, for in the age next to the Apostles, they gave to all baptised persons milk and honey, to represent unto them their duty, that though in age of understanding they were men, yet they were babes in Christ, and children in malice, etc.] 
Pag. 229.  
Indeed we read of such a custom in Tertullia's 
Ind● suscepti, lactis & me●●is concordiam praegustamus. Tertul. de Coronâ mil. c. 3. & ib. advers. Martion. l. 1. c. 14. Nec me●lis & lactis societatem quâ su● infantat.— Haec citat Pol. Virg. l. 4. c. 4. Buch●lcer. lnd. Chrone. Anno Christi 208. Christ. Helvici. Theatr. Histor. p. 91.  time, but that was two hundred years after Christ: but I find not the sense of the Church therein by him expressed to your purpose. And Hierom 
Hieron. in Isai. 55.  mentioneth the same custom, but giveth no such sense as you pretend to; it being well known that he was for Infant-baptism. 
— qui mos ac typus in occidentis Eccles●h● die usque ser●● ut ●● in Christ● vinam, lacque tri●●tar ad●●● Pelag. al. 3.  And it appears not by any thing you here cite or say, that such a custom proveth any thing against Baptism of Infants, for whom milk and honey is fitter nourishment th●n for the strong, 1 corinth. 3. 2. Hebr. 5. 12, 13. Your other conjecture is but feebly grounded; yet you say,   
But to infer the sense of the Pedo-baptists is so weak a manner of arguing, that Augustine, whose device it was (and men use to to be in love with their own fancies) at the most pretended it but as probable, and a mere conjecture.] 
To which we answer, 1. That things which Christ commanded to his Apostles, 
Bea●us quidem Cyprianus non aliqu●d decrei●●●ndens n●●●m, ●ed Ecclesiae Fidem firmissim●m servans, ad corrigendum ●os qui putabent ante octa●●m diem nativitatis, non esse par●ulum baptizandum— mox n●tum rite baptizari posse, cum s●● quibusdam coépiscopis censuit.  could not be Augustine's, or any humane invention, but a divine Institution, such was baptising of Infants, as will appear in due place. And this is the ground of this whole controversy. 2. That it was none of Augustine's device or fancy, with which he was therefore in love, as being his own, Augustine 
Augustin, Hieron. ep. 28.— contra Ecclesiae sundatissimum morem nemo sentiat. ib. Hec Ecclesia semper habuit, semper tenuit, hoc à majorum fide percepit, hoc usque in finem perseveranter cust●dit. Ib. Aug. de verb. Apostlie. Ser. 10.  his self clearly testifieth. S. Cyprian 
Cyprian lib. 3. Epist. 8.  (saith he) not composing any new decree, but holding the most firm faith of the Church, to correct their error, who thought that an infant might not be baptised before he were eight days old; he, with certain his fellow. Bishops, was of this sense, that a newborn infant might rightly be baptised. As for the words of Cyprian, we have cited them a little before. Cyprian with a Conncell of 66. Bishops, resolved so, not out of any then newborn opinion, or decree, but maintained that which was of old, the firm faith and doctrine of the Church which was long before him: And Cyprian flourished about the year of our Lord: 22, and was crowned with martyrdom under the persecuting Emperor Valerian, about the year 260. 
Bucholcer. lnd. Chronol. Passus est sub Valeriano & Galieno principibus persecutione Octauâ. Catalogue. script. Eccles. Hieronym. ●om. 1.  And St. Augustine flourished about the year 410. and died about the year 430. 
Ecclesia ab Apostol● traditionem accepit etiam pervulis dare baptismum. Orig. come. in Rom. 6. Vid. ib. in Levit. hom. 8 & ib. in Luc. hom 14.  So that had Augustine (as you say) devised it, i● must have 150 years' years before Augustine was born, been devised by Augustine, which had been a singular device indeed. Origen of whom you say Augustine had this tradition of Baptising Infants (pag. 237. N. 25) saith, because we are all conceived and born in sin, the Church hath received a Tradition from the Apostles to administer Baptism to little child●●. Now Origen lived about the same time with Cyprian. How you can reconcile yourself (in that you here affirm that Pedobaptism was Augustine's device, and yet confess that Augustine had it from Origen, who died so many years before Augustine was born) I say not to the truth, but to yourself, I do not understand. 
Tertul. advers. Valentin. c. 5. Hieron. Catol script. Eccles●ren l. 4 c. 14.  Justin Martyr, 
Just. Martyr. q. ●● ort●. 56.  whom Tertullian mentioneth as an Ancestor (he lived under the Emperor Antoninus Pius) and. 
Omnem atatem sanctificans per illam quae ad ip sumerat similitudinem. Omnes enim venit per semetipsum salvar●. Omnes inquim, qui per cum renascuntur in D●●m, insantes & parvulos, & ●●●●s, & ju●énes, & seniores. Ide● per omnem venit, aetatem, & insantibus infans factus sanctisicans infants, etc. Iren. l. 2. c. 29.  Irenaeus speaketh of Infants baptised in his time. Irenaeus speaking of Christ's Baptism and entrance into his public Ministry, saith, He sanctified every age by that similitude which was to himself, for he came to save all by himself; I say all, who by him are regenerate to God, infants and little ones, boys, young men and old: therefore passed he through every age, for infants he became an infant, sanctifying infants, etc. This Irenaeus was so ancient, that he saw Polycarp 
Polycarpus ●utem non solum ab Apostolis edoctus, & conversatus cum multis ex eyes, qui dominum nostrum viderunt.— quera & nos vidimus in primâ nostrâ a●ate, etc. Iren. l 3. c. 3. ●●id. Hieronym. Catol. scriptor: Eccles. Igna●.  who was an hearer of some of the Apostles of Christ. It was therefore none of Augustine's device. 
Si quisquam in hac re au●●●tatem divinam quaerat, quanquam quod universatenet Ecclesia, nec confiliis inftitut●●, sed semper retentum est, non nisi authoritate Apostolicâ traditum, rectissimè creditu● tamen verac●ter con●inere possumus, quid valeat in parv●lis, baptismi sacramentum, ex circumcisine carnis, quam prior populus accepit; quam priusquam acciperet justificatus est Abraham scut Cornelius etiam ●on● Spiritus sancti priusquam baptizaretur, etc. Cur ergo praeceptum est, ut o●●● d●inceps infantulum masculum octavo die circumcideret, qui nondum poter●t corde credere, etc. nisi quia & ipsum per s●ipsum sact amentum multum valebat? Aug. ●●●● 7. part. ●. de baptism. ●●●, Donat. l. 3. c. 24.   
3. Whether this be true which you affirm, that Augustine at the most pretended it but as probable, and a me●●conjecture (to baptise infants, as infants were circumcised) let Augustine speak for himself (who saith) If any man in this thing look for Divine authority, although that which the universal Church holdeth, being no Decree of any Council, but hath been always observed, that we must rightly believe to have been delivered no otherwise then by Apostolical authority: yet we may truly apprehend of what value the Sacrament of Baptism of Infants may be, from the circumcision of the flesh, which the former people received. Abraham was justified before he received it; as also Cornelius was endued with the gift of the holy Ghost before he was baptised, etc. why therefore was ●e commanded thenceforth to circumcise every male child on the eighth day, seeing they could not yet believe with the heart? etc. but because the Sacrament itself, is of itself of great moment: so untrue is it that Augustine either devised Infant-baptism, or so slightly pretended to it, as you report. But you go on,   
And as ill success will they have with their other Arguments as with this] 
Pag. 229. Num. 14.  
And what is that for which you cry victory in your former encounters? I will not be so expensive of time, or so much entrench upon the Readers patience, as to repeat, let him judge of what he hath read. But what other battalios come next up? You say,   
From the action of Christ's blessing Infants, to infer that they are to be baptised, proves nothing so much, as that there is great want of better Arguments.] 
A gallant flourish indeed: but seriously; Did Christ take them up in his arms, and bless them; and are they not blessed? Doth not God's blessing give both end and means that we may be so? Or spoke Christ only concerning the carnal seed of Abraham, and not of the spiritual when he said, Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven? Surely if Christ adjudge and give the Kingdom of heaven (which himself only can give, and in which none but the elect shall be) to an infant, it must be no less than impious in man, to abridge, abjudge, and bar him of admission into the visible Church of Christ by baptism, which sinful and ignorant man can administer, and which reprobates as well as the elect may and do receive. But what follows?   
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.] 
Pag. 230.  
'Tis a pretty argument wherein both Antecedent and Consequent are lame; 
John 4. 1.  'tis true and granted, that Christ in his own person baptised them not; but how prove you that he baptised them not by some one of his Disciples? What; because 'tis not written? The Apostle may give you satisfaction herein, who saith,— There are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books. 
John 20. 3.  How invalid is the Moderators Agument, 
John 21. 25.  à non scripto, ad nonfactum? Can there be a sound conclusion from rotten premises? Christ blessed children and so dismissed them, but baptised them not, therefore Infants are not to be baptised.— Antonii gladios potuit contemnere, si sic omnia dixisset.— Would it not as well follow à non scripto? Jesus granted the Centurion's request, and cured his servant, and so for aught we read dismissed them, but baptised them not, Mat. 8. 10, 3. Christ healed the sick of the palsy and dismissed him; but for aught we read baptised him not; Matth. 9 2, 6, 7. Mark 2. 23. 5. 11, 12. He healed the woman of the bloody issue; but for aught we read baptised her not, Mat. 9 22. Mark. 5. 34. So the Ruler of the Synagogues daughter, Matth. 9 25. Mark 5. 41, 42. So he dismissed the man out of whom he had cast many Devils, Luke 8. 38, 39 we read not that he baptised him. So he pronounced pardon, accepted the repentance, and dismissed the penitent sinner in peace, Luke 7. 50. It were too long to repeat all. So he cured the lame at Bethesda, John 5. 8. Where (though so near the convenience of water) we read not that he so much as once spoke of Baptism to him; neither when finding him in the Temple he said to him,— thou art healed, sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee, 
Vers. 14.  can any therefore reasonably conclude those men and women of years whose bodies Christ cureth, whose repentance he accepteth, whose faith his self testifieth (who cannot be deceived) were not, and therefore are not (though of years) to be baptised? He that had his time of doing those favours to them, was free to take his time of enjoining their baptism: And how could you prove that these children were not baptised before or after they were brought to Christ? Before you censure our Arguments as invalid and weak; do yourself the right to consider your own.   
— As we are sure that God hath not commanded Infants to be baptised]. 
Page 230. Num. 15.  
True, God hath not given the command to the Infant himself, but to others whom it concerneth, we are sure he hath: if you mean the first, you triste; if the second, you do, upon the matter, beg the question.   
Quid ego festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem peccatorum, was the question of Tertullian (lib. de Bapt.) he knew no such danger from their original guilt, as to drive them to a laver, of which in that age of innocence's, they had no need, as he conceived.] 
Pag. 230. Num. 16.  
Whether infants can make haste to baptism, I appeal to experience: Whether they are innocent and have no need of baptism, as Pelagius affirmed, I appeal to your own conscience. 
Praeser, bitur nemini sine baptism●●●mpetere salutem— ●●m à pri●●dia cir●●●● ut praeceptam Dei excederet, & propterea in mortem datus exinde totum ge●● de suo semine insectum, s●ae etiam d●●●●●tionis tradacem fecit. Te tul. de ●est. anim. c. 3.  Do you think there is no danger from infants original guilt which makes them stand in need of the laver of regeneration for the remission of their sin? If you do not, why do you urge against us an authority which yourself consenteth not unto? To let pass what Tertullian meant when he affirmed such a necessity of baptism, as that he said, It is prescribed that no man shall be saved without baptism; which he inferreth from John 3. 5. pray teach me what he meant when he said; Man from his beginning circumvented, so as that he would transgress God's command, therefore was condemned to death, whereby he also made all mankind, being infected from his seed, a traduction (or derivation from one to another) of his own damnation: Think you damnation no danger? or did not Tertullian 
Tertal. de Bapt. c. 18.  know what he wrote? How he forgot himself and the truth when he would have children come to Christ only then when they could learn and know Christ, whereas Christ said, 
Mark 10. 14.  Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not; I can give no better account, then for other his errors; only let the Reader note, that in the same place he affirmeth, that the unmarried also are to be deferred, and not baptised until they are married, or settled in continency; but I spare this: We look for truth, and shall be glad to own and embrace it, in what Author soever we find it; but against the truth we are bound to none: only we may note, that if Tertullian 
Non minore de causâ innpti quoque procr●sti●●ndi. Tertul. q. sup.  spoke in the forecited place concerning Infants that Pedobaptisme was in his time in use in the Church; and so it must appear most false, which you before said, that it was Augustine's device.   
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 so 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, etc. 
Pag. 229.  
What need this stir you make to trouble the peace of Christ's Church? Why trouble you yourself with our stir to do that which Christ commandeth us? Shall we suffer the Wolf quietly to take away sheep from Christ's flock (as we daily see by the sleepy cowardice and dangerous silence of some temporising Pastors, who possibly have learned from that old Courtier Crispus—.— qui nunquam direxirbrachia contra torrentem) nay, but we know there is a dangerous silence. See Ezek. 3. 18. Ester 4. 14. But to the matter, we say, that as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive, 1 Cor. 15. 22. which being restrained according to the Apostles intention, to the faithful and elect, might reasonably conclude, that as all men, even the faithful and elect, were by natural propagation condemnable in Adam, God justly imputing to his whole posterity that his act, whereby he not only made his own person guilty, but also corrupted his nature: so are they by regeneration saved in Christ, God mercifully imputing his merits to them for their justification: so that, as they were condemnable for that they did not in their own persons commit, so shall they be saved by that which Christ, not they, did freely without the works of the Law: but of what consequence is solemnity? Would you have our fall in Adam, and repair in Christ run literally parallel, even to circumstances? But what manner of arguing this were, we have often said. How many ridiculous consequences would you thence infer? concerning a man, a woman, and a Serpent, and no more in the Scene: a garden, a fruit, etc. But remembering that we are speaking of sacred things, we resolve; that a Sacrament which is instituted of God to this end, 
Ursin. Catech.  that it may be a solemn receiving into the Church, and a severing, or sign of distinguishing the whole Church, & all her parts, from all other Sects, aught to be ministered solemnly, that others may take notice of the same, and that it may be the stricter bond to the baptised when they come to years, to hold them into saith, obedience, renunciation of the world, impious desires, and carnal affections, into which condition they were solemnly, and before many witnesses admitted by baptism.   
And it is (you say) too narrow a conception of God Almighty because he hath tied us to the observation of the Ceremonies of his own institution, that therefore he hath tied himself to it.] 
Pag. 231.  
We never had that conceit, you mistake the matter: we say not that God is tied to his own Ordinances, as if he could no otherwise save any, but that we are tied to God's Ordinances, because they are the revealed will of God, which man is bound to obey. 
— Interim tamen ex eo ●●n potest inferri baptismum non esse ordinarium regenerationis medium ad cujus usunt a●●igati turnus'. Joh. Gerhard; de Baptism. Sect. 2. class. 2.  And though God be the most free Agent, and not tied, yet it doth not hence follow, that baptism is not the ordinary means of regeneration, to which we are tied. God hath not in your sense tied himself to the baptism of persons in years, as may appear in the penitent thief, who unbaptised was saved, Luke 23. 43. It is so in his other ordinances.— It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe, 1 Cor. 1. 21. Therefore ordinarily faith is by hearing the word, Rom. 10. 17. yet God hath not so absolutely tied it to preaching, but that he could at his pleasure convert Saul breathing threatenings, Acts 9 Neither is he tied to the Eucharist: would you conclude hence that men and women of years are not tied to be baptised, hear the word, or receive the Lords Supper, because God, and his free grace, are not tied to these external and ordinary means? If not, what meaneth that your medium (God hath not tied himself) and what can it more conclude against Infant's baptism, then against the baptism, hearing, receiving the Eucharist by persons of years?  
Yet we affirm, that when God made the promise to Abraham, being willing more abundantly to show to the heirs of promise, the immutability of his council, confirmed it by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, etc. Heb. 6. 17, 18. In which sense, God hath bound himself to make good to us, all that which the Seals of his Covenant by himself appointed, hold forth unto us. But you add,   
Many thousand ways there are by which God can bring any reasonable soul to himself.] 
We answer: The admitting of the one is not always the excluding of all other: and we question not God's power herein, but his will; here is an Ignoratio elenchi. 
Inclus● unius non est exclusio alterius. Gerh. ●●●. ser. 3. n. 188 sin.  What think you of the validity of that Argument which is from God's power to his will? He can open the eyes of the blind, and convert the hearts of temporizers, and professed enemies of his Church and Truth, I would I were assured that he would now do so.   
But (you say) 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. 
Here is again a fallacious arguing: You take the thing in question for your medium: The question is, Whether baptism of Infants he a divine or humane institution, upon which dependeth wholly whether we ought o●ught not to baptise Infants? Now you would prove that we ought not to carry infants to Christ by baptism, because he appointed or directed us not so to do; but (as you say) we do it of our own heads: Nay, but confining sacramental administrations to such time, age, or other circumstance, by Christ never limited or enjoined, it will-worship, and man's invention: This your conceit is so poor and low, that a puny Sophister would be ashamed of it.   
Only this (you say) that God hath as great a care of Infants, as of others, etc.] 
Page 231. Num. 17.  
Here is another argument as fe●ble as the foregoing: What? because God hath as great a care of them as of others, therefore we must have no care of them in the application of the ordinary means? so hath he a care for their bodily preservation and sustenance; doth that prove that we ought not to feed or clothe them? God respectively careth for all the Creatures, he giveth to the beast his food, Psal. 147. 9 
Mat. 6. 26, 28.  Were it good Georgics to say, Trouble not yourself to fodder your cattle, or lose them from their stall that they may drink? Who knoweth not that God hath appointed ordinary mean, although he can do it without such means, and though he say not that he will not otherwise preserve them, but leave them to the dictates of common reason to conclude?   
— God (you say) 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,— is no good Argument, etc.] 
Prove that one Assertion, That God will by his own immediate mercy save Infants, and have no means used thereto, and you have the Cause: but Christ hath appointed baptism for the ordinary means to bring people into his visible Church, that they may be saved: that he doth otherwise, that is, by an immediate act of mercy save some, to whom his all-disposing providence hath not given time or means, as in Infants dying before they were or could be baptised; this variety not the Rule, for our question is not concerning them, and to say that therefore he will do it by an external act, because he will save them, or bring them thither whither he hath intended them, by his own immediate mercy, is no good Argument, you may lay your life o●'t. Immediately signifieth without means, so that Immediately by means is a contradiction in the adject: this were to my sense so far from a good argument, that I should doubt whether such a Disputant were awake, or not: Immediately by an external act and ministry? none of ours ever so reasoned.   
And why cannot God as well do his mercies to infants now immediately, as he did before the institution either of circumcision or baptism? 
Once again we say, We question not God's power: truly nor his will in many Infants dying before they could be baptised: the question is, whether we may or aught, according to Gods revealed will, baptise them? In which it seemeth to us a very weak query, And why cannot God as well do his mercies to Infants now immediately? etc.]   
However (you say) there is no danger that Infants should perish for want of this external ministry, etc. 
Pag. 231. Num. 18. ] 
Not to dispute Gods secret counsels, we say, the danger will be to the despiser and neglecter of God's Ordinance; wherein Tertullia's Assertion may serve for a reason: Because (saith he) he shall be guilty of a man's destruction, who shall omit to do that which he freely might have performed. 
Quoniam reus erit perditi hominis, si supersederit pr●●●are, quod lib. ●● potuir. Tertul. de bapt. c. 17.    
For (say you) Water and the Spirit in this place (John 3. 5.) signify the same thing; and by water is meant the effect of the Spirit, cleansing and purifying the soul etc.] 
It is true that Calvin, Oecolampadius, and some others, do not think that Christ doth there precisely speak of Baptism, but that he either opposed it to Pharisaical washings and purifications; to which possibly Nicodemus, with whom he then discoursed, might be too much addicted: Or, that those words are simply to be interpreted concerning Regeneration; but Justin Martyr, 
Just. Mart. Ap●l. 2. Ambresde Abraham. l. 2 c. 11. & ib. ●●. ●●. lib. 10  chrysostom, Theophilact, Cyril, Euthymius, Augustine, Rupertus, Bonaventure, Musculus, B. Aretius, R, Rolloc, Pelargus, and others expound these words concerning Baptism, the Sacrament of Regeneration; the present speech of Christ being concerning Regeneration; and it is most probable that Christ therein respected the common order of the Church, mentioning the Spirit and Water; to show that we must be baptised if we will be saved; yet 'tis not the water but God's holy Spirit which washeth away our sins: Neither doth he so simply and necessarily tie the grace and efficacy of God's Spirit to the Sacrament of Baptism, as if none could be saved without Baptism, 
Sic accipienda, est, etc. ●t respe●●erit communem Ecclesiae ordinem, neque tamen simpliciter gratiam Dei adsirixerit sacramento, quasi sit absolutè & sine exceptione necessarium, Beza in Joh 3. 5.  and that God could not extraordinarily and immediately save. Whatsoever Papists say to the contrary to assert their bloody decree and cruel doctrine concerning Infants dying without Baptism: yet their Schoolmen, and they, in their more sober fits, confess, that God hath not absolutely tied his grace to the Sacraments. Christ saith, He that shall believe and be baptised, shall be saved; 
Deus non alligavit gratiam suam sacramen●us.  but in the Antithesis he saith not, Whosoever shall not be baptised, shall not be saved; to show us, that faith alone may sometime be sufficient to salvation, as in the penitent Thief; but nothing can suffice without faith; because without it, 
Ipse (Christius) p●●uit effe●●ium sacramentorum sine exteriore sacramento confer. Aquin. 3●. l. 64 a. 3. c.  it is impossible to please God. And because faith only apprehendeth Christ, in whom alone there is salvation, Acts 4THS To conclude, it doth not appear, that Water and the Spirit in the forecited place, John 3. 5. signify one and the same thing. Although Christ's Baptism with the Spirit, (which gives the effect of Baptism) were more excellent than John Baptists, 

— Deus qui suam potentiam sacra mentis non alligavit. P. Lombard. l. 4. distinct. 4. ●. Mark. 16. 16.  
— Cautè & vigilantèr non re●●tierit (qui ver● baptiza●us non fuerint) sed tantùm, qui vere non ●rediderit condemnabiiur nimirum inn ●ens solum interdum sidem sufficere ad salatem, & sine i●sa, sufficere nihil. ● Bernard. Ep 77.   or any Ministers of the Gospel: for so is it still, and yet no sober man will deny, that the water in baptism and the Spirit, do differ, as the external sign and inward grace thereby signified. You say further,   
— You may as well conclude, that infants must also pass through the fire, as through the water, etc.] 
This assertion might better have suited with the dream of some fanatical Jacobite: 
Jacobite n●n aquam sed ig ●●● ma●e●ium baptisim ●●●●●●.  What will not such an advocate say for his Clients? I appeal to your own conscience, may we as well conclude against God's word, as for it? God expressly saith, Deut. 18. 10. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire; and it is above all rational controversy, that he instituted baptising with water, who said, Baptise all Nations, without any exception at all to infants: this is a poor trick of yours to elude Scripture: And where doth Peter say the same thing, that we may as well conclude that infants must also pass through the fire, as through the water? No, no, Peter by the Spirit of truth speaketh another thing, indeed intimating by those words, 1 Pet. 3. 21. Not the washing of the flesh, but the confidence (as we translate, but the answer) of a good conscience toward God— the effects of the inward baptism; which the Syriac in his Paraphrastical interpretation of that place, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  maketh more clear, but confessing God in a pure conscience: as when in the peace thereof we call upon him with an holy security of his hearing us, 
Sed confitentes Deum in conscientiá purá. Tremel.  which can be only in the inward Baptism, which the Spirit of Jesus giveth by faith and sanctification, wherein we have peace toward God in the assurance of our justification, Rom. 5. 1. Rom. 8. 15, 16. So that the sum is, that the outward sign, the water and washing of the body in baptism, is not sufficient to salvation, if the Spirit of Jesus give not the inward effect thereof; and therefore it is dangerous to live securely in sin and unbelief, as too many do, in vain confidence that they must needs be saved, because they have been baptised into the visible Church of Christ: No, but the external sign availeth not where the inward grace thereby signified is wanting. So in the preaching of the Gospel, & administration of the holy Eucharist, man's ministry can nothing prevail to the receivers salvation, without God's Spirit giving the inward effect: so that Peter briefly toucheth the power & use of baptism, recalling us to the testimony of a good conscience, & that confidence therein, which can endure the sight of God and his Tribunal, and fly unto him in all wants through Christ, But this Scripture is fanatically Perverted by Schuincfeld & others, who would hence conclude against the effect of the Sacrament in the elect, whereas the Apostle affirmeth not, that the institution of Christ for baptising the body with water, is vain or effectless; but secretly admonisheth carnal Gospelers, that they rest not in their security, but consult their own consciences, whether they find there the effect of their baptism: so that he neither saith, that infants may as well pass through the fire as through the water, as you trifle; nor is this place any thing to the purpose in this question of Infant-baptism: so that your following confused Hypotheses are of no value or use, except to puzzle the Reader to find out what you mean, which he hardly shall: Therefore when you express yourself more orderly and clearly, we owe you an Answer.   
This (you say) 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 comederitis carnem filii hominis, etc.] 
This is another argument of Anabaptists à pari: if infants (say they) are to be baptised, they are also to be admitted to the Lords Supper. But in this agument there is a Sophisma ●lenchi: for first it wants the condition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; if we follow your sense concerning spiritual infants, 
Pag. 229.  taking infants for spiritual or regenerate persons in the major, and for those who are literally infants in the minor: and it wanteth also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is no question but that baptised infants have right to the holy Communion, as they have to strong meat, but not a capacity as such, or while they are infants: and God hath in express terms restrained the Lord's supper to those who can actually apprehend, remember, & declare forth Christ's death, 1 Cor. 11. 26. which because infants cannot do, we give them not the Communion. Secondly, God hath denounced a grievous curse, or punishment against any that shall presume without due examination of himself, to eat of that bread & drink of that cup: but not so concerning Baptism, it being the seal of our new-birth and reception into the visible Church and Covenant, which hath no such condition annexed, as may justly exclude Infants in respect of any present non-performance thereof. But the Lord's Supper is the Seal of our gro●●h in grace, and spiritual strength, instituted for the confirmation of our admittance into, and our continuance in the Church of Christ, whose death and passion for our redemption, we thereby show forth and commemorate, for our spiritual perfection, nourishment, and strengthening in faith and other graces of his Spirit, for our assurance, that God having once received us into his favour, will continue his mercy to us in Christ: By these disparities the invalidity of the Pleaders Argument may appear. 
See more hereof, Mr. Cobbet explic. Luke 18. 15. Page 121, 122. ●nit.  And if it were true which he further saith, that the wit of man is not able to show a disparity in the sanction, etc. yet the wisdom of God is able, and hath declared this difference in holy Scripture; and the same can show more than the wit of man can discern, and hath showed more than the learned Pleader doth, or will understand, who I conceive, doth not yet know all that the wit of man, or all the world can inform him of; but is it not better even for those who have been in the Mount with God, to cast the veil of modest humility over those excellencies which they have received, and with which they shine to others admiration, then to ostent them to the contempt of others? The Apostle of Christ was rap't up into the third Heaven, and yet professed— we know in part, and we prophesy in part,— 1 Cor. 13. 9 
2 Cor. 12. 2.    
But you further say,— Since the ancient Church did with an equal opinion of necessity, give them the Communion, etc.] 
That which you said a little before,— They are as honest and as reasonable that do neither, to wit, baptise infants, or give them the Comunion, as those that understood the Obligation to be Parallel, we may very well believe and wish, that either of them may prove honest hereafter. But to that which you say, That the ancient Church did with an equal opinion of necessity give them the Communion, I answer, 1. with Tertullian, 
Id esse Dominicum & verum quod sit prius traditum: id autem extraneum & falsum quod sit posteriu●●nmissum. Tertul. de Prescript. c. 31.  That is of the Lord and true, which was first delivered; but that is extraneous and false which is afterward received in. 
Non debemus attendere, quid aliquis ante nos faciendum pu●averit; sed quid qui aute omnes est Christus fe●erit: neque enim hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet, sed Dei veritatem. Cypr. l. 2. Ep. 3.  And with Cyprian, We ought not to heed what some before us have thought was to be done; but what Christ did, who was before all: for we ought not to follow the custom of men, but the truth of God. 2 Your own rule must bind you, (though it cannot others who consent not thereto) they who reject tradition when 'tis against them, must not pretend it at all for them, pag. 237. Numb 25: 3 It is considerable in that custom of the church, as some other incoveniences, which Augustine saith, 
Aluid est quod docemus, aliud quod sustinemus: aliud quod praecipere jubemur; aluid quod emendare praecipimur, & dree emendemus tolerare compellimur. To. 6. contr. Faust. Manich. l. 20. c. 21. Quis comeditur zelo demus Deit qui omnia quae forte ubi vidit perverta satagit emendare, cupit corrigere, non quiescit, si ●mendare non potest, tolerat, gemit: non excutitur de areâ gran●m: sustinet paleam, ut intret in horreum cum pales fuerit separata. Aug. tract. 1●. in Joh. 2. In his enim rebus de quibus nihil certi statuit Scriptura divina, vios populi Dei, vel instituta majorum, pro lege temenda sunt— orietur interminata lucta●io— utique cavendum est ne tempestate contentionis serenitas charitatis obnubile●●. Aug. Casulano ep. 86.  It is (saith he) one thing which we teach, and another which we endure; one thing which we are enjoined to command, and another thing which we are commanded to amend; and until we amend, we are compelled to endure it. And again, who is eaten with the zeal of God's house? why, he that endeavoureth and desireth to amend all that he sees amiss; he resteth not; if he cannot amend it, he endureth it, he sighs: the grain is not tossed out of the floor; it endures the chaff, that it may enter into the granary when the chaff is winnowed out. 4 We adhere not so to tradition, that we universally receive all that which was done or said of old: things delivered by some, but not generally received by the Church, we esteem but superstructions of particular men, or superseminations, which possibly may spread far, as many pernicious opinions have done; yet no sober man ever took them for Apostolical, or so much as Ecclesiastical traditions: we neither reject any tradition which appeareth to be Apostolical (if not peculiar to their times, or suited peculiarly to certain times, places, or persons) nor do we rashly receive any tradition for such, except we are certain that the Scripture determineth nothing against it, or where strong consequence from thence justifieth it. 5 We conceive Augustine's rule herein to be good: In those things (saith he) concerning which divine Scripture determineth nothing certainly, the custom of God's people, or institution of our ancestors are to be held for a law— otherwise, endless contention will arise— also we must beware that the calm of charity be not clouded by the storm of contention. 6 We will not rashly descent from reverend antiquity, wherein it dissenteth not from the truth: we love peace with all who hold that in fundamentals at least, and therefore will follow Augustin's advice, in that he piously saith concerning his reader— where (saith he) he knows his error, 
Ubi errorem suum cognoscit, redeat ad me; ubi meu●, revocet me, etc. Aug. de trivit. l. 1. c. 2.  let him return to me; where mine, let him recall me: our rule being, that of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 11 1. be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ: more no good man will require, nor render less to Ancestors. 7 Last we say that the Scripture which you cite, Joh. 6. 53. except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you; is not spoken concerning a Sacramental, but a spiritual feeding; and although 
* Bellar●●. de sacr. Euch l. 1. c. 5. 7. ib. l. 2. c. 8. ib. l. 4. c. 25. Goster Enchirid. de Eucharist. Sacr. 7. Suares. disp. p. 46. Sec. 2. Maldon in Joh. 6. Gab●. Vasquez. disp. 179. c. 4. ●● Aquin. 3a. q. 65. a. 4. 2m. dicit illud— est intelligendum de spirituali m●nducatione. Sci Pet. Lombard. dist. 8. D. Dist. 9 A. B. Jansenius concord. Evang. c. 59 Dan. Chamier Panstrat. To. 4. l. 11. c. 3. 4.  * some of the Jesuits and other Papists contend against us herein, yet ●● some of the most sober of them acknowledge that those words are not to be understood concerning eating or receiving the Lords super; which ours generally maintain: you might do yourself right to join with us, and not with the most eager Jesuits concerning the spiritual feeding of infants to eternal life by the merit of Christ applied to them for their Union with him, and salvation in and by him, we willingly accord: the manner of effecting by the secret power of the holy Ghost, we inquire not after, because it is not revealed, but for the reasons alleged, we give them not the communion.   
Next you say— If Anabaptist shall be a name of disgrace, why shall not some other name be invented for them that deny to communicate infants, which shall be equally disgraceful, & c?] 
That would be a rare invention indeed: but if to call Anabaptists Anabaptists, be just, why find you fault with it? if evil or unjust, why consult you how to imitate it by way of revenge? is it not a shame to be such, as we are or may well be ashamed to be called? truly we allow not any disgraceful name or reviling; but know that the name injureth not where the thing itself is not disgraceful: some name we must distinguish them by: if you can invent a more true and proper one, we shall be beholding to you for an invention, and they for a new name. Next you say,   
That the discourse of S. Peter, 
Pag. 233. Nam. 19  which is pretended for the intitling infants to the promise of the holy Ghost, and by consequence to baptism, which is supposed to be its instrument and conveyance, is wholly a fancy, and hath in it nothing of certainty ordemonstration, and not much probability.] 
We answer: your words carry a dangerous show of blasphemy, but we desire to allow them the fairest interpretation which can be made of them, and suppose you meant not to say (as the connexion of your words imports) that S. Peter's discourse is wholly a fancy, etc. but either that the pretence from these words intitling infants to the promise of the holy Ghost, and so by consequence to baptism, or as you after affirm, that baptism is not the means of conveying the holy Ghost, some of these you take to be wholly a fancy. 
Pag. 234.  To which we reply; that we neither affirm, nor conceive that these words of S. Peter had a promise for infants as such, to receive the extraordinary, and visible gifts of the holy Ghost which then flourished in the primitive Church, and which men of years commonly after baptism than received; but that promise was for present addressed to S. Peter's hearers which were pricked in their hearts and said unto Peter and the rest of the Apostles, men and brethren what shall we do? and to whom Peter said, repent and be baptised every one of you, etc. to which he encourageth them by three arguments or motives: first from God's abundant mercy in the remission of their sins, however grievous. Secondly from his gracious beneficence, as well in giving, as forgiving, and ye shall receive the gifts, etc. for your confirmation. Thirdly from the extent of God's federal promise; for the promise is to you and your children: that promise is recorded Gen. 17. 7. I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, to be a God unto thee and thy seed after thee, etc. these words S. Peter relateth to, when he persuaded them to receive baptism the seal of God's new covenant with them in Christ, 
Rom. 4. 11.  a seal of the same righteousness of faith in Christ; and he bringeth down infants right to the seal of the covenant with Abraham's carnal seed (that is, circumcision) to their right to the seal of the covenant with his spiritual seed under the gospel, that is baptism for the remission of sins: so that if S. Peter's argument may pass with you for demonstration, and not be mistaken for a fancy, this shows the right and title which infants have to baptism, grounded on the sure promise of God, which the Apostle well knew was first sealed with infant-circumcision, as well as circumcision of proselyted men of years; and therefore applieth it to the seal of the promise under the gospel, to wit baptism: Be baptised every one of you● who? all those to whom the promise of God is: that is, you and your children, for the promise is to you and them. But you say,   
This is a promise that concerneth them, as they are reasonable creatures, etc. 
This is a reasonless assertion: for it baptism concern them as they are reasonable creatures, than all such are concerned herein: and so the promise which S. Peter there mentioneth, is to all reasonable creatures, 
Acts 2. 38, 39  Jews, Turks, Painims, for these are all reasonable creatures, and may in their conversion have a title to it, in proportion to their nature: The argument is fallacious à non causâ pro causâ (except the causa stolida, or causa sine quâ non) though none but reasonable creatures have interest herein, yet all reasonable creatures have it not; neither always; as in unbelief, impenitency, or out of the covenant, as infants of unbelieving parents: it is not their reason, but God's covenant which gives them interest in the promise of salvation and all things thereto subordinate and belonging. Note here, to what unreasonable conclusions wilful error will lead men at last: what more perverse, then in the prosecution of their dislike to infant-baptisme, 
See Mr. Cobbet explicat. Luke 18. 15. Pa. 126.  to allow more to children of professed enemies of Christ, as Turks and Jews, then to infants of Christian parents with whom God made his covenant of grace and mercy? They affirm that even infants of Turks and Jews are sanctified in the moment of their birth, 
Mr. Fisher in his dispute at Folkston in Kent. March 10 1650.  but will not allow children of believing parents baptism, which is but the external seal of the covenant, which the very reprobate may, and doth sometime receive at their hands, who cannot judge of any persons final estate: and who knows not, that sanctification is incomparably greater and more excellent than the external seal: this man can give, that God only can give, and giveth it to the elect only; and without that, the external seal shall avail nothing. But you go on.   
Besides this, I say, the words mentioned in S. Peter's Sermon (which are the only record of the promise) are interpreted upon a weak mistake: the promise belongs to you, and to your children; therefore infants are actually receptive of it in that capacity.] 
Certainly Gods promise is of that invincible strength that whosoever pleads against it, none (no not the gates of hell) shall ever overthrow it: and as certainly the inference was strong once, upon the same ground, when God had made the promise to Abraham and his seed; and therefore, and then his infants in that capacity were receptive, actually receptive, of the seal of the same righteousness of faith: and certainly infants do no less belong to the covenant and Church of God, 
Jerem. Basting, de baptism.  than those that are of years of discretion, which is evident by Gods promise made unto Abraham, I will establish my covenant between me and thee, 
Quaest 74. 4. See the learned and judicious Mr. Richard Baxter, on Matth. 28. 19 plain Scripture proof of infants Church-membership, and baptism.  and thy seed after thee— this is my covenant— every male child among you shall be circumcised— he that is eight days old shall be circumcised— the very same promise doth S. Peter rehearse and expound Act. 2. 39 for to you is the promise, and to your children, and to all that are a far off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call: for indeed, by one spirit we are all baptised into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, etc. And let the reader mark, that after the Apostle had exhorted every one of them to be baptised for the remission of sins, 
Genes. 1●. 7. 10, 12.  he deriveth not the ground and reason thereof from their age, 
1 Cor. 12, 13.  nor from their repentance, nor from their years of discretion, but from the promise of God, which was no less to their children in that very capacity, then to themselves: for the sign of the covenant, Baptism, appertaineth to them also, as being partakers of the common salvation in Christ, Lastly, how our infants have forfeited or lost the capacity, which 'tis most certain the infants of Jews had, I know not, nor will the pleader ever make it appear to us. You say further,   
But he, that whenever the word (children) is used in Scripture shall by (children) understand infants, must needs believe, that in all Israel there were no men, but all were infants: and if that had been true, it had been the greater wonder they should overcome the Anakims, and beat the King of Moab, and march so far, and discourse so well, for they were all called the children of Israel. 
We know the word (children) importeth not always infants; what then? because it doth not in every place of Scripture signify infants, 
Videat jui●ult. V. Schindler. pentegl●● in ●●  therefore doth it not any where, no not where infants are spoken of? the promise before specified was to all Israel, 
Pag. 212. E 213. c. 214 c. l. Gen. 17. ●. Act. 2. 39  and their infants, and unto them the seal of the covenant and promise appertained; but because the men of wisdom and valour were included under the name of children, were there no infants among them? or do you not take a child of eight days old (when it was by God's command and covenant to receive the seal) to be an infant? and why not now? seeing the promise is as well and sure to us, who (though then far off) have now by the free mercy of God, been called to the saving knowledge of the gospel: for that promise of God to Abraham, did not so belong to his seed according to the flesh, as that it appertains not unto us also: for the Apostle clearly testifieth, that it was not given to Abraham or his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith— and he was the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised, that righteousness might be impured to them also— and again he saith— they which are of faith, 
Rom. 4. 11. 13. Gal. 3. 7.  the same are the children of Abraham: so Christ said that Zache converted to the same faith, 
Luk. 1●. 9  was that day the son of Abraham: and indeed the eternal covenant which God made with Abraham's seed, that he would be their God, is not chiefly verified in his carnal seed, for very few of them for some hundred years last passed have been God's people, but rather professed enemies to those that are: and therefore that covenant must be understood of Abraham's children according to that promise, which is as sure and well to us who believe, as ever it was to the Israelites: and so we and our children are as justly to be reckoned children of Abraham, and heirs of that promise, as they ever were: and if within the covenant, and heirs of the same promise, what incapacity barreth our children from the same privileges thereto subordinate, and from the seal of admittance unto the same, more than barred the carnal or natural children of Abraham from the seal of the covenant, which then was in use?   
And for the allegation of S. Paul, that infants are holy if their parents be faithful, 
Pag. 233. Numb. 20.  it signifies nothing but that they are holy by designation, just as Jeremy, and John Baptist were sanctified in their mother's womb, that is, they were appointed and designed for holy ministeries, etc.] 
We answer, whether you mean literally by holy ministries, the office of priest or prophet; or mystically, 
Rev. 1. 6. 1 Pet. 2. 5.  a royal priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifice acceptable to God by Jesus Christ, that which you affirm will appear very false; for many of the children of believers, are neither priests, prophets, nor so sanctified as to offer up spiritual sacrifice acceptable to God: now the Apostle saith not, else were some of your children unholy; but, 
1 Cor. ●. 14.  now are they holy, without exception of any: so that his words being infallibly true, there must be some such holiness there intended, as universally concerns all that are born of believing parents; which cannot be true in your sense of disignation to holy ministries, nor in the other sense concerning sanctification by the spirit of adoption and regeneration peculiar to the elect of God: nor is it to be understood, as some think, of a mere political cleanness (seeing that, out of the Church also, there is a difference between the legitimate and spurious children) it must be understood therefore of a federal, or ecclesiastical holiness, to which reprobates (if born of believing parents, or at least of either parent being a believer, and within the covenant) may have right as well as the elect: so had Ishmael, Esau, and millions more, as well as Isaac and jacob, by this federal or ecclesiastical holiness they have right unto the seal of initiation, and admittance into the Church; whereas they who are born of both parents without the Church, are counted unclean, that is, God's promise and the seal thereof appertain not unto them: neither may they be baptised, until growing up and being instructed, they repent and embrace the faith of Christ, and it is not improbable which some say, that the form of the Apostles speaking seemeth derived from the levitical law; in which it was ordained, 
Jo. Gerhard. de S. Bap. S 4. de paedobapt.  that some persons should for a time be barred (as unclean) from coming within the tents of Israel: so the children of infidels are unclean, and not presently to be admitted into the Church by baptism which is the door and inlet thereto, ever standing open to the clean: and as under the law, some beasts were clean and some unclean, that is by a levitical or ceremonial cleanness, or uncleanness, for it was neither spiritual, nor civil: so the Apostle 1 Cor. 7. 14. understandeth an ecclesiastical holiness, 
D. Mencer. To. 3. disp. 14. thes. 116. citat. a J. Geth. quo sup.  that is, a Church— privilege, to be admitted to baptism: so that indeed the Pleader weakly mistaketh when he concludeth, that just so the children of Christian parents are sanctified, that is, designed to the service of Jesus Christ, and the future participation of the promises: but he saith further,  And as the promise appertains not (for aught appears) to infants in that capacity and consistence, but only by the title of their being reasonable creatures, and when they come to that act of which by nature they have the faculty, etc. 
Pag. 234. Num. 21. ] 
No colour or proportion can appear to the blind, or those who wilfully shut their eyes, nor any truth, be it never so evident to them on whom is the curse Isai. 6. 9, 10. 
Matth. 13. 14, 15.  As for that you say concerning the title of their being reasonable creatures, I refer the reader to that which hath been answered, Numb. 19 
Pag. 226.  Only adding here: if the promise of God appertain to infants only as they are reasonable creatures, what was the privilege of the Jew, or what profit was there of circumcision? 
Rom. 3. 1. 2●  the Apostle saith, much every way: and what is the advantage of the believing Christians child, and God's covenant with them? what, no more then of Turks, and Jews? where is then that promise, 
Genes. 1●. 7. Act. 2. 39  I will be a God unto thee, and thy seed, interpreted by S. Peter, the promise is to you and your children, and to as many as the Lord our God shall call? what, is it of force only to men and women of years; where's the infant's part? where is his privilege of federal holiness, as being borne of believing parents? What must they be interessed only when they come to that act of which by nature they have the faculty? That is the act of understanding, faith and repentance? In those acts, the persons and children of Turks, and Jews have a right in the same promises; you cannot exclude any person from baptism, who believes in Christ, repenteth, and desireth baptism at your hands: Thus you make the promise of God concerning the children of the faithful of no effect, by your tradition and vain opinion. But to amend this, you say,   
Baptism is not the means of conveying the holy Ghost.] 
I suppose you mean the ordinary gifts and graces of the holy Ghost, as faith, love, hope, sanctity, etc. if not, there may be a double fallacy in your assertion: First in the term (conveying) and next in the term (holy Ghost) both which may be homonymically intended; and then your discourse is merely captions; and ●o discover it, is a sufficient answer: and indeed by your following words, (God by that miracle did give testimony, etc.) it seems you mean, that baptism is not now the ordinary means of conveying the holy Ghost, that is, the gift of miracles unto the baptised: if so, here is both an homonymia, and an ignoratio elenchi: Your reason being reduced to a Syllogism, you might take these words (the holy Ghost) for the ordinary gifts and graces of God, necessary to salvation, in the one proposition, and for the extraordinary in the other, and so the question were mistaken; which is not whether baptism be an ordinary means of conveying the extraordinary gifs of the holy Ghost into the baptised, as speaking divers unstudied languages, curing the sick, raising the dead, casting out devils, etc. which we affirm not; but whether baptism (as the word preached) be not the external ordinary means by God appointed, to seal us up to a lively hope in Christ, to beget faith, and to engage us to repentance and newness of life? to which, all that you here trifle concerning imposition of hands, and insinuation of rite to confirmation, is nothing to purpose; neither is the case of Cornelius and Peter's argument thereon, any ways advantageous to you: for, you confess it a miracle; and how then is it pertinent to our present question? You say, that God by that miracle, did give testimony, that the persons of the men were in great disposition to heaven, and therefore were to be admitted to those rites, which are the ordinary inlets into the kingdom of heaven: I then demand, if that argument be good, Are not children of believing parents to be admitted to those rites which are the ordinary inlets into the kingdom of heaven, seeing they are also in great disposition to heaven whom Christ blessed, and proposed for patterns to all that shall enter therein? But we answer, 1. That the great disposition which you talk of, was not so much the gift of miracles, as the persons inward baptism by the spirit of regeneration and sanctification: for the gift of miracles is not of itself, any certain argument of salvation: see Matth 7. 22, 23. but this was a sufficient warrant to Peter to baptise them, as being marked out thereby for the visible Church at least, into which elect and reprobate may come. 2. To the main we answer, That as by delivering a key, putting in possession of an house is not only signified, but also livery and seisin, 
Basting. quo sup, de bapt. in●●. 1.  the conveyance and chirogrophu●● are passed, confirmed and actually made sure: So in baptism by water, the washing which is wrought by the blood of Christ, 
●●● de relig. Christian. par, ●. conclus. 9  is not only figured, but also at last fulfilled in the elect by Christ. 3. In a right use of the Sacraments, the things thereby signified are ever held out and conveyed together with the fignes, which are neither fallacious, empty, nor void of a due effect, or without the thing represented (because they are of God, who cannot deceive, and is able to give the effect) if the receiver do not ponere obicem: therefore the Sacraments are rightly called the Channels or Conduits of grace, that is, the ordinary means to convey the graces of God into the receivers. 
Math. 20. Luk. 10. 16.  4. God confirms his mercies to us by the Sacraments, wherein the Minister, by Gods own deputation, beareth his person or place in the Church, as well as in preaching the word, so that what they do (who are his Ministers) by his appointment, he doth, both in respect of the institution and effect. So the Lord is said to have anointed Saul, whereas Samuel●nointed ●nointed him: 
1 Sam. 10. 11  so Jesus made and baptised more disciple than John, 
Joh. 4. 1, 2.  whereas Jesus baptised no●, but his disciples, by his assignment: Therefore although these signs neither convey grace, nor confirm any thing to them for good who keep not the Covenant (for God made no promise to them) yet are they means to convey the graces of God to those that do. To conclude, we affirm not that baptism conveyeth God's grace to all that are baptised, but to the elect only, as that whereof he hath made a peculiar promise to them; and that so certain as are those things which God himself sealeth, covenanteth for, and testifieth in heaven and earth; as 'tis written, There are threo that bear record in heaven, the father, the word, and the holy Ghost— and there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood.— Now if we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater. 
1 Joh. 5. 7. etc.  Under the mouth of two or three witnesses, every word must be confirmed, and taken for sure; how much more when we have by God's blessing, the same witnesses of our faith, who are also the promisers (workers, and sureties of our salvation? 
Si in tribus testibus stabit omne verbum, quanto magis dum habemus per benedictionem eosdem arbitros fidei, quos & sponsores salutis. Tertul. de bapt. c. 6.    
But from thence (you say) to argue, that wherever there is a capacity of receivinig the same grace, there also the same sign is to be ministered, and from thence to infer poede-baptism, is an argument very fallacious, etc.] 
Quis tulerit Gracchoes—? your dispute is fallacious upon your grounds, on which we go not; and so all your impertinent superstruction here falleth together.   
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.] 
I would gladly be resolved, quanta est illa propositio? is your meaning, Some of them that are capable of the same grace, are not always capable of the sign thereof? If so, alta pax esto: We say so too: for infants, being capable of the same grace which is exhibited and received in the Lord's supper, are not always (that is, while they are children) capable of the same sign, because they cannot examine themselves, nor show forth the Lords death: and women not only under the Law, but now also have and ever will have for aught you can say, the same incapacity of circumcision; what makes this to conclude children's incapacity of baptism? this is to argue à genere ad genus; though women had not a capacity of that sign, they have a capacity of baptism; infants had then a right to that whereof they had a capacity: let them have so still, and the controversy is ended. You further say,   
The gift of the holy Ghost— was ordinarily given by imposition of hands, and that after baptism.] 
By this it appears, 
Pag. 235. Concerning imposition of hands, see the learned Animadversion of N Homes upon Mr. Tombs his exercit. about infant-bapt. pag. 59 60. Pag. 235. Num. 22.  that your foregoing argument was fallacious, you intending the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost, which we pretend not to; and what is this dispute to us now, or to the present question, seeing they are long since ceased? But beware your lying too near a wind, and mentioning crisme, or confirmation and sanctifying the holy Apostles, displease not your clients, and you be taken for an ambodexter. But you say,  After all this, lest these arguments should not ascertain their cause, they fall on complaing against God, etc.] 
Tell true, and shame the devil: where? to whom? when? which of all the reformed Churches ever did so? We clearly affirm that God is ever, 
Unsin. de Christ. relig. par. 2.  and alike to be believed, whether by signs, or by words which signify his will: we say not that God did more for the children of the Jews; but that your peevishness, denying children baptism, would have it seem so. Do we then complain against God, when we complain of the Anabaptists abridging children of that which God hath allowed them? How vain and ma●tious is this calumny of yours? But you say,  He made a covenant of spiritual promises on his part, and spiritual and real services on ours.] 
What are these real services, and whose? if of children, what can they, as such, perform? but you say, this pertains to children when they are capable, but made with them assoon as they are alive (that is in the mother's womb) what this? this covenant? so the words seem to import: nay, but undeniably God's covenant and spiritual promises on his part, presently belong to them who shall be saved, for many of them presently die: or mean you by● (this) spiritual and real services on our part, belong to children when they are capable? Surely then they cannot have this covenant made with them as soon as they are born, otherwise then by baptism; because for the present they can perform nothing real: If you mean spiritual and real services of parents in relation to their covenanted infants, as such, they cannot yet teach them; they can only present them to the Church, that the public seal of God's covenant being set to them, they may according to their true interest in her external communion, be thereby marked, and known for parts and members of the same and this indeed pertaineth to children when they are capable, that is, as soon as they are born. That which you infer to show a disparity between Christian infants, and the Jews babes, is frivolous: for thoug there appear some show of difference in circumstance, as the particular promise of the inheritance of Canaan, etc. yet for substance there is none; there being as real a promise of blessings to Christians and their children in every kind; for godliness hath the promise of this life, 
1 Tim. 4. 8. Tit. 3. 5, 6. etc. Tit. 3. 14.  and that which is to come, and the present seal of faith marketh them for God's peculiar people; the effect whereof being wrought and perfected by the spirit of Jesus in their regeneration, the work is done in them (and no otherwise was it in the Jews children) for he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh,— but circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, Rom. 2. 28, 29. Col 2. 11, ●2, and the Jewish children were no otherwise sealed then into the same faith of Jesus, nor otherwise saved, then by faith in him, neither less saved than we and our children.   
This (say you) is the greatest vanity in the world 
pag. 136. ] 
What vanity? you say, to affirm that unless this mercy be consigned by baptism, as good not at all in respect of us, because we want the comfort of it. This is the vanity— well let it be so; and let them own it that will: I known not whom you mean; I am sure there appears vanity enough in your following assertion, and reason offered for proof.   
Shall not (say you) this promise, this word of God be of sufficient truth, certainty, and efficacy, to cause comfort, unless we tempts God, and require a sign of him?] 
Yes, God's promise is of sufficient truth and certain efficacy thereto: therefore we baptise our children: and it had been sufficient on God's part, and it must have been on ours, had he not seen good further to confirm us by a seal set to his promise; or had he not required more of us, as our duty and a condition and seal of his covenant with us & our children: for as Augustine saith, how much available, 
Luk. 23. 42. 47 Quantum valet etiam sine visibi●i sacramento baptisms, quod ait Ap●stolus, cord creditur ad justitiam, ere autem confessio fit ad salutem, in illo latrone declaratum ests sed tunc imple●ur invisibiliter, cum mysterium baptismi non c●ntemptus religienis, sed articulus necessitatis excludi●●nam multo magis in Cornelio & in amiois ejus, quam in latrone, possit videri superfluum, ut aquâ etiam ●ingerentur in quibus jam donum spi●i●us Sancti, &c Aug. de bapt. co●tr. Donat. l. 4. c. 22. ●.  even without the visible Sacrament of baptism, is that which the Apostle saith Rom. 10. 10. with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth Confession is made unto salvation, was declared in the penitent thief: but than it is invisibly fulfilled, when not any contempt of religion, but a point or moment of necessity, excludeth or preventeth baptism: for it might have seemed much more superfluous in Cornelius and his friends to be baptised, who had already received the gift of the holy Ghost, then in the thief: yet they were baptised: and in that act, the Apostolical authority is extant, as also the necessity of obeying God in his ordinance: now how childish and perverse is that cavil— unless we tempt God, and require a sign of him? Do you account obedience to God and his holy ordinances, to be a tempting of God? is bringing children to Christ (which he commandeth) and that by baptism (which you confess is the ordinary inlet into the kingdom of heaven) to require a sign of him, or is it to receive a sign of him by his own appointment? and what certainity of comfort could we concieve, if on the contrary, we should wilfully disobey, neglect, and contemn God's ordinance, as your clients do? were it not rather to tempt God, if (as much as in us lies) we should shut up the door and inlet into his kingdom against infants? man can do no more to shut them out, then by denying them baptism: 'tis true, that God can, and often doth save them without our ministry, as when death preventeth our baptising them; but to neglect the ordinary means of our own or others salvation, and to put it on the extraordinary power of God, is to tempt God: if I should ask you, why you eat, or feed your infants, seeing God can preserve you and them without food? you would easily say, to neglect the ordinary means, were to tempt God, so 'tis here. But you say.   
A wicked & adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, etc.] 
Possibly, Mr. Fisher at his Ashford-conference was beholding to you for this opprobry, 
See Mr. Wilcocks' infant. baptism maintained. Pag. 2.  and abuse of holy Scripture; but we entreat you seriously and timely to consider the severity of the Judge who hath said concerning any that take his name in vain, 
Exod. 20.  I will not hold him guiltless, and whether pernicious playing with holy Scripture, and wilful perverting the sense thereof, fall not under the sentence of self-destruction: consider the terrors which Christ useth Matth 12. 38. 39 
2 Pet. 3. 16.  and Matth. 16. 4. the thing which the Scribes & pharisees required; was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word, though it signify divers things, as may appear by comparing Mat. 14. 3. & 26. 48. Luk. 2. 12. Rom. 4. 11. 2. Thess. 3. 17. yet is it more than manifest, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joh. 4. 48. Acts 2. 43. Acts 4. 3. Acts 5. 12. Acts 6. 8. Acts 7. 37. etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quod praeter naturam st natum ib. suid. portentum, etc. Stephan. saepe de inusitat is & insolius. se● monsiriss ● prodigius, &c Tr●st. lex. sur. p. 186.  that they required a miracle, and that extraordinary, and above all those divine works of Christ, which hitherto they had ever seen, as casting out devils, raising the dead, etc. they required a sign from or out of heaven, Matth. 16. 1. Mark. 8. 11. and then Christ answered, a wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a wonder; which words are often joined to express the same thing; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commonly signifies a prodigy, or monster. Suidas gives it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, praeter ordinariamrationem formatum, praeter naturam genitum: such a sign as begetteth admiration and amazement in the beholders; and so the Syriack Joh. 4, 48, expresseth it by a word coming of that verb which signifieth, to be amazed, or very much to admire: now I appeal to your conscience; do we seek any such sign or miracle from heaven, when we bring children to be baptised? 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tremel. & M. Trost. Syr. Test. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à verbo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ethpah. stupuit, obstupuit Joh. Buxtorf. Jun. lex. Chald. & syr. Val. Shindl. Pent●n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jo. 8. 39 44.  is not this frothy- Rhetoric? you confess baptism to be the ordinary inlet into the kingdom of heaven; and is an ordinary thing a sign or miracle? consider also the persons of whom Christ spoke; they were a wicked and an adulterous generation: for though they pretended to be Abraham's children, yet neither heiring him in faith or works, but degenerating from him, they deservedly heard— ye are of your father the devil: if this present generation be such, consider who makes it so; and whether you have any commission to judge them wicked who profess true faith and obedience to Jesus Christ, and his holy gospel, in all things, that any shall, or can make appear to us to be the truth? But you say   
The truth●out is, this argument is nothing but a direct quarrelling with almighty God.] 
The untruth of this assertion is so evident, that it were but lost labour to bestow more words to refute it.   
Now since there is no strength in the doctrinal part, etc.] 
Pag. 236.  
I appeal to the judicious reader; 
Numb. 23.  let him judge what strength hath appeared in your oppositions, concerning the words which you here multiply to little if any purpose. I shall say no more, but only mark the strength of the pleader's present argument, the sum whereof is; Some Apostolical traditions were pro loco & tempore, accommodate to place and time (as the forementioned, love— feasts, saluting with an holy kiss, anointing the sick abstaining from blood, etc.) therefore no Apostolical traditions passed an engagement upon following ages. We answer: we contend not for any such traditions as were pro loco & tempore, yet doth it not follow that because all Apostolical traditions engage not posterities, therefore none do, as in that instance concerning the sabbath, I suppose you will accord with us. But you say   
Because other parallel expressions of Scripture do determine and expound themselves to a sense that includes not all persons absolutely, but of a capable condition, as, Adorate eum omnes gentes, & psallite Deo, etc.] 
Suppose all that granted what then? you would infer that infants have not a condition capable of baptism, because some other places of Scripture are relating to capahcity; what makes this against the baptism of infants, who being within God's covenant are therefore capable of the seal thereof, as they were under the law, although even then the Scripture saying psallite Deo omnes, etc. said that to those only who could sing to God and praise him, and not unto infants of eight-dayes old to be circumcised? who thinks not, that God commanded several things with respect to several capacities? doth the incapacity in respect of one command, conclude an incapacity of all? women were not capable of circumcision, nor of the office of teaching in the congregation, nor of execution of priestly offices; yet they also could and aught to sing to the Lord, and were of that part of nations commanded to praise the Lord. Psal. 148. 12. Psal. 149. 3, 5. Exod. 15. 20, 21. ●udg. 5. 1. Infants had not a capacity of singing praises to God, they had of circumcision, and therefore they were then circumcised, though they could not sing: infants cannot sing now, therefore that precept, sing unto the Lord, etc. concerneth them not for present; but they can be baptised as such, therefore that precept baptise all nations, reacheth unto them; you say more,   
As for the conjecture concerning the family of Stephanas, 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] 
Pag. 236. 237. Numb. 24. 1 Cor. 1. 16.  
Admit that to be conjectural, and we take it for no more; yet it is no light conjecture, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tremel. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  (the Syriac gives it & filij domus ●jus omnes, speaking of the keeper of the prison, Act. 16. 33.) that children were baptised with the rest of the family: for though ●● there also may signify any domestic, yet certainly it signifieth a child also, and children were usually domestics: but it can be no more than a light conjecture of Anabaptists, that there were no infants in this family, or that of Stephanas which Paul baptised; howsoever it can be no conjecture, but certain truth, that in all nations there ever were and still are, a great part infants; and it is more than conjectural, that the Apostles did as Christ commanded them, saying baptise all nations; as for that which you say, in Scripture is meant all persons of reasons and age within the family, because it is said that the ruler at Capernaum believed, and all his house: is that proposition universal? do you affirm that by whole families, is ever meant all persons of age within the family, and such only? if so, your assertion is apparently false; but if your proposition be particular, it falleth short of our cause; for what can it hurt it, 
Gen 1: 5. Acts. 3 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 omnes familiae terrae. 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Acts 2. 39 See Leu. 25. 10 Numb 2. 34. and 3. 15. 39 and 18. 31. and 33. 54. Levit. 25. 13. Num. 20. 22. Acts 7. 10. Rom. 4. 16. and 10. 12. and 11. 31. Matth. 12 15. 1 Cor. 10. 1. 2. etc. ay The. ●. 12 2 Thes. 3. 16. 18. 1 Tim. 4. 10. Joh. 11. 50, etc.  if by all, or whole families in Scripture, sometimes is meant all persons of reason and age? deal ingenuously then; do you affime that by whole, or all, the Scripture doth always mean, persons of reason and age? what doth God, when he said to Abraham— and in thee all the families of the earth shall be blessed; doth he mean only all persons of age? are children in their nonage excluded from the blessing in Christ? Nay but the Apostle saith expressly, the promise is unto you, and to your children: and such Christ blessed, and of such is the kingdom of heaven. Doth the Scripture, Genes. 7. 21● saying all flesh died— every man— mean only all of reason and age? were the infants excepted? many places of Scripture may show the vanity of this your assertion: but if your proposition be particular, that is, that sometimes the Scripture by whole families means persons of reason (that is who have the use of reason) and age: we can grant it you. I add; sometimes, all, signifieth only a great part; as Mat. 10. 22 ye shall be hated of all men for my name sake: that is of many: times in the Hebrew manner of speaking it signifies, none, or not any one: as Psal. 147. 20. he hath not done so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to all, or every nation: 
Est autem & hoc Scripturae idioma utomnes dicat pro pluribus. Euth. in Matth. 10.  that is, not to any; so Exod. 12. 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. every son of a stranger shall not eat thereof, that is none: now would you have the sense of Christ's words go and baptise all nations, to be, go and baptise some nations, or a major part of the nations? the evidence of the truth is against that, as well as against the other, go and baptise none; but you would fain have it, go and baptise those that are persons of reason and age within the nations: show us any such precept of Christ, and we will obey it; in the mean time we must do that which we know he commanded us, that is, baptise all nations, all against whom we find no exception: and why should we look for exception in families, seeing we find none mentioned by our Saviour in nations? but you would have here, a limitation to capacity, which you think infants have not: first we say, show us any Scripture-proofe for such limitation: secondly we say that although the incapacity of an infant limit a command where there appeareth a present impossibility of doing that which God in general commandeth (as where he saith believe, repent, confess your sins, sing unto God, praise him, &c) for God commandeth no impossibilities: yet where it is possible that the command may be fulfilled, there lieth no such limitation: now you will not say that 'tis impossible for infants to be baptised: if you say they ought not to be baptised until they can actually believe, repent, etc. we must answer you with your own: this is unmanlike to build upon such slight and airy conjectures: as are humane fancies, to forbid infant's baptism; and when you can bring us no solid ground for that you would have, to beg the question. But you say, 
P. 237. Nu. 25.    
Tradition by all means must supply the place of Scripture: and there is pretended a tradition Apostolical, that infants were baptised, etc.] 
You seem here to speak three things: first, that when we cite traditions, we use them in place of Scripture, or for defect of Scripture-proofe: which to deny, is confutation enough until you can show which of us so pretend to tradition. Secondly in your following words you pretend, that we sometimes reject Apostolical tradition (for of that you speak) to which we say, that when the quaestion is concerning a tradition of the gospel or Apostles, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ephiphan. To. 2. exposit. fidei 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Concil. Gangrenes. Canon. 21. Severin. Bin. Concil. To. 1. Jud. 12. v. de quibus Concil. La●dicen. Can. 28. 16. Bin. Quod traditum tenet universitas Ecclesiae, cum parvuli infantes Laptizantur. Aug. To. 7. part 1● de bapt. contra Donat. l. 4. c. 23, etc.  as Epiphanius speaks, we receive it; and with an ancient Council wish that those things may be done in the Church, which were delivered by divine Scripture or Apostolical tradition; which we add hereto, though we have no reason to admit of all that is alleged for such: as for those things which the Apostles desivered in compliance with particular times, places, or persons, as anointing with oil, saluting with an holy kiss, love-feasts, etc. they were necessary then and to that people who had been long accustomed thereto, of whom a gospel-Church was now to be gathered; but they were neither universally prescribed, neither do they concern us now. Next we say with S. Augustine; the whole Church holdeth by tradition the baptism of infants; and that being continually observed, we justly believe to have been delivered and confirmed by Apostolical tradition. But you say,   
So far as it can appear, it relies wholly upon the testimony of Origen; for from him Augustine had it, etc.] 
Yet before you affirmed, that infant-baptisme was Augustin's device; how had Augustine it from Origen if it were Augustin's device? That it was neither his device, neither that it relieth wholly upon the testimony of Origen, many other testimonis by us alleged, make manifest; as Dionysius, 
Dionys. Hierar. c. ult. Jrenae. l. 2. c. 39 Cyprian l. 2. cp. 8. ad Fidum. Amb. de Abraham. l. 2. c. 11. nec senex (inquit) nec infans vernaculus excipitur, quia ●mnis ●● peccato obnoxia, & ideo omnis aetas sacramento idenea; nus●um excipit, non infintem, etc. Hieronym. contra Pelag. 1. 3.  Jrenaus, Cyprian, Ambros Jerom, Cyril, Gre. Nazianzen, Basil, etc. as also ancient, Councils, as that of ●arthage An●. 407. the Milevitan. An●. 420, etc. to conclude, we rely not upon the testimony of man, though we reverence holy antiquity, but on the command of Christ and the Apostles practices, baptising whole nations without any appearing exception to infants of believing parents; and therefore you following inferences either nothing concern, or nothing hurt us. You say further,   
There was no command of Scripture to oblige children to the susception of it.] 
No command to children to oblige them! a dainty caption: neither was there any command to infants to oblige them to the susception of circumcision; for they could neither act nor understand that or any other command: The command was to the parents for present, and to children for the future: therefore, if you mea●e that there was no command of Scripture to oblige ●s to the baptising of infants, the contrary appears Matth. 28. 19 But you require express terms: we rejoins; what express terms in Scripture have you to prove that there is an holy Trinity in the unity of the deity? or for the abrogating the Jewish Sabbath, and observation of our Lord-day Sabbath, or for women's receiving the Lords supper, or for your rebaptising, or dipping over head and ears? But you say,   
The necessity of pedobaptism was not determined in the Church till in the eighth age after Christ; but in the year 418. in the Milevitan Council— never till then] 
What necessity speak you of? de necessitate medii, in respect of infant's salvation, as if they could not be saved without it? we maintain it not; if you mean such a necessity on our part, as bindeth us to obedience, that is, to baptise infants of believing parents; we say with S. Augustin, the custom of our mother the Church in baptising infants is not at all to be despised, 
Consuet●ch tamen ●atris ecclesiae in baptizandis paruxlis, nequaquanispernenda est; neque ulla modo superflua deputanda, nec omnin● credenda nisi Apostolica esset traditio. August. de Genes. ad lit. l. 10. c. 23. vid. ad Numb. 13. p. 229.  or by any means to be esteemed superfluous, nor to be believed any other than an Apostolical tradition; the ground hereof is laid down, l. 3. c. 24. Contra Donat. before by us cited, to which I refer the reader; the sum is, That whatsoever is universally observed in all Churches, and no man can say by what Council it was determined, or when it began, must be thought to have descended from the tradition of the Apostles themselves, and therefore we hold it as we are commanded, 2 Thes. 2.15. and we believe it is necessary to be held, because 'tis so commanded. That which you say, that it was not determined in the Church till in the eighth age after Christ, and but in the year 418. in the Milevitan Council, will easily appear false: for the Council of Carthage in Cyprians time, who flourished about the year 250. determined that children might be baptised, and that even before the eight day, against the opinion of Fidus, as was before noted out of Cyprian; 
Cyprian. l. 3. ep. 3.  but you say that infant-baptism was not determined in the Church until the Milevitan Council. 
August ep. 28.   
1. I demand, Doth a determination by a succeeding Council exclude a determination of the same thing by a foregoing● or doth it conclude a thing to be no Apostolical tradition? What think you then of our Christian Sabbath? will you say that the abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath, that our Christian Sabbath might succeed, was not an Apostolical tradition, or that it was not sufficiently determined in the Church until about the year 364. because then there was a Canon made for the same in the Council of Laodicea? 
On uphrius. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil. Laodic. Canon. 29.  Nay but the practice of the Apostles was a sufficient determination thereof: And truly, Ecclesiastical Canons (as also municipal Laws and Statutes) may with good reason be made for confirmation of things rightly and long before sufficiently determined, where some emergent opposition to the former, requireth a due revisal, and further expression, interpretation, or confirmation of the same.  
2. I say, that there needed no determination by a general Council, before any opposition was made publicly against a received custom of the Church; but so soon as it was questioned and openly opposed by the Pelagians, than the second Milevitan Council was called against Pelagius and Celestius. It were but a weak argument against an Apostolical tradition, if we should find little or no mention thereof in any writer, in some ages of the Primitive Church; seeing that besides that there were some of them obscure, generally without Ecclesiastical Writers; what necessity can be alleged, that in every age some writers must make particular mention and rehearsal of all Apostolical traditions or practices of the Church, when an uninterrupted peace thereof sufficed, and no opposition gave occasion of providing for defence? Indeed when any turbulent and disobedient spirit of contradiction broke out to disturb the peace and unity of the Church, than the Ministers disputed, preached, or wrote, as need required, or Counsels were called, which could not come together from divers Nations without much trouble and charge; and therefore they were not assembled except in case of some urgent necessity; and then their Canons were agreed upon for suppressing of emergent errors, and that in all reason; for what need arming without an enemy? 
Celebratum est p●●mum Conciliu● Hierosolymis. Act. 15. 1. Corranzasum. council.  to make Statutes, provisions, Ordinances or Canons without some present danger, might possibly teach men to offend, or err, who without such occasion, had not minded it at all. The first Apostolical Synod, had an apparent cause;— certain men— taught the brethren, saying, Except ye be circumcised, after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved: Then the Apostles and Elders ●ame together to consider of this matter. 
Quatuor concilia suscipere & venerari me fatetor; Nicenum, in quo perversum Arii degma desirui●ur. Constantinepolitanum— in quo Eunomii & Maedonii error convincitur. Ephesinum pr●mum, ●n quo Nestorii impietas judicatur. Calcedonense— in quo Eutychis Dioscorique pravitas reprobature Gregor. ep. 24. l. 1.  So the four first Counsels had their several occasions. The Nicen Council was called by Constantin, to suppress the damnable heresy of the Arians. The Council of Constantinople was called against Maedonius and Eunomius denying the deity of the holy Ghost (in the reign of Gratian and Theodosius.) The Council of Ephesus (in the reign of Theodosius the younger) against Nestorius and Caelestius; and the Chalcedon Council was gathered against the heresy of Eutychus and Dioscorus: so was the Council of Gangris against Eustathius: The first Council of Carthage against the rebaptising Donatists; the Arelatense was occasioned by their appeal: and the second Milevitan Council was called against Pelagius and Caelestius his great Factor, denying infants original sin and baptism: So that the non determination of a thing for many ages in the Church, the Church constantly holding and practising it, proves nothing, but that no body opposed it all that time; and had Pelagi●u●s heresy concerning infant-baptism, after the Milevitan Council, and after the writings of Jerome, Augustin, Optatus and others, still slept, I know not why any man should now have written, or spoken against it. 
Severin. Bin. Coneil. To. 1. Carranza. sum. Concil.    
I grant (you say) 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. Augustin was the first that ever preached it to be absolutely necessary, and that was in his heat and anger against Pelagius, who had warmed and chased him so in that question, that it made him innovate in other doctrines possibly of ●●re concernment than this,] 
You grant the practice of infant-baptism in Africa, and that some of them thought well of it. It hath been proved that an ancient Council there established it, as a custom of the Church derived from the practice or tradition of the Apostles, obeying Christ's general precept to baptise all nations: that none of them before Augustin pretended it to be necessary, cannot be true; for they would not have practised a thing of so high concernment, except they ●ad held it to be necessary on the part of the administrers. Further I say that the Churches of Africa were of a very ancient plantation, 
See Rev. 1. 11. Act. 19 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Epiphan. haeref. 46 See also Mr. Homes, c. 13. pago 110. etc. Rom. 10. 18.  as were also the Churches of Asia, of which was Justin Martyr, by birth a Samaritan, which is of Asia the greater, and he was for infant-baptism; above all controversy, the sound of the Apostles preaching went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world; and therefore all the Christian Churches were first planted according to the Gospel and traditions of the Apostles, among which we have showed infant-baptism to be one: for good cause therefore they thought well of it, and so do we. That none of them did ever before Augustine, pretend it necessary, is apparently false; for it was in liking and use in Cypriant time, as hath been proved; therefore if Augustin were the first that ever preached it to be absolutely necessary to salvation, and in his heat against the Pelagians did something innovate, it hurteth not our cause, who do not affirm so rigid a necessity of baptism, as we have said formerly. But you sa   
— Nor at all in other places; we have the testimony of a learned Pedobaptist Ludovicus Vives, who in his annotations upon S. Augustin de. C. Dei l. 1. c. 2●. affirms, neminem nisi adultum antiquitùs solere baptizari.] 
That infant-baptism was not at all practised in other places, is very untrue, as appeareth by that which hath been alleged out of Ireneus, who was of France, and Justin Martyr, Jerom, Ambrose, etc. 
Lugdunensem in Gallia regebat ecclesiam. Ca●ol. scriptor. eceles. Hieron. To. 1. L. Vives. in Aug. de. C. D. l. 1. C. 27.  That which you cite out of Ludovicus Vives, neminem nisi adultum antiquitùs solere baptizari; I suppose you may read in some index or marginal ●●●e, or in Bellarmin with a little change; the words of V●●● in the cited place are— ne quis fallatur hoc loco; nemo olim sacro admovebatur baptisterio, nisi adultâ jam aetate, etc. lest any should be deceived in this place, none anciently was moved to the sacred font, but such as were come to full age, etc. Certainly Augustin spoke there concerning those who being of years, could understand what the sacred mystery signisied, and could desire the same: What is the cause (saith he) why we should spend times in exhorting them, wherein by speaking we endeavour to inflame the baptised either unto virgin integrity, or vidual continency, or unto a conjugal fidelity, etc. 
Quid igitur causae est, cur cis exhortationibus tempore consumamus quibus baptizates alloquend● sludeamus accentere, sive ad virgina●em integr●tatem. sive ad c●nt●ne●tiam vidu●lem, sive ad ipsam thori ●●● jugalis fidem, etc. Aug. de G. D. l. 1. c. 2●.  he meant not such words to infants. What did vidual continency, or conjugal fidelity concern infants, as such? and L. Vives words immediately following intimate the same; The image of which thing (saith he) we yet see in our baptising of infants. If this were not his meaning, as it was Augustins, it was frivolous enough, and such as I cannot easily believe so learned an Author, and so well acquainted with Augustins' sense, and judgement in this matter could be guilty of; possibly his olim, related to the baptism which was administered in ecclesiâ constituendâ (when the partition wall being broken down, 
Cuius rei imagine in a●●●ue, in nostris infantium baptismis videm us. L. Viu. loco citato. Eph. 3 14. Rom. 11. 19  and the natural branches broken off, that others might be grass into Christ) which was, and could no otherwise be then by instructing people in the faith of Christ, and then baptising them, that their children might afterward be baptised, as being within the covenant by their father's privilege, and their own, as being children of believing parents; so that in the constituting a Christian Church, the Ministers first, and most general work of administering baptism, was with persons of years (by their preaching to them) converting to the faith, but in ecclesiâ constitutâ it is much otherwise: our general work of administration of baptism is with infants of enchurched parents; we seldom meeting with any Turk, or Pagan, or Jew converted, and desiring baptism; to conclude, if L. Vives by you cited, had been of your opinion (to spare the mentioning the authority of Ireneus, Cyprian, Augustin, Jerom, etc. or the African or other Counsels, who much better knew the custom of the ancient Churches then Lud. Vives could) we can balance Vives with Polydor Virgil, 
Vt cutem insantes apud judaeos octavo ab ortu die circum cidebantur, sic apud nos plurimum 〈◊〉, quod t●men Angli in ipso natali die faciunt, id quod di ●us Cyprianus— mulus rati●nibus esse faciendum probat. Polydor. Virg. de invent. l. 4. c. 4.  another learned Author, who saith, As infants among the Jews were circumcised the eight day from their nativity, so are they for the most part, with us baptised, which yet the English do in the very day wherein they are born, that which S. Cyprian— by many reasons proveth may be done.   
But (you say) 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 infants ought not to be baptised, and this is clear in the sixth Canon of the Council of Neocaes●rea, etc.] 
It is proved to be Apostolical, and therefore (above controversy) it can be proved: You talk of very good evidence from antiquity, that it was the opinion of the Primitive Church, that infants ought not to be baptised, and this, you say, is clear in the sixth Canon of the Council of Neocaesarea: so then, it is likely that one testimony is very good and clear evidence for you; and shall not many, and of them, some more ancient, witnesses be good for us? Origen, Ireneus, Cyprian, with the whole Council of Carthage, held about anno 258. were more ancient than the Council of Neocaesarea held about the year 316. and those, as hath been showed, were for infant-baptism, 
●●●n. council. To 1. p. 288. Aug. ep. ●●●. autoritare Apostolicà tradi●um. Aug. contra. Dona●ist. l 3. c. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Council. Neocaesar. cor: 6. Binn. council. To. 1.  as many others also express. Augustin, as we have before noted (on Num. 13) calleth it ecclesiae fidem firmissimam, and fundatissimum morem, the most firm faith of the Church, and the most grounded custom. And again, that which was delivered by Apostolical authority. But let us now behold how clear it is in the sixth Canon of the Council of Neocaesarea which you alleged. The Canon saith, A woman with child may be baptised when she please; for the baptism of her that is to be delivered, in this matter concerneth not the infant to be born, because every ones own choice or purpose is manifested or declared by his own confession, the mother's baptism doth not so concern the infant that is to be born, as if that needed not to be baptised when 'tis born: The woman must for the present make her confession of faith, whereby she may declare he choice; and so must the child for his own part, when he comes to age, and can show that he embraceth the Christian faith. 
Si quaeritur an baptizati mat●e infans in uter● tan ●u●n pars ejus baptizelur, dicendum est quod non, ut dicit Augustinus contra lalia● etc. Gabriel. B●el in 4. sent. dist. 4. l. 2.  Mark how clear this Canon makes it, that Infants ought not to be baptised. Here's not one word forbidding infant-baptism, the whole scope being rather to show that the infant must be baptised for himself; because the mother's baptism (in whose womb he then was) cannot excuse him from being baptised. Add hereto that which some observe, That regeneration by baptism, presupposeth a precedent natural birth, which the unborn child hath not; therefore the unborn infant cannot be regenerate in his mother's baptism: Indeed it gives him a right hereto, if he have none by the father's side, 1 Cor. 7. 14. 
Nemo pote●t ranas●i nisi priu● nascatur. Gerard. de baptism. sol. 606. sin.  So that if any man lift to think that the Council spoke Gospel; yet it will no more thence follow, that infants ought not to be baptised, because they cannot yet make confession of their faith, then that all that which is said of the adult, is precisely to be applied to infant's for present, as that 2. Thes. 3. 10. 
— Quandoqui●em non potest quis ●●● nisi prius nascatur, Alex. Alensis part. 4. desair baptism. q. 8. m. ●●. 1. resol. — This we command you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat— which concerneth infants no otherwise than when they should be able; but in the mean time would you not have them eat? you know that though the rule bear a show of universality● yet it concerneth persons of age and ability, not infants; so here, the Minister's interrogating persons of years to be baptised, was simply necessary; for how else should it have been known whether they were fit to be admitted into the Church privileges by baptism? that therefore they did not admit infants to baptism, because they did not examine them, follows not, except you could show that they admitted none to baptism but persons of years, which is the question in hand, and therefore may not be a medium to prove your assertion by: as for ask them questions to be answered by Sponsors, Godfathers and Godmothers, we shall speak anon.   
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 account to be given of it.] 
We say that by your present confession, such sponsion by Godfathers is but a circumstance; therefore the sponsors supply not any incapacity of infants in the respect of the substance of baptism, which is to be sprinkled, washed with, or dipped in water, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost: for this their own capacity is sufficient (they being born of believing parents, and within the Church) without the supply of any answer of others for them; which if you grant us, we have the end of our dispute; as for circumstances, neither commanded nor forbidden by God in the holy scriptures, we shall willingly submit to the authority and practice of the Church in which we live: If you dispute from the circumstance, or any pretended inconvenience therein, to the anulling the substance controverted, you know how unreasonable that fallacia accidentis is; and what sensible account can be given of it? But you say.   
That which some imperfectly murmur concerning stipulations civil performed by Tutors in the name of their Pupils, is an absolute vanity, etc.] 
Have a care that you be not answered with à turpe est Dactori, etc. Do you not vainly argue, that in the use of God fathers, etc. God is tied, and Christian Religion transacts her mysteries by proportion and compliance with the Law of the Romans; concerning which something hath been answered before; I only add here, 
Ad num. 16. pag. 231.  that God neither commanding nor forbidding Godfathers, it is no vanity to obey authority herein: But to disturb the peace of the Church, and make schisms for things in their own nature indifferent, and commended to us by venerable antiquity, is not only vain, but impious: And how is God tied, where he neither forbids nor commands? To the rest we say not that Christian Religion must transact her mysteries by compliance with Roman Laws, or humane customs; but that in some things she may, in things circumstantial, and no ways repugnant to the word of God. You say further,   
I know God might, 
pag 239.  if he would, have appointed God fathers to give answer in behalf of children, and to be fideiussors for them, but we cannot find any authority or ground that he hath; and if he had, than 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.] 
We answer 1. In that you can find no authority or ground for it, nor against it, as we know it can be no other than adiaphorous, or indifferent, and in or for such things as are merely circumstantial and in their own nature indifferent to descent from antiquity; disobey the Church's authority, and break the sacred band of unity, let your own consciences tell you what you do.  
2. Whereas you would bespatter this custom of imputation of will-worship and untruth in the users thereof; I say first, That whatsoever God hath commanded or forbidden in holy Scriptures, that is necessarily to be observed; and this faithful word we must hold fast, Tit. 1. 9 But those things which he hath neither commanded nor forbidden, neither expressly, nor by necessary consequence, fall under the general rule belonging to things arbitrary and indifferent, Let all things be done decently and in order, ● Cor. 14. 4●. which then only can be when we unanimously and uniformly do that which a general consent and constant practice of the Church warranteth; not that which every private spirit liketh or disliketh: There can be no decency without order, nor order in confusion of practices: therefore God having left many things circumstantial, arbitrary as to the authority of the Church, we ought to tender her unity, and reverence her authority; the contempt whereof hath opened so wide a door to schism as now troubleth the Christian world. Secondly, there may be falsehood in some men's answers, though no fault in the order which God will, 
Sicut e●g● peccatum in eo non est, ita peccatum ex eo nom est.  it being his perfection that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; God that cannot lie, Tit. 1. 2. and it is the inviolable holiness of his will, that he will not, neither can will any evil; and it is certainly true which Fulgentius saith, As there is no sin in him, so there is no sin of him. 
Fulgent. de prae. dost. ed Minim. l 1.    
For the question (you say) is asked of believing in the present; and if the Godfathers answer in the name of the child (I do believe) it is notorious that they speak false and ridiculously; for the infant is not capable of believing, etc.] 
For answer, we may say with Augustin, Who knows not, that to be baptised, is in, or for infants, instead of believing? And again, they are borne to Church, and although they cannot run thither on their own feet, yet go they on others feet, that they may be healed: our mother the Church dareth them others feet, that they may come, others heart that they may believe, others tongue that they may confess, that for as much as in that they are sick, they are more grievously burdened with another's sin (that is, which they acted not in their own persons) so when these are cured, they may be healed or saved, another confessing for them. 
Quis autem n●●●●● creder● esse infani●bus bapt●zari. Aug de piece. ●●● merit. l. 1. c. 27.— ipsi p●rtantur ad ●●●, ●pedibus illuc currere n●n p●ssunt, alienis pedibus curruntut sanentur: accommodat illis mater ecclesi● aliorum pedes ut veniant, aliorum c●r ut credant, aliorum linguam ut fateantur, ut quoniam quod aegri sunt alio peccante praegravantur, sic cum hi sani sunt al●● pro eis confitente salvantur. Augustinide verb. Apost. serm. 10.  But I demand, Why may we not here with better reason understand present, for future believing, than you do children of believers holiness, which the Apostle, 1 Cor. 7. 14. pronounceth in the present) by a designation to the service of Jesus Christ, and the future participation of the promises?  But Augustin saith very well,— If the Sacraments had not a certain similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments, 
pag. 233, 234. Num. 20. Si enim sacramenta quandam similitudinem earum retum quarum sacramenta sunt non haberent, omnino sacramenta non essent: ex hac autem similitudine plerumque etiam ipsarum return nomina accipiunt; sicut ergo secundum quendam modum, sacramentum corporis Christi, corpus Christi, est, sacramentum sanguinis Christi, sanguis Christi est, ita sacramentum fidei fides est; nihil autem est aliud credere, quam fidem habere, ac per hoc, cum respondetur parvulum credere, qui fidei nondum habet affectum, respondetur fidem habere proper fidei sacramentum, & convertere se ad Deum propter convulsionis sacramentum, quia & ispa re●ponsio ad celebrationem pertinet sacramenti; sicut de ipso baptismo Apostolus; Consepulti, inquit, sumus Christo per baptismum in mortem: non ait sepulturam significamus, sed prorsus ait, consepulti sumus: sacramentum ergo tantae rei, non nisi ejusdem rei vocabulo nuncupavit. Itaque parvulum et●i nondum fides illa, quae in credentium voluntate consistit, jam tamen ipsius fidei sacramentum fidelem facit: nam sicut credere respondetur, ita etiam fidelis vocatur, non rem ipsa ment annuendo, sed ipsi●s rei sacramentum percipiendo. Augustin. ep. 23. Bonifac:  they should not at all be Sacraments; but by reason of this likeness, they oftentimes receive the very names of these things themselves; therefore as after a certain manner, the Sacrament of Christ's body is the body of Christ; the Sacrament of Christ's blood, is the blood of Christ; so the Sacrament of faith, is faith: Now to believe, is nothing else but to have faith; and so when 'tis answered that the infant believeth, who hath not yet the affection of faith; we answer, that he hath faith in respect of the sacrament of faith; and that he converteth to God, in respect of the sacrament of conversion; because even that very answer appertaineth unto the celebration of the Sacrament; as the Apostle speaketh of baptism itself; We are, saith he, Buried with him by baptism into death; he saith not, we signify burial, but altogether saith, We are buried— therefore he called the Sacrament of so great a matter, by no other name then of the thing itself: So that faith, though it be not yet such as consisteth in the will of believers, yet the very Sacrament of that faith, makes a (baptised) infant faithful, or a believer: For as 'tis answered that he believeth, so is he called a believer; not signifying that thing in the very mind, but in respect of his receiving the Sacrament of that very thing; to wit, of believing, and giving his name to Christ. 
But what unreasonableness acted with a worse circumstance, is there for Godfathers thus answering— All this I steadfastly believe (wherein though possibly there may be untruth, 
Cum patrimi respendent credo, sensus est, puerum ad credendum & me obligo. etc. A. lex. Alens. par 4. q. 7. m. 3. ● 1. resol.  because the Sponsor doth not as he professeth, steadfastly believe, yet so may there also be, when persons of years answer for themselves, that they believe) seeing the lawfulness of baptising infants, is affirmed on condition of their parents believing, and Church-priviledge, which is often testified personally by the very parents, 
Baptisinus confertur publicè in ext● Christianorum, quorum testimenium non petest repudiari; e●dem fine adhibentur patrimi, tanquam testes batismi, etc. loh. Gerard des. baptis. class 4. 164.— adhibentur veluti rei gestae testes. Polydo●. Virgil. de invent. l. 4. c. 4.  Grandfathers, Grandmothers, and sometimes in defect, or necessary absence of such, by some fellow-believers testifying for them, and the child's privilege and baptism: but your sensible account is, that they speak false and ridiculously; if you can bear the echo of your own words, we therein answer you; yet for the sober reader's sake, we further answer after Augustin, treating of the same argument, Let no man whisper to you other doctrines; this the Church ever had, ever held, etc. doubtless the custom is very ancient; Histories tell us of it in the time of Higinus, who was coetaneous with Polycarp a disciple of S john's, they lived under the reign of Antoninus Pius, about the year 140. some think it came into the Church from the custom of those who were Catechumenists, who being examined before they were admitted to baptism, concerning their faith and repentance, were not only to answer in their own persons, but to have sponsors as witnesses of their faith, conversion, and baptism. 

Nemo ergo vobis: susu●rat ●●● alienas, hoc ecclesia ●●per ha●uit, temper teruit, etc. Aug. d verb. Apos●. Serm. 1●3.  
— V●●●it item ●●um salt●m p●rimam, ●●●●●●● marrim●m baptism●●●teresse sic enim eos appellant qui in●●ntes tenent, dum baptizantur; huyus quo que temp●ris fuit Polycarpus Johannis Apostoli discipulus— Platina de vit. Pont. Telesph. & Higin.— mentio patrimorum fit apud Dionys. Areopag. Hierarch. Eccles. c. 2. Tertul. de bapt. c. 18. Euseb. l. 7. c. 20. vid. Polyd●r. Virgil. de invent. l. 4. c. 4. Hugo de S. victor. part. 6. c. 12. Mr. Homes anim advers. upon Mr. Tombs Exerc. c. 14. pag. 181.   It is not improbable which some here propose, that— As children were baptised when their Christian parents had formerly made confession; so sureties confessed in relation to themselves, that they might be fit to stand as a kind of parents, etc. Seeing therefore this custom is nothing repugnant to holy scripture, neither hath in it any appearance of evil, but rather of profit and edification, though it be not of the essence of baptism, but a ceremonial circumstance, 'tis foolish and impious to quarrel it, and for it to break unity and disturb the peace of the Church. But you say,   
— The infant is not capable of believing, and if he were, he were also capable of dissenting; and how then do they know his mind?] 
pag. 239.  
If it be necessary to baptism that the baptizer know the mind of the person to be baptised, how can you baptise men of years? You will say they express their minds, and so we baptise them. I grant you may know their, words, their minds you cannot; because they may dissemble. If you say you are in charity to believe the best; once more we say, Be but as charitable towards infants, of whom you can know no actual evil, nor show any just cause why you should suspect it for the future. And I pray how could the Priest under the Law know the minds of children to be circum●●sed? To conclude, 'tis nothing material whether we know the infant's mind, 'tis behooveful that we know his privilege, as being born within the Church and Covenant of God, which giveth him a sufficient right to the seals thereof. But you say,   
Tertullian gives advice that baptism of infants should be deferred till they could give account of their faith.] 
I answer, 1. Tertullian speaking of deferring baptism, lest they should rashly give it, as to persons out of the Covenant, or unbelievers, instanceth specially children; that is, extraneorum, non foederatorum, as the learned Fra. lunius interpreteth the same: so that this concerneth not our present question which is of children of Christians. 2. This shows then that the practice of infant-baptism was none of Augustins' device, as you charge him, seeing it was in use in the time of Tertullian. 3. But let us hear the rest of Tertullia's advice; was it only concerning the deferring infant's baptism? Let them come when they can learn, when they are taught whither they come, let them be made Christians when they shall be able to know Christ— nay but presently he saith, For no less cause the unmarried also are to be delayed, in whom the tentation is prepared, both in virgins by their maturity, and widows by their going up and down until they are either married or confirmed in constancy— Will you follow Tertullia's advice herein? But what if they never marry, must they never be baptised? If not, give us leave to decline it in the other, or to take it in the sense he meaneth it, as may appear in that he specifieth widows, who being at that age, are necessarily to be supposed either baptised after their first marriage, or out of the Covenant. 
Veniant ergo dum adoles●unt, veniant dum dis●unt, lum sus veniant docentur, fiant Chri●liani qu●m Christum nesse potuerint— non minore de cause ●innupti quoque pr●●sstinandi, in quibustentatio praeparatae est tam virginibus per maturitatem, quam viduis per vagationem, donec aut nubant, aut c●ntinentiâ ●●●●rentur, &c Tertul. de bapt. c. 18.   
And the same (you say) is also the Council of Gregory Bishop of Nazianzum, etc. Gregory Nazianz●n in his fortieth Oration (which you cite in your margin) saith, Sow when the time of sowing is— plant prune thy vine when the season is, etc. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Greg. Nazian. Orat. 40. ib ip. sis unguiculis spiritu consecretur. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. ib. Greg. Naz.  But at all times intent thy salvation, and think that any time is seasonable, or appointed for baptism: among other ages of man be instanceth in Infancy. Hast thou an Infant (saith he) let not wickedness take away the occasion, let it be sanctified from its infancy, let it be dedicated to the Spirit from it ●ender years: fearest thou the seal in respect of the infirmity of Nature? How poor a spirited mother art thou, and of how little faith? But Anna promised Samuel unto the Lord before he was born, etc. You say concerning Gr. Nazianzen, that his reason taught him that which was fit, (true, for he allowed Infant-baptsm) yet he was overborn with— the opinion of his Age, etc. So far also I consent as this relates to that they thought, that Infants dying without Baptism, should neither he glorified nor punished. That which you further say, although he allowed them to hasten in case of necessity, falleth under a double consideration: First, in respect of those times appointed for Baptism in the primitive Church, to wit, Easter, and Whitsuntide, or Pentecost, which he mentioneth: But when he cometh to the question, whether Infants should be baptised, he answereth positively; By all means, if any danger urge, and showeth it from the Analogy between Circumcision and Baptism. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 10. part. post●  He taketh away the objection from the years at which Christ was baptised, which was indeed to be deferred until the fullness of time for the world's redemption was come: and that we are not to imitate all the actions of Christ. To that which you say— Yet in another place he makes mention of some to whom Baptism was not administered, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc.  by reason of Infancy; we say you utterly mistake: for Nazianzen in the same Oration speaking of delay in performance of that duty, reckons up several sorts of those whose Baptism was deferred; some for sloth, or insatiable desire of sinning; others are not in ability to receive it, either for their infancy, or some sudden and violent accident, disabling them so that they cannot receive this grace if they would. True, infants have neither ability nor will to come to Baptism; nor can those (though of years) who are accidentally disabled: they have not power, though they have a will to come. What is this to our deferring Infant's Baptism in the Rule, which in some cases may reasonably and lawfully be done. As for example, Suppose an infant near some Mahometan border were found, and the parents not known, we may and aught to demur: But what makes this against baptising infants of parents known to be within the Church? But you say,   
To which if we add that the parents of S. Augustine, S. Hierom, and St. Ambrose, although they were Christian, yet did they not baptise their children before they were 30 years of age, it will be very considerable in the Example, and of great efficacy for the destroying the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles. 
This may make a formidable noise in some vulgar ear; 'tis true which Mr. Homes notes, 
A nen facto. ad n●n jus faciendi, non valet argumentu●.  pag. 188. that the opinions or practices of some few, conclude no more against the general tenet and practice of the Church, than the Hills and Valleys do against the roundness of the world. But to what purpose do you propose any of these examples to your client's imitation? If not, why infer you them? Possibly the parents of some great and excellent men, might err in such omission of duty; or there might be some in. vincible lets or obstructions to their desires: however you would not have your children's Baptism deferred ●0 years. To the particulars I say, Possidonius in the life of Augustine, 
Et Aug●●●ract. l. 1. c. 6  saith, that he was born of honest and Christian parents, and that he received of St. Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, both the wholesome doctrine of the Catholic Church, and the Divine Sacraments. 
Aug. Confess l. ● c. 11. his words are these,— Vidifii Demine cum adhuc puer essem, & quodam die pressus stomachi dolore, repentè ●s●uarem paenè m●riturus, vidisti Deus meus— quo ino●● animi, & quâ fide baptisinum Christi tui— fiagitavi ● pita●e matris meae, & matris omnium nostrum ecclesiae tuae— dilata est ●taque ●●●●●● mea— ita jam credebam, & illa, & omnisd●mus, ●si pater solus, qui tamen, non ●●●●● in me jus maternae pietatis quo minus in Christum crederem, si●ut ille n●n●um credi●ert●. ●  But Augustine saith, he believed and desired baptism from his childhood; the cause of the delay thereof he putteth on a sudden great sickness, 
See A●g●●stin. c●n●●ll. l 3 c. c. 11.  and his father's unbelief: but if the parents were then Christian when he was born, 
Fieri enim n●n p●test at plius istar●●m lach●yinarum perea●.  and either understood not, or neglected his Baptism, what is this to our cause? I know nothing hence following but that, if so they neglected, they were culpable. 
Ib. c. 12. Ab his domi●●● genter institutus unà cum ●●●● in●er i p●os sia●● p●rentun anple●cus, & n●tricam bianditias Chris●●● im●i●it, a● m●x Christiane pletatis rudimentis imbutus, etc.  We read of his dangerous estate while he was a Maniche, and his mother's constant and importunate tears and intercession for his conversion, as her sorrow for the delay thereof; which at last happily obtained, according to that which the Prelate answered her, It cannot be that the son of those tears should perish. After his conversion he seriously learned, 
Erasm. in vie. D, Hieron.  and happily taught others, not to defer infant-baptism, as may appear by that which hath been alleged out of him.  
As for St. Hierom, they also say that both his parents were Christian, and that he was diligently taught and brought up of them at home, and that with Bonosus presently even in his Parents embraces, and Nurses gentle language he received in Christ, and presently he was instructed in the rudiments of Christian piety, which very probably importeth his infant-baptisme, rather than that he had any Nurses at his being ●0 years old. That which Erasmus (who gathered his story out of other Authors) after saith on Hieroms Epistle to Damasus, 
Ejus urbis silem v●lle se sui, in qua Christi●●● accepi●●● Erasm. s. 1.  that he would follow the saith of that City in which he had received the garment of Christ, as the same Erasmus gives the sense in the life of Hierom, proves not that he was not baptised before he was 30 years old: for Hieroms words are to this sense, because the Eastern Churches have rend the seamless Coat of Christ (by their schisms) so that it is hard there to know where the Church is, therefore. I thought it meet that I should consult with Peter's Chair, and the faith commended by the Apostles mouth (Rom. 1.) thence now requiring food for my soul, where long since I took on me the garment of Christ. What was it which he called Peter's Chair? What the City of Rome? Was that faith which the Apostle commended only there, or then when Hierom wrote in all the Western Church? his words concerning the Eastern Churches divisions by reason of the Arian faction, and the following, concerning the great distance at which Hierom (being then in Syria, near Antioch) was make it plain, that he spoke of the Western Church in which he was baptised, probably in oppido Stridonis, where he was born, not in Rome: As for Erasmus' opinion of his being baptised in Rome, 'tis grounded but upon an opinor. I think saith he) he meaneth it not of his Priesthood, or orders. And what solidity is there on these conjectures, to conclude that Hieroms parents, though Christian, deferred his baptism until he was 30 years old? or what will it advantage you if it were true? there may be such lets to sealing, as to Israel in the Wilderness, and God bore with them 40 years together, yet they should have circumcised the male children at eight days old upon a severe penalty, Gen, 17. 14. an inevitable necessity varieth not the rule.  
Concerning the last instance in Ambrose, 
Paulinus vir. D. Ambros.  I find that his Father was Deputy, or Governor of France; but whether Christian or not, 
Ne senex erg● Mase●●tus, ne●infans vernacalus excipitur, ●●emnis ●● paceato obnoxia, & i●●● omnis atas ●●ramento idenea— ni quis icnatus f●erit ex ●● sp. S. etc. atique nul. 'em ●●infantum, etc. Ambred.  I find nothing in Paulinus who wrote his life, and you avouch no Author for that you say. We read that after he was chosen Bishop of Milan, after Auxentius the Arian, by the joint suffrages of the discordant parties; and being (though much against his own will) confirmed in that charge by Valentinian the Emperor, he was baptised; and with the Church held Infant-baptism against Pelagius and the Donatists, upon this ground, Because every age is subject to sin, therefore every age is fit for the Sacrament; let the reader mark how this also is very considerable in the example, and of what great efficacy it is for the destroying the supposed necessity, or derivation from the Apostles, as the pleader saith: But seeing he can raise no stronger batteries against it, 
Abra. l. 2. c. 11. vid. lb. l. 10. etc. 84 ad Demerriadem. pag. 239. Num. 28. pag. 240.  he might more easily and certainly conclude, that it will stand whether he will or no.   
But however (saith he) it is against the perpetual analogy of Christian Doctrine to baptise infants]. 
This is gallantly spoken, if he could tell how to prove it, or any part thereof.   
Besides that Christ never gave any precept to baptise them, etc.] 
This is his Argument; all that for which Christ never gave any precept for the doing it, and which neither himself nor his Apostles (that appears) did, is against the perpetual Analogy of Christ's Doctrine; but Christ never gave any precept to baptise them, etc. ergo.— I answer, This foundered Argument, lame on both feet, doth poorly charge. 1. 'Tis not true that all is against the perpetual Analogy of Christ's Doctrine for which no express precept of Christ, or practice of himself or his Apostles appears, for there are many things circumstantial and indifferent, neither commanded nor forbidden, which yet on second thoughts you will not say are against the perpetual Analogy of Christ's Doctrine: I might instance the postures, or numbers, or sexes, or places where, in the receiving the Lords Supper: Where do you read of any command of Christ, or practice of himself or Apostles, that the Communicants should stand, or sit, or kneel, or lie down; one of these (or if you can think of any other) must needs be; show us either precept or practice obliging to either; where is any precept of Christ obliging to a set or determined number of Communicants: where are we commanded to administer to women? where is any precept obliging to a place? who knows not that these and the like things are left under the general rule, Let all things be done decently, and in order? which observed they are not against the Analogy of Christ's Doctrine. Again, what think you of the Sabath, is that which we now do therein against the Analogy of Christ's Doctrine, because we find no express precept or practice of Christ or his Disciples for the translation of it? That it is and aught to be the Christian Sabbath, is grounded on necessary consequence, but no express precept. 2. It is also notoriously false, that Christ never gave any express precept to baptise all Nations, without any exception to infants within the Covenant; and who knoweth not that infants ever were and are a great part of every Nation; what then? though he never said in so many syllables, or by naming infants, go and baptise them also, is it not sufficient to name all Nations without enumeration of particulars? Indeed he needed not give such an express command concerning children, seeing that he sent them to administer this seal of the new Covenant and Sacrament of initiation, who were in the old, their selves sealed in their infancy by circumcision, and so used to that Doctrine of children's being within the Covenant with believing parents, and the daily practice of their initiation and reception into the communion of a visible Church, that it might have seemed very superfluous to say any more than Go baptise all Nations. There is also much difference, Inter ecclesiam constituendam, & constitutam; the Apostles business was generally to baptise Heathens and converted unbelievers; but we have to deal with a Church constituted; therefore faith and repentance, were so often mentioned in the story of the Apostles practice; but we living in a settled Church, have to deal with baptising infants who cannot yet actually believe or repent: But in that no particulars are mentioned in Christ's universal command to baptise, it showeth that all within the Church-priviledg and Covenant of God are included. Again, whereas you require a command in terminis for baptising infants, I demand, Where doth he in terminis say, Baptise men of years, or Kings, peasants, rich, poor, high, low, men, women, Citizens, Countrymen, Fishers, Husbandmen, Thresher's, Shoemakers, Tailors, Shopkeepers, or Mechanics? 
Ursin. par. 2.  He commandeth that all be baptised, of what sex, age, condition or estate whatsoever they be, which appertain to any Nation. 
See Mr. Cobbet of children's baptismal right. s. 8. pag. 143. ●.  So in general Prescripts, Laws, Grants, and Franchises, the rehearsal of particulars is not requisite; because such things pass on the whole kind therein contained, and will that the censure or privilege concern all particulars within that general, except in case of any exemption of some specified particular, or exception made by him who made the Covenant, or granted the Privileges. We cannot find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in these very words in any place of Scripture, 
Jo. Gerard. de baptism. sect. 3, de paedobapt. 193.  Baptise Women, or administer the Lords Supper to women yet from these general precepts, Baptise all Nations— take eat this is my body— and— d●i●k ye all of it (now it is— evident that the twelve Apostles only were then present when he instituted this Sacrament, 
Mat. 28. 19 Mar. 26. 20, 27.  and that he spoke and administered it unto them only) yet I say we all, without quarrel about it, baptise women, and respectively administer the Lord's Supper to them, as included in the general precepts; and why are we not contented with a general precept including children's baptism, seeing no exception of the Covenant-maker can appear to the contrary? Lastly we say again, that the reason why Christ gave his Disciples no express or peculiar command concerning baptising infants, but included them in the general, was because the Apostles were so well acquainted with children's reception into the Church-priviledges, and sealing into the same, that they could not reasonably make any question of baptising infants, having a general command to baptise all Nations, infants being under the Law circumcised; 
— Cum gratta Det non sit stricti●r & a●gusti●r in novolqu●● in V. T. Io. Gerard. S. S.  and knowing moreover that the grace of God was not more strict or restrained in the new Testament then in the old; but contrariwise, more diffused or large; and therefore a greater and more difficult question might have been concerning the baptism of women, there being neither analogy from circumcision, nor particular precept to induce them to baptise them; but that they knew that the general precept was authority sufficient, without specifying particulars in terminis. You say more,   
All that either he or his Apostles said concerning it, requires such previous dispositions to baptism, of which infants are not capable, and these are faith and repentance.] 
Your whole scope is fallacious: form your Argument,  
Christ and his Apostles in all that he or they said concerning baptism, required faith and repentance, as previous dispositions to baptism, but no infant can believe or repent; ergo, infants are not previously disposed to, or capable of baptism, according to that Christ or his Apostles ever said. 1. We say here is a Paralogism or fallacy, à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simplicitèr; Your Major is true, if you speak of persons of years to be instructed; but false concerning children, because he never requireth any impossibility. 2. He that appointed Infant's baptism, requires no other previous disposition to infant-baptism, but such as they are capable of, that is, of being admitted into the visible Church, and sealed with the external Seal thereof into the future profession of faith and repentance. Add hereto, that children under the Gospel, are thus capable of the seal of faith, as children were under the Law, although they cannot actually repent or believe, which were and are no less previous dispositions, if we speak of persons of mature years to be baptised: But if your dispute be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, your ignoratio elenchi may not pass for current reason, if by previous dispositions to baptism of men of years, you would obtrude the same on infants, concerning whom we say that actual faith or repentance are no more previous dispositions to baptism, than they were to circumcision. And so you see that I might reasonably answer all that you say herein by rejecting your consequence; but for the prudent Readers further satisfaction, I say, 3. Aprevious disposition necessary to the capacity of a thing, is considerable, either as it is in or of the subject.  
1. A previous disposition in the subject, we may understand either as a self-disposing by some intrinsical and inward faculty, or as a being extrinsecally disposed and fitted by some other power, to a capacity or receptibility of something which yet it hath not, neither was capable thereof before such a disposition: Now this in our present instance presupposeth, or speaks some change of the mind by illumination, faith, remorse of conscience, purpose of leading a new life, and desire to be implanted into Christ and the communion of Saints by baptism; and so it is internal; or professing of that endeavour of knowing the mysteries of the Gospel, faith and repentance testified before men; and so these dispositions are external, or expressed to men whom it may concern; these are necessary in persons of years coming to baptism.  
2. there is a previous disposition of the subject without any present change of the mind, which springeth from his relation to some other, or some others act: So some titles of honour come on children in their father's Charters without any present change of the child's mind; so Lands and Inheritances, by right of adoption, may be settled on them in their infancy, without their present change or knowledge: so also the believing parents privilege, and being within God's Covenant made with them and their children, previously disposeth infants to the seal thereof, to wit, by giving them a certain right thereto, and so was it in circumcision: But if a Proselyte were to receive the seal of the Covenant, he must necessarily be prepared and first disposed thereto, by the knowledge of God's Law and Covenant, faith, repentance, or at least the profession thereof, and those other rites which the Law required on that behalf. The infants previous disposition to circumcision, was no other than his fathers and his own privilege, and being within God's Covenant: Of the child was neither faith nor repentance required for the present, but future; so must we understand concerning baptism, the seal of faith under the Gospel.   
And not (say you) to instance in those innumerable places that require faith before this Sacrament, there needs no more but this one, He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved—] 
I answer, 1. Deal fairly, dispute ad idem; and show me one place of Scripture which universally requireth faith before this Sacrament, and you shall be excused for the innumerable places which you speak of: We can show that the rule holds not universally that faith must precede the Sacraments: for though Abraham's faith preceded the seal thereof, yet Isaaks seal preceded his faith: Mr. Calvin expresseth the reason hereof: Why (saith he) doth in Abraham the Sacrament follow faith, and in Isaak his son it goeth before all understanding? because it is meet that he, which being in fullgrown age is received into fellowship of the Covenant, from which he had hitherto been a stranger, should first learn the conditions thereof: but an infant begotten of him, needed not so, which by right of inheritance, according to the form of the promise, is even from his mother's womb contained in the Covenant. And certainly in this respect God calleth the infants of covenanted parents, sons and daughters born unto him, 
Gen. 17. 7.  Ezek. 16. 20. & 23. 37. 
Act. 2. 39 etc. 2 Cor. 6. 18.  be esteeming them his children who are born of those parents to whom God made the promise to be a God unto them and their seed after them; which promise as truly concerns us and our children, as it concerned Abraham and his. 2. If the argument be good from that place, Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptised; faith is first named, and then baptism: ergo, faith must precede baptism: Why shall not the Argument from other places be good to the contrary? as John 3. 5. Except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God: Baptism is first named, and then regeneration; therefore baptism must precede regeneration. So again Ephes. 5. 26. Washing with water, that is, baptism is mentioned before the word, ergo, we must first be baptised, and afterward receive the word. 3. If this argument were good, how many men and women of age, must by the same reason be denied baptism? For all have not saith; but the truth is, that to be born in the Church, is unto, or in infants instead of profession of faith and repentance, as to the outward seal, for which we contend; and profession of faith and repentance, is to and for the adult instead of the same, for their right to the desired seal (so was it to Ishmael, and Esau whom God hated) because they were born of covenanted parents. 4. Sure it is that Christ in the forementioned place, speaketh of men and women of years: For you confess that infants as such, cannot believe; and what then must follow if your cruel principles were true? Christ saith, But he that believeth not, shall be damned: If this were as you would have it, spoken concerning infants also, what should become of all those that die in their infancy? what are they damned? Here appears an inexcusable perverseness of these men, who when children are proposed to their interest in general terms granted them, there they would exclude them, except they show a particular warrant; and baptise all Nations, without a baptise infants, shall not advantage them for the seal of their admission into Christ's visible Church: But where a general rule is mentioned, from whence they are in reason and all charitable construction to be exempted, there it must include them for their disadvantage, even to damnation, without any particular warrant for such inteterpretation. Mr. Cobbet observeth well, That the Covenant-priviledges of grace, 
— Of child. baptismal right, cap. 8. conclus. 7. pag. 143.  are ever to be expounded in favour of the principal or less principal counterparties, unless any exception be made of persons or privileges by him which was the Covenant-maker. To avoid this, you must either acknowledge that the place you cite, is either to be understood of those of years who contumaciously reject the Ordinances of God, being hardened in wilful blindness and unbelief, and so that i● doth not concern children, as such; or else you must allow infants some secret seeds of faith and regeneration, and so you shall justly acknowledge their capacity of baptism.   
Plainly (you say) thus, faith and baptism in conjunction, will bring a man to heaven; but if he have not faith, baptises shall do him no good.] 
True in those (who though baptised) as Simon Magus, 
In●●●lem sanetificati●nem quibui●lam ●●●● a●●aisse & profuisse five visibilibus sacramentis: visibilem vero sa●●●ficati●nem, quae fit sacramento visibili, sine invisibili, p●sse adesse, non posse prodesse: ne●tonen visibile sacramentam ide● centemnendum est, quiatcontemp●or ejus invisibiliter sanctificari non potest, etc. P. Lombard. l. 4. dist. 4. E. Post Aug. sup. Leu. in fine. c. 8.  are yet but in the gall of bitterness; but this is a mere ignoratio elenchi, hence to conclude against infant's baptism; our question not being whether all that are baptised shall be saved; but whether children of believing parents ought to be baptised; which if you would thus disprove, whosoever have not a saving faith that the Sacrament may do them good, may not be baptised; but children have not such faith, that baptism received may do them good: ergo, children are not to be baptised: your reasoning would appear unreasonable, both Propositions being false or fallacious. The Major, because baptism is but the external seal of admission into the visible Church, into which elect and reprobates may enter, as it were into the outward Court of the Temple. And if saving faith finally doing the baptised good, or, which is the same, if the inward baptism by the holy Ghost, were the rule by which the baptising Minister must proceed, what man were sufficient for that Office? The examples of Simon Magus, Judas, Demas, etc. show enough that the most discerning men may be deceived in others fair profession; and who can foresee the final estates of men and women baptised? I cannot reasonably think that you take all those for elect, whom yourselves baptise, or that your baptism shall do them all good. And if you dispute 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
Calvin. two stir. l. 4. c. 16 N. 20.  concerning one and the same faith in several degrees, that is, if you mean the seeds or habit of faith; that Minor is false; for elect infants have the seeds of faith in baptism, though they be not form in them, yet by the secret working of the spirit, the seeds thereof for a time lying hidden in them, shall flourish and show their growth in them in newness of life. If you mean it of actual faith, 
At enim qui●●● 〈…〉 Aug. ●p. 48 Vincan.  that want of that condition, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 discovereth the Paralogism: And we say infants want of actual faith in present infancy thereof incapable, concludeth nothing against their having of it in mature age; and so as little against their baptism. I cannot conclude so well as in Augustins' words; But (some may say) the things do some men no good; what must the Medicine therefore be neglected, because some men's pestilence is incurable?   
So that if baptism be necessary, then so is faith, and much more; for want of faith damneth absolutely.] 
I demand then, Do infants believe? Why do ye deny them baptism? or because they have not faith, do you conclude them all damned who die in their infancy? That were a damnable assertion; and to pay you with your own coin, Against the perpetual analogy of Christ's Doctrine, who commanded infants to be brought unto him, bless them, and positively affirmed, that Of such is the Kingdom of heaven, Further I say, If your Proposition be universal, it is notoriously false; for all want of faith doth not absolutely damn: For 1. They who pray for faith, or the increases thereof, (as the Disciples did) want faith, yet were they not damned; he that hungereth and thirsteth for the righteousness of faith, wanteth the same; for hunger and thirst are of emptiness: yet Christ pronounceth such blessed. 
Mat. 5. 6. 1 Tim. 1. 13.  2. He that now believeth not, may hereafter believe: It was Paul's case; had you seen him persecute the faith and faithful in ignorance and unbelief, would you presently have devoted him to absolute damnation? Judge not, that you be not judged: I know no man living that wanteth not faith; and I pray the good Lord to help my unbelief, and exhort you otherwise to express your fancies, that they prove not snares to weak and afflicted consciences:   
Then (you say) it is sottish to say the same incapacity of reason and faith, shall not excuse from the actual susception of baptism, etc.] 
A very acute and witty assertion indeed; but we answer, 1. By this principle you might have been as blasphemous against God's Ordinance in circumcision, had you lived under the Law. 2. We say not but that infants by their incapacity, are excused from actual susception of baptism, for they cannot act thereto: But parents are not excusable, if they contemn or neglect their parts in sealing those that are joint heirs of the Promises and Covenant of God with them and their children, because they have a capacity to promote and effect it: and this appeareth in the History of Moses, Exod. 4. 24, 25. 
Quod in filio Most per Ang●●um manifestatum est, qui own ad●uc incircum●●●●●tre ferretur. praesenti & evidenti periculo ut circumcideretur exactum est, & cum factan ●●●●, depuija est pernicies. Aug. cont. Donatist. 1. 4. c. 24.  We very well know that infants cannot come and desire the Seals, their present incapacity excuseth them from that they cannot possibly do: but their parents or friends can entreat it for them, and present them to it: so that infants have a passive capacity; they cannot profess faith and repentance; but their parents professing of the same, interesseth them in all those external Church-priviledges whereof they are capable: and so to be born in the Church, is to them and for them, instead, and in place of their profession. What your terms of reasonably and humanely received, do mean, if to any purpose, want interpretation.   
The conclusion (you say) is, that baptism is also to be deferred till the time of faith.] 
Why might you not say the same also concerning circumcision? It is certain that by the same you may conclude, that many thousand persons of age must never be baptised, because they never come to believe; as for their profession, no man can say whether it be hypocritical or not.   
Since faith is necessary to the susception of baptism, etc.] 
Pag. 240. Num. 29.  
True in adult is; what is this to our present question concerning infants? We have often said that this your arguing a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter, is fallacious, and not passable among young Sophisters; and we owe no other answer then denying the consequence. Our contest is about Infant-baptism, wherein we say a present actual faith is not required: It is necessary, or at least the profession thereof in those who present to, or administer baptism; we cannot say so of infants, to whom God doth not yet give the use of reason: therefore they cannot first believe and after receive the Seal, 
Ergo sunt baptizandi ut sidem & salutem co●sequantur. Jo. Gerard. de poe. dobap. sect. 3. Numb. 196. Heb. 4. 2. Rom. 10. ● joh. 17. 20.  as Abraham did: But therefore they are to be baptised that they may attain faith and salvation: So the word preached profiteth not, if it be not mixed with faith in them that hear; yet is the preaching thereof an effectual means whereby God will work faith in the hearers: To conclude, Baptism profiteth not without faith; yet is it an effectual means whereby God worketh regeneration and salvation, therefore none within his Covenant are to be barred from it. It is not improbably conjectured by some, that therefore the Disciples forbade them to bring children to Christ, because they thought children have not faith, nor can any teach them, who are yet incapable of doctrine: Possibly they did not yet understand the abolition of the old Seal for the introduction of the new, 
Gal 5. 2.  nor how baptism was to succeed circumcision; that was sometime after disputed and determined, Act● 1 ●●, 2. but Christ was much displeased with it, rebuked them, and seriously protested, that of such is the kingdom of heaven.   
Whatever can be said to take off from the necessity of actual saith all that, 
Pag. 241.  and much more (you say) may be said to excuse from the actual susception of baptism.] 
True in adultis, but most faise in infants; I am weary of telling you of your fallacious arguing, à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter: Again, if here by actual susception of baptism, you mean that infants are to be excused from it, we have answered in the foregoing paragraph; if you mean from administration of infant baptism, we deny your assertion, and expect proof.   
The second device (you say) was of Calvin and his.] 
You said before that some said infants have imputative saith, 
〈…〉  and by the number you now attribute it to Calvin; indeed Mr. Calvin saith, as I have noted, That infants are baptised into future repentance and faith, which although they be not yet form in them, yet by the secret operation of the spirit, the seed of either lieth hid in them: and in the same chapter he saith as Paul there reasoneth, That the Jews are sanctified of their parents; so in another place he teacheth. That the children of Christians receive the same sanctification of their fathers: Also in the same chapter be saith— not that I mean rashly to affirm, that they be endued with the same faith which we feel in ourselves, or that they have at all knowledge of faith (which I had rather leave in suspense, etc.) but concerning imputative faith, I find neither device nor approbation of calvin's. Why did you not rather say that this device was P. Lombard's (who mentioneth the Imputative faith you speak of) or some of the following Schoolmen? 
— ●equiritur fides Ecclesiae, Al. Aleni. de sacr. bapt. q. 8. m. 3. a. 1. sect. 3. resol. Itemque— par●ui●● in baptistis●●, impasto. Chris●●●, ●fferentium fide, & c. ●b. m. 8. a. 3. sect. 1. resol.  Or Polydore Virgil who in his fourth book concerning the Inventors of these things cleareth Calvin from this invention, saying— Seeing infants, by reason of their age, cannot testify their own saith, as Cyprian saith, it was provided from the beginning, that they should profess their faith by others; that as another's fault, to wit Adam cur first parents sin was evil to them, in so much that from their birth they were subject to original sin, so others endeavour might be good to them, Who therefore (as Ambrose saith in his second book concerning the calling of the Gentiles) believe and are baptised by another's confession. Or why do you not rather lay the invention hereof to Justin Martyr, who living long before any of these, 
Fides aliena, sine qua non datur parvulis remissi●, non est fides offerentium, sed est fides ecc●●sis. Gab. Byel. in 4. lent. distinct 4 q.z. G. ib. dist. 5. q. 1. R; Re quiritur fides ecclesiae, etc. Polydore Virgil. de invent. l. 4. c. 4. inquir, ... Quibus cum per ●tatem nen licer●t de sua fide testari, ● principi● sie●t tradit Cyprianus, provisuin suit, ut per alios credere profiterentur; quo queinadmedum alienâ culpd, id est Adam primi parentis delictam eye qu●● malo suit, quod statim nati originali peccato obligarentur, sic aliena opera bono e●●●t, qui ideirco, velut ait, Ambrosiu, l. de vocat. Gent. 2. ex alien● confession credunt & baptizant●r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Iust. Mart. q. & relpons. aa orthodox. q. 56.  saith, They are made worthy of the good things of Baptism, by their faith who present them to be baptised? The Reader may hence gather how little Calvin said for imputative faith; and if he had affirmed any such thing, yet how untrue it is, that Calvin, or any of his, invented it. But the pleader saith further,   
Can 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? Pag. 241. 
Yes, caeter is paribss: for though the Sacraments work not the same effect in all receivers, yet God's holy Spirit deserteth not his ordinance in the elect, though for causes ever just, though most unknown to us, it doth not always alike show its power in the recipient. It is true, that the seal and ministration of man can nothing profit where God giveth not the inward Baptism by his holy Spirit; though the inward may save without the outward, as hath been noted: but your supposition being rightly laid concerning an elect infant baptised, and so carried away, you must grant, that God, whose election can by no means be defeated or made void, will give and make effectual the means to the end, that is, salvation, whether by acquainting the party baptised with his will declared in his word preached to him, or by his secret work within him, if he will take him away in infancy: in the adult, coming to the knowledge of God's covenant in Christ, and of his own sealing in infancy, it must make him more confident of his implantation into Christ, then if he knew that he never had been baptised. What then? Must this be by virtue of baptism by water only, or the external ministration thereof? No, but by the power of God's Spirit working on his ordinance, and accomplishing his own decrees, do we follow your supposition, dividing preaching of the word to such when they come to years, from the precedent seal? Truly such a strange invention were absolutely without Art, without Scripture, reason or authority, I would say, as is your argument here alleged against insant-baptism, but that you call it Demonstrative and Unanswerable: but consider how to overcome before you cry victory. To answer your supposition; suppose that an infant were not by any habitual faith so much as disposed to any actual belief without a new master; what could this conclude more than that it is necessary to the actual faith of an insant come to fit years, that he be taught the doctrine of faith, repentance, etc. which we constantly affirm: what makes this against infant-baptism? We unanimously confess, and solemnly profess, that the infant, so soon as it shall be able to learn, aught to be, and shall be taught the mysteries of eternal life and salvation by Christ: so your demonstration proves but a poor fallacy: you utterly mistaking or willingly dissembling the question. We affirm not that the Word ought to be divided from the Sacrament whereof newborn infants are capable, but that the word is to be preached to them, & they are to be instructed in all the Rudiments of Christian Religion, so soon as they shall be able to learn: I only add hereto, what have you said in this your so much applauded argument against infant-baptism, which might not as reasonably and religiously have been urged against infant-circumcision? Could they if sent into Painim-countreys' with all the terms of your supposition, have been more disposed to an actual belief without a new Master? yet they had, and we have right to the seal of the righteousness of Faith, not for any excellency or ability to produce any good and saving effect in ourselves, but through the merits of our Saviour, the free mercy of God, and the right of our Fathers, with whom God made his Covenant for their persons and posterity. Next, you say,   
To which also this consideration may be added, 
Pag. 241: Numb. 30.  That if baptism be necessary to the salvation of infants, upon whom is the imposition laid?] 
Concerning Baptism in general, 'tis considerable which Tertullian saith, The Lord himself who owed no repentance, was baptised; and was it not necessary to sinners? his reason will reach (possibly beyond his opinion) to infants also, except we should say with Pelagius, that they are not sinners. Further we say, that Baptism, the laver of regeneration, is necessary to the salvation of infants; yet in case of privation or impossibility, they are saved by the peculiar and extraordinary goodness and providence of God. So that the necessity of Baptism, as hath been avowed, is not absolute, as if none could be saved without it; but necessary on our part, who are to obey the ordinance of God. God is not tied to his ordinance, but we are: he can otherwise save, but we cannot be saved in the contempt thereof God (saith Tertullian) hath bound faith to the necessity of Baptism; therefore Cernelius and those that were with him, after they were sanctified by the holy Ghost, 

Disringui●● igitur inter necessitatem ex parte Dei & ex parte nostri: inter casum pri●ationis & viam ordinariam, etc. joh Gerhard de Baptism. c. 7. c. 23●.  
Obstrinxit sidem ad bapt j●●● necessitatum. Tertul. q. s. c. 13.  
— Nec tamen visibile Sacramutum ideo contemnendum; quia c●ntempter e●us invisibiliter sanctisi●●ri non potest: Hinc Cornelius, & qui cum eo crant, jam Spirita Sanctificati, baptizati sunt: nee su●eis●● jud●● aest, etc. P. Lemb. sent. l. 4. dist. 4. E.   were yet baptised; neither is the visible sanctification superfluous, because the invisible preceded; seeing God alone giveth the one, and appointeth man to do the other for a seal and confirmation of his covenant. You say more,   
To whom is the commandment given? To the Parents or to the children? Not to the children, for they are not capable of a law; not to the parents, for then God hath put the salvation of innocent babes into the power of others, and infants may be damned for their father's carelessness or malice, etc.] 
You trifle here; you know that we hold no such necessity of the means, as hath been said; your foundation therefore failing, nothing of your superstructure can stand. If men neglect or contemn the ordinance of God toward their infant's salvation, they do as much as in them lieth, 
2. ●●n. 2. 19  to shut them from heaven: but yet the foundation of the Lord remaineth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are his though men neglect to mark them, who cannot help themselves thereto, yet the Lord knoweth all his, 
●●e Mr. Cobbet of child. Baptism. right, sect 10. p. 447, 448,  and is not unjust to punish the child's involuntary defect for the parents voluntary neglect, which God will severely punish, though the child shall be held guiltless thereof, as may appear in the forerecited example of Moses; which might persuade considering men to beware of denying children baptism (for if the neglect be such a sin, 
— qui dam eye etc. talibus parentibus ●● secit, oftendis, qu●●d cum f●●de●e sa● dignitus Andr. Rivet to. 2. stract. 3. q. 3. n. 2.  what is the contempt thereof?) to which their parent's faith giveth them right; not as an efficient, principal, or meritorious cause of infant's salvation, but as a sign and seal of God's good will towards their children, whose providence causing them to be born of such parents showeth that he vouchsafeth them the privilege of his covenant: and how horrible a presumption is it for man to take away that which God pleaseth to give?   
It follows (say you) that it is not necessary at all to be done to th●m to whom it cannot be prescribed as a law, and in whose behalf it cannot be reasonably entrusted to others with the appendent necessity.] 
We have said enough concerning the necessity you still harp on, and fear to weary the Reader by telling you, we hold no such absolute necessity as we have expressed; but that it follows not that it is necessary at all to be done, etc. is evidently false, as may appear in circumcision, which was enjoined the parents, not the children; as untrue is your second branch (in whose behalf it cannot be reasonably entrusted to others—) for the infant's circumcision was reasonably entrusted to the parent under this necessity— The uncircumcised man child— that person shall be cut off from his people, Gen. 17. 14.   
And (you say) if it be not necessary, it is certain it is not reasonable.] 
Stay and prove that it is not necessary, before you build up many conclusions upon that which never was, not will be granted you. We have showed how 'tis necessary.   
It is nowhere in terms prescribed.] 
Neither is the Sabbath which we observe, nor many other things which of duty we do perform: See what hath been answered hereto, pag. 240. Num. 28. and so we baptise infants; for it is both reasonable, and they have a capacity thereof, though you deny both.   
Either baptism produc●th spiritual effects, or it produceth them not, etc.] 
Pag. 2 42. Num. 31;  
A rare Dilemma, but that 'tis fallacious. Reduce it to a Syllogism, and it will appear a Paralogism ex accident. Suppose thus,  
That which produceth no spiritual effects, is not to be contended for; but baptism produceth no spiritual effect; ergo, it is not to be contended for: Who knows not that 'tis accidental to baptism to produce no spiritual effect in the baptised? This is for man's unbelief and forsaking the Covenants, by wilful sinning which doth ponere ●bicem, and make the Ordinance of none effect to salvation: If we should thus dispute, 
Rom. 4. 15.  That which causeth wrath is evil; but the Law causeth wrath, 
Rom. 7. 12. Psal. 19 7, 8.  ergo, the Law is evil: the Fallacy were the same: For it is accidental, and through man's disobedience that the Law causeth wrath; of itself it is good and holy, right and pure: so here, though baptism produce no good spiritual effect in the reprobate (or not ex opere operato) yet by the institution of God, whose spirit worketh on his Ordinance, it doth.   
What are we nearer heaven if we are baptised?] 
If I were of your Council, I would entreat you to beware of these political temporize which come so near Atheism: Believe you the Scriptures who thus slight Gods holy Ordinances?   
But if— baptism does do a work upon the soul, producing spiritual benefits and advantages, these advantages are produced by the external work of the Sacrament alone, or by that as it is helped by the co-operation and predispositions of the suscipient. 
Here you bring another fallacy, à non causâ pro causâ We say that neither are the effects or spiritual advantages of baptism, produced by the external work of the Sacrament alone, nor by that as it is helped by the co-operation and pre-disposition of the suscipient (as hath been proved) but by the spirit of God working on his own Ordinance.   
If (you say) by the external work alone, how doth this differ from the opus operatum of Papists, save that it is worse? 
If the Sky fall we shall have Larks. Who affirms that which you suppose?   
For they say the Sacrament does not produce its effect but in a suscipient disposed by all requisites and due preparations of piety, faith and repentance.] 
Do they say so when they speak of infant-baptism? slander them not; herein they are better than you who deny infant's baptism, which they grant though children cannot actually believe, confess, profess or repent.   
But this opinion says it does of itself, without the help or so much as the coexistence of any condition but the mere reception.] 
Make much of the Minerva of your own brain; if it be your opinion, we own it not.   
But if the Sacrament does not do its work alone, but per modum recipientis, according to the predispositions of the suscipient, then because infants can neither hinder it, nor do any thing to further it, it does them no benefit at all.] 
You might have pleaded the same against circumcision, with as good success: They could neither hinder it, nor do any thing to further it; did it therefore do them no benefit at all? But who saith it is per modum recipient is, etc. which is not properly expressed according to the predisposition, Per modum speaks a cause, ad, or secundum, a condition: We say that the Sacrament doth work according to the dispositions of the receivers, because God gives that to infants which makes them fit to be baptised, giving them by his own Covenant with his believieving parents, federal holiness, and so a right to the external initiatory seal of his Covenant with them: Whether it do them good or no, whether it produce a spiritual good effect or no (that is to regeneration and salvation) a right they have to the external seal, as being born within the Church, and that as soon as they are born; we understand not any other predisposing cause in the infant to be baptised, as if he were able to contribute any thing to his receptibility, more than the unborn Jacob was in relation to the love of God, which indeed never found any cause but itself; 
Rom. 9 11. etc. 2 Cor. 5. 10. Rom. 3 20.  yet ere the children were born, God loved Jacob and hated Esau. Further we say, as we shall be saved secundum opera, but not propter opera: Good works are in the regenerate excellent signs of justification and salvation future, they cannot be the causes of either; they follow, they cannot precede justification: So we may say that baptism works according to the dispos●●ons of the suscipient, which are not in infants, faith, profession, repentance, etc. which God gives not to infants, but to persons of years; but as to their ri●● baptism by his Covenant: what other predispositi●●●re in them are secret, and known to God above. And so your exploded fancy and dream of a notable advantage vanisheth.   
Either baptism (you say) is a mere Ceremony, or it implies a duty on our part. If it be a ceremony only, how doth it sanctify us, or make the comers thereunto perfect? If it implys a duty on our part, how then can children receive it, who cannot do duty at all?] 
How many impertinences are here twisted up together? We answer plainly, Ceremony and duty on man's part, are not membra dividentia nor always contradistinct for they may coïncidere; as in those ceremonies of the Law, which being commanded of God, were duties of men subject to the Law, and to be performed, though they could not make the comers thereunto perfect: and so is baptism now a duty on our part to be administered, though of itself it cannot make all the comers thereunto perfect. But you demand, if it implies a duty on our part; how then can children receive it, who cannot do duty at all? Where is now the revelation, reason, common sense, and all experience in the World, in which you so lately triumphed, as if you had driven us to take sanctuary? If it be a duty on our part to administer it● how can children receive it, who cannot do any duty at all? Nay but tell me, if you can, by all your reason, how could infants receive baptism except we did administer it? say you, how can he be passive who cannot be active at all? how could infants receive circumcision, who could do as little duty as infants now can? That homonymical (on our part) must be otherwise limited by some expression, or else your Argument will appear fallacious. It is a duty on our part to baptise infants; on the children's part no duty is required● they can do none, as such; for God enjoineth no impossibilities. But you say,   
this way of ministration, makes baptism to be wholly an outward duty, a work of the Law, ●●rnal Ordinance, it makes us adhere to the letter, without any regard of the spirit, etc.] 
This Rhetoric would something better ●●●●●●im that careth not what, but how much he saith ●●●●●● vain and injurious expressions, are mere aspersions: and call you this an Argument considerable? wherein appears either matter or form thereto pertinent? For the rest (which in some other man I should take for some aegri insomnium) we say if you mean by Mystery, the spiritual baptism mysteriously signified by the outward ministration, to which you seem to drive, 'tis evident that it doth not always accompany it (except you will say that the Sacrament justifieth ex opere operato, 
Pag. 242.  which a little before you would have pinned on our backs) which appears in Judas, Simon Magus, 
Pag. 243.  and all others who fall away: And as certainly false is it, that it never follows in order of time; common experience showing that the spiritual seed sowed in baptism, many times, and in many of the baptised, lieth long before it actually appeareth, either in any outward effects, inward signs of calling, or fruits of regeneration; as in Abraham faith preceded, and circumcision the seal of the righteousness of faith, followed: so in Cornelius, a spiritual sanctification preceded, and baptism followed; but in Isaak circumcised the eight day, the seal preceded, and faith and sanctity followed: So in Infant-baptism the seal and laver of regeneration goeth before, 
Augustin. contr. Donat. l. 4. c. 21.  and actual faith followeth it in season, if they hold fast the faith of Christ. You say again,   
Baptism is never propounded, mentioned or enjoined as a means of remission of sins, or of eternal life, but something of duty, choice, and sanctity is joined with it, in order to production of the end so mentioned. Know you not that as many as are baptised into Christ Jesus, are baptised into his death, etc. 
Rom. 6. 3. ] 
Good reason that such things should be propounded, mentioned and enjoined to those who converting to the faith in years capable of Doctrine, require the seal of God's Covenant; and certainly so was it to Proselytes to be circumcised; but you cannot reasonably think, that they proposed or enjoined Infants to be circumcised any such things: and it were as vain to propose any of these to Infants now to be baptised: Therefore we seal them now, and propound these like things to them when they be capable: Now the Scripture speaking to men or women of understanding, propounds to them their present duty who are to be baptised, or who are baptised, as faith, repentance, walking in newness of life, mortification; and (as hath been said) the Apostles in the ecclesiâ constituendâ had mostly to do, being to endeavour the calling and conversion of the Gentiles, who before were aliens from the Covenant of God: But in ecclesiâ constitutâ, we rarely meet with any first to be taught, and then to be sealed; the children of Christian parents having Church-priviledg, are now baptised first (as in the settled Covenant under the Law they were first circumcised) and when they come to fit years, instructed: And what then do all your impertinences disadvantage our cause, seeing elect infants in their baptism, are implanted into Christ, and in due time walk in newness of life?   
This is indeed truly to be baptised, both in the Symbol and the Mystery: Whatsoever is less than this, is but the Symbol, only a mere ceremony, etc.] 
The effects of elect children's baptism being nothing less, this Rhetoric might have been spared.   
Plainer yet; Whosoever are baptised into Christ, have put on Christ, have put on the new man: But to put on this new man, is to be form in righteousness, and holiness, and truth, etc.] 
All this plainly makes for infant's baptism, who being naturally flesh and blood, such as cannot enter into the Kingdom of heaven, conceived and born in sin, children of wrath, must indeed put on Christ Jesus that they may be saved: These premises we willingly adhere to; but your conclusion is liable to a non sequitur; because it is either fallacious, disputing ab adultis ad infants, which wanting the condition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, becomes an ignoratio elenchi, and mistaking or mispursuing the Question, or begging it in those terms (remaining in the present incapacities) which cannot be granted. I answer two things, 1. God can give capacity of regeneration, and newness of life to any age; That he doth not give it to infants, cannot appear to us: The contrary doth; for he giveth the spirit of sanctification to some infants, in, and from the womb, for many dying young, are saved, which being conceived in sin, and born the children of wrath● they could not be, without regeneration and sanctification: And truly when I consider what marvellous instinct God giveth to the new-cast young of beasts, to take the breast (as well as to newborn infants) for their bodily preservation. I cannot but conceive that the good God gives infants (on whom he hath set his own image, which consisteth in understanding, sanctity, immortality, etc. 
Quae consu●it in immortalitate, in innocentiâ, ●●ju●ii●â ●ireli●●●●●●●ianimi d●●bus. Va●abl. in Gen. 1 26. See Mr. Cobbet. Explicat. of Mar 28. & Mar. 16. pag. 177. pag. 244. 1 Pet. 3. 21. ) some admirable, though to us secret, light of mind, and capacity of that which is snbordinate to the preservation of their immortal souls. 2. Children under the Gospel have no less capacity than children under the Law had who yet received the seal of the same righteousness of faith in their infancy, and were circumcised to newness of life. Rom. 2. 29. But you say,   
— And then have they but one member of the distinction used by S. Peter, they have that baptism which is a putting away the filth of the flesh; but they have not that baptism which is the answer of a good conscience towards God, which is the only baptism that saveth us—] 
I answer, 1. You vainly dispute è non concessis; 'tis not granted, nor can it ever be proved that elect children in baptism are not form new in righteousness and holiness; and so your superstruction concerning their having only that baptism which is a putting away the filth of the flesh, but not the rest necessary to salvation, is frivolous. 2. The answer of a good conscience toward God, is an effect of the inward baptism by the spirit of Jesus, peculiar to the elect. Now if your reason hence taken, for the exclusion of infants from baptism, the external seal, were good; by the same reason none but the elect, or those who have the answer of a good conscience towards God, must be admitted to baptism and whom then might you with good conscience baptise? certainly but few; and for ought you can certainly know, none: For in these last and worst days, what know you, but that they who fairly profess faith and repentance, etc. may yet notwithstanding be mere hypocrites? And where is then their answer of a good conscience toward God? 3. I say, what secret light, and sweet confidence elect infants have in God, I know not; sure I am they have that which is and shall be sufficient to their salvation in Christ, though they die before man can teach them mor●● and why shall man exclude them from the external Seal of God's Covenaut with them (as being born within the Church) of which they have as evident (and a more easy) capacity than children had of circumcision? God gives Infants the incomparably greater and more excellent part, sanctity and sealing to salvation; and shall man presume to deny the less and subordinate part, the external Seal of Christ's visible Church, whereof Reprobates, born within the Church, have a capacity? 4. Faith, good conscience, repentance, etc. are in the elect those fruits, whose seeds were sown in baptism; and (as hath been said) were it reasonable to say, we may not sow until the fruits thereof appear? Nay, but we therefore sow in hope, that we may in due season see and reap the fruits thereof. 5. Whereas you say that the answer of a good conscience towards God, is the only baptism that saveth us; I answer, 1. It is not the answer of a good conscience that saveth any man, though a good conscience be an excellent sign of our salvation by Christ; for, Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom also we have access by faith, etc. 2. 
Rom. 5. 1, 2.  Your reasoning is fallacious, your medium being homonymical: For, allowing you the sign for the cause, yet if that (which saveth us) though it may be true, if understood concerning persons of years, and as good conscience, an undoubted effect of regeneration, is opposed to the bare seal thereof, without any inward effect of the spirit. I say if it be understood of Infants, as in your sense, excluded from a capacity of good conscience, or the acts thereof, it is very false, except you will also exclude all Infants from salvation, which were against the express doctrine of Christ.   
As infants (you say) by the force of nature cannot put themselves into a supernatural condition (and therefore say the Poedobaptists, they need baptism to put them into it) so if they be baptised before the use of reason, before the works of the spirit, before the operation of grace, before they can throw off the works of darkness, and live in righteousness & newness of life, they are never the near.] 
I answer, 1. Neither can men of years by the force of naeture put themselves into a supernatural condition, supposing you mean subordinate to salvation; and what then can the use of reason without the works of the Spirit, advantage them hereto? Shall not they therefore that have the use of reason be baptised? 2. What do you herein say which might not as well have been objected against the circumcision of infants? Would you have concluded them never the near, because at eight days old they had not the use of reason to know what or why it was so done unto them before they could throw off the works of darkness, and live in righteousness and newness of life? 3. If you will have none baptised before the works of the Spirit, before the operations of grace, etc. when and whom may you baptise? For the wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit. 
John 3. ●.  God can, and doth sanctify infants (as in the elect infants, dying such must be granted, if you have so much reason or charity as to think that at least some of them are elected and saved) and he can and doth sanctify in age, sometimes in the very last act thereof, as appeared in the penitent thief; how then will it follow that infants are never the nearer if they be baptised before the use of reason, etc. 4. We must understand that baptism comprehendeth first, the sign water, and the whole ceremony, sprinkling, washing, or dipping into water in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost. Secondly, the things themselves signified by the visible and external things, which are sprinkling of the blood of Jesus on the baptised for the remission of sins, mortification of the old man, quickening the new man into certain hope of resurrection to eternal life to come. Thirdly, the commandment & promise of Christ, whence the sign hath authority and power of sealing and confirming these things unto the baptised. They then that say baptism is an external sign and washing of the body, and therefore a bare and effectless sign, do fallaciously dispute, 
Fallacia, divisionis.  dividing that which God (who cannot deceive us) hath joined together, by giving us order to baptise, and be baptised for the remission of sins freely for Christ's sake, into whom we are implanted by Baptism. How false then must it be which you, upon the matter, affirm that we shall be never the nearer, if we cannot contribute something to the efficacy of Baptism in the use of our own reason? Certainly Gods Spirit accompanieth his ordinance in the elect, sooner or later: If the reprobate be never the nearer salvation for his baptism, that is accidental, & maketh nothing against the effectual sealing of the elect to eternal life in their baptism. There are many sorts of hearers of the Word; some like the stony ground, 
Matth. 13.  some like the thorny, some like the highway; shall the Apostasy, unbelief, and barrenness of the greater part, make the ordinance of God of none effect to believers? 
●Quicunque partulosrecentes al uteris ma●rum baptizaudos negat aut dicit, in re●issi●●ē peccatorum eos baptizari, sed nihil ex Adam trahere criginalis peccati, quod regenerationis lavacre expictur, etc. Anat ema sit. Council Milvetian 2. can. & ib. eod Can. Eccles. Afric. 1 ●c. Aug. l. 3. de peccaturum merit. Hieron. rom. 2. advers. felag. l. 3. Psal. ● 1. 5. Eph 23. John 3. 6. 1 Cor. 15. 50. John 3. 5.  To conclude, it is but the outward ministration which is committed to us; the capacity or incapacity, fruitbearing or sterility of receivers, belongs to God to judge of, not to us; we must do our duty, and leave the issues to to him. But you say,   
From the pains of hell they shall be saved by the mercies of God and their own innocency, though they die in puris naturalibus, and baptism will carry them no further.] 
What? Popery and Pelagianism twisted together? If you speak of children's salvation by the mercies of God to his elect, so far we accord: if you say by their own innocency, that Pelagians and Donatists taught, who affirmed that infants were born without original sin, and therefore would not have them baptised. Against this heresy the second Milvetian Council determined. Canon 2. as hath been noted. For that you say they shall be saved though they die in puris naturalibus, that is, such as they are by nature without regeneration, it is against the express word of God, as may clearly appear, in that all are conceived and born in sin, the children of wrath by nature: That which is born of the flesh is flesh,— and flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, that is, such as it is by, and in the state of corrupted nature; therefore except the infant be regenerate, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which you say, that Baptism will carry infants no further, then from the pains of hell, smells strongly of Popery: They say that children dying without Baptism, shall have poe●am damni, non sensus, that is, they shall be free from hell fire, but that they shall not enter into heavenly joys: But Augustine so far said well, there is not to any, and middle place, that he can be any where but with the Devil, who is not with Christ. Certainly the Scripture mentioneth only heaven for the elect and blessed, and hell for the reprobate and damned. 
Vid. Bellar. to. 4. de amiss. gratiae. l. 6. c. 2, 3, 4. N●● est ullus ulli medius locus ut possit essenisi cum diabolo, qu● n●n est cum Christo. de p●. cat. merit. c● 28. & ●●. serm. 14. de verb. Apostoli.    
For that Baptism that saveth us is not only the washing with water, of which only children are capable, but the answer of a good conscience towards God, of which they are not capable till the use of reason, till they know to choose the good and refuse the evil.] 
If you mean by washing with water, baptism according to Christ's institution administered; we say also it is not that only (which is the Ministers part to give) which saveth us, but the power and grace of God's Spirit inwardly baptising, sanctifying, regenerating and cleansing us from our sins by the precious blood of Jesus that saveth us: Now that infants are not hereof capable till the use of reason, is evidently false, if you but hold these three Principles; 1. That no unregenerate unclean person can be saved, 2. That all mankind is born in sin, Rom. 5. 12. 3. That some infants dying before their use of reason, are saved. That which you say, that infants are capable of washing with water (that is of baptism, or else you trifle) we asser●t to, and desire you to say no more; infants of believing parents, that is of professed Christians, are capable of baptism: for the rest we contend not, we refer the effect thereof in particulars to God, who alone knoweth his elect, and how and when to give them the inward fruit of his own ordinances: we neither affirm that all the baptised shall be saved, neither can we or you determine which shall, and which shall not, but indifferently, as charity requireth, hope well of every one whom we baptise, concerninig. whom we can say nothing to the contrary: But you say,   
All vows made by persons under other names, stipulations made by minors, are not valid till they (be) by a supervening act after they are of a sufficient age to racifie them.] 
To which we answer, 1. though all be not valid in such case, it is enough that some are: 2. Your assertion, if granted, that is, that all vows, or (which is more than you affirm) if no vows made by persons under others names, or stipulations made by minors, or persons in their minority, are not valid until by a supervening act after they are of sufficient age to ratify them they are confirmed: what could this make against our duty of Infant-baptism? the case being much different between stipulations of men, and the covenant between God & man, as hath been showed, & as appeared in circumcision which was with Infants eight days old. Mr. Cobbet well observeth, that the covenant of grace is as well a testament, 1 Cor. 11. 25. Heb. 9 15, etc. 
In Gen. 17. ●. ●. 99, etc.  Now a testament may be, and useth to be made in reference to little ones without knowledge: nor do any use to deny a child's right in the Testators will,— because it understood not the same: and that many Infants with whom God made the covenant, Gen. 17. dying such, were yet saved: and that they restipulate in their Parents knowing acceptance of the covenant, and professed owning of it upon the Covenant terms, as well on their children's parts as their own: & they restipulate in a passive reception of the Covenant condition & bond to af●er imitation of their father Abraham's faith & obedience. Again, our question is not concerning the ratification or effect of Infant-baptism, by their act or acts, to make it good to themselves and effectual, when they come of age; but concerning a Church-priviledge on Infant's part, which is to be admitted unto the external seal of God's Covenant with his Church, it being to Parents and their children; and this dependth on God's institution to appoint it, and his inward working to make it good: Secondly, in the confirmation of children come to age, they then professing faith, obedience, repentance, newness of life, etc. into which in their infancy they were baptised, that is, then ratified which others promised and stipulated for them, as concerning outward profession, which is in your language a supervening act, to make the former appear valid. Thirdly, the question is not concerning the final effect of baptism in particula●● baptised, which cannot fall under the Minister's cognizance (it being kept in heaven in the archives and secret counsel of God) but concerning their right to baptism, who are born within the verge and precincts of the Church. 
1 Pet. 1. 4.  Whether such infants do afterwards believe, repent, and amend their lives to salvation by Christ, or not, we cannot foresee, nor have we any exception to supersede or limit our duty of administering the outward seal of baptism: For as much as children born of Christian parents and within the Church, are thereby partakers of the Covenant of grace, even they who are not partakers of the grace of the Covenant, Fourthly, we answer, That children in God's account, do vow, confess, and avouch the Lord in their parents vowing, confession, or avouching him, as they did of old; which the learned Mr. Cobbet observeth from Deut. 26. 17, 18. 
Pag. 121.  where we read— Thou hast avouched the Lord this day, to be thy God, and to walk in his ways, etc. and the Lord hath avouched thee this day, to be his peculiar people, as he hath promised thee— and Deut, 19 10, 11, etc. Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God: Your Captains and your Tribes, your Elders and your Officers, with all the men of Israel, your little ones, your wives and strangers— that those shouldest enter into a Covenant with the Lord thy God, and into his Oath which the Lord thy. God maketh with thee this day, that he may establish thee to day for a people unto himself, and that he may be unto thee a God, as he hath said unto thee, and as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaak, and to Jacob, etc. whereof see Gen. 17. 7. Though therefore some stipulations made in minority and nonage, bind not the person under age, except he confirm it when he cometh to age, yet you will not say that the same is not valid if made by Parents, Governors, or Guardians for children: and so in some public Covenants and Acts of one City or State, with another, which concern the present and future ages, the infants within that City or State, as being in minority free Denizens, are bound by the same Covenant and Act, though as such, they could neither transact, speak, nor consent to the same, but all was agreed on and done by their Parents or Commissioners of years thereto designed, in their own and children's name: which may appear in Israel's Covenant with the Gibeonites, 
Jo●●. 9 15.  which, though the stipulators were beguiled, yet Israel's children were bound to, and when Saul out of a perverse zeal, about 380 
* Rather 433. ●. Sam. 21. 1.  years after, would needs violate, how hinding that Covenant was, God declared in a severe judgement on Saul's Family, and all Israel. But upon this invalid supposition you build another quere.   
— Why were it not as good they stayed to make it, till that time, before which time if they do make it, it is to no purpose? this would be considered.] 
It would, or should be considered, that it is very dangerous playing thus with the sacred Ordinances of God: You confess that baptism is the only inlet into the Church of Christ; and is it to no purpose to be let into his Church and Covenant, out of which you say there is no salvation? 'Tis true that all are not saved that are within the Church and Covenant, but no man is saved out of it. God hath appointed baptism to be a seal and token of our receiving and entrance into the Church; is it to no purpose to obey him in his Ordinances? God would not only have all the Citizens of his Church thus enfranchised, but those who are not baptised when they may, he will not have reckoned in the number of his Church: And say you, 'tis to no purpose to have children marked for members of Christ's Church? 
●rfin part. 2. Christ. relig.  Baptism is Gods mark whereby he will have his people discerned from all other false Churches and Sects; and think you 'tis to no purpose to have Gods mark set on children, that they may not with a perishing world be touched by the destroyers? Yet you say,   
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.] 
Pag. 244. Num. 2.  
How often hath Satan in tempting to sin, misled the incaucious with this suggestion, there can be no danger in it, 'tis the surer way? 'tis neither reasonable not humane wilfully to act his part, and as much as in us lieth, to shut infants from the kingdom of heaven; and so to do that which much angered Christ in the days of his flesh; to wit, to bar or forbid children to come to him; this would be considered. 
Mark 10.  And why is it more proportionable to an act of reason and humanity to defer children's baptism, then in due time to baptise them? Infants were circumcised long before they could give any account of their faith, and yet that act was proportionable to reason; and Moses was near a sad affliction for delaying it. You say further,   
For to say that infants may be damned for want of baptism, etc. 
Exod. 4. pag. 245.  
I know no Protestant that ever said so: but take heed you damn not yourselves by teaching contempt of the Sacrament. We are well satisfied that the privation thereof shall not condemn infants, it not being their fault if they want it; it may be, and certainly is theirs, who teach men to deny it them: And then consider in the inviolable justice of God, whose the damnation will be. 
Contemns sacramenti damnat, non priv●tio. Bern, ep. 37. Voluntos pro facto input●tur ubi factum excludit necessita●. ib. ep. 77.  We cannot conceive that a mere privation of circumcision condemned those Hebrew babes who died before the eighth day; because God is unchangeably just, who confined their sealing to that day; yet you will grant that it was a great sin (except in case of evident and inevitable necessity, as during Israel's marches in the Wilderness) a great sin I say of parents to neglect the administration thereof (for God never threatened any punishment, such as is mentioned, Gen. 17. 14. but in respect of great sin) much more was it obstinately to deny it them: It is certainly true which hath been noted out of Augustine. There may be conversion of the heart without baptism; but it cannot be in the contempt of baptism; for it can by no means be called the conversion of the heart to God, when the Sacrament of God is contemned. 
Conversio autem 〈…〉  And so take your dirt back again into your own faces which you cast at ours, Whosoever will pertinaciously persist in this opinion of Anabaptists, and practise it accordingly, they pollute the blood of the everlasting Testament; and in the Apostles sense; Heb. 4, 5, 6. They crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to open shame, who being once baptised (and thereby planted together in the likeness of his death, Rom. 6. 4 5. Who having once died, dyeth no more, death hath no more dominion over him) will yet be baptised again: The Apostles saying, It is impossible for those who were once enlightened (that is, baptised, as the Syriac Interpreter rendereth it, and as we shall make it appear more anon)— If they fall away, to renew them again unto repentance, seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame: How do they crucify him afresh to themselves, that is, as much as in them is? 
P●●. 245. 〈…〉 anim●d. in ep. ad Heb. ●.  Why, 1. They are said so to do, who iterate, or again do, or resume that which is a resemblance or similitude of Christ's suffering, who died but once: for in a reiterating it, we declare or intimate the first to be void: and so if we will have a new baptism, we must have a new Christ, and he must in our Symbol suffer, as if one Christ, or his once suffering were not sufficient for our redemption. And is not this to pollute the blood of the everlasting Covenant and Testament, and to crucify again the Son of God. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉  Secondly, this may be said in respect of reciduation or falling away from Christ (as they do who renounce their baptism by which they were implanted into him, by receiving another baptism) because the merit of Christ's Cross being abolished and made void, by which they were once renewed, it must needs be that Christ should be crucified again and put to shame, that they might be renewed by a fresh, or new merit of the Cross; which seeing it cannot be, the Apostle possibly would infer that it was impossible that they which are once sealed and regenerate, should ever fall away, and that therefore all Christians should do their uttermost endeavour that they may be like good ground, near the blessing, and that they may not want an iterated renovation, which no man can possibly a●●ain. 
Quia ab●lito & irrito r●●dd●to ●●u●is Christi i●erito, quo jemel ren●●●●● 〈…〉 sup.   
As for the rest of your revile, though we have no cause to be troubled at your dogged eloquence; yet for their sakes who are weak, I shall endeavour to show the injurious falsehood thereof: You say that we in baptising infants, dishonour and make a Pageantry of the Sacrament, etc. We answer to this puted calumny, 1. You may as well in this your Theomachy; and fight against God's Ordinance, object the same against Circumcision of Infants, if incapacity of present giving account of their faith, as you pretend, can make the Sealer's of infant's liable to your unjust censure: for infants could then no more give an account of their faith then now they can● 2. Infants have a capacity of the holy Ghost (as hath been proved in the examples of Jeremy and John Baptist, &c:) yea such a measure of sanctification, 
●●● 1. 5. Lu●. 1.  and so certain a regeneration, working in them all such things as God knoweth to be necessary to their salvation; or himself supplying all those things; as that Christ both pronounceth their propriety in the Kingdom of heaven, and proposed them as patterns to all those who should enter thereinto. 
Ma●●. 22, 23. Act. 1●●● 47.  Therefore the Apostles Argument being good, from the extraordinary and visible gifts of the holy Ghost (gifts of miracles flourishing in the primitive Church, and marking many receivers to a capacity of baptism, which yet might then be had without any interest in the Kingdom of heaven) who can forbid water that these should not be baptised, which have received the holy Ghost as well as we? It must as certainly hold from the gift to regeneration, and the spirit of sanctification, which is in many infants, because many infants, dying such, are saved: And now in your judgement doth the baptism of such as are saved dishonour the Sacrament (the outward seal which man can give, and wicked men receive) who have received the thing signified, the inward seal of God's holy spirit, which none but himself can give, and none but the elect receive? Or do you dishonour yourself, who were so admitted into the Church, the Church our holy Mother, who ma●gre the Devil's malice, and the powers of hell, by Infant-baptism bringeth an holy seed to Christ, Christ himself commanding us to baptise all, without exception to any estate, sex, age, or condition, that either are within the Church as born of Christian parents, or in their conversion, profession of faith and repentance, desire to be admitted into the same: Add hereto that Christ particularly cautioned for children, left any should despise them, openly declaring, that of such is the kingdom of heaven: And yet the doing of this duty is dishonour to the Sacrament, and Pageantry with you: 
Mat. 12. 30.  But, If of every idle word which men shall speak they shall give an account in the day of judgement, it concerneth them speedily to repent of these blasphemous calumnies, left it prove a black and dismal day to them, in respect of these things for which they can give no better account than their own fancies and others.  
And whereas you say, they that baptise infants ineffectually, represent a Sepulture into the death of Christ, and please themselves with a sign without an effect, making baptism like the figtree in the Gospel, full of leaves, but no fruit: To say this is an untruth, is as much answer as we owe to so reasonless a calumny: yet I shall be contented to lay it further open.  
I say, 1. Can you be assured that none of these who are baptised in infancy, and no otherwise, are regenerate and saved? Whence have you either such knowledge or commission so to judge? You say the Anabaptists say so; so said the Pharisees concerning those that believed in Christ— This people who knows not the Law, are cursed: 
Joh. 7. 49.  But what warrant is this for you to blaspheme for company?  
2. God be blessed that we who believe one God, one Mediator, one Faith, one Baptism which we received in our infancy, have such a testimony of God's holy spirit, effectually working faith, repentance, mortification, and a comfortable measure of sanctification in us, as that we know you speak untruth in that you say, that Poedobaptists ineffectually represent a Sepulture into the death of Christ, and please themselves in a sign without an effect, etc. God be blessed, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a lively hope— wherein as we need not be beholding to you for testimony, so neither are we to regard what you say against it. 
1 Pet. 1. 3.  With me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgement— but he that judgeth me is the Lord; therefore judge nothing before the time. 
1 Cor. 4. 3. 4.  He that saith that baptism is a bare sign only, fallaciously concludeth, dividing things which God hath joined together.  
3. Although baptism of infants be effectless to the reprobate, whether infant, or person of years, as in Judas, Simon Magus, Demas, and others like, ●et it is effectual to salvation to all the elect, in whom God's spirit powerfully worketh to faith, repentance, sanctification, etc. without which all the waters under heaven cannot be effectual for the cleansing of one soul.  
4. We please not ourselves with a sign without effect; if you do, rest not in that state, lest you and your stingy leaves without fruit, withering, become fuel for the fire which goes not out, to fill up the measure of impious calumny. 
Cyril. Hierosol. car 2. 3, etc. Grug. Naz. orat. 40. Clem-Alexandr. Poedag. l. 1. c. 6. saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  You say,   
They invocate the holy Ghost in vain, doing as if one should call upon him to illuminate a stone or a tree.] 
1. I wonder what they will be ashamed to say, who blush not at such assertions? 'Tis true that the Apostle useth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be illuminated, for to be baptised, as the Syriac Interpreter gives it, Hebr. 4. 6. Hebr. 10. 32. and that the Greek Fathers so commonly used the word: and it is no improbable conjecture, that there was an allusion to the Hebrew manner of speaking; who by one and the same word express illumination, and a River or Source of water, and by a Metaphor, Illumination of the mind: For they who are baptised by water, and the spirit of Jesus, are in God's good time and the measure he knows fit, illuminated, and find not only a River of elementary water, but of that water which floweth to eternal life, whereof Christ spoke. John 7. that is, the spirit of illumination and sanctification. 
Chrys. hom. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i.e. ad baptiz. Just. Mar. Ap. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illiminatus fuit, ut Psal. 34. 5 respexerunt ad eum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & illuminati sunt. 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per m●taph. ment illuminatus sui●. V. Shin●●er.   
2. I would desire you again consider, is the case all one, or alike, when we pray that God would be pleased to illuminate, sanctify, and save an elect infant for whom Christ shed his precious blood, for whose salvation he came from heaven, became an infant, and man of sorrows to the death, whom he blessed, of whom he said, Of such is the kingdom of heaven, and except ye become as one of these, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven; Is I say, the case all one when we pray according to God's word and promise, for these, as if we should pray God to illuminate, sanctify and save a stone, or a tree? hath a stone or tree any habitual faith, or reason, or any capacity of the holy Ghost, illumination, or sanctification? Do any creatures under the degrees of man, bear the image of their Creator, in immortality, sanctity and light of understanding? Would God you could be ashamed of blaspheming, and laying such pernicious stumbling-blocks before the blind to make them fall. 
Pentaglot. item fluvius; nam qui ad fluvium baptismi Christi accedit, illuminatur, invenitque fluvium n●n tantum aquae eleme●taris, sed & aquae vi●●● profluentis è ven, ●●●●●● caristas Jo●●●ec aliud est quam denum illuminationis. Ludo vi● de Die●. ●●● sup.    
Since (you say) there is no direct impiety in the opinion (of Anabaptists) nor any that is apparently consequent to it, and they with so much probability do, or may pretend to true persuasion, they are with all means, Christian, fair and humane, to be redargued, or instructed.] 
I hoped that the Plea being ended, the Pleader would have come to himself again; but this and another strain promise no more but a lucid interval. 
See John Cloppenburg Gangrene of Anabaptist. cited by N. Homes animadvers. etc. p. 106.   
I answer, As to your charity towards the persons of the Anabaptists: I also wish they may by all Christian, fair, and humane means, be reproved, convinced, or instructed: but that there is no direct impiety in their opinion, nor any that is apparently consequent to it, 
Vid. Joh. Sleid● come. l. 6. impress. Argentorati. An. 1558 p 93. a. ib. l. 10. p. 161. b. f. etc.  is apparently untrue, for that which is displeasing to Christ, is directly impious; and such is withholding Infants from him: that which is uncharitable, is direct impiety; and such is that opinion which barreth Infants from the Seal of God's Covenant with them, and the Communion of Saints; as also in that it damneth so great a part of the world; presupposing that God had no Church in the world for so many hundred years, as Infant-Baptism hath been the general inlet to the same; except a little while in the schism of Pelagians and Donatists; and again, when the same Heresy revived in Germany, in Charles 5. 
Joh. Sleidan. come. l. 10.  his reign, and now again in these distracted and calamitous times: much more hath been, and might be said herein: but I shall be so far from being their accuser, that I heartily pray the Lord to open their eyes that they sleep not in death: only I say to the Pleader who would so courteously veil others impiety, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.— Lastly, you say that you think   
That there is much more truth than evidence on our side, and therefore we may be confident as for our own particulars, but not too forward peremptorily to prescribe to others, much less to damn, or to kill, or to persecute them that only in this particular disagree.] 
That we may be confident of the truth on our side, I assent: likewise, that none be too forward peremptorily to prescribe, except where the Word of God and necessary consequence from thence prescribeth; that none should persecute, kill, or much less for opimons less than blasphemous against God, or destructive to Religion, 
Religio cogi non pote●; verbis p●●ius quam ●erberibus res Lactant. l. 5. c. 20.  and salvation of souls, (saving to Supreme Authority their lawful right) agenda est, ut sit voluntas. Long diversa sunt carnificina & pietas, I also assent to: but can by no mean● be of your opinion, that there is less evidence than truth or our side; as any ways intimating a defect of evidence: therefore I say, 1. That evidence, sensu forensi, in common sense of controversies, or matters of judicatuye, importeth sufficient proof: so we say that witnesses give in evidence; that is, not always in terminis, and express words, as in actions of case is requirable; nor as they say, ore rotundo, as to say, Verres is a Thief, etc. but from considerable circumstances, or necessary consequences sufficient to evince, and to inform to sentence. This evidence on our side you will not deny in this case, nor (I suppose) affirm that falsehood hath more proof or evidence in Scripture then truth. 2. Sometimes we speak of evidence in relation to the party or parties to be informed; in which, not only his or their capacity is considerable, but also other circumstances; as the Informers expression, which possibly may be defective; the Informeds' attention, for want whereof, that may not appear which were otherwise sufficiently evident. Again, In case of God's judgement over the disobedient given over to strong delusions, that they should believ lies and he damned, who received not the love of the truth (of itself evident enough) ● that they might be saved: here of see Isa. 6. 9, 10. Mat. 13. 13, 14, 15. 
1 Thess. 2. 11.  To a blind man, or one that winketh in the clearest & most evident light, no colours or proportions are evident; because men if blind cannot, if obstinate & schismatical, will not see & understand.  
3. There is a notius natura, and a notius nobis: if in the evidence you speak of, you mean the first, and that error and falsehood is more known in nature, that is manifestly false; for the truth is first and best known in nature. If you mean the second, that is, that we less know the truth then the evidence; what blame you in our cause, or advantage your Clients? If you say we see no evidence, nor can the blind see the Sun; what can you gain hereby? it may be, and certainly is, that the Gospel's light is hid to some, the Apostle will tell you to whom, and why, 2 Cor. 4. 3, 4. It is hid to them that are lost, in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ— should shine unto them— we undertake not to make the truth evident to every gain-sayer and despiser thereof, but say of such an one, as Elisha for his servant at the beleaguered Dothan, 2 King. 6. 17. Lord, I pray thee open his eyes that he may see. The most manifest light of the Gospel had not evidence enough with the Pharisees, whom Christ pronounced blind; and it concerned them chiefly which he said, they have winked with their eyes, etc. an unbeliever may doubt of any truth, and then it is not evident to him. 
Mar. 13.  The old Academics were wont to question the testimony and evidence of their own senses with a quid si falleris? being not confident of the truth of that they saw with their eyes, and heard with their ears. Carneades doubted of all things; yet certainly many things were evident of themselves to those who could and would see and know manifest truths, though not to him. 4. They who deny convincing evidence in God's Word, not only err not knowing the Scriptures, but tacitly accuse the Wisdom and Providence of God for man's salvation, of insufficiency: for how shall matters of controversy concerning faith and manners be decided without sufficient evidence? and if you think there is not sufficient evidence in Scripture to keep us from error, and to direct us in the way of truth and salvation, in what other rule, or testimony will you place such evidence as you would have? what in Traditions and unwritten verities? where shall we seek these, among our adversaries? nay, but no man can be edified by that which is destructive; or in Enthusiasms and Revelations? 
Nem● inde ●●●●●●●● unde d●struitur, Teriul. de praes●r. c. 1●.  but what evidence can there be in those things, whose authority cannot be proved, and whose truth cannot be infallible? nothing less than that which cannot be false, can be the ground of faith and religion: whatsoever falleth below that supreme certainty, is but opinion at most. Now the Word of God only is infallible, because he cannot lie, T●●. 1. 2. and therefore his Word is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works, 2 T●●. 3. 16, 17. 5 If it be rejoined, that in our present question, and some other cases, the Scripture saith nothing expressly and positively to evidence the truth. 
Nec p●riclitor dicere ipsas quo que Scriptures, sic esse ex Dei volun●a●e disposit●●s, ut Hereti. cis ●aterias subministrarent, cum legam o● or. ●ere h●reses esse quae sine Scripturis esse non possent. Tertul. de prescrip. c. 39  I answer, 1 with Tertullian, I am confident to say, that the Scriptures themselves were so disposed by the will of God, that they might administer matter to Heretics; seeing that I read, there must be heresies, which could not be without Scriptures. 2 That is Scripture truth which the Scripture proposeth or enjoineth, by necessary consequence, though not in express words; and whosoever disbelieveth or disobeyeth that, so far he rejecteth the Scripture, in his error and ignorance of Scripture. So the Sadduces 
— Secundum (argumentum Sadducaeorum) est ● non scripto. Jo Drus. praerer●a l. 1. in Mat. 22. ex libris V. T. tantum recipiebant Pentateuchum, Jo. Drus. at ●oc. N. T. come. 1.  denied the resurrection of the dead, among other vain arguments, so principally a non scripto, because Moses (whose writings only, they received) did not in terminis, or express words, and syllables, say, the dead shall rise again: now though that is true, Moses did not expressly say so; yet our Saviour told them that therein they erred, not knowing the Scriptures, Mat. 22. 29. 
Sadducaei) high quoque tantum libros Mofis recipiebant, Pro●●etarum vatic nia respuentes, Hierorym in Mat. 22.  where he meaneth not express words of Scripture, but necessary consequence: for certainly, they knew the express letter, yet thought they had not evidence enough from Scripture, because they found nothing there in terminis, against their error, which Christ yet justly chargeth on them— Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, 
Hi ergo resurrectionem ex mortuis negabant; eo quod in Mosaicis Scrip●●ris hujus manifestè non flat mentio: nam bas solas agnoscebant, aliis libris non receptis. Euthym. in Mat. 22. c. 53. init.  — as touching the resurrection of the dead, have you not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob! Well, what express Scripture is here to prove the resurrection of the dead, that Christ should charge those that denied the same with error and ignorance of Scriptures? Truly no more than we find for Infant-baptism, in appearance much less; yet thus he who could not be deceived, chargeth them; because denying necessary consequence they required express words: now the consequence was thus, God is not the God of the dead, but of the living, therefore the dead shall rise again.  
To the folding up of all, I might repeat sundry things which as necessarily conclude our Infant-baptism, as Infant's circumcision into the same faith: God's Covenant with Abraham and his spiritual seed, that is, all Believers: Christ's honouring Infants with sacred embraces, proposing them as heirs and patterns designed for the Kingdom of heaven; the extent of God's federal promise to us and our children; children's capacity of the inward baptism, signified in the external sign: whole Families and Nations baptised, 
Act. 2. 39  of which children are, and ever were a great part; Christ's absolute command to baptise all Nations, without any tittle of exception to Infants; Infants federal and ecclesiastical holiness by their parents, and their own right: But that I would not be irksome to the prudent and pious Reader, to whom I heartily wish a right understanding in all things, constancy in the truth, and unity of the holy Spirit, that we may all meet in God's eternal kingdom of glory.  
AMEN.    

A SURVEY OF The Controverted Points, CONCERNING INFANT-BAPTISM, etc. THE SECOND PART.  

CHAP. I.  
Infants of Christian Parents ought to be baptised.  

I Need not be long in describing this Sacrament; 
Col. 2. 11.  only I say that Baptism is a Sacrament of the New Testament, 
1 Cor. 10. 2.  succeeding Circumeision the Seal of the Old, 
Mat. 28. 19  appointed by Christ for our Inlet into his Church, 
Rom. 6. 3, 5.  our implantation into Him, and the similitude of his death and resurrection, in which the water sanctified by the word, 
1 Joh. 5 8: ● Cor. 1. 2●.  representeth the blood of Christ, sealeth and exhibiteth to the Elect all the benefits of his inestimable merits, death, passion, 
Eph. 1. 13.  and resurrection, to our regeneration, 
Act. 2. 38. 5. 31 1 Cor. 6. 11.  remission of sins, and cleansing our bodies and souls from them all; 
Joh. 13. 10: Tit. 3. 5.  though not presently so, that we have no sin; yet so, as that believing in Christ we have no guilt of original or actual sin imputed to us to condemnation: for the water, 
1 Joh. 1. 7, 8: & 3. 9  by the Ordinance of God, 
Rom. 8. 1.  touching the body, 
Mat. 3. 11.  the Spirit of Jesus baptizeth body and soul. 
Joh. 1. 33.  Hence Baptism is said to save us, 1 Pet. 3. 21. the end of Baptism is, 
Aqua tangit corpus, sed Spiritus Dei tangit animaem.  that being baptised we might be illuminated; being illuminated, we might be adopted sons of God; being adopted, we might be perfected, that we may become immortally blessed. 
Clem. Alexand. Poed. l. 1. c. 6. inquit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— Cum baptiza●ur in nomen Pa●ris, Fi●ii, & Spiritus Sancti, tanquam solenni jur●jurando decla●●●, nos totos uni Deo & trino addictos esse, & Deus testatur se recipere eum qui baptizatur etc. Faith, Enchirid, Theolog. de Sacr. Bapt. disp. 77.  In our being baptised in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, we do, as it were, by a solemn Oath or Covenant, declare and protest, that we are wholly devoted to one God in Trinity of Unity; and God on his part herein testifieth, that by this Seal of his Covenant, he receiveth us into the participation of his free mercies in Christ, and into the holy communion of his Church, the body of Christ, I Joh. 5. 7, 8.  
The Protestant Church holdeth, That the subject of Baptism are all they who either are, or (professing faith, repentance, etc.) desire to be admitted into the Church and Covenant of God: and that Infants of Christian Parents, being within the same, aught to be baptised, forasmuch as the Covenant and Promise of God is to Parents and their children.  
The Pelagians, and Dovatists (long since condemned of Heresy by the Church) and now again of late, the Anabaptists deny the baptism of children to be lawful, until they come to years that they may be taught, and profess their faith, and repentance, and desire of baptism, upon these and the like grounds: 
Object. ●●    
Christ saith— Go therefore and teach all Nations, baptising them in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: therefore Teaching must go before Baptism; 
Mat. 28. 19  and consequently Infants may not be baptised before they be taught 
Unto which we answer, 1 That in the cited place there was not intended an exact and complete model of Christ's commission to the Apostles; for there is no mention of the Lords Supper: Christ only nameth the two more usual things for making or initiating disciples for the gathering of a Church, that is, teaching for them who were capable, thereof, and baptising for them and their children not yet capable of doctrine; that having their names given unto Christ, and being admitted into his school, they might as they grew up to capacity, be instructed concerning the mysteries of salvation in Christ: neither was this the first institution of baptism; for when Christ spoke these words, he was about to ascend up into heaven: he had some years before that time appointed baptism among the jews converted to the faith, and confirmed it by his own reception of baptism, not that he needed it, or had any sin to be washed away therein; but to sanctify the element of water by his sacred body, 
— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. Epi●●. to. 2. l. 3. fi. expos. N: 14. ad aquas desen●●i●●●● timen, ut po●ius aliquid conse●●, quam ●c. cip●ris— quip ●● su●lu. co coustravit etc. vid. & Greg. Nazia●●. ●●. 40. tinctus est a Inglut ●●●●, spi●●li peccu● non sua quae ●●ique non b●● b●bat, sed carnis quam ge●●●, aboler●● Lactant. l. 4. c. 15. vid. Ephes. 5. 26. Tit. ●. 5.  to the use and end of baptism; that is, to appoint for us a laver of regeneration: and in the cited place (being to leave the world) he enlarged the commission of baptism on the receivers part; as if he had said, Hitherto ye were not to go into the way of the Gentiles, but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel: but now go and call the Gentiles also, go baptise and teach all Nations the mysteries of the Gospel, as I have taught you: now therefore the order and laws of Baptism are not hence to be derived.  
2 Christ than sent his Disciples to convert and baptise those Gentiles, who possibly had not so much as heard of Christ, much less of faith in him, and baptism into his Church: it was necessary therefore that the Apostles should first instruct them what they were to do in baptism, and why: but when the parents were baptised and instructed, so that there were Churches settled among the Gentiles; then their children were also to be baptised into the same Covenant of God, which runneth to covenanted parents and their children; which before their parents sealing and admission into Christ's Church might not be: so that (as hath been often noted) we must distinguish between a Church to be constituted and settled, 
Inter Ecclesiam constituendam & constitutam.  and a constituted or settled Church: as also between persons of years, and Infants presented to baptism. In a Church to be constituted and converted from Judaisme or Paganism, those that are of years must necessarily first be taught, and afterward baptised; but in a constituted or settled Church, Infants are first to be baptised, and then to be taught when they are able to learn: no otherwise was it in circumcision which was the former Seal of the same Covenant and righteousness of Faith, into which we are now, under the Gospel, baptised. 
Rom. 4. 11.  When Abraham according to God's commandment, came to circumcise the men of his family, doubtless he first instructed them, and preached to them the reason, use, and end of that sacrament, according as the Lord said, Gen. 18. 19 I know him that he will command his children, and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord: but when Isaac was born, he did not expect till he was come to years of discreetion to learn, but circumcised him on the eighth day, Gen. 21. 4.  
3 In the cited place, the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) distinguitur autem à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 e● quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sit eos decere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erudire qui à magisteris 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doctrinâ nostrâ alieni sunt, ut discipu●i reddantur: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vero docere significat eos, qui jam discipuli redditi sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 magisterio nostro jam addicti: qua duae noticens hîc optimè recurrunt. E. Leigh, Crit. Sacr. ex Nou. in Mat. ●8.  signifieth also make Disciples; which was to gather a Church both by preaching the Gospel, and administration of Baptism, the Sacrament of initiation, and first entrance of Infants thereto. So these two means are expressed in the very next words of Christ— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. that is, Baptising them in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded. Some do well observe that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to teach them that are strangers to doctrine, that they may become Disciples (and so in any humane school also, scholars are entered or admitted, before they are therein taught,) but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies to teach them that are Disciples. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, discipu●●●s sum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. P●ut. vit. I●●crat. In●●. pre● Suidae reddit 〈…〉.  So Mat. 27. 57 it is said of Joseph of Arimathea, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— who also was Jesus Disciple. And so the same word is expounded Job. 4. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to make Disciples— the Pharisees heard that Jesus made and baptised more Disciples then John. And so the Hebrews from their word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 didicit, assuevit, derive their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Talmid, a Disciple or Scholar. So that here appeareth no such necessity of the order (by our adversaries pretended to) as can conclude that none may be baptised, but such as are first taught. 
Ind ver●uin Syrum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 docuit, absolute discipulus fuit. Val Shind●●pen tagle in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉   
4 If the order of those words must determine the order of the actions, then by the same reason, repentance must be before faith; for Mark. 1. 15. it is said, Repent ye and believe the Gospel. So Rom. 10. 9 If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart, etc. thou shalt be saved. Doth it follow therefore a man may make confession of Christ with his mouth to salvation, before he believeth in him in his heart? and indeed if the order of words may determine in what order we must act in this business, then from other places of Scripture it may be concluded that Baptism must precede teaching, as Mark. 1. 4. John did baptise in the Wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance, and Mat. 28. 19, 20. when Christ had said— baptising them, etc. he presently inferreth teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded. So Joh. 3. 5. the water is named before the Spirit, and Eph. 5. 26. the washing of water, that is, of baptism, is named before the Word.  
5 Christ doth not in the cited place, in one syllable prescribe or limit the Apostles, whom they should baptise, and whom not, but only enjoineth that they baptise all Nations in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the H. Ghost, teaching them to observe all those things which he had formerly taught them: his principal end being there to command them to preach and to set to the Seal of the Gospel-covenant; mentioning no particulars, but intimating, that all those that were of capacity should be taught; and that those that were not of present understanding (yet if born of such persons as had given their names to Christ): should be admitted to the seal of the righteousness of faith in Christ, that they might be instructed when, and as they were able to learn.   
There are two conditions of Baptism, Believe and Repent, which seeing Infants, 
Object. 2.  as such, cannot do, their baptism ought to be deferred until they can. 
We answer, 1 These are the conditions, If the question were concerning persons of years to be baptised; but it is concerning Infants, on whom no such condition is, or can reasonably for the present, be laid.  
2 The argument is impious and ridiculous, as if one should say, the condition of eating is labouring, which seeing Infants cannot do, let their eating or feeding be defered till they can. The Apostle saith, If there be any that will not labour, let him not eat, 2 Thess. 3. 10. who (of any sense) doth not understand that of those that can, 
Ut in baptismo adultorum requiritur fides praevia— Sic ab illis qui baptizantur cum jam infants fint, requiritur fides subsequens, quam si non praestiterint poste●, retinent externam tantummodo baptismi sanctificationem, interna sanctificationis effecta non habent. Davenant. exposit, Col. 2. 12.  and will not? and why not so in believing and repenting, seeing that God requireth impossibilities neither in things temporal nor spiritual?  
3 As in the baptism of those who are of years, a previous faith is required, so is a subsequent faith of those who are baptised Infants, which if they afterward have not, they forfeit the benefit of the Seal which they received.  
4 Though Infants, as such, cannot have actual faith, yet have they the seeds thereof in baptism, covered or shut up in the habitual beginning of grace, which Christ both can, and doth work in them. 
In habituali principio gratiae inclusam— porro, n●n necesse ●st ut sacramenta e● ipso momento quo administra●tur efficiant ea omnia quae figarant; im● pactio dila●oria l●um ba●t, cum in ips● suscep●ione obe● p●nitur, ib. pag. 209.  Nor is it simply necessary that the Sacraments should in the same moment in which they are administered, effect all things which they figure or represent— yea a dilatory paction hath place, when in the making thereof there is some invincible let to present performance, as want of the present use of reason is to infant's faith, repentance, and obedience to the Gospel, unto which they are by Covenant bound in their baptism: and indeed to be within the Covenant gives the Infant a just capacity to the seal of the same: Now Infants of believing and baptised parents are within the Covenant, Gen. 17. 7. Act. 2. 39 
Object. 3.    
Christ was not baptised in his Infancy, although the Deity hypostatically united, dwelled in him fully; but deferred the same until he was about 30 years of age: therefore what ever habitual faith or seeds of grace can be pretended to for infants, they ought not to be baptised until they come of years to know what they do. 
We answer, 1 Christ requireth not that we should imitate him in all that he did, which is proposed to us for doctrine, but not for imitation: for example, he was both circumcised (as being of the seed of Abraham under the Law, the righteousness whereof he was to perform, Mat. 3. 15.) and also baptised: if we should be so, Christ should profit us nothing, Gal. 5. 2.  
2 The time was not come at the birth of Christ, for the repealing of the seals of the ceremonial Law,: nor was the seal of the new Covenant to be instituted until the time drew near wherein he was to publish it by preaching the Gospel, 
Quemadmodum Jud●os suscept● circumcis●me, sic etiam ge●tes baptismo— salvaret. Licta●. l. 4 c. 15.  and accomplishing the great work of our redemption in his blood: therefore he that was Saviour both of Jews and Gentiles, was circumcised in his Infancy, and baptised as soon as that Sacrament was instituted.  
3 They that herein require imitation of Christ, intimate a necessity of deferring baptism until the age of 30 years, 
See Calv. instit. l. 4. c● 16. sect. 29.  which our Antagonists (that I know of) do not practise.  
4 A bare example without a precept doth not bind to imitation: Christ administered the communion with unleavened bread after supper, in an upper room to twelve men only and no women: but seeing we find no precept in the Gospel which commandeth us to do the same, we believe we are not bound by that example.  
5. There was neither neglect, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Gr. Nazianz. Or● 4  contempt, nor danger in so long delaying Christ's Baptism; there must needs be some of all these in the delay of our children's Baptism: Christ had no sin, but we have both Original and Actual: he not only foreknew, but foreordained (as God) the manner and time, as of his nativity, so also of his death: We neither know nor can appoint the time of our departures hence; therefore we may not defer our children's Baptism; they may suddenly die  
6. Christ would not before that age be baptised, and enter into his public Ministry, among other causes, for this also, that the truth hereof might answer the type preceding in the Levitical Priests, who although they were received into the College of Priests at five and twenty, yet were they not admitted to exercise their Ministry until they were thirty years old, Numb. 4. 3.   
The Lord's Supper may not be given to Infants, 
Object. 4.  by reason of their incapacity: On the same ground neither aught Baptism the other Sacrament. 
We answer, That the reason why we may not administer the Communion to Infants, 
1 Cor. 11. 28 29.  is because God hath given an express command,— Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that Bread, and drink of that Cup— And there followeth a dreadful reason,— For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lords body: Now Infants can neither examine themselves, nor discern the Lords body, because they cannot understand the institution, end, use and condition of that Sacrament: Therefore we do not administer it unto them until they can be instructed therein. No such limitation can be showed concerning Baptism; for though Faith and Repentance be mentioned as conditions of Baptism and Remission of sins, and Salvation to persons of years; yet the case is far otherwise with Infants, who though they cannot (as such) actually believe and repent, yet we doubt not of their Remission of sins and salvation: neither could those Infants who were circumcised actually believe and repent, yet that barred them not from the Seal of the same Righteousness of Faith. Again, that which is said Mark 16. 16. is very considerable (as hath been noted) He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned: It showeth that the condition of believing is proposed to persons of years, who may believe, or obstinately reject the Gospel, which Infants (as such) cannot do: and therefore it cannot for present concern them, without involving them all in the sentence of damnation; which opinion were damnable and Antichristian, 
Mark 10. 14.  Christ having positively pronounced for them— Of such is the Kingdom of God: To Infants, to be born within God's Covenant, and to receive the Seal thereof obliging them to future Faith, Repentance and Obedience, is instead of all these. Lastly, Baptism is the Seal of Initiation, Entrance and Admittance into the Church; that therefore we give Infants, that when they shall be capable of the Sacrament of Confirmation (the Lord's Supper) they may receive that also.   
The Spirit acknowledgeth no other means of Regeneration than the incorruptible Seed, 
Object. 5. , the Word of God, 1 Pet. 1. 23. which seeing Infants cannot receive, they cannot be regenerate; 
Servet. l. 4. de regenerate.  therefore their Baptism is effectless to Regeneration. 
We answer, 
Object. 6.  The major appeareth false by Tit. 3. 5. St. Peter speaks there only of those Believers who had been taught by the preaching of the Gospel, 
Non solum verbum sed baptismus est Regeneration is ●redium, Gerh. de S. Bapt.  comprehending under it the Seal thereof; Baptism, the Laver of Regeneration, which is taught in that Word as a means of Regeneration.   
Faith must go before the Sign or Seal thereof; 
Object. 7.  as Abraham believed first, and then received the Seal, Circumcision; Therefore until Infants can actually believe, they must not be baptised. 
We answer, That if we speak of persons of years, they must first believe, or make profession of their faith; because by Baptism they are to be admitted into the Covenant of God, and Communion of his Church, to which they were formerly Aliens and Strangers: But it holdeth not in Infants born of Christian Parents, they being already within the Covenant and Church, and so having present right to the Seal thereof: So in Isaac's Circumcision at eight days old, the Seal went long before the faith or profession thereof.   
God bringeth not the blind into his Covenant, 
Object. 7.  but enlighteneth them, that they may know the will of God for their Salvation: But Infants, as such, are not capable of Illumination; therefore they are not to be baptised. 
We answer: 1. God calleth the poor, maimed, halt, and lame unto the great supper, that is the Communion of Christ, Luke 14. 21.  
2. The Greek Divines were wont to call Baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Illumination; and it can be no less than impious presumption to affirm, That God doth not in the Baptism of Elect Infants, secretly infuse such a light as he knoweth sufficient to their salvation; seeing that it is certain, that as God dwelleth not in all that know him, 
Aug. Epist. 57  Rom. 1. 21. so neither do all those presently know him in whom he dwelleth by the spirit of illumination and regeneration (until they have received such a further measure of the Spirit which is of God, that they may know the things which are freely given to them of God, 1 Cor. 2. 12.) which appears, in that Elect children are saved; which, without the Spirit of Regeneration, none can be, John 3. 3, 5 and doubtless the soul of an Infant in Gods divine presence in heaven, hath therein more illumination than the most knowing mortal in the world hath.  
3. Neither did the Apostles their selves presently understand all these things necessary to salvation which Christ taugh them; 
John 16. 12.  neither did he propose Doctrines to them above their present capacity:— I have yet many things, to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now: He patiently expected their future abilities; with a— What I do, thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know,— John 13. 7. which both Peter and the rest had experience of, when the promised Comforter taught them, and brought all things to remembrance which Jesus had said unto: them, 
John 14. 26.  and the Spirit of Truth guided them into all truth; 
john 16, 13.  and shall we not believe that God will graciously bear with an Infants present defect of understanding, which himself gives him by degrees, and in such measure and time as his self appointeth?  
4. As Faith and Confession sufficed the penitent Thief, without Baptism; so Baptism, the Seal of the Righteousness of Faith and Repentance sufficeth an Elect Infant, dying without confession of Faith, and actual Repentance; and the living, until he come of age and ability to know and make profession.   
With the heart man believeth unto Righteousness, 
Object. 8.  and with the mouth confession is made unto Salvation, Rom. 10. 10. But Infants can do neither of these; therefore they profane the holy Seal, who give it to them who cannot be profited thereby. 
We answer. 1. The same might have been objected against circumcision, where the Seal sufficed, until the sealed came to years and ability to believe and confess. 2. The Apostles speaks there concerning persons of years, it nothing concerns Infants, as such. 3. If giving the Seal to those who cannot be profited thereby, be profanation of the same, how often do you profane the holy Seal? How can any mere man know whom to baptise, though of years, and whom to put by? None can foresee men's final estates but God alone. We know that Judas and Simon Magus were baptised, though whatsoever they confessed with their mouth, 'tis certain they did not believe with their heart unto righteousness. Did their Baptizers profane Baptism? If not, how maliciously is this objected against us, baptising Infants of Believers, Christ himself expressly avowing them as subjects of his Kingdom?   
The Seals of the New Testament are perfect and spiritual: 
Object. 9  But Infants are carnal; and, The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, 1 Cor. 2. 14. Therefore these Seals agree not to, and with Infants present incapacity. 
We answer, The Apostle there speaks concerning the understanding of divine mysteries, not comprehensible of profane and carnal men: Now Infants being carnal, as born of flesh, want Regeneration, that they may become spiritual, 
John 3 35.  and enter into the Kingdom of God; and because they are by corrupted nature imperfect, therefore they ought to be admitted to the ordinary means by God appointed to make them perfect.   
The Apostle biddeth us, Draw near with a true heart, 
Object. 10.  in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water, Hebr. 10. 22. Which seeing Infants cannot for present do, the washing of their bodies with the pure water of Baptism belongeth to others who can have a good conscience, not to them. 
We answer, The Apostle there showeth, what we who are baptised, and of age ought to do, and with what confidence, not who ought to be baptised; and so it nothing concerneth Infants till they come of age.   
Baptism which saveth us, 
Object. 11. 1 Pet. 3. 21.  is with the testimony of a good conscience: This Infants cannot have who have no knowledge; Therefore Infants ought not to receive that Baptism which cannot save them. 
We answer, 1. The Apostle speaks not there of the subject of Baptism, but of the fruits and effects thereof in those who are of ripe years; the fruits which indeed Elect Infants, if living, shall here reap in due time; and into which they are for present sealed: Now the outward Administration of the sign of the Covenant (concerning which our present question is) is one thing, and the inward effect thereof another: As it is also in the Word preached, 
Matth. 13.  the Administration must be indifferently to all, Mark 16. 15. whether stony, thorny, highway, or good ground, God's Seeds-men must diligently sow; the fruit and efficacy will be to Believers only, Hebr. 4. 2. but that no mere man can foresee.  
2. What Illumination Infants have by the secret working and influence of God's holy Spirit, belongeth to God's secret council, and therefore not to our inquest.  
3. Sanctification, more than Ecclesiastical, in order of time doth not always precede the Seal and Sacrament thereof, as may be proved from Infant Circumcision, but by the Sacrament which implanteth us into Christ, and which is therefore the washing of Regeneration and Renovation, the seeds of Faith, Sanctity, and good conscience are sowed in us, which by a powerful and secret working of the Holy Ghost, showeth itself in due season; without which work of the Spirit, the Gospel most powerfully preached, and Sacraments, duly administered to the most knowing men and women, could bring forth no better effects, than a savour of death, unto death and condemnation: Seeing then the effect to Sanctification and Salvation is neither in the Minister, nature of the Water, 
Causa formalis Sacramentoium est ●rdinati●● Dei in i●sius ve●b● comprehense, etc. Beza ●um. doct. de re ●a. ●ra●●. q. 3. Nallum tamen est ●icopus ●peratum, sed omnis efficacia venit● spirit●, etc. Dr. Andr. Rive●. C●thol. Or●●d. To. 2. q. 1.  and Washing therewith, but in the Ordinance of God; nor in the capacity or ability of the most prudent sons of men, but in the sole working of God's gracious Spirit; why should any rest in ope●e operato, the work itself done? or deny it to any within the Church, needing Regeneration, that they may be saved?   
Christ joineth these two together, 
Object. 12.  Teach and Baptise; and, Believe, 
Non Baptismus ●●●is ●●sq● praedi, ●t one saliem in●litutium. ●r Andr. Rivet●●. 5. De●r●he ver. hum, & quid est aquae nisi aqua? accedit verbum ad elementam & sit Sacramentuum,— und● ista tanta virtus aquae, ut c●rpus tangat & cor abluat, ●● faciente ver●●, non quia dicitur ●ed quia creditur Aug. 10. in ● han. treat. I.  Repent, and be Baptised: But Infants are not capable of Faith and Repentance; Therefore they ought not, as such, to be Baptised. 
We answer, Here is an Ignoratio Elenchi in the mistake of the Question; which is not, Whether that teaching aught to be divided from Baptism, which we affirm not: but the contrary; persons of years ought first to be taught to believe and repent, and then to be baptised: But our question is not concerning the Baptism of Adults, or persons capable of these things for the present, but of Infants; here again the question is mistaken, and therefore such disputes are fallacious. It is true, the water without the Word can make no Sacrament, nor give any sacramental effect; therefore neither young nor old may be baptised; where the Gospel is not first preached and received: For Baptism is a seal of the Gospel; but believing Parents have been taught, received the Gospel, and been sealed into God's Covenant; therefore they ought to present their children to Baptism, who are joint Covenanters with them. Again, Baptism is administered with the words of institution by Christ appointed; take away the Word, and what is the Water but ordinary water? The Word is added to the element, and makes the Sacrament— of the Water, that it but toucheth the body, and cleanseth the heart, but by the Word; not because it is spoken; but because it is believed. Moreover, though God taught Abraham concerning the Sacrament of Circumcision, and so he was circumcised and all his Males, yet he circumcised Isaac at eight days old; & so long before that word of faith could be preached to Isaac, he received the same● Sacrament and Seal of the same Righteousness of faith in Christ, in whom believing we also are saved. Men of ripe years were first instructed concerning the institution, end and use of Circumcision, and then received the Seal; but Infants (as such, not capable of instruction) first received the Seal of Faith; and if they lived to years, than they were taught, yet the Word and the Seal were not parted in either: So is it in Infant-Baptism now.   
Those Infants whom Christ blessed, 
Object. 13.  and of whom he pronounced, Theirs, or, Of such is the Kingdom of heaven; were such as were fit to be taught: for so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also signifieth: And Christ in the persons of children, blesseth those that were such in humility and innocency, not in age. 
We answer, 'Tis true, 
— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mark 10. 14.  that in their persons Christ commended humility and innocency; and also showed their interest in the Kingdom of heaven; saying, Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven; that is, of such persons, and of persons of such quality; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mat. 19 14.  for he proposeth Infants for a pattern: Now as they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which sometimes signifieth a Son or Servant of years; yet not always, as common use of that word shows, 
— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Infans, faetus recens editus, Hen. Ste.  Matth. ●2. 13, 14, 20. Luke 2. 21, etc. so are the same called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Luke 18. 15. which without controversy properly signifieth Infants lately born; as Luke 2. 12, 16. Acts 7. 19 1 Pet. 2. 2. new born babes; and sometimes children in the womb; as Luke 1. 41, 44. that which is said, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Gr. Nazianz. orat. 40.  2 Tim. 3. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—: From a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures, is as much as the Greeks proverbially said, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and the Latins, à teneris unguiculis, from thy tender years; that is, so soon as it was possible for thee to learn: so Psal. 58. 3. The wicked are estranged, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the womb, they go astray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab utero, as soon as they are born speaking lies: So Psal. 22. 9 Thou didst make me hope, 
Super uberamatris meae. Montanab. infanti● Val. Shidler Penned in  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, when I was upon my mother's breasts; that is, very soon, very young. The Syriac, 2 Tim. 3. 15. translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, from a child (from thy tender years, so soon as it was possible for thee to learn) by a word indifferently signifying Infancy, Childhood, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 et quod à pueriti● tuâ Trem.  or Youth; but that Luke 18. 15. the same render by the word which signifieth Infants, 1 Tim. 2. 15. Acts 7. 19 1 Pet. 2. 2. and Mark 10. 16. it is said that Christ took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Syr. est.  and blessed them— which showeth, that they were little portable children; had they been of man's growth, though never so humble or innocent, they would have been too heavy to have been carried in the arms. Lastly, there can be no rational doubt, but that he blessed Infants, properly so called, who took on him Infancy to save them: Nor may we think that they are less than blessed of Christ, who are saved by his blood, as Infants are.   
That which God Commandeth not in some express precept concerning his worship, is not any better than man's invention, Will-worship, and may not be done: But Infant-Baptism is no where in Scripture commanded in any express Precept; Therefore it is no better than man's invention, Will-worship, and may not be done. 
We answer, 1. By demanding, quanta est major Propositio? if it be universal, the sense running thus, All that is Will-worship, which is not commanded in some express Precept; it is evidently false: For there is no express Precept for many things left arbitrary, and falling under the Rule of Decency and Order, which yet are not Will-worship.  
Next we say, That the substance and Institution of God's worship, must have an express precept for it, or it will fall under the notion of Will-worship; but in the circumstances and accidents it is not always so; for example, had not Christ somewhere commanded to baptise, it had been Will-worship for any man to have instituted that Sacrament: but though Christ say nowhere baptise children at seven days, six months, seven years; or though he say nowhere Baptise women; yet neither of these are Will-worship, 
Mat. 28. 1●. Mark. 16. 15. 16.  because the substance and institution of Baptism is grounded on his express command; age and sex are accidents. Lastly, If the major proposition be particular, 
Ex puris particularibus nihil sequitur.  the rule is well known, Of mere particulars nothing is concluded.  
2 There was an express command for the sealing of Abraham's sons in their generations, in their infancy, Gen. 17. 7. etc. and Believers are expressly the sons or children of Abraham, Gal. 3. 7. that is, his spiritual seed, who have no less privilege in things belonging to salvation, than his carnal seed. And the Apostles who were Jews and brought up amongst them, who were sealed in their infancy, did not (that we read of) so much as ask Christ any question what they were to do with Infants: and Christ giving them no prohibition concerning them, he did thereby sufficiently intimate, that he having not repealed the law of sealing Infants into his covenant, would have them proceed according to the Analogy of the first seal of his covenant. The greater doubt might possibly have been concerning baptising of females, who were not formerly sealed, the doubt concerning the Gentiles sealing, being removed by an express precept, Baptise all Nations, Mat. 28. 19  
3 On this very ground on which Anabaptists deny Infant-baptism, 
Euthym. in Mat. 22.  the old Sadduces denied the resurrection of the dead, because they found it not expressly written in the books of Moses, which only, they received. See what hath been answered to the Pleader near the end  
4 Although we read not in terminis, and so many words and syllables in holy Scripture, Baptise Infants, yet we read it in most firm and evident consequence, if we but hold these three certain conclusions. 1 That Children are conceived and born in sin, the children of wrath. 2 That God would not have them perish, but rather be brought into the holy communion of Christ and his Church, that they may be saved. 3 That he hath appointed no other external ordinary means, to us known, for Infant's regeneration, but baptism.  
5 If the matter must be put upon express words of Scripture, let our Antagonists show us where they are expressly forbidden to baptise Infants? where is there any syllable express, or probable for rebaptising any? where have they any express precept for dipping over head and ears? where have they any express precept for their long prayers, for baptising women, or administering the communion to them? show us any express precept for the change of the Sabbath.   
That which we read not expressly mentioned in Scripture that the Apostles did, 
Obj. 15.  that we may not do: but we read not in express words in Scripture, that the Apostles ever baptised Infants, therefore we may not baptise them. 
We answer, 1 If your principle were true, it might thence be concluded, that the Lords Supper may not be administered to women, for we no where read in express words, that the Apostles ever administered it unto them.  
2 Express words in Scripture are not always necessary to prove a thing which necessary consequence doth conclude: we have no express words in Scripture naming an holy Unity, in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, most undeniable consequence we have Mat. 28. 19, 1 Joh. 5. 7. Again, we have no express word that the Apostles were baptised; for Christ himself baptised none, Joh. 4. 1. etc. and we read not where, or when John Baptist baptised them; yet certainly they were baptised: we read not expressly that the Apostles in baptising mentioned the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost; but most certain consequence concludeth it; because Christ so appointed it, and it was of the essence of the Sacrament: and why should we more tie the baptism of Infants to express words, than any of these fundamental things are tied? and on the like consequential grounds, why should we doubt whether the Apostles did indeed usually baptise Infants of Christians, 
Joh. 20. 30. & 21. 25.  because it is not expressly written; seeing that many other words, 
Act. 2. 40.  matters, and actions of the Apostles, and Christ himself, were not written?  
3 Christ expressly commanded to baptise all Nations, in no one syllable, title, or word therein excepting Infants, who are and ever were a great and numerous part thereof: and that which concerneth all alike, concerneth every part thereof.   
When Peter was asked what was needful to be done for the Jews pricked at heart, 
Obj. 16.  Act. 2. 37, 38. he said, Repent and be baptised: but Infants can neither actually repent, nor contribute any thing towards their baptism: therefore they ought not to be baptised. And again, Mat. 3. they confessed their sins and were baptised, which Infants cannot do. 
We answer, 1 Forasmuch as Infants cannot actually (as such) repent or confess, it concludeth that these things for the present, concern not Infants; (for no impossibility is reasonably enjoined any) but belong to persons of years, or those who were not yet sealed into the communion of Christ's Church, and it is apparent that unto such Peter spoke: as far as his words concerned Infants is also express,— be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins— for the promise is to you and to your children; What promise? why that Gen. 17. 7. To what children was that promise made? what, to those who had been children, but were now of years to be taught, believe and repent? No, but to those first who were to be sealed the eighth day after they were born; who certainly could then no more actually believe, or repent, then can our Infants now: therefore 'tis plain to those who will understand, that persons of years to be taught, must first repent, etc. but Infants, to whom the promise, covenant, or seal thereof jointly belongeth, must besealed as joint-covenanters with their Parents, before they can actually believe or repent: for why else after this exhortation to repentance and baptism, doth he mention their children? were they no ways liable to this double precept, repent and be baptised every one of you? who? they only who can actually for the present repent? nay, but Peter knew well that children of whom he spoke, could not do that, by reason of their present want of the use of reason: yet he knew they had need of remission of sins by Christ, and that the promise of God was made to them (without which 'twere but vain for men to seal) and as firmly concerned them, as their enchurched parents, and therefore he mentioned them.   
There appears neither act nor habit of regeneration in Infant-baptism, 
Obj. 17.  until they be taught the Word; neither any more promptitude to learn it, then is in unbaptised children coming to years; therefore their baptism is effectless, and consequently unlawful. 
We answer, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ita ut observari possit. Beza.  1 The Kingdom of God cometh not with observation, Luk. 17. 20. and the internal acts of the Spirit are secret: for what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of a man which is within him, 1 Cor. 2. 11.  
2 If outward appearance be a good argument to the denying of internal acts and habits; you might by the same medium as well conclude that Infants are not reasonable creatures: Infants inspired by God's Spirit may be said to be Believers, as they are said truly to be rationals; that is, actu primo, non secundo: and they confess and avouch the Lord, in their Parents avouching of him, as appear, Deut.. 26. 16, 17, 18. Deut. 29. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15.  
3 It is not true, that baptised Infants have no more promptitude to learn the mysteries of salvation when they come to years to be taught, than other unbaptized children, have cateris paribus: for the H. Ghost doth not desert his own ordinance in the Elect; though for causes very just, yea, when most unknown to us, it doth not always alike show its power: as for the reprobate, the seal or administration of man can nothing profit him who abuseth it, and where God ever denyeth inward baptism by his holy Spirit of sanctification.   
Reprobates who cannot be profited by baptism, 
Obj. 18.  ought not to be baptised, lest we add to their condemnation: but of Infants some are such, and we cannot say which of them, offered to baptism is elect, and which not: therefore seeing we cannot distinguish them, nor can they express themselves, we ought not to baptise them until they can. 
We answer, If the major proposition in this argument be universalis negans, it is most false; for Simon Magus and Judas, who were not profited by their baptism, were yet rightly baptised; if particular, though granted, it would conclude nothing against Infant-baptism; for by the same reason they may deny baptism to persons of years: for alas, many of them are Reprobates. Neither can any mere man distinguish between the one and the other, seeing that whatever profession of faith and repentance men make, 'tis possible they may dissemble or fall away. Now we in charity, hope the best, where the contrary is not manifest, and therefore deny them not baptism, who do but profess faith, repentance, and desire of baptism: and if we can have as much charity to innocent Infants, we must also allow them baptism, who being born of Christian parents, are within God's covenant of Grace. And indeed the final estate of Infants or aged people, being alike secret and known to God alone; we must perform our ministry respectively, and leave the fruit and issue thereof to God: so in preaching the Gospel, the sincere Milk of the Word, 1 Pet. 2. 2. we do often as it were, draw out the breast like the mother of the living child, 1 King. 3. 20, 21. to some dead (in belief, sins, and trespasses) laid in our bosom; who know not who shall profit by it, nor to whom it shall prove a favour of death unto death; that must be left to God, but we must instantly preach the Gospel.   
When the Eunuch said to Philip, Act. 8. 36: see here is water, 
Obj. 19  what doth let me to be baptised? he answered, If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest: therefore he that believeth not may not be baptised: such are Infants. 
We answer, 1 It is manifest enough that Philip spoke to a man who could hear and read, 
Act. 8. 30. 35.  and was than something instructed in the Gospel of Christ: what doth this concern Infants?  
2 Infants have now as much capacity of baptism, as under the Law they had of circumcision; both had faith, as reason, in the seed, though not in the fruit: and the sacrament of baptism now performeth the same to us, which circumcision did to them: as that was to them a sign of their receiving into the Church and people of God, so is baptism to us, 
Ursin. de relig. Christian. part. 2  the first mark which severeth and distinguisheth the people of God from the profane and wicked aliens   
Faith ought not to be separated from the seal thereof; 
Obj. 20.  therefore Infants, who cannot actually believe, ought not to be baptised until they can. 
See what hath been said Obj. 12. to which we here add, that this proposition is ture concerning persons of years; but concerneth not Infants in whom we cannot know Gods present work: but in baptism, the seed of faith, regeneration, mortification, and newness of life is sowed in them: and all know that precedence concludeth not separation. Lastly, we say that if faith and baptism must so indivisibly be united, as that none may be baptised but they who do actually believe, whom might our adversaries baptise, or whom put by, though of years? If they say they profess saith, there is much difference between professing and actual believing: and I much fear that many will too late find as much distance between justifying faith, and temptation of security, as is between heaven and hell.   
Such are to be baptised as confess their sins, 
Obj. 21.  Mat. 3. 6. as gladly receive the Word, Act. 2. 41. as give heed to the Word preached, Act. 8. 6. but this Infants cannot do, therefore they are not to be baptised. 
We answer, The affirmative may from such places be concluded, Such aught to be baptised: but the negative cannot (therefore none but men so qualified may be baptised) it no more followeth, then if you should say, Cornelius and those that were with him when Peter preached, 
Act. 10.  received the holy Ghost in the extraordinary gifts thereof; therefore none but such as have received the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost may be baptised: nay, but though it well concluded affirmatively for them, that they were to be baptised; it cannot conclude negatively against others, that they may not be baptised who have not received such gifts.   
If baptising Infants be grounded on circumcision, 
Obj. 22.  the males only must be baptised: but that is not true, for females also ought to be baptised. 
We answer, Here is a fallacia accidentis, an arguing from the substance to the circumstance: whereas baptism succeeded circumcision in substance, not in every circumstance: The substance was; that was a seal of faith, and Church-priviledge; so is this; that was administered to all that would join in the faith of Abraham, and their children as being in God's covenant; so must it be here: in that was sealed to the Covenanter the promise of grace and mercy by Christ, which is always one and the same; so here; that signified mortification, and a promise on man's part, of faith and obedience to God; so it is here: that was the inlet to God's Church, the Sacrament of initiation, admission, and engraffing into the Church; 
Ursin q. sup. See Reply p. 12, 13. ad num. 13.  so is baptism: so they agree, 1 In the end, Rom. 4. 11. Tit. 3. 5. 2 In signification, Col. 2. 11, 12. Deut. 30. 6. jer. 4. 4. Rom. 2. 29. Mark. 1. 4. Rom. 6. 3. 3 In the effect. In circumstance they differ, as hath been formerly showed.   
Though Christ took little children into his arms and blessed them, 
Obj. 23.  yet he baptised them not: therefore, though we may pray for our Infants, yet we may not baptise them. 
We answer, 1 If you speak of Christ's baptising personally, he baptised none, Joh. 4. 2. but it followeth not that therefore none ought to be baptised.  
2 It cannot appear that Christ commanded not some of his Disciples to baptise those Infants, neither that ever he commanded them not to baptise Infants.  
3 If it could appear that these Infants were not now baptised, there might be some obstruction and let which we know not; as possibly their parents were not yet baptised, etc.  
4 These children were not brought to Christ that he should baptise them, 
D. Featly chill. bapt. justified, p. 76.  but that he should touch them; and that he did, for he laid his hands upon them, and blessed them; and his blessing them was as effectual to their salvation, as if he had christened them: for Christ's grace dependeth not upon the virtue of the Sacrament: but contrarily the virtue of the Sacrament upon his grace and blessing. And that which Christ did to them, is more than the ministry of all the men in the world could, or can do in baptising or blessing them.; for Christ's blessing maketh men truly and really blessed: See what hath been said Reply num. 14. sine.   
Infant's circumcised were inserted into the Covenant and Church privileges by an express command: but we have no such express command for baptising Infants, 
Obj. 24.  therefore we may not on that ground baptise them. 
To that which hath been said, 
●●. Ob●, 14, 15.  we further add for answer, because they were expressly commanded to put the seal of the same righteousness of faith on Infants; therefore (neither that faith nor the object thereof being changed, in the change of the seal) there needed not a particular, or express command concerning the subject or persons to be sealed, seeing the commission was so much enlarged as the whole World, and the Nations thereof, were greater than the land of Canaan, and Abraham's carnal children therein planted. Add hereto, that which hath been noted, those whom Christ sent to baptise were sealed in their infancy, and daily used to Infant-sealing: so that they needed no express command, or other Information concerning Infants, then that which they had sufficiently learned in Christ's blessing Infants, blessing and embracing them, as it were, with special affection to them: and in that they could not be ignorant that baptism succeeded circumcision in all the substance thereof; and that the same cause still remaineth for Infant's reception of the seal, to wit, 
Act. 2. 38.  Baptism for the remission of sins.   
Christ appointed the Sacraments for a remembrance of his death and bloodshedding for our redemption: But Infants, 
Object. 25.  who have no acts of understanding, cannot remember; Therefore they ought not to be baptised. 
We answer, This Argument would conclude; 
1 Cor. 11. 26.  that Infants, as such, may not receive the Lords Supper, because they cannot do it in remembrance of Christ, 
Tit. 3. 5.  nor show his death thereby, therefore we do not administer it unto them. But Baptism is the Laver of Regeneration, which they have present need of, and whereof they are passively capable, because their Parents are within the Covenant, which is to them and their children; and the Seal thereof is a part and condition of the same to their children, 
Gen. 17. 7.  as well as to themselves: 
Acts 2. 39  Neither was the Covenant on Abraham's part fulfilled any more than to halves, 
Mark 16. 16.  before he had sealed his children; and by proportion, neither do we fulfil our Covenant with God in Baptism, if we refuse to baptise our Infants, who have as indefeasible a right to the same as we; the same promise for the main being to us and our children, Acts 2. 39   
In the Old Testament it was not lawful to offer sheep or goats so soon as they were cast, 
Object. 26. Ser●●t. ●. ●up. l. 4. de regenerate.  but at a certain age and maturity of their perfection: This figured Infants not presently to be offered to God, or Sealed. 
We answer: 1. By the same Argument (if it were good) neither aught the Jews to have circumcised their Infants on the eighth day.  
2. Allegorical Arguments, 
Theolegio allcg●rica non est argumentat. J. Gerhardde S. bapt.  when they are well applied, illustrate rather than prove: And if you will plead thus, tell us why every firstborn of man or beast, so soon as it came into the world (that is, every male) was sacred to the Lord; 
Exod 13. 11, 13.  and the firstborn of the unclean beast was to be redeemed or destroyed? and why seek ye further, omitting the type of Circumcision?   
Christ saith, 
Object. 27.  He that believeth and is baptised shall be ● saved, Mark 16. 16 without believing there is no salvation, nor saving effect of Baptism: But Infants cannot believe; Therefore their Baptism is effectless and vain. 
We answer: 1. That wholly concerns those who are of years; who when the Church was to be collected and settled, were first and generally such persons as were first to be instructed in the faith of Christ, and then to be baptised; it concerned not Infants.  
2. That which immediately follows, But he that believeth not shall be damned— manifesteth that it concerned not Infants, who though they cannot actually believe, yet shall not all be damned, though dying Infants.  
3. If those words were to be presidential to all Churches and times as a rule, what persons we are to baptise, and what not; that is, that we ought to baptise none but such and so qualified as are there described; then it would follow, that you must baptise none, but those who appear to have a justifying faith; for such there Christ speaks of, and only such, relating to their salvation: And how few have this? and how can you who baptise discern this? Secondly, They must be such as can cast out Devils, speak unstudied Languages, take up Serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them, such as can cure the sick: For Christ there thus marked out Believers of those times.  
4. He saith not, He that believeth not shall not be baptised; for that indeed might have concerned Infants Baptism: But he saith, He that believeth not shall be damned; which cannot concern Infants, except you will say they have faith (and so you must grant them a capacity of Baptism) or pretend that they all are damned who die in Infancy, which is a damnable fancy.  
Lastly, We must distinguish between an interest in, and the effects of Baptism. Many thousands born within the Covenant, have therefore a just interest in the Covenant of Grace, 
In Baptisma induitur Christus interdum sacramenta tenus, interdum quoad vitae sanctiste ationem: primum bonis & malis est commune; secundum b●norum & piorum est proprium. Aug. contr. Dona●ist. l. 5. c. 24.  and the Seal thereof, who neither believing nor obeying, have no effects thereof, nor grace of the Covenant: So some put on Christ only sacramentally, and others to sanctification and salvation also.   
It is absurd and to no purpose to baptise any unto they know not what: Such is Infants-Baptism; 
Object. 28.  Therefore they are absurdly and to no purpose baptised. 
1. We answer: Circumcision was to Isaac and Evangelical Ordinance and Seal of God's Covenant of the same Grace common to him and us; yet that being administered to him at eight days old, he knew not what he was circumcised to; yet was it neither in vain nor absurdly administered to him.  
2. Some mysterious things have been done to them, who though of age, knew not for the present what was done unto them; yet not absurdly, nor to no purpose; as when Peter's feet were washed, John 13. 7, etc. Christ told him, What I do, thou knowest not now— yet was it not absurdly, or to no purpose done. 3. No circumcised Infants knew what was done to them for present, yet was it to purpose done to all, either to salvation, or further condemnation.   
That Tenet and Practice, 
Object. 29.  which being put, or supposed Baptism, cannot be administered as John Baptist and the Apostles administered it, agreeth not with the Practice of John Baptist and the Apostles: But the Tenent and Practice of Infant-Baptism being put, 
Mr. Tombs: exercit. arg. 3. sect. 16.  Baptism cannot be administered as John Baptist and the Apostles administered it; Ergo. 
We answer: Here is an Ign●ratio elenchi, the argument driving at that which is not in question. The question is not whether John B. and the Apostles did baptise Infants; for in case they had not opportunity so to do, it follows not, that when opportunity was, baptising such agreed not with their practice; no more than to have circumcised men of years had not agreed with Moses Institution of Circumcision, because we never read that he ever did circumcise any Jews of years.  
2. The Minor can never be proved. How know you that John B. or the Apostles never baptised any Infants? You have been often told, à non Scripto ad non factum followeth not: No man can certainly say, that John B. and the Apostles never baptised Infants: The contrary appeareth in that which hath been said.    

CHAP. II.  
Mr. Fisher's Objections, at Folkstone in Kent, March 10. 1650. answered.  

IF Baptism of Infants be no Ordinance of Christ, 
Obj. 1.  than it is unlawful: But the Baptism of Infants is no Ordinace of Christ: Ergo.  
We deny the Minor.  
If the Baptism of Infants is not ordained in the New Testament of Christ, 
Object. 2.  than it is no Ordinance of Christ● But it is not ordained in the New Testament of Christ; Ergo, etc.  
We deny the Minor.  
If it be ordained in the Testament of Christ, 
Object. 3.  than it is to be found where; Ergo, etc.  
We answer: 1. The minor is again denied; for the matter in question is to be found in several places, from firm and good consequence.  
2. If otherwise, you argue negatively from Scriptures in respect of express terms. We further say: 1. That the like reason might be urged against baptising of women, and administering the Lords Supper to them, there being no express or particular precept in terminis for either; nor express example of the latter, nor promise to it in all the Scripture: And if you say women are comprehended in the general precepts; we answer, so are Infants of believing Parents, as parts of Families and Nations: If you say women are admitted to the Communion, because Christ died for them as well as men. We say so to; and that he as certainly died for Infants. 2. The command for baptising Infants, is Matth. 28. 19 The examples, Acts 16 33. 1 Cor. 1. 16. And the promise, Acts 2. 39   
If Infant-Baptism be an Ordinance of Christ, 
Object. 4.  than it is expressly set down: But it is not expressly set down; Ergo, etc. 
We answer: 1. If the question be concerning the example of Christ or his Disciples baptising Infants; and you would reason thus. They did never baptise Infants, because it is not expressly written: We have often said, à non scripto ad non factum, non valet argumentum: Christ and his Apostles did many things which are not expressly written.  
2. We may understand this word (Expressly) to signify either a writing in terminis; that is, so many words and syllables (God and Baptise Infants) if you would have it so strictly understood, that it is not the Ordinance of Christ that any should be baptised, but such as are so mentioned in Scriptures; than you must also conclude, that the Baptism of women is no Ordinance of Christ (and indeed there might appear more colour of doubting concerning their baptising, who were not sealed under the Law, then of male Infants which were) and then giving the Eucharist to women must be no Ordinance of Christ; nay, baptising of men and women of ripe years, must then be no Ordinance of Christ; for where can you show us, where Christ expressly said, Go and baptise men and women of ripe years? Where can you show us in terminis, Thou Thomas, John, Andrew, etc. shalt be baptised and saved? This you will put upon necessary consequence, where you have no express word: And why shall we not have the like liberty for Infant-Baptism? Or we may understand this word (Expressly) in a greater latitude, to import a general and implicit command in such terms and grounds, quibus positis, alia necessariò consequuntur: So we say Christ expressly commanded Infant-Baptism, where he said, without any limitation or exception to Infants, Go baptise all Nations: whereof Infants then and ever were, and are a great part; because (except in case of some evident incapacity) eadem est ratio partis & totius.  
3. Taking (Expressly) in a proper and strict sense, as it seems you here do, for (in terminis) so many words and syllables: We say from other instances, that your assertion may appear false and erroneous: For 1. There is no express place of Scripture which nameth three persons in the unity of the Deity, which yet we must believe; again, there is no Express Precept for abrogating the Jewish Sabbath, and religious observation of the Christian Sabbath, as hath been noted.   
If Matth. 28. 19 
Object. 5.  Christ gave Commission to teach those whom they were to baptise; than not to baptise Infants: But Matth 28. 19 he gave commission to teach those they were to baptise: Therefore there he gave no commission to baptise infants. 
1. We answer: Your major is Amphibologi●ae: For it is doubtful whether you affirm by (those whom they were to baptise) all those, or only some of those: If you mean All, your minor is false: For Christ gave them no commission to teach Infants, as such, though he gave them commission to baptise them into future faith and obedience: If you mean thus, Christ gave commission, Matth. 28. 19, 20. to teach some of those whom they were to baptise; therefore he gave them not Commission to baptise Infants: then the Sequel of your major is lame, and cannot follow; for though Christ there gave them commission to teach and baptise the Parents first; it follows not thence, that therefore he gave them not commission to baptise their Infants; but contrariwise he therefore gave them commission to baptise the Infants of such: For the Parents being taught and sealed, entitled their children to the Seal of the same Promise and Covenant of God, which is jointly to sealed Parents and their Children, Gen. 17. 7. and so Christ commanded them to teach those who were capable of doctrine, and only to baptise them who were capable of Baptism only, as Infants.  
2. Christ not repeating there an exact copy of his commission formerly given them at sundry times, and on sundry occasions (for there he mentioneth not any particular heads of doctrine or discipline, nor so much as the Eucharist) but to those things relateth in general, verse 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you— whereof he nameth the two first and and most usual things, — Teaching and Baptising, for the making of Disciples and gathering a Church of all Nations: So that he nameth not here the matter or subject of baptism in particular; but saith in general— Baptising them &c. Teaching them to observe all, etc. 
See answer to Obj. 1. num. 3.  Now although children cannot be first taught before they are baptised, as such, as their Parents might and ought to be, yet might they be first baptised, and in due time taught, as Christ commanded. And it is here to be noted, That children of sealed Parents were called Disciples, and so accounted in both Testaments: See Acts 15. 10. John 9 28. We are Moses Disciples,— said the Jews: Now the only thing which entered them into the School of Moses, or denominated them Moses Disciples, was their Circumcision in their infancy, which obliged them coming to years, to the observation of the whole Law, Gal. 5. 3. delivered by Moses. So Baptism of Infants doth not anticipate profession of Christianity, but oblige unto it in d●e time; and therefore is Baptism a sign that the baptised professeth himself a Disciple of Christ, who appointed it as a mark and cognizance of his Disciples: Baptism makes Infants Disciples in the first form of his School, into which they are thereby entered, though not actually for the present taught, because they are not yet capable of Doctrine: Yet so is fulfilled in Infants-Baptism that same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (in Christ's commission, Mat. 28. 19) Make Disciples, baptising them &c. and children of Believers are counted Disciples, Acts 15. 10. Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the DISCIPLES? What yoke? Why Circumcision; as appears Verse 1. Now those upon whom the false Teachers would have laid this yoke, are called by the Apostle DISCIPLES: and that yoke of Circumcision was put upon children most commonly, in respect of whom the Proselytes were very few: And there is no great doubt but that those false Masters who would have grown Disciples circumcised, as much, at least, urged, that their children should be circumcised; therefore Infants were accounted Disciples. And I see not but that Christ spoke of Infants, Matth. 10. 42. as well as others— Whosoever shall give to drink, unto one of these little ones— in the name of a DISCIPLE, that is, as is interpreted, Mark 9 41.— because ye belong to Christ (as do baptised Infants) and so Matth. 18. 5. Whoso shall receive one such little child in my name, receiveth me— that is, a child which is a Christian: Nor do the following words, v. 6. (Whoso shall offend one of these little ones, which (as our common translation hath it) believe in me) conclude that he spoke there only of such as were little in their own eyes; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mat. 18. 6.  that is, humble (as 1 Sam, 15. 17.) though of years, or of such children as were of years to believe: for the words may as well be translated, One of these little ones of those that believe in me; or of believers in me; that is, any infant of a Believer or Christian.  
3. Christ Matth 28. 19, 20. spoke concerning the plantation of Christian Faith and Conversion of nations, in which work preaching must go before Baptism. So was it in the beginning, and so must we do now, if we were sent to convert Turks, Pagans, or Jews: but where the Gospel is planted, and believing Parents are received into the Church by baptism, their children are first to be baptised, and afterwards taught, so soon as they are able to learn; So that the cited place can conclude no more, than that administration of baptism began first on the Parents that received the word, and were made disciples by baptism, and so it descended to their children: So was it in circumcision.  
4 Children are to be taught when they are capable, concludeth nothing against their present baptising, 
Mr Cobbet. part. ●. exp. o● Matth. 2●. page, 179.  of which they are passively capable: one affirmative excludeth not another thereto subordinate: nor do affirmative precepts which bind always, bind to all and every particular time, as negatives do: teaching them therefore concludeth not a present teaching the baptised, but a duty of teaching them as they became capable of being taught.  
5 The particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 relateth to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in general and indefinitely, though it agree not Grammatically with it: for Christ faith not baptise some, or only those who are taught (in deed such a determination of the subject, would have excluded Infants, as such, from baptism) but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, baptising them; that is, men, women, and children of believers and baptised Parents of all Nations: it is not now as when Religion was, as it were, shut up in Judea; now the stop of the Partition wall is broken down; 
Eph. 2.  now Christ will have all Nations come and be sealed into the Covenant of his free grace and mercy: and this Enallagie or change of Gender is often found in Scripture, as Rev. 2. 26, 27. Rev. 19 15. Act. 15. 17. Act. 26. 17. Act. 21. 25. Eph. 2. 11. So here he saith collectively, teach, or disciple 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and distributively, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, baptising them, one by one, of what Nation soever they are. So Mat. 25. 32. before him shall be gathered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— all Nations, and he shall separate them one from another; some on the right hand and some on the left; but all by particulars must be distributed without exception of any person, age, or condition: otherwise it might seem that some Nations should be gathered to judgement, and not some others; which cannot be, because God is impartially just.   
If the children of Israel had only a ceremonial holiness, 
Obj. 6.  than the pretence from circumcision to baptism of Infants is invalid: but the children of Israel had only a ceremonial holiness; ergo, etc. 
The minor being denied, was thus attempted to be proved:   
If the Covenant Gen. 17. 7. etc. was only for the land of Canaan, than the Israelites had only a ceremonial holiness: but the Covenant Gen. 17. 7. etc. was only for the land of Canaan; ergo, etc. 
We answer, 1 If by ceremonial, you mean federal holiness as appertaining (by God's Promise and Covenant with Abraham and his carnal seed) to some of the Israelites, not of the election to salvation, it may be granted you without prejudice to our cause that such carnal Israelites had only a ceremonial holiness; not because God's covenant held forth no more than external and temporal things unto them; but because through unbelief they apprehended no more. But if the proposition be universal, as also relating to the chief and best part of Israel, to wit, the Elect, for whose sakes others enjoyed secular blessings with them; then your minor is apparently false; for they had internal circumcision of the heart, as well as the external in the flesh, Deut. 10. 16. Deut. 20. 6. Rom. 2. 29. Jer. ●4. 4.  
2 To say that God made no promise of spiritual things in the covenant of the Old Testament is evidently false, 
See Cloppenburg, Gangrene. of Anabapt. etc. N. 3.  as appears Gen. 17. 7. 2 Cor. 6. 18. I will be a father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and my daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. See also Joh. 1. 12, 13. 1 Joh. 3. 1, 2, 8, 9 1 Joh. 2. 25. God covenanted Gen. 17. 7. to be their God, and repeateth it, Leu. 26. 12. and applied it to the Gentiles, 2 Cor. 6. 16. Jer. 31. 1, 2. 2 Cor. 6. 18. Act. 2. 39 whence it may clearly appear that the main substance of the covenant and promise of God, with and to Abraham and his seed, was for eternal life, as also in the New Testament, 1 Joh. 2. 25. The land of Canaan, and other secular blessings were promised as other temporal goods subordinate, and as a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or additament over and above, or an accession to the main, as Mat. 6. 33. & 1 King. 3. 10, 11, 13. and also for a figure of their heavenly inheritance, Heb. 4. 8, 9, 11. and for a confirmation of their interest therein, to which they were to come through the red sea which figured our baptism.  
3 If the Covenant of God with Abraham and his spiritual seed, that is, Believers, had been only for the land of Canaan, and temporal blessings there into be enjoyed, than that gracious Covenant had entitled him to no more than many wicked enemies of God, and mere reprobates had, and at this hour have: for the impious Canaanites then had all that good land and the temporal profits thereof, as the more impious Turks now have; as it is written Psal. 73. 12. Behold these are the ungodly who prosper in the world, they increase in riches: but this were foolish to affirm, and against the whole Analogy of Scriptures, which expressly affirm that godliness hath the promise of this life that now is, and of that which is to come, 1 Tim. 4. 8.   
The seal of Circumcision was set to Abraham to seat him up only to the honour of the Father of the faithful, 
Obj. 7.  that is, under this notion only (as a seal) to honour him as the Father of the faithful, etc. 
We answer, This makes nothing to the proof of the former assertion; yet we say, it was not only to seal this honour unto him, but for a seal of the righteousness of faith, Rome, 4. 11. and to seal him personally, or to his own personal interest in Christ to come, as it is written, Abraham rejoiced to see my day, Joh. 8. 56.   
That which was set only to honour the greatness of Abraham's faith, 
Obj. 8.  not to strengthen the weakness of his faith, was set to him only as a seal to honour him as the father of the faithful: But Circumcision was set only to honour the greatness of his faith, not to strengthen the weakness of his faith. ergo, etc. 
We answer to this caption and weak argument That Abraham's circumcision was set both to confirm his strong faith, and also to carry a remembrance thereof to posterity, and to confirm that which was weak; for faith hath certain degrees, and the greatest measure thereof may be greatned (because it is not infinite) and so more confirmed. Abraham's circumcision. Gen, 17. 23, 24, 26. was a seal of the righteousness of faith which he had being yet uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also. Rom. 4. 11. his faith preceded the seal who believed in hope, that he might become the father of many Nations. Rom. 4. 18. this was when God spoke to him, Gen. 15. 6. and he not weak in faith— being fully persuaded, etc. Rom. 4. 21. of what? See Gen. 15. 4, 5, 6. so shall thy seed be; and he believed in the Lord— he was afterward circumised, Gen. 17. 24. and his great trial of faith was some years after his circumcision: and then to confirm his faith yet more, the Lord said Gen. 22. 16. By myself have I sworn— blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and in thy seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed, Gen. 22. 17, 18 and the effect of this faith the Apostle magnifieth, Heb. 11. 17. Isaac●and ●and mentioning the same, Heb. 6. 13, 16, 17. he saith, an oath for confirmation is to them and end of all strife: wherein God to show more abundantly unto the heirs of Promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: what in respect of God's truth? nay, but nothing can be added to an infinite: such is God's truth, which is no accident in him, but his essence; for whatsoever is in God, is God: it was therefore that the heirs of promise (of which number you will allow Abraham to be one) might be confirmed, 
Heb. 6. 18.  and have strong consolation to lay hold upon the hope set before them: whence it appeareth that even Abraham's strong faith might be confirmed; and so his circumcision had other ends then to honour him as the father of the faithful: nor is that of any better value which was farther objected to the same end.   
That which was not set to any of his posterity to confirm them in their faith, 
Obj. 9  was set only to Abraham to honour his faith, &c 
That. What? the seal of circumcision? Your minor is so false that it needs no more confutation than denial; for circumcision the seal of the righteousness of faith was set to Abraham's seed and posterity to confirm them in the same faith, and to assure them that God was their God, as he promised Gen. 17. 7. and indeed Abraham was not styled the Father of the faithful in regard of Israel's carnal propagation; for that which is born of the flesh is flesh, Joh. 3. 6. and they which are of the faith, the same are the children of Abraham, Gal. 3. 7. 
Meta● heri● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pater, dici●tur, anti●ior, major, magister, prin●e●s, inventor, primus a●icuju●, ●ci author, & crig. V. Shi●●●. Pent. 1. 9  nor as the first believer; for many others believed before him, as Abel, Enoch, Noah, Shem, etc. moreover Father is used by the Hebrews to signify divers relations, as Prince or Lord, 2 King. 5. 13. first teacher, 1 Cor. 4. 14. God our heavenly father, Deut. 3. 2. Mat. 6. Isa. 9 6. or Master, 2 King. 2. 12. (hence Disciples were called sons of the Prophets, 1 Sam. 10. 12.) or a Counsellor, Gen. 45. 8. or an Inventor or Author, as Jabel was the father of such as dwell in tents, Gen. 4. 20. and Jubal, the father of all such as handle the harp and organ: but Abraham is called the father of the faithful, as being first sealed with this seal into the covenant of the righteousness of faith: and as a pattern and example to which we must frame our lives in faith and obedience; faith is the condition of our covenant with God in Christ, made with Abraham and his seed, 
Gal. 3. 7. Rom. 4.  that is, believers; and thereupon the first seal of the righteousness of faith was given to his natural seed: and now a believing Parent, being by faith of the seed of Abraham, the first seal of the present covenant, is by the same proportion to be given to his natural-born Infants.   
In that commission in which those only are meant which are capable of being taught, 
Obj. 10.  and to learn, Infants are neither named, intended, nor meant: but such is that commission Mat. 28. 19, 20. therefore there is no commission to baptise Infants. 
For proof of the minor, which was denied, was offered this reason:   
He that gives commission to teach persons before they are baptised, 
Obj. 11.  requires no more to be baptised then are capable to be taught, etc. ergo. 
Though enough hath been said to satisfy herein; yet to satisfy your instance, we say further, 1 The minor is fallacious, the condition, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is here considerable; without which it is a Paralogism or fallaeious disputing: we affirm not a present capacity or actual docibility of Infants, but an habitual; that is, that Infants have reason whereby they will in time to come be capable of being taught (though for the present they have so slender an use thereof, that they cannot apprehend spiritual things) otherwise we might not baptise them, could they not bear the image of God: to baptise bells, altars, etc. or beasts, were a most detestable and blasphemous profanation of the holy Sacrament.  
2 If (capable of being taught, and to learn) be taken for a present capacity, and the sense of your proposition runs thus in that commission in which only persons of years are meant, Infants are not intended or meant ● 'tis easily granted; but then your minor being this: in that commission Mat. 28. 19, 20. only persons of years are meant, is a gross begging of the Question, which is, whether in that commission Christ intended only the baptism of persons of years, and for the present apt to be taught and learn, or also with such Infants of Christian Parents? which we affirm:  
3 It appeareth by that which hath been formerly answered to Obj. 5. that Christ saith in the cited place, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make Disciples, baptising them, etc. and though children, as such, cannot be taught, yet they may be made Disciples of Christ, by being admitted into his school, their Parents, giving their names to Christ, both for themselves and their families: and in Christ's commission in that place, teaching doth follow baptising them in the Name of the Father, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. Mat. 28. 19, 10.  of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost— which we do, teaching our baptised Infants, so soon as they become fit to be taught, what Christ hath commanded.  
4 Though Infants, as such, are not capable of teaching, yet are they capable of baptism, that is, of being washed with water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost, of being prayed for, and of being received into Christ's congregation; and so were Infants capable of circumcision the eighth day.   
Those that are not in the cited place, 
Obj. 12.  commanded to be baptised, are not to be baptised: But Infants are not there commanded to be baptised; therefore they are not to be baptised, 
We answer: 1 The minor is false: It is there commanded to baptise Infants. 2. If you mean that the command is not addressed to Infants, you trifle, the amphibology being in (those that are not commanded) and so that being understood personally of Infants, there is an Ignoratio Elenchi in the Minor, we not affirming that which you assume; to wit, That Infants in their own persons are commanded. 3. The Major is fallacious in another respect, in this word Commanded, which may import either Implicitly Comprehended; so are Infants commanded to be baptised: or explicitly and in terminis, which if you mean, which say again, neither are women nor persons of years there or elsewhere in terminis, commanded to be baptised, though by the series of holy Scripture and necessary consequence, it is certainly employed. See more Obj. 14.   
The Apostle 1 Cor. 7. 14. intended by holy, 
Obj. 13.  legitimacy, not sanctity: for if it were not the faith of the parents, 
So Mr. Tombs Ed. Barber etc.  but their matrimony which the Apostle there spoke of, than it was not sanctity or holiness, but legitimation which he there intended: But it was not faith, but their matrimony that the Apostle there spoke to; ergo, etc. the argument for Infant-baptism thereon grounded, is invalid. 
We answer 1 The scruple of the Corinthians was concerning spiritual pollution by a believers cohabiting with an husband or wife not converted: the Apostle answereth in effect, that they need not fear that; for the unbelieveng husband is sanctified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the wife, that is, in respect of the wife, not as if an unbelieving husband were made holy by the faith of the wife: but because the believing wife may with good conscience live as a wife with such an husband (for why should another's conscience make her guilty of sin?) for unto the pure by faith, 
Ob uxorem, vel propter uxorem, respectu uxoris. Piscarr in loc. sic Beza,— quia ratione faederis, qued hic spectar Apostolus fidelis primartum & principalem obtiner locum; hinc fit ut maritus infidelis eo respectu accessorium sit uxoris fidelis, adeoque ipsa sanctificata, ipse quoque in ca sanctificetur— 1 Cor. 3. 21.— omnia vestra sunt, i.e. in omnia jus, dominium & potestatem habetis fideles, etc. L. de Dieu. in loc.  all things are pure, Tit. 1. 15. marriage, meats, all, being sanctified by the Word allowing them, and promising a blessing to believers, as also by prayer of faith obtaining the same. This he proveth by their children's holiness, as from the absurdity and falsehood of the contrary, else were your children unclean, but now are they holy, that is, within the covenant of the Lord, who saith, I will be a God unto thee and thy seed after thee: and this he leaveth on a known and common practice of the Churches everywhere, 
1 Tim. 4. 5. Gen. 17. 7.  that if but one of the Parents were a believer, the children of him or her, were brought to baptism as the seal of the Covenant.  
2 This cannot reach to children born of both unbelieving parents, though so born in lawful matrimony, they were civilly legitimate, for that would make the Apostles supposition void: for what was it to his purpose to speak of legitimacy or illegitimacie of paynims children? neither could civil legitimacy give them any privilege in God's covenant, out of which can be no holiness; nor illegitimacie exclude those from the seal thereof, who converted, professed their faith and desired the same. That which is said Deut. 23. 2. A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord, even unto his tenth generation— is not to be understood, as if it barred them from salvation, or any means thereto subordinate, the covenant of God, seals thereof, sacraments, or public service of God; but that it excluded them from a right to bear any public office, Ecclesiastical or Civil: neither may Jophta's extraordinary calling to public office, make void the general rule: in the forecited place it is said— the Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord, etc. what, not in case of their becoming proselytes? nay, but Ruth the Moabitess is rehearsed in the genealogy of our Saviour Christ, and there was but one law to him that is home-born, and unto the stranger; he may not bear any public office, but he might be received into God's covenant, and so be capable of all holy duties. So, v. 1. the maimed or Eunuch shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord etc. what? might he not be sealed or saved? the contrary expressly appeareth Is. 56. 4, 5, 6, 7. Mat. 19 12. To our present purpose, the Apostle gathereth that matrimonial conjunction between a believer and an unbeliever, is holy, because the denomination and estimate being from the better part, their children are within the covenant of God, by an argument from the effect to the cause. 
Gen. 17. 13. Exod. 12. 19 Mat. 1.   
3 The Apostle discoursed not there of civil Policy, but of conscience; and how could it satisfy any Christians conscience to take an argument from the civil laws of any of the Nations? it is notorious that among those, many things were established by their laws, which a Christians conscience would, and must abhor: yea, even such divorces without the case of adultery, as were in civil respects tolerated by Moses; 
Beza in 1 Cor. 7.  for the hardness of the Jews hearts, excused not the offender's conscience, though that permissive law would bear him out before men?  
4 When the Apostle saith the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife; if any ask, what wife? we cannot say in a wife as she is only civilly legitimate; for so far that husband hath as good and evident a ground of sanctification on his part and in himself without any accession of privilege from his wife; for he must needs be as lawfully her husband as she is his wife; we can therefore no otherwise rationally answer, then, a believing wife: and so on the other side. Now seeing the Apostle puts it on a peculiar privilege, which is sometimes in the man when he is a believer, and his wife is not; and sometimes in the wife, if she be a believer, and her husband is not so; it appears that the foundation of comfort here intended by the Apostle, is laid in faith, peculiar but to one of the two, and not in matrimonial legitimacy common and equal to both.  
5 Faith which rendereth us acceptable to God in Christ, purifieth us, and all estates and possessions to us: that sanctifieth marriage, not marriage it; that uniteth us by one Spirit to Christ, and is therefore far more excellent than marriage, which uniteth man and woman only in one flesh: 
Tit. 1. 15.  faith therefore gives our children a denomination and right to the seals of the covenant as they are holy, not marriage, which though civilly lawful, may yet be impious before God; as where one puts away his wife for less than adultery and marrieth another, or another man marrieth her so put away: 
Mat. 13. 9  it is therefore the faith and Church-priviledge of parents which thus denominateth children holy.  
6 The Apostle could not here mean legitimacy of children: for that can neither sanctify them, nor entitle them to the seal of God's covenant; neither is sanctification here or in any other place of Scripture taken otherwise then for separating some way from some thing profane or impious. So persons, times, places, etc. are said to be sanctified, which legitimation cannot do: neither can (holy) necessarily imply (no bastard) for some holy men have been such; neither can (no bastard) conclude a man holy. The children of infidels, and aliens from the covenant of God, born in lawful wedlock, are legitimate and no bastards; and yet as such, far from holy: and bastardy, though the effect and product of foul sin of parents, and the child's indelible dishonour before men, yet maketh them not such as belong not to the covenant of God, as appears in Pharez and Zarah, Gen. 38. 18, 29, 30. Jephtah, Judg. 11. 1, 2. etc. it must needs be therefore, that the Apostle in that term of holy, signified some thing peculiar to those that are within the Church of God, and not communicable to children of Infidels, as such: so Tertullian speaks of the unregenerate, 
I. e. non erit sa●ctus, ita omnis anima eo usque censetur in Adam, donec in Christa recenseatur, vid. Tertul. de anim. c. 39 40.  from Joh. 3. 5. he shall not enter into the kingdom of God: that is, he shall not be holy: such every soul is counted in Adam, until he be recounted in Christ.  
7 We must consider that legitimacy of children (which our Antagonists would here have intended) is a proceed of legitimacy of marriage, which is, of one man and one wife joined together in matrimony according to God's ordinance, as it is written, 
Mat. 10. 4, 5. Calv. in. Mal. 2. 15.  they two shall be one flesh: not they many: and he that made them at the beginning, made them male and female; now the institution of marriage is in place of a perpetual law, the violation whereof is sin and wickedness: Therefore Christ refuted their objection from Moses permission of the bill of divorcement from the original, and Gods first institution of marriage, because he in the beginning appointed it otherwise, and the same sanction is inviolable. 
Mal. 2. ●5.  So when the Prophet would recall the Jews from Polygamy to pure wedlock, he said, did not he (that is God the Creator) make one? that is, did he make any more wives for Adam then one? or did he at first make any more than one husband and one wife? 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & resi●●●uin ●ut excellentia spiritus ci.  yet had he the residue (or excellency) of the Spirit, that is, he had power enough if he had pleased, to have made more: that therefore is illegitimate which agreeth not with the first unrepealable law and institution of God, who created but one man and one woman for the fountain of all humane propagation, as it is written Gen. 1. 27. God created him-male and female created be them: both one flesh, and so but one— and wherefore one? 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 semen Dei. Unum tamum par conjugavit, qu●d semen Dei, i.e. pastes libe●●s progigneret: qaic quid supra est, perfidiae●●●●●ae acceptum ferendum est. Jun. in Malipiero 2. Semen in matrimonio promi●an à Dei. Vatabl. in Mal. 2.  saith the Prophet— that he might seek a godly seed: that is, a generation according to God's holy institution, which is between one man and one woman lawfully joined in matrimony; this he opposeth to their Polygamy, secretly here intimating that all they are spurious who are born of polygamy; because they cannot and ought not to be esteemed legitimate, who are begotten otherwise then in that matrimony which God appointed, which is only between one man and one woman. Now this legitimacy all the tribes of Israel (though they were otherwise holy) had not in the Prophet's sense; but they had it in the Apostles sense, 1 Cor. 7. 14. for (not to question more) Dan and Nephtali, Bilhab the handmaids sons, and God and Ash●r, Zilpah the other handmaids sons, liad not this legitimacy, and yet were they and their posterity holy to the Lord: it must needs be therefore that it was from some other fountain of holiness than civil● legitimacy can give; and that could be none but federal holiness from the covenant of God made with Abraham and his seed, wherein he contracted to be their God, and that they should be his people, sealed and set apart to him according to him own appointment which privilege, neither the wisdom, power, honour, will of man, consent of Nations, nor any civil Laws or Ordinances of man, ever could or can give; but God alone who freely bestoweth that favour, and appointeth the conditions thereof.   
Only believers are the lawful subject of baeptism (that is, 
Obj. 14.  such as appear to believe with all their heart, Act. 8. 37.) but children appear not to believe so; therefore they are not the lawful subject of baptism. 
We answer, 1 That such are to be baptised, is granted; so that you may conclude affirmatively for such persons of years; but this cannot conclude negatively to the exclusion of Infants born within the Church of Christ.  
2 If believing with all the heart were the rule of lawful administration of baptism: who could securely presume to baptise persons of years, concerning whose hearty believing they cannot be certain: as for outward appearance, that many times deceiveth the most discerning men: Jerusalem and all Judea, etc. came and were baptised of John Baptist, 
Mat. 3. 5. Joh. 6. 66.  yet many of them proved blasphemers and persecutors of Christ: some of them came so far as to be professed Disciples, and yet proved Apostates: others were said to believe in Christ, yet he discerning their hearts, would not commit himself unto them; Joh. 2. 23. Ananias and Saphira came up to so real a profession as to sell their possession for the advancement of the Gospel: and did these believe with all their heart, or were they not baptised? I might add hereto, Judas, Demas, and Simon Magus; all these show that outward appearance demonstrateth not faith in the heart: and therefore, if only believers, that is, with all their hearts, be the lawful subject of baptism; either your supposed rule of baptising, leaves it uncertain to you, whom you may, or may not baptise: or else admitteth of hypocrites, whom God abhorreth, and on whom Christ denounced so many woes, and excludeth believers Infants from the seal of God's covenant, in which God himself testifieth children of such are, and whom Christ embraced in his sacred arms, testifying that of such is the kingdom of heaven.  
3 Show us a rule in all the New Testament in terminis (as you require of us for Infant-baptism) for baptising only persons of ripe years to make profession of their faith, and at once (if you can, set an end to this unhappy controversy which hath so much troubled the Church) put it out of doubt that none may be baptised until there be an appearance of their faith and repentance; or give us some infallible proof, that all those whom you baptise are indeed and certainly belonging to the kingdom of heaven: nay, show us any necessary consequence for the exclusion of our Infants from baptism: what? because those of years professed their faith, and confessed their sins? therefore Infants who cannot so do, may not be baptised? it follows not: nay, yet further, were there an express precept, if any believe not with all the heart, baptise them not; it would no more exclude Infants from their right to baptism, then that which the Apostle saith (as hath been noted) if any would not work, neither should he eat, excludeth them from their right to be fed. 
● Thess 3. 10  To conclude, we show you an infallible word of Christ, that Infants belong to the kingdom of heaven; and therefore the appearance (from these words of Christ, and the covenant of God with believing parents and their children) is as good and certain that the kingdom of heaven belongs to the Infants of constant professors whom we baptise, as any profession of new Converts can show; for men and women may and often do deceive men, who know not the heart, or future condition of professors, whatsoever they now seem or say: but Christ who knows all things, yea the secrets of every heart, and ends of all that are or shall be, could not be deceived in so judging of Infants. The foundation of the Lord remains sure, 
2 Tim. 2. 19 Gen. 17. 7. Act. 2. 39  and hath this seal, the Lord knoweth who are his: and his covenant being that he will be to the covenanted & his seed a God, whose promises are therefore sure to them; and the parent, as such, being as well known to be converted, as any new proselyte is or can be known to be converted; Gods promise to me concerning my children, is more sure to me, than man's judgement concerning the sincerritie of any new Convert can be, whatsoever appeareth in his words, or professions.  
4 The interest of sealing into the covenant of grace dependeth not on the sealed persons worthiness or unworthiness, sex, age, or condition, but upon God the author and free appointer thereof: so circumcision was one and the same in the external seal, to the elect and reprobate, Infant or Proselyte of years. The commandment of God did not put any difference, but equally enjoined it to all sorts of males within the pale of Israel: he said not circumcise only believers, the penitent, etc. (though in persons of years, that was to be understood) but circumcise every male● child the eighth day; when 'tis sure they could neither actually believe, repent, nor make any appearance thereof; as then the external seal was one and the same, though the effect in the sealed was variable; so is it in baptism; the secret unworthiness or Apostasy of the receiver foreseen only by God, did not make them uncapable of the seal; therefore man administering, was to do his part according to the general command of God, and to leave the particular success and effect to God, and so is it in baptism.  
5 Though unbelievers who reject the word of God, may not, as such, be baptised; yet Infants, who at most may be called but negatively unbelievers, cannot be included in that rule which excludeth contemners, seeing they have faith as they have reason, in the seed, not in the fruit, in the root, though not in the leaf; in some inward operation, though not in any outward expression, as Tidenus cited by the learned Dr. Fearly well observes.  
6 None are required to manifest their faith and repentance before baptism, but such as having the use of reason, have been taught and instructed in the same; for God requireth no impossibilities in respect of the abilities which himself ever gave: so that in common reason, all texts of Scripture which require confession of faith, repentance, etc. are to be understood of such as have the use of reason and tongue, whereby they are enabled so to do.   
If the parents: 
Obj. 15.  to whom the Apostle spoke, Act. 2. 39 were not believers, than the promise was not to them and their children: but they were not believers; ergo, etc. 
We answer, The Apostle saying expressly- the promise is to you and to your children, your dispute, labouring to prove that the promise was not to them and their children, is point blank against the express Word of God; and you denying that principle, are not worthy of further answer: yet for the pious Readers sake, we say further; 1 That believers may be taken two ways: 
Rome, 10. 20.  first for such as do in heart believe unto righteousness: this God alone can judge of; and therefore man is not to expect his rule and direction for his ministration from hence. Secondly, for such as profess faith or show good and probable signs and symptoms thereof, as those hearers of, Peter did: for they received the word gladly and were baptised: and before that there appeared an excellent sign of faith in them, in that the word which they heard, profited them to compunction of heart and repentance, with desiring remedy: but where the Word of God is not mixed with faith in the hearers, it profiteth not, as appear, Heb. 4. 2. Therefore that assumption is irrational where you say, they to whom the Apostle spoke were not believers. 2 There may be an amphibology in the major, believers being either such only in profession and bearing the external seal of the righteousness of faith, or for such in the heart; and so the sequel is unsound: for the promise of God's covenant was to all Israel● as being the seed of Abraham within that covenant; although many of them through unbelief obtained not remission of sins and eternal life held out to them in the same: 
1 Cor. 10. 5. Heb. 4. 2.  which made not the promise of nose effect to them who believed; and many unbelieving parents had and have believing children: but a covenanted Parents unbelief barreth not his Infant born within the Church from the external seal of the covenant: so that the promise did belong to them though their Parents had secretly been unbelievers and impious persons; much more, seeing they so expressed and professed their faith, repentance, and care to be saved.   
If those children Act. 2. 39 were entitled to baptism in their infancy, 
Obj. 16.  than they were, or must have been baptised in their infancy: but they were not baptised in their infancy, but their father's only, who received the word gladly; therefore they to whom the promise is Act. 2. 39 were not entitled to baptism in their infancy. 
We deny your minor, and you can never prove it: their fathers were first baptised; but it appeareth not that they only were baptised. 1. It hath been often said, and you need still to hear it; it followeth not that it was not done, because it is not written. Christ spoke and did many things which are not written. 
See the answer to Obj. 4.  2 If you could from Scripture prove that de facto they were not baptised in their infancy; yet that would not prove that de jure they might not be baptised. The parents neglect of their duty, or any other intercident obstructions could not make void, the children's interest. Moses son was not circumcised on the eighth day, 
Exod. 4.  nor many thousand Israelists Infants in the wilderness for 40 years; yet we cannot hence conclude that they ought not to have been circumcised had there been no let, or that, they had no interest in the seal because there were lets.   
Only Abraham's spiritual ●seed are to be baptised: 
Obj● 17.  but Infants are not the spiritual seed of Abraham; therefore Infants are not to be baptised. 
We answer, 1 This is the same argument under another synonimical dress, to which we have answered: there you said, only believers are to be baptised; here you say only Abraham's spiritual seed are to be baptised; whereas believers and Abraham's spiritual seed are one and the same in the Apostles account, Gal 3. 7. 2 Many thousands which were Abraham's carnal seed, were baptised; which were indeed not his spiritual seed, that is, true believers: See Mat. 3. 5, 6. Act. 2 41. which being done by John Baptist and Christ's disciples, and so precedentially to us, shows the falsehood of your major. 3 If Abraham's spiritual seed, by your own confession be to be baptised, than Infants of believers within the Church must be baptised, they being Abraham's spiritual seed, 
1 Cor. 12. 12, 13. ●al. 3. 7.  (except you will say that God's promise was to some who were not within the covenant made with Abraham) and indeed the whole mystical body of Christ, is the spiritual seed of Abraham, of which none can rationally deny Infants of covenanted Parents to be a part, who acknowledge Christ to be their Saviour. See Eph. 5. 28. and that out of him and his body the Church, is no salvation. So that by the way we may note, that to exclude Christian Infants from being a part of Christ's visible Church in general, is to exclude them from the ordinary state and way to salvation: and so to deny them to be Abraham's spiritual seed, is to exclude them from the same, and to leave them to an extraordinary means thereto; in which some Pagans, Turks, and obstinate Jews &c. by the mercy of God, (illuminating & converting them to the faith of Christ by extraordinary means) may be saved: and this is to suppose Infants of Christian Parents as bad as Heathens, 
Eph. 2. 12. 1 Thes, 4.  without Christ, aliens from the Commonwealth of Israel, strangers from the covenants of promise-without God in the World. Add hereto, that if parents may not sorrow as men without hope for their deceased Infants, they cannot have sound hope without faith, nor faith without a promise or word of faith, that is, Scripture-promise to confirm & ground it on: and that not in general, but such as properly concerns their children, as that Gen. 17. 7. Act. 2. 39 Luk. 18. 16, 17: etc. Now to deny children's interest herein, or that they are the spiritual seed of Abraham, is to leave afflicted Parents hopeless of their children's salvation, in that by such an an uncharitable & impious tenet, Parents must not believ those comfortable promises belong to their children, and that God will not so much as by an external seal, assure them that he is by covenant a God unto their Infants. Nor can we think that ever any were saved ordinarily, if at all, touching whom God never made any promise, neither in respect of internal and saving faith, nor so much as in respect of external right to sealing thereto: so that to avoid this, we must say, that Christian Infants are Abraham's undoubted spiritual seed & therefore they have at least an ecclesiastical right as to the covenant made with Abraham, so to the Church-priviledges respectively; that is, to baptism, which is now the seal of God's covenant in Christ exhibited.    

CHAP. III.  
Infant baptism asserted and justified, by sundry arguments by the Church of Christ alleged.  
1 ALl they who are members of Christ's body the Church, are to be baptised that they may be admitted into the same by the initiatory seal thereof, which is baptism, that they may be externally known to be of the Church: but Infants of Church-priviledged persons are members of Christ's body the Church; 
Basting de bap●quaest. 74. Vis● a. Catech. etc.  ergo, they ought to be baptised that they may be admitted into the same by the initiatory seal thereof, which is baptism, etc.  
The major is thus confirmed; such persons as were circumcised under the Law, that they might be known to be of the Church, aught to be baptised under the Gospel for the same end; for baptism answereth circumcision; and is called by the same name, Col. 2 11, 12. as having the same end & effect to seal up the same grace unto faith, mortification, remission of sins, & admission into the visible Church. If it be excepted that under the Law, there was an express command for Infant-circumcision on the eighth day, but there is none for Infant-baptism; We say, 1 Because there was an express command under the Law never repealed in the Gospel, and the same end and use still remain; therefore there need be none in the Gospel more than that general opening the kingdom of heaven to all believers, in taking away the stop of the partition wall by that which is said, Baptise all Nations. None but Israelites and their proselytes were sealed under the Law, none but male children at eight days old; but now go baptise all nations, without exception to nation, age, sex, or condition. 2 There is in all the Scripture no express prohibition, neither can any by any sound consequence imply it.  
The assumption is thus confirmed, Those whom Christ saveth are members of his body, (for he is the head of the Church, and Saviour of the body, Eph. 5. 23.) But Christ saveth Infants of believing parents; therefore Infants are members of Christ's body the Church. The major is evident; for Christ saveth none but those who are members of his body the Church. The minor is as evident, it being granted that any Infants are saved, which is apparent from the covenant of God, Gen. 17. 7. and the words of Christ, 
Luk. 18. 16.  of such is the kingdom of God, as also by this argument: Those whom Christ loved, and for whom he gave himself to death's those he will sanctify and cleanse with the washing of water by the Word, Eph. 5. 26. that they may be received into the Church, and be made partakers of the benefits of his death: but Christ not only loved and gave himself for persons of years, but also for Infants; therefore he will sanctify and cleanse Infants with the washing of water by the Word, etc.  
2 All Infants were by Adam capable of sin and the expressions of God's justice punishing the same by death, sickness, etc. but Infants are not less capable of the grace and mercy of God in Christ in respect of the expressions thereof, than they were of his justice in Adam: Therefore Infants are capable of the expressions of God's grace and mercy in Christ, which in the ordinary dispensation thereof is baptism. The major is evident, Rom. 5. 12. 1 Cor. 15. 22. The minor Rom. 5. 20 where sin abounded, grace did much more abound, that is, God's grace doth more abundantly appear in holding out the visible remedy, than his justice inflicting the denounced punishment; which could not be, if Infants (visibly involved in the condemnatory sentence and execution thereof) should be excluded from the ordinary and visible means of recovery and salvation by Christ, which in them can be no other external means but baptism the laver of regeneration: & it can be no less than a sacrilegious injury to the grace & mercy of God in Christ, to suppose that the sin of man is more powerful to hurt then the grace of God in Christ is to heal and save.  
3 If we ought not to baptise Infants, than there must be some apparent let and impediment thereto, either on God's part prohibiting, or on the Minister's part, or in the Sacrament itself, or in the incapacity of the receiver; but there is no apparent let or impdiment on the part (or in any) of these therefore there is none at all. 1 There is no impediment on God's part, for God no where expressly or by good consequence saith, Baptise not Infants, or Baptise none but those who do first testify their faith and repentance. 2 There is no impediment on the Minister's part, for he can as easily baptise Infants as persons of years. 3 There is no impediment in respect of the Sacrament itself; for all the essentials of baptism may be placed on children: profession of faith, repentance, etc. are conditions of baptism in persons of years, and effects of it, which may in due time appear and follow in baptised Infants: those therefore are not of the essence of baptism, nor so much as universal conditions thereof; for the present sprinkling, washing, or dipping in water, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the H. Ghost, are the essence of baptism; so are not faith, repentance, or newness of life: for it may be a true baptism, where these graces do neither precede nor follow it, though without these preceding or following, baptism cannot be effectual to salvation; which need not seem strange to him that considereth that Judas, Simon Magus, and many who were, and now are truly baptised, are not saved. 4 Neither can the let be in the Infant, who cannot by any actual hardness of heart, impenitency, or positive unbelief, or contempt of the ordinance of God, refuse or despise the grace of God offered in baptism. Therefore they are to be admitted to that whereof they are apparently & undeniably capable; which is the external seal at least: which is all that man for present can administer, or we will contend for; being most willing to leave secret things to God, and to hope the best, where the contrary cannot appear unto us: only add hereto, if the issue be put upon the capacity or incapacity of the Infant, with relation to any condition so much insisted on, let any of our Antagonists show us how or wherein Infants under the Gospel & covenant of grace in Christ, have less capacity in respect thereof then Infants under the Law of Moses had, 
Rom. 4.  or that baptism is not the seal of the same righteousness of faith in Christ, whereof circumcision for the time was the seal.  
4 That which without any expressed exception to particulars Christ's commission holds forth to all nations, 
Matth. 28. 19 Mark 16. 16.  belongs to Infants as well as persons of years; for Infants are always a great part of all nations: but Christ's commission holds forth baptism to all nations without any expressed exception to particulars: therefore baptism belongs to Infants (of believing Parents) as well as to persons of years.  
5 No man may forbid water, that is, the outward administration, where God hath given the inward operation of his H. Spirit (which maxim the Apostle built on, 
Act. 10. 47. See Act. 10. 1, 14, 15, 20. Act. 11. 3, 15, 17.  in that then— difficult question, whether the Gentiles might be sealed into the covenant of grace.) But God hath given the inward operation of his H. Spirit to Infants. jer. 1. 5. Luk. 1. 15. 1 Cor. 7. 14 therefore no man may forbid water, or the outward administration for the baptism of Infants. The reason of the major is that all they who are partakers of the grace both signified & exhibited in baptism, have right to the sign and sacrament thereof, and therefore may not be barred from it; for that were to withstand God, Act. 11. 17. In reason where God hath bestowed the grace signified, man may not deny the signifying element; and in common right, the apparent heirs are unjustly denied the deeds and evidences whereby that right is assured upon them: for these are a part of their inheritance, and aught by right to follow the same: moreover 'tis impious to divide that which God hath joined, the sign from the thing signified; as they do, who allow children, grace, remission of sins and salvation by Christ, and yet deny them baptism into Christ; they will yield them the Jewels, but not the Cabinet, the Treasure, but not the Purse.  
6 All that are capable of the initiatory seal of future faith, aught to be baptised: but Infants are capable thereof, therefore they ought to be baptised. So under the law Infants were capable of circumcision, the seal of their future faith: & our Infants have no less capacity thereof then they had.  
7 All they to whom God's covenant of Grace extends, are to receive the initiatory seal thereof (for sealing of the covenant respectively, is a part thereof, Gen. 17. 10, 11. Mark. 16. 16.) but God's covenant of Grace in Christ extends to Infants of covenanted persons: therefore Infants ought to receive the initiatory seal of the covenant, which is baptism. The assumption is proved from Act. 2. 38, 39 Be baptised every one of you— for the remission of sins-for the promise is unto you, and to your children. What promise? that upon which the Covenant was sealed to Abraham and his seed, the faithful: and when, where, or how have Infants of Christians forfeited their right to the seal, who as such, cannot forfeit?  
8 If circumcision and baptism were for substance, both respective seals of the same covenant of God in Christ, than those sorts of men who were capable of the one, are capable of the other: but circumcision and baptism were for substance both respective seals of the same covenant of God in Christ, therefore those sorts of men (to wit, Infants as well as persons of years) who were capable of circumcision, are capable of baptism. The major may appear in that God never made any covenant of grace but only in Christ, and the same Gospel was preached to Abraham, and he believed in the same Christ, Gal. 3. 8. add hereto, there is the same efficient primary cause, to wit, God making a covenant with his, and appointing the respective seals thereof: the same necessity on the receivers part, original sin in Infants, who have therefore as much need of regeneration and admission into the covenant of God for remedy, as they had under the law, and there is the same power and efficacy of the holy Ghost still remaining; otherwise God's grace in the New Testament, and covenant in Christ exhibited, should be more restrained, and of less latitude, than it was in the Old, under that severe Schoolmaster the Law; and, which were impious to affirm, than Christ's coming into the world should be so much disvantageous to believers, as that the Gospel should take away the seal of God's covenant of grace from our children, which the Law allowed them under the severity thereof.  
No part or condition of the covenant by God appointed for remission of sins and salvation, may be withheld by man from those who have right to the covenant and promise of God, under severe punishment: but the initiatory Sacrament, Baptism, now is a part or condition of the covenant by God appointed for remission of sins and salvation, whereto Infants have right: therefore it may not be withheld from such Infants as are within the covenant, and have right thereto and to the promise of God, See Exod. 4. Luk. 3. 3. Act. 2. 38, 39 Tit. 3. 5. now the initiatory seal of the covenant was, and is a part or condition of the same, Gen. 17. 10, 11. Mark. 16. 16. Joh, 3. 5.  
10 All they whom God accounteth holy, have a capacity of baptism the seal thereof: but God accounteth children of believing parents holy, 1 Cor. 7. 14. Therefore children of believing parents have a capacity of baptism; 
See Andr. Riu. Cath. Or●hod. to 2. q. 3. tract. 3. p. 31, 38, 39  nor doth that ridiculous interpretation which Anabaptists have borrowed of the Jesuits concerning legitimacy, overthrew this argument.  
11 All those who being redeemed by Christ, have right to the kingdom of heaven, have right to the ordinary Port and Inlet into the same, that is baptism: but children of believers have right to the kingdom of heaven, Mark. 10. 14 Mat. 19 13. therefore children of believers have right to baptism. Christ expresseth the entrance or means to regeneration and the kingdom of heaven Joh. 3. 5. to wit, water of baptism, by which the H. Ghost doth ordinarily work thereto; and presently gives the reason— that which is born of the flesh is flesh: that, as such, cannot enter into the kingdom of God, 1 Cor. 15. 50. now Infants are from their natural birth, but flesh and blood, Ps. 51. 7. Eph. 2. 3. therefore if they must enter into the kingdom of God, they must be born again of water and the H. Ghost: it is true, that God can and doth regenerate many Infants without baptism by his H. Spirit, so that they dying without the Sacrament, are yet saved in an extraordinary way: but for us to deny them baptism, and to put their salvation upon extraordinary means, where God hath appointed and declared the ordinary, is as much as man can do to shut them from the kingdom of heaven; and so though their want of baptism shall not be their eternal loss whom God hath elected, yet is it their great sin who neglect or despise the ordinance of God, and thereby (except in case of repentance) they shall exclude themselves.  
12 Whatsoever Christ commanded Ministers to do, and which the Apostles in the ordinary office of Ministers did do, that is right and just to be done, and we ought to do: but Christ commanded Ministers to baptise all nations without exception of children; and that the Apostles did do (for above all contradiction they obeyed Christ therein) therefore it is right and just to baptise Infants, as being a great part of all nations, and we ought to do it.  
13 That which agreeth with the nature of the seal of the righteousness of faith and the institution of Christ, aught to be done: but Infant-baptism agreeth with these; therefore it ought to be done: it agreeth with the institution of Christ, who commanding to baptise all nations, well knew that there were many Infants therein, yet makes no exception of them, but gives them so high an eulogium, that we may know that the initiatory seal belongeth principally to them, as it did under the Law: what though God name not Infants to be baptised, in so many words and syllables? yet seeing he neither nameth men of years nor women, it must needs be that under these words all nations, he comprehended all those of which, nations, as their integrant parts, consist; which are men, women and children: it agreeth also with the nature of the seal, which is the initiatory Sacrament of regeneration, implantation into Christ, faith, mortification, putting off the old man, putting on Christ, remission of sins, deliverance from the wrath of God and curse of the Law; all which is as necessary for Infants that they may be saved, as for any others, and into these either for present or future they are baptised.  
14 God ever since his covenant made with Abraham, appointed Infants some seal of his covenant as well with them as their parents, whereof they were some ways capable, and whereby they might be externally known not only to God (that they are long before any man can seal them, 2 Tim. 2. 19 Tit. 1. 2. Rom. 8. 29. & 9 11.) but also of men (or otherwise he must have cast out Infants under the Gospel from right to the seal of his covenant which he gave them under the Law) to be within God's covenant; therefore God hath appointed baptism to Infants: add hereto, that whereas poor Infants need mercy for remission of original sin; they are not for present capable of the other ordinary means appointed persons of years, as hearing the Word, receiving the Lord's Supper, prayer, repentance, etc. they are passively capable of baptism, as under the law they were of circumcision; therefore seeing remission of sin is simply necessary; baptism, the ordinary means thereto, is necessary, if it may be had.  
15 Whatsoever Infants of believers are capable of, as interested in God's covenant, without the help of present understanding, that man ought not to bar them of: but such Infants as interested in God's covenant, are capable of baptism without the present help of understanding: therefore they ought not to be barred thereof by man. The major appeareth in Infant's circumcision on the eighth day; that was the seal of the same faith and covenant of God in Christ, 
Gen. 17. 10, 11. Mark. 16. 16. Joh. 3. 5.  and a part or condition of the same, as baptism now is, as hath been proved. The minor appears Gen. 17. 7. I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, etc. that is, with thy Infants also as well as with thee: and by virtue hereof Isaac at eight days old received the seal of the righteousness of faith without the help of present understanding: and there is the same reason of baptism in respect of God's promise, Act. 2. 39 and the alteration of the seal altereth not the covenant in substance, subject or end. I suppose all know that children of Christians without the help of present understanding, are now as capable of Baptism the more easy seal, as they were of Circumcision the more painful and bloody: And lest any should think that this Privilege of Infants-sealing, belonged only to Abraham's Carnal-seed the Jews, the Holy Ghost testifieth that they which are of the Faith, the same are the children of Abraham, Gal. 3. 7. and again, The Promise is to you, 
Acts 2 39  and to your children, and to all that are a far off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call: Now he hath called us Gentiles to the faith in Christ, who were once a far off: Therefore Infants of those who by Calling are interessed in God's Covenant, are capable of Baptism: Moreover, as hath been noted, as the worldly wise men (by the creatures, Rom. 1. 21.) knew God, 
Quem● potuerunt ill● nosse nec ha. bear, isti potuerunt habere antequam nosse. Aug. Ep. 57  but loved him not (by grace dwelling in them) neither glorified him as God. So these (Infants) may have him, before they can know him; that is, they may be regenerate by the holy Spirit before they have the use of understanding, that they may know the things which are given them of God; and certainly all Elect Infants, though dying young, are regenerate, (else could they not be saved) yet so young they can have no actual knowledge of their regeneration, or means thereunto belonging; and if they are saved, and have the inward Seal of God's Spirit, how injuriously are they barred from the external seal by man? 
Acts 2. 39  To conclude, Infants are interressed by God's promise, which dependeth not on any man's understanding, sanctity or excellency, but on the free grace of God, 
Rom. 5. 10.  who made this Covenant with us when we were all in the course of corrupted nature, enemies, without Christ, aliens, strangers from the Covenants of Promise, having no hope, and without God in the world, Ephes. 2. 12. Lastly, as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, and so sin is communicated to all mankind, yea, to those who have not yet the use of reason; for we see that Infants die as well as old men: So by one, Christ's Righteousness imputed, many are made righteous in Baptism the Laver of Regeneration, though they yet understand it not: So put they on Christ, though it be not yet given them to know the things which are given them of God. 
Oct. 2. 12.  See Argument 2.  
16. The command for baptising is for all that are to be saved: But among those are many Infants; therefore the command for baptising is for Infants also, 
Ma●th. 28. 19 Mark 16. 16.  or without exclusion of all Infants.  
17. That opinion which makes the Covenant or Privilege of the Gospel worse to Abraham's spiritual seed, than it was to his carnal, is false and erroneous, yea Antichristian: But to deny Believers Infants baptism, (the initiatory Seal of the Covenant, and the privilege thereof) makes this worse than that; Therefore it is false etc. The major is confirmed in that God avoweth the Gospel to be a better Covenant then that of the Law, Heb. 8. 6. The minor likewise, because under the Law, Infants had the privilege of the initiatory seal. The Gospel-Covenant holdeth forth an enlargement of the signs and subject of God's mercy: It was before only to the Jews generally, who had the Ordinances of Righteousness, as gideon's Fleece the dew, while all the floor (which then figured the Gentiles) was dry: But now Christ saith, 
Psal. 47. 20.  Go Teach all nations, baptising them— So far was it from diminishing, or contracting the grace of God by the coming of Christ like rain into the Fleece, that now he sent it to all Nations, who before gave it only to one. And the Covenant of God made with Abraham, was testified by an external Seal, to comfort Parents in assurance that God had care for, and a Covenant with their children also. Now they that take this away from children under the Gospel, make the Gospel-Covenant much worse, as being less testified than that under the Law. Add hereto, that the coming of Christ (which set an end to Legal ceremonies, and appointed Baptism) diminished not the grace of his Father in the Signs and Dispensations thereof, making it more dark, or less testified by a Seal towards those who are within the Covenant of Grace; but rather increased or communicated it more clearly, and therein it is a better Covenant, Hebr. 8. 6. not in respect of God the appointer thereof, he is one and the same for ever; not in respect of Christ the Mediator, he is the same under the Law and Gospel; but in respect of the exhibition of things promised and shadowed out in the Law, and clearer manifestation of God's grace and truth in Christ. Now they who deny Infants of believers the initiatory seal of God's Covenant, as much as in them lieth, diminish the grace of God; and make the Covenant seem worse by Christ's coming, in that they diminish the comfortable assurance of our children's implantation into Christ, and of his care of, and favour to them, if they may not so much as be marked with the external sign and seal thereof, which yet elect and reprobates, if of years, may by your leave, and do receive.  
18. That which is evil to be done, is forbidden in some express and known Law and Word of God: But Infant-baptism is forbidden in no express and known Law and word of God; therefore it is not evil, as our Antagonists would make the world believe.  
19 That whereof God will severely punish the contempt or neglect, we must not omit: But God will severely punish the contempt or neglect of his Covenant of grace and mercy, whereof Baptism is a part or condition, as well with Infants as persons of years; therefore we may not omit it. See Gen. 17. 14. Exod. 4. Mark 16. 16 Hebr. 10. 28, 29. and that being supposed (which hath hitherto been proved) that Infants of Church-priviledged Parents, aught to be baptised, the Minister who upon such fancies and unsufficient grounds as are alleged by our Antagonists, refuseth to baptise them (or the Parent who will not have them baptised) must needs be under a woeful condition; the Apostles argument being good from the dispensation of the Gospel committed to him to the necessary administration of the same, as in preaching the word, so in the seals thereto belonging, whereof he expressly saith, 1 Cor. 9 16. Woe is unto me, if I preach. not the Gospel: For though his principal and first office was to preach, as being appointed the Doctor of the Gentiles, first to be taught, and then respectively to be baptised, yet it is manifest that the Dispensation of Baptism, the seal of the Gospel, and Covenant of God in Christ, went along in charge with preaching of the same, and was committed to the Apostles, 
Matth. 28. 19, 20.  and all Ministers their Successors, and so woe will be to them if they baptise not (where Christ intended the seal of his Grace) as surely as if they preach not the Gospel.  
20. They are to be held as Heathens and Publicans, who refuse to hear and obey the Church of Christ: But such are Anabaptists; nor is it any excuse, but an aggravation of their sin to bespatter the Church with impious calumnies: It had been and ever was, as easy for all sorts of heretics in and since Christ and the Apostles time, and in the purest ages of the primitive Church, to have said for a pretended defence of their error and contumacy, you are not the true Church; but in spite of Satan and the powers of hell, we are through the mercy of God, a member of the true Church of Christ, & therefore their schism & contempt is the more condemnable.  
21. Those to whom the things signified belong, unto them belong also the signs and seals thereof, except in case of some apparent condition making an evident exception (as want of ability to examine themselves, barreth Infants from the holy Eucharist) But the thing signified by Baptism belongs to Infants, and there is no apparent condition making any evident exception to bar them from it; therefore Baptism belongeth to them. The things signified by Baptism, are, that we are thereby received into God's favour, for the blood of Christ shed for us, to bind us to a sincere obedience to faith, and endeavour to newness of life; Gods promise of grace and mercy in Christ, marking us for sheep of his pasture; our putting on Christ, regeneration, washing from our sins, justification & salvation by Christ; these things belong to all the elect, whereof Infants of Believers are a very considerable part: And these things are held forth in Baptism as things signified in the sign by God appointed to all receivers sacramentally, and to an external communion, of which lambs aswel assheep, Infants aswel as the aged are capable: Therefore Baptism belongeth to Infants of Christian Parents.  
22. To whom the Covenant in force runneth in the same tenor in the new Testament as in the old, to such persons the application of the Initiatory seal of the new Testament ought to be administered, 
N. Home● pag. 9  as well as was the Initiatory seal of the old: But the Covenant in force runs in the same tenor, etc. therefore the Initiatory seal of the Covenant ought now to be administered to such persons as the Initiatory seal of the Covenant was administered to in the old: The tenor of the Covenant was to Parents and their children upon condition that they should be sealed according to the promise, that God would be their God, who would observe the Laws and conditions thereof: the same is still for substance in force, though the seals are changed: So that as Infants were circumcised, so ought they now to be baptised: and except this be allowed to our Infants as well as to ourselves believing in Christ, we are not (as the Apostle affirms, Col. 2. 10.) Complete in him— In whom we are circumcised with the Circumcision made without hands— Buried with him in Baptism, etc. Nor are we and our children so sealed into our implantation into the death of Christ, that we may (in the ordinary way) thereby be assured, that as he put off the infirm affections of the natural body, so we put off the body of sin spiritually. See Rom. 6. 3, etc.  
23. Such persons as were typically baptised unto Moses, 
Dr. Faith child. bapt. justified, pag. 45. 46.  are capable of the real and true baptism under the Gospel of Christ: For in the main the argument holds from the type to the truth, though possibly not in every circumstance: But children as well as persons of years were baptised in the cloud, and in the red-sea unto Moses, 1 Cor. 10. 2. and their washing with rain from the cloud, prefigured our washing in Baptism, and by the Spirit; therefore children of covenanted persons are capable of the true and real Baptism under the Gospel of Christ.  
24. Where there is a command for a thing never remanded or countermanded, 
Hen Ainsworth ot the Anabapt. Gen. 17. 7, 9  there that thing is still in force: But there is a command for the signing of Infants of Believers with the sign of God's Covenant with their Parents and them, never yet remanded or countermanded; Therefore the signing of Believers children with the sign of God's Covenant, which is Baptism, is still in force.  
24. That, which dependeth not on any age, or act of man, but on the mere institution and gracious promise of God, as its ground, may not be denied by man to any comprehended under the general term of All Nations, in respect of any age, or defects thereof, as want of understanding, and the acts thereof in faith, repentance, etc. in Infants: But Baptism depended not on any age or act of man as its ground, but on the mere institution and gracious promise of God; therefore ●t ought not by anyman be denied infants, in respect of their present defect or want of understanding, or the acts ●hereof in faith, repentance, etc. they being comprehended in All Nations.  
The minor appears in S. Peter's answer to his hearers pricked in heart, Repent and be baptised every one of you for the remission of s●●●; For the Promise is unto you and unto your children, 
Gen 17. 7.  &c, He saith not, Be baptised, for ye have repent, ye are of age, and a good understanding; but, Be baptised, etc. for the Promise is to you and to your children; 
Deus ut personam non accipit, fie nec ●tatem, Cypri. ad Fid. Ep. 59. ●asting. de bapt. infant,  though they cannot yet actually believe, repent, understand, etc. yet they have Gods promise for the ground of their sealing, on whose grace and ordinance the whole power and virtue of the sacrament dependeth: But his grace and Ordinance depend not on any excellency, ability or act of man; therefore the Apostle fetched not the reason of his Exhortation from their age or repentance, but from the promise and mercy of God calling them who were far of.  
26. For conclusion, I take up this congeriem of arguments out of the learned Urs●●●s. That opinion is pernicious which robs poor Infants of their right, which obscureth the grace and mercy of God (who would that Infants of Believers should from the womb be reckoned members of his Church) which derogates from the grace offered in the new Covenant, making it less than that in the old; which weakeneth the comfort of the Church and faithful Parents; which denyeth Infants that seal which should differ them from the children of Jews and Pagans'; which contradicteth, the Apostles reason (Can may man forbid water, that these should not be baptiptized, which have received the holy Ghost as well as we?) which keepeth Infants (as much as man can) from Christ; he expressly saying, Safer little children to come unto me, which without a Covenant they cannot do spiritually, nor without the external seal sacramentally: Now such is the opinion of Anabaptists, denying Christian's Infants Baptism.   

CHAP. IU.  
Anabaptists Arguments concerning the necessity of Dipping over head and ears in Baptism, examined and answered.  
THe envious Philistims will still be casting earth into Isaac's wells of livings waters, 
Genes. 26. 15.  to stop them up: Satan envying man, these waters of life in the Laver of Regeneration, eftsoon casteth in scruples to obstruct and make void the holy ordinances of God to deluded souls, by causing them to renounce their Baptism (and Christ whom they sacramentally had put on therein) by taking on them another Baptism under a vain pretence, that they were not susceptive of Baptism in their infancy, 
A. R. vin. of child. bcp p 8.  nor lawfully baptised, neither at all truly, if happily they were not dipped under water; for they say, the institution of Christ requireth that the whole man be dipped all over in water: so that the Anabaptists now hold, that dipping the whole body into water is essential to baptism, 
Acts 15. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Epiphan. haeres. 40. n, 1. Archon. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ib. Epiphan. Chari. haeres. 39 n. &. Cyprian. EP. ●9.  & so necessary, that except they are so dipped, they are not duly and truly baptised according to the institution of Christ. Since the infancy of the Gospel, Satan hath not ceased to trouble the Church concerning baptism: Some of the Jews would have circumcision joined with baptism; the Archontici condemned baptism with a curse: the Novatians deferred if to the last, because they understood not the power of this ordinance of God to cleanse the whole life, but thought that there was no mercy for him who sinned after baptism: Liberius the Monk, as also Fidus, would have children's Baptism tied to the eighth day; Anabaptists not only deny believers children Baptism, as the Pelagians and Donatists did of old; but affirm, That dipping the whole body under water is so necessary, that without it, none are truly baptised (as hath been said). So the subtle enemy still assaileth Baptism in one part or another, that we may not unaptly apply that to him. & his factors, which Tertullian once said concerning the most impious Persecutor Nero, 
Qui enim scitillum, intelligere potest, non nissigrande aliquod bonum à Nerone damnatum. Tertul. Apol. c 15.  He that knows him well, may understand, that nothing but some great (or singular) Nero● And indeed we ought more highly to esteem God's favour in sealing us into his Covenant of grace, and more seriously and carefully endeavour to answer thereto in newness and sanctity of living, by how much more the enemy rageth against it. The Protestant Church holdeth, that the word and the element make the Sacrament; and that neither sprinkling is simply necessary, nor washing or dipping unlawful; but that according to the convenience of times, places and persons, either sprinkling, washing or dipping in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, is the true form of Baptism; and that, caeteris paribus, either of these three applications of the water have the same effect, and may as convenience serves, indifferently be used, being fit to signify the application of the benefit of Christ's blood for the remission of sin, and cleansing therefrom. But our Antagonists say;  
We are buried with Christ by baptism into his death, 
Object. 1.  that like as Christ was raised up from the dead, even so we also should walk in newness of life, Rom. 6. 4. But Christ in his burial was covered, that he might thence rise out of the earth; therefore in Baptism we must be covered, and as it were buried. under water, that we may rise again as Christ did. 
We answer, 
Scire autem? oporte●, quod non undiqueque exempla ad omne propos●ium aptantur rebus ad quas assu●●nu● sed ut plurimum in magis propriis ac principalioribus partibus. Euthym. in Matth 22. Non tportet parabolss ad verbum interpretari. ib. in Matth. 24. post Chrysostom. Parabolica it● oractanda sunt quasi significantia solum ea qual necessaria sunt. Euthym, in Matth. 24.  1. Similitudes run not on four feet; types, signs and similitudes are not to be extended beyond the scope and meaning of the Speaker (as might be showed in almost innumerable instances) lest not only absurdities, but horrid blasphemies should be thence inferred. The Ark in the Deluge was a type of Baptism, 1 Pet. 3 20, 21. what, must the type and truth agree in all things? must all the world be drowned, and only eight persons saved? I doubt you would hardly agree among yourselves, which should be the eight. The red-sea and cloud, figured baptism, 1 Cor. 10. 1, etc. what, would you have your disciples baptised with the sprie of two neighbouring seas, and a cloud of fresh water raining on their heads? Jonah's being in the Whale's belly, was a type of Christ's burial and resurrection; you would not have your disciples in their conformity, be three days under water. These instances may show the vanity of stretching types and signs to every fancy of Hectic brains; and now deal ingenuously; what reason or warrant have you to wrest this similitude to what you please? in those similes which are most apt, there may be many disconveniences found: Or what commission can you dream of, that gives you authority to draw this alleged. Scripture beyond the Apostles scope and purpose, rather to that which seems to favour your fancy and practise of immersion, then to another sense?  
2. Those expressions, Rom. 6. 4. are merely figurative, and therefore do not at all bind us to any external, or literal sense or observance in the manner of baptising; & if the similitude: must fully hold, some might possibly reason thus; as Christ was first dead and buried, and rose again the third day, so we must first be dead and buried, and then be baptised, and rise with Christ a third time (Martion, that old pernicious heretic, held, that one might be three times baptised) or they might infer that we must not rise up out of the water into which we are dipped, until the third day: but how absurd such inferences are, none can be ignorant.  
3. The alleged scripture concludes not the manner of our baptism, but the effects thereof; not how the water should be applied, or in what manner we should be baptised, whether by sprinkling, washing or dipping; but how we ought to live who are baptised; that sin should henceforth have no more power over us, then if we were dead; that we should so live to righteousness, and bringing forth fruits thereof, as being implanted into Christ, and so no more living our own life, but the holy life of Christ.  
4. He saith not, We are buried with Christ in water, or just as Christ was buried in his baptism; but, into the likeness of his death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead, so we should (not be raised out of the water, but) walk in newness of life: Here is the main substance of the similitude; 'tis not in any circumstance. Now I would said know whether a man may not walk in newness of life, being baptised with sprinkling, as well as if he had been doused.  
5. The argument here drawn to prove necessity of immersion is a fallicia accident is; a reasoning from the the substance to the accident. Suppose thus, We must be baptised into the similitude of Christ's death: But he was covered and rose again; ergo, We must be covered with water that we may be raised again, etc. Non sequitur: his being covered in the rocky vault, was but a circumstance, as was his lying covered to the third day: therefore it can be no more here concluded, that we must be like Christ in being covered with water in baptism, then that we must lie under water three days and nights in our baptism, because he lay so long in his grave; for why should one circumstance or accident be concluded, rather than another?  
6. If the similitude must be so strictly urged, it will be rather for us. Christ was not thrown down, prone, with his face downward (as they use to dive their disciples) but honourably embalmed, and decently laid in a new Sepulchre; and we use solemnly to bury our dead with their faces upward, & sprinkle dust and earth upon them; and in such decent posture we baptise Infants, by putting our sprinkling water on them, or by dipping them.  
7. 
* Corpus Christi naturale fuit verè sepultum; an putandum est nostra corpora eodom modo sepeliri in administratine baptismi? non id vult Apostolus; sed us recte. Chrys. observavit in 6. ad Rome quod in Christo factum est per naturam, id innobis fieri intelligit per analogiam & propartionem: corpus igitur peccati sepelitur quando ejus vis enervatur— obruitur, & quasi eadaver terra oblatum, non possit amp●ius m●vere, & quoquo velit hominom impel. lere, etc. Daun. in Col. 2. 12.  Christ's natural body was truly dead & buried, we must therefore understand that which must be done in us by analogy and proportion, and not wrest the Apostles words to a literal sense: The body of sin is then buried, when the power thereof is enervated and weakened, and as it were a dead carcase, is so over whelmed and buried, that it can no more move and force a man whither it would, and was wont: and this is said to be done in Baptism in a twofold respect, 1. In respect of Christ, into whom when we are implanted by baptism, all the benefits of his death are freely given and sealed to us; so that our sins are buried in his grave, who bore our sins in his own body, 1 Pet. ●●. 24 so in his burial our sins were covered, no more to appear in judgement against us, or to be imputed to us. 2. In respect of our mortification, sacramentally accomplished in our baptism, and by the Spirit of God by certain degrees in all our life long; though bodily death, being a privation of life, hath no degrees: he that is dead dyeth no more; yet in our spiritual death to sin, there are degrees, & we die daily, as the power of sin is more and more broken in us.   
That baptism which is not agreeable to Christ's or John's baptism, 
Object. 2.  is not instituted by Christ (& therefore man's invention, and will-worship) But washing or sprinkling with water agreeth not with the baptism of Christ or John (for they baptised and were baptised in Jordan; and the Eunuch was baptised in the brook, Acts 8. 38.) therefore baptising with sprinkling, or only washing, is not instituted by Christ. 
We answer, 1. This is a fallacious arguing, the term (agreeable) being bo●o●ymical: 'tis doubtful in the assumption, whether he mean agreeable in substance, or in circumstance: that which is not agreeable in substance with the baptism of Christ and John Baptist, is not instituted by Christ; but this holds not in point of circumstance; for then there could be no lawful baptism but in Jordan, or some other water of Palestine.  
2. It follows not that John B. dived Christ or any other into water; or Philip the Eunuch, because John baptised in Jordan (where were some sandy places) because we read, they went down into the water; for so they may do, who only wet their feet, or go up to their knees or ankles: & we must consider, that in the infancy of the Gospel, they had not public Oratories and Fonts to accommodate them baptising, as in a settled state of the Church we have seen; and therefore they baptised where they could have convenience of water, which in that dry region was not every where to be had; as appeareth in that reason of● John's 
John 3. 21.  baptising in AEnon near Salim, given by the Evangelist— becauso there was much water there.  
3. It is not probable that Christ was dipped clothes and all in Jordan, and so went immediately wringing-wet into the wilderness: see Mark 1. 1, 2, 10. nor that he was stripped naked with such a confused multitude of men and women as kam to John's baptism: see Luke 3. 21. Matth. 21. 31, 32. Matth 3. 5, 6.  
4. It is but a weak Fallacy to dispute à particulari, ad generale; thus, some went into the river to be baptised; therefore all that are to be baptised aught so to do: for in things circumstantial, and without some binding Precept to impose them as duties, a particular example can beget no general rule for our due and necessary imitation.  
5. If it could be proved (which all our Antagonists can never do) that Christ and those whom John baptised, were ducked into the water when they were baptised, yet it doth no more follow thence, that all must everywhere, and at all seasons be so baptised, then that the Lords Supper may be administered with none but unleavened bread, in an upper room after Supper, to twelve men only, no women; because Christ so administered it; or that we must anoint the sick with oil, or salute with an holy kiss, because these things were in use in those Regions; nay, but matters circumstantial are ever liable to the test of accommodation and customs of times and places, and persons: dipping might be convenient in those hot Regions, and at Easter and Pentecost, to which their baptising 
Baptisma olim non nisi in Pascha & Pentecoste collatum, etc. vid Concil. Constantinop. 2 c. 1. n. 2. Greg. Nazianz. ora. 40 Tertul de bapt. c. 19, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, fundo, of. fundo, interp. Suid. reddit fundo, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fundo, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉- ●ibamina manibus fundo. Budaus. Syr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●quem effudit ju● er nos. Tran el. Beza, etc. à verbo Siro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 effudit. Shindler, in Rom. 3. 15. Matth 9 17. & 13. 35.  was limited of old, which in these Northern climates, and in the dead of winter, were near deathful to tender bodies.  
6. Christ's baptism is washing, Ephes. 5 25, 26. and washing is as well by sprinkling, or pouring on of water, as by dipping into water: hence the Apostle speaking of the washing of Regeneration, presently saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which he hath poured out on us; and the Scripture calleth the divers sprinklings mentioned, Heb. 9 13, 19, 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, baptisms, v. 10. As washings or sprinklings are also called, Mark 7. 4. but hereof we shall see more anon; for the present only note, that the Holy Ghost, the surest Interpreter of Scripture, interpreteth Baptising by sprinkling or washing, so that there is no necessity (as our Antagonists would said have it) of dipping or dousing the whole body under water.   
Dipping (say they) is baptising, 
Object. 3.  and baptising dipping: Christ therefore who instituted Baptism, therein appointed that the whole man should be dipped in Baptism. 
We answer: 1. If this bubble had any weight or solidity, it were easily retorted; washing or sprinkling is baptising (in Gospel-sense) Christ therefore who instituted Baptism, therein appointed men to be washed or sprinkled with water.  
2. Prove that Christ appointed the whole man should be dipped all over in water, by some other medium if you can: by this you cannot; true it is, that all dipping all over in water is baptising, but not convertibly; for all baptising is not dipping: for it is proved by the fore-alledged Scriptures, that washing by pouring on, or sprinkling water, is also a kind of baptising: If you should say, every man is a living creature, that is true, but not convertible, therefore every living creature is a man: it follows not; because there are more species of living creatures then one; all dipping is baptising; therefore all baptising is dipping, follows not, because there are more sorts of baptizings then one by dipping. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifieth to dip, but not always: The Apostles according to Christ's promise, were baptised with fire; 
Matth. 3. ●1. Acts 2. 3.  they were not (after the foolish Jacobites opinion) dipped into fire, the cloven tongues sat upon each of them. The Pharisees among many other traditions, used the baptism of beds. Mark 7. 4. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  You will not understand that to have been dipping their beds into water (that would quickly, have rotten and made them useless and unwholesome) but of some light sprinkling with water: So when they came from the market, they eat not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— except they be baptised: You will not understand, except they be dipped over head and ears in the Water; but, except they washed as our translation gives it, after the Syriac; neither had they in that dry Climate, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nisi abluant ●● Tremel.  convenience and store of waters every where to dive into. They had commonly their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, water-pots, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, John 2. 6. out of which they drew a little, for lustrations or sprinklings, Moreover, the Israelites, 1 Cor. 10. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, were baptised in the cloud— not dipped into it, but be sprinkled with the distilling drops thereof: for the prepositoin in there used, in such expressions, signifieth not in, but with; as, He shall baptise you in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with (not in) the holy Ghost and fire, Matth 3. 11. So Rev. 19 11. The rest were slain, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with (not in) the sword, it is an usual Hebraism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the sword; that is, with the sword, Exod. 6. 6. 
● In Principio nominum notat casum ablati, v●m, quo-instrumentum, causa, modus agendi, etc. significatur. vide si vacat. Shindl. Penteg. See the like 1. 17. 4●. Gen. 27. 40. & 32 10. & 48. 22. Exod. 17. 13. Numb. 21: 24, etc. Tertul. de corona milit●  I will redeem you, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in braehio extenso. So Deut. ●. 15. The Lord thy God brought thee out thence. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in, that is, by a mighty hand, and a stretched out arm. Again, the sons of Zebede● were to be baptised with the baptism of blood, Mark 10. 39 that is, in Tertullia's phrase, Russari suo sanguine, beseneared, or wet with drops of their own blood; not dipped into blood. The same use of ●●, derived from the Hebrew●, we often find in the new Testament, Rom. 10. 9 1 Cor. 4. 21. 1 Per. 1. ●1. Rev. 2. 16. & 12. 5. & 19 15.  
3. It is granted, that Christ and many others were baptised in Jordan, and that Philip did go down into the water to baptise the Eunuch, and that such baptisms in hot Climates have, and may lawfully be used; yet no scripture-proof at all appears, that Christ in his own person was dived under water, or the Eunuch, or any of those whom John or any of the Apostles baptised; neither do we at all deny immersion to be lawful; but we deny it to be so necessary, as to the exclusion of washing or sprinkling, as if they were not as effectually used; We deny that dipping in rivers is so necessary to baptism, as that none ought to be accounted baptised, but those who are dipped after such a manner: And we say, that where we have other conveniencies in the settled Churches, that practice appeareth merely Schismatical, affected and unnecessary.   
Baptism being a sign, must answer to the thing signified; as. The washing of the whole soul in the blood of Christ. 2. That interest which the Saints have in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, is not partial, but total; so therefore ought the baptising of the body to be. 
We answer: 1. It must still be remembered, that this sacrament may be rightly and effectually administered by any of the three ways, 
Immersio, vel aspersio trina an una, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eseputamus, pro loco, tempore, & ●clefi● consuetudine. An. Fayi. Enchivid, Theol. de Sacr. bapt. Vrsin. Cateth. de bapt. In una fide nihil efficit sanctae ecclesi● consuetudo diversa. Greg, Ep. 41. sordes— & maculas mentis lavare non potest, nisi qui ejusdem fabricator est mentis. Opratus. l 5. Dicimur in baptisms sepulti cum Christo, resurrexisse etiam in Christo vel per Christum, ne haec supernaturalia effecta, vel externo elemento, vel nostris propriis viribus tribuainus. Christi it ●que mors, sepultura, resurrectio causa est mortificationis & vivificaticnis nostrae spiritualis, etc. Davenant. q. sup. Nomen est qued sanctisicat non opus, Optatus. q. sup.  dipping, washing or sprinkling, and we approve of dipping, where custom and convenience require it, so far, as that it excludes not the other: For a divers custom of several Churches, makes no difference, where they all hold one faith in the main.  
2. It is not in the quaintity of the Element, but the institution of Christ, the virtue of his death and passion, and the powerful working of his holy Spirit, which gives the fruit and effect of baptism; therefore John 3. 5. the Spirit is mentioned with water, because the power of regenerating is not of the water, but of God's Spirit and Ordinance effectually working by the water of baptism: And here we may note, that Infants are capable of this operation, as hath been proved; and Christ in his institution of baptism, prescribed not (so far as can appear in Scripture) how much water must be used herein, not how deep it must be (as there is no quantum of the elements prescribed in the Eucharist) neither is there in all the new Testament, either one precept for, or example of plunging or dousing the party to be baptised over head and ears under water.  
3. In Circumcision, the whole body was not cut, but only the foreskin of the flesh, whereby the whole person, body and soul was sealed and admitted into God's Covenant; and so is it proportionably in baptism, the seal of God's present Covenant: In common use we know the seal of a writing obligatory is not set all over the deed, but to some one part, by which the whole is confirmed; and as in Livery and Seisin a little turf of grass, with a twig or small bough delivered to the Purchaser, investeth him in the whole state of the demeasn: So here, 'tis the seal and subscription of a just Deed which passeth the estate, not the quantity of the wax, or largeness of the parchment, nor greatness of the Character, whether Text-hand, Chancery, Court-hand, Secretary; all these things are circumstantial, and no more: and so is it in the matter of much or little water in baptism, the essence whereof is applying water to the body of the baptised in the name of the Father, 
Totum corpus mergi non est niece ●e. A. Fay●q. sup. est enim uni●ss Partis ablutio ejusdem naturae cum totius ablutione. Dan. Chamier. To. 4. lib. 5. c. 2. de Baptismo; uno corporis membro aqua baptismi loc● totius hominis, reg●ne ratio à spiritu sancto perficitur. Jo. Gerhard. de s. Bapt. c. 5. N. 99  of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. There is therefore no simple necessity of dipping the whole body under water; it is sufficient if the face, (which is as it were the representative, or epitome of man, in which are united all the senses) be dipped, washed, or sprinkled.  
4. In baptism lawfully administered by washing. sprinkling or dipping, the elect have the same interest in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, as if they were baptised in the deepest channel of Jordan, or any other water: Faith, which instrumentally gives them interest in Christ, being no effect of deep waters, but of those Rivers of living waters whereof Christ spoke, John 7. 38, 39 to wit, the Holy Ghost.  
5 Sprinkling doth also aptly signify our sprinkling with the blood of Christ in baptism, cleansing us from our sins, and sealing our election, 1 John 1. 7. 1 Pet. 1. 2. and pousing water, signifieth the effusion of the Spirit upon us, Tit. 3. 5. and those sprinklings of the blood of sacrifices, signified the very same.   
Christ being baptised, is said to have come up out of the water, Matth. 3. 16. therefore he was in it: And the Eunuch went down into the Water with Philip; in neither appears any sprinkling or washing, but rather dipping. 
We answer: 1. It appears that Christ and the Eunuch were baptised: it appears not that either they, or any other whom John B. or any of Christ's Disciples baptised, were dipped all under water (as hath been said) any more than that they were washed or sprinkled with water. The word Baptizing●n ●n the original signifying sprinkling, washing or dipping; ●herefore we take it to be indifferent which of the three ways baptism be administered, respect being had to convenience of times, places and persons.  
2. The Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the cited places, rendered Out of, signifieth properly From; as, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Matth. 3, 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 respondet Latinis praepesionibus, A, Ap, E, etc. Fra●iger de praecip. Graer. dict. idiem l. 9 sect. 1. n. 11. Ezek 37. 3, 4. Josh. 3. 15. & 13. 9, 16. ● Chron. 12. 5.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, From (not from under) the ships; and so Christ might come from the water, though he were never dived under it, or though he had gone only to the depth of the first or second measure of the Sanctuary waters, to the ankles, or to the knees.  
3. Philip and the Eunuch are said to have gone down into the water, Act. 8. 38. for it was a descent to them; the waters (though shallow, or possibly not within very low or hollow banks, as Jordan and all great waters of Rivers usually run) yet always running lower than the Superficies of the earth near the sources and channels thereof.  
4. The words Acts 8. 38. are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, And both of them descended, etc. so the word also signifieth, to descend, or to alight; as, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to alight from (not to come from under) an horse: or to descend, or lot down ones self; or to come down from some higher place; as, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith Budaeus, 
Aristophan. Batrac. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  after Suidas,) or to go down to some even place, as to invest an enemy, to wrestle, fight, or encounter; also to go from one place to another; as Acts 17. 15. it is said— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jacob descended, or went into Egypt, Acts 10. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— Get thee down and go with them. So Acts 14. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they went down unto Attalia; for so they uswally expressed going from one place to another, as the Hebrews by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So far is that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 8. 38. they Went down both to, or into the water, from enforcing the conclusion aimed at (therefore the Eunuch baptised was dived under water) that it makes nothing for it, more than that Jacob going down into Egypt, was therefore ducked in Nilus, or Peter in the waters of Caesarea, or Paul and Barnabas in some Attalian waters; because these were said in the very same word, to go down to these places. all which being frivolous and vain, your assertion must be left unconcluded, for any thing to the contrary in these cited Texts appearing. Add hereto, that here is nothing said of the Eunuch, as going down into the water, more than of Philip (for they both went down, etc.) now I suppose you will not affirm, that Philip, as, and then when he baptised the Eunuch, in that administration, stood all under water with the Eunuch; or that John B. in the like action in Jordan, was ever doused over head and ears for company: And how then can it hence appear, that the baptised were more dived than the baptizers? Behold upon what unsound grounds our Antagonists build their pretended necessity of ducking their disciples in Rivers or deep waters.    

CHAP. V.  
Protestants arguments against the supposed necessity of dipping, rather than sprinkling or washing with water in Baptism.  
THat which the word used by Christ (enjoining the duty of Baptism) doth indifferently signify, and commonly import (there being neither express example nor precept to restrain it precisely to either) that is lawfully and warrantably to be done in baptising: But the word used by Christ enjoining the duty of Baptism (or Baptising) doth indifferently and commonly signify dipping, washing or sprinkling; and there is no express example or precept (in Scripture) to restrain it precisely to either; Therefore in Baptising we may lawfully and warrantably (pro more loci, temporis & statu personarum) either dip, wash, or sprinkle in water (In the name of the Father, and the Son, and of the Holy Ghost) The major is out of controversy. The minor thus confirmed: The Word used by Christ, Matthew 28. 19, is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signifieth indifferently, to was, sprinkle, or dip; and as the learned Mr. Leigh well noteth, it is taken largely for any kinds of Washing, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,- à verb● differt quod profundum etere, & subtermergere significat. Mr. Leigh. Crit Sacr. primum parva 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Lavant aquá calidá. Aristophan.  Rinsing or Cleansing, even when there is no dipping at all. So AEmilius Portus gives it by mergo, immergo, tingo, intingo, madefacio, lavo, abluo, etc. Suidas interpreteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, lavant. The same word signifieth washing or sprinkling in many places of Scripture, and from necessary consequences.  

1. From the types of that which was signified in the old Testament, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Heb. 9 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perfundo, aspergo, irroro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Aristophan. aspergo paspebras. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, idem, inde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aspersio. Lactan, l. 4. c. 15 (vocat baptismum) purifici rorisaspersienem  which the holy Ghost (as hath been noted) calleth Baptisms or Washings: to wit, by Sprinklings: for how were they performed? see Numb. 19 2●. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 70. gives it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the water of Separation hath not been Sprinkled upon him: so is it often named there: and Levi●. 4. 17. The Priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and Sprinkle it Seven times, etc. 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So Leu. 14. 16. and Leu. 16. 14, 15. he shall take the blood of the bullock. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and shall sprinkle it with his finger. So Numb. 8. 7. Thus shalt thou do unto them to cleanse them, Sprinkle water of purifying upon them. So Numb. 19 18, 19 A clean person shall take hyssop and dip it into the water, and Sprinkle it upon the Tent— and upon the persons— so Exod. 24. 8. Moses took the blood, and Sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the Blood of the Covenant, which the Lord hath made with you: 
1 John 1. 7.  which signified the blood of Christ to cleanse them from sin, as the water of Baptism now doth: And these very Sprinklings the holy Ghost calleth Baptisms, Heb. 9 10. 13, 2c. where the mystery is clearly unfolded.  
2. From the truth thereby signified: So Ezek. 36. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I will sprinkle you with clean water, (or— clean water upon you) and ye shall be clean: how? The Apostle telleth us, 1 Pet. 1, 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, unto obedience (that is, by the Spirit of Sanctification) and Sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ; as, Heb. 10. 22. Let us draw near with a true heart, in full assurance of faith, having our hearts Sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water; that is the water mentioned by Ezekiel, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the purifying water of baptism; and Heb. 12. 24. We are come to Jesus the Mediator of the new Covenant, and to the blood of Sprinkling— that is, the application of the blood and merit of Christ in Baptism, for the remission of our sins.  
3. From necessary consequences, from the common use of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Scriptures, where they cannot reasonably be interpreted by dipping, but by washing or sprinkling; 
Baptismum ●ui sit per sanguinem Euthyn. in Mark 20. 23.  as Matth. 26. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. he did not dip his whole fist into the dish, but only wet his fingers therein: So Matth. 20. 23. Christ mentioneth his baptism, which all understand of his bloodshedding, not dipping therein but besprinkling therewith. So Luke 11. 38. when the Pharisee invited Christ to dinner, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mark 7. 2  he wondered, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉- that he had not first washed before dinner; it cannot there reasonably be interpreted, that he had not first been dipped over head and ears in water. So 1 Cor. 10. 2. They were all baptised unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea: No reasonable man can think that all Israel, 
Lotiones lectorum. Ar. M●ntan. Beza, c. Syr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & lectorum. Tremel. (●a●d & Syr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lectus. ut. Ma●c. 2. 4. (ab Hab. Mat●c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) 2. 6. interdum thalamus nupti alis. Hebr. 13. 4 Luc. 11. 7 & 17 34, Act. 9 33. 2  with their wives and children were dowsed into the sea (nay, but they passed through dry● foot) nor were they dived into the cloud, but only as those who were rinsed or wetted under a rainy cloud by the drops thereof distilling on them. So Mark 7. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the letter, Except they baptize●, or be baptised: he meaneth not by dipping the whole into the water; but as it is clearly manifested by the Holy Ghost (the best interpreter of himself) a little before, they e'er not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, with common hands; that is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unwashen: and in the same place (as hath hath noted) we read also, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to the letter Baptisms of beds; which was not by dipping into, but (though understood of tables, which they commonly made of Couch-beds set together) by sprinkling them with a little wate●, which manner of purification they too superstitiously and commonly used.   

As for the second clause of our minor proposition, we appeal to Scriptures, whether there be any express example or precept restraining baptism only to dipping over head and ears.  
2 In the Lord's Supper the efficacy of the Sacrament is not in the quantity of the element: a little bread, therein, is as good and effectual as a whole loaf: so here● it is not (as hath been said) in the quantity of the element, but in the ordinance of God, and operation of his Spirit: Now herein Christ never gave any precept concerning the quantum: the Word and the Element make the Sacrament; and a few drops sprinkled, are as truly water as all Jordan.  
3. If Baptism in the type thereof were administered by God by sprinkling, than it is lawfully and effectually so to be administered by man in the truth (for in the main Analogy the truth must answer the type) But Baptism in the type was administered by sprinkling (infants as well as persons of years) for all Israel were baptised under the Cloud, 1 Cor. 10. 2. Therefore Baptism may lawfully and effectually be administered by sprinkling of water.  
4. That administration of Baptism whereby Christ cleanseth his Church, is lawful and effectual. But Christ cleanseth his Church with the washing of water through the word, Ephes. 5. 26. 
Acts 2. Videntur tria millia uno die à paucis Apostostalis non potuisse baptizari si singuli inersi fu●●sent: nec vero, carceraris intra carcerem fuisse ad manum tantum aequae quantum mergendo opus erat. Dan. Chamier. de bapt. l. 15. c. 2.  Therefore that administration of Baptism which is by washing with water (according to his precept, Matth. 28. 19) is lawful and effectual.  
5. The Gaoler, Acts 16. 33. was baptised about midnight, and it is improbable that he had any such store and convenience of water in his house, as to dip himself and family, or that they went out to some river at such a season; neither was it probable that three thousand added to the Church in one day, durs●in those times when Christians were so eagerly persecuted, go publicly with the Apostles to the pool of Bethesda, Siloam, or the brook Cedron, or any like place to be doused: more probably they were baptised by washing or sprinkling with water, as they had private accommodation thereto: nor could so many in one day have been baptised by a few Apostles, if all had been baptised by dipping.  
6. If immersion were simply necessary, and of the Essence of Baptism, than it might not be dispensed withal in case some sick Convert should desire it before his death for the comfort and peace of his afflicted conscience, which were extreme uncharitableness, which belongs not to any Ordinance of God. Therefore it cannot be simply necessary.  
7 That which can neither be proved by example of Christ, John Baptist, or any of the Apostles baptising, nor by any precept of Christ concerning the same, is not essential or simply necessary to baptism: but dipping or dowsing in baptism, can neither be proved by example, etc. or any precept of Christ concerning the same: therefore diping or dowsing is not essential, or simply necessary to baptism: and indeed were there to be found in Scripture any example hereof, without a precept to lay the same universally upon the Ordinance, it were not binding, as hath been proved from Christ's administering the communion with unleavened bread, after supper in an upper room to twelve men only and no women. So that if that which you can never prove, should be granted you, that John Baptist and Christ's disciples, did then and there baptise by dipping; yet it would not follow that we ought to baptise in the like and no other manner. In the infancy of the Church they had not Baptisteries or Churches as we have; there was a kind of necessity for them as they met with occasions, to make use of waters as they could find them in rivers or sources; wherein it cannot be proved that they dipped: nor could it conclude our Antagonists pretended necessity, if it were supposed.  
8 Whatsoever was or is essential to baptism, or simply necessary thereto, is mentioned in some clear example or express precent of Christ: But dipping the whole body in baptism is neither mentioned in any clear example, nor any express precept of Christ: therefore it is not essential or simply necessary to baptism. Christ omitted nothing necessary, 
2 Tim 3. 16. etc.  and the holy Scriptures are able to make men wise to salvation. And let our Antagonists now seriously consider what they do, when they rebaptize upon that fancy, that washing or sprinkling with water (in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost) is not true baptism.    

CHAP. VI  
Anabaptists Arguments for their dangerous practice of Rebaptising examined and answered.  
THE malicious Serpent (ever attempting to poison or trouble these sanctuary-waters, obstructing, or hindering their effect, lest they should heal sin-wounded souls) sometimes moved Pelagius, Donatus, and others, reviving their errors, to deny the most innocent children, of believers baptism; sometimes he teacheth them to except against the manner of baptising, 
De Eunomio dicit Epiphanius, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ano●, haeres. 75. N. 6.— Auxentius solvit baptismum Christi— curigit●r rebaptizand●s Auxentius fideles populos putat baptize●os in nomine Trinitatis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ambros. l. 5. cp. 32: fine, orat. in Auxent.  as if the virtue of the Sacrament depended on the quantity of the element, and not solely on the Ordinance and power of God working thereon: sometimes he causeth deluded people to annul their baptism, and in effect, to renounce their faith, and Christ, whom they had sacramentally put on in baptism, by receiving a second, third, or iterated baptism: we read that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 baptised every day, supposing that their former baptisms were made void by any sin after committed: on which fancy, possibly the Novatians 
Novatianus— quos iterati baptismatis labe inquinevit. Ambros. de paenit. l. 1. c. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. haeres. 42. ●o. 3. l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mr Tombs exercite about Infant-baptism.  thought that baptism ought to be deferred to the end of their lives. Auxentius the Arrian taught that baptism ought ro be iterated: the Marcionites baptised their disciples three times: The Anabaptists rebaptize baptised Infants coming to age, and affirm that the assuming of baptism in ripe years, by those who were washed in Infancy, is not a renouncing baptism— but a firmer avouching thereof according to Christ's mind; errors are fruitful; one absurdity granted, many will readily follow: they think, first that Infants having no present actual faith and repentance, not present use of reason to understand the Gospel preached, are not as such to be baptised; but, until they ●ome to years to be taught and to make profession of their faith and repentance, to be kept from baptism; and that so Infant-baptism is void, and to be esteemed no baptism.  
Secondly, they dream that those who are not dived under water, are not baptised, and therefore they rebaptize them who were baptised in Infancy; though that ground may often fail them, because some have been baptised by immersion. Now that which hath been said on our part is enough to satisfy those in those things, 
●●●●● potius qu●m perducte● quispiam. Plaut. ●●●stel.  who are not wilfully bend with Simo in the Comedian, rather to err then to be directed by any. Therefore to avoid repetitions, let the issue be, if Infant-baptism, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost, either by washing, sprinkling with, or dipping into water, be indeed a complete and warrantable baptism according to the institution of Christ; then Anabaptists rebaptising, do impiously seduce and teach simple people to renounce that baptism by which they had, at least sacramentally, put on Christ, and thereby were readmitted into that Church out of which can be no salvation. And let the prudent Reader judge, whom I herein refer to an impartial and serious consideration of that which hath been said: which being proved, the Anabaptists whole fabric of dowsing and rebaptising falleth heavily on their Dippers heads.  
The Church of Christ holds, 
●●●si esset di●●●●●, diceret qui semel benè l●tus fuerit: sed ●m non addidit verbum ben● in●icat quia quic quid in Trinitate factum fuerit, benè est, etc. Optatus l.s. See Epiph. haeres. 65. N. 7. ib. haeres. 62. l. 2. N. ●. ib. haeres. 42. N. 2. ib. haeres. 69.  that Infants of enchurched Parents, or others of yea●s converting to the faith, being once sprinkled, washed, or dipped, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost, according to Christ's institution, ought not on any pretence to be rebaptised. I say thus baptised according to the ordinance of Christ, because the Samosatenians, Sabellians, Marcionites, Arrians, or the like, who any ways opposed the holy Trinity, or denied any persons thereof, did not baptise according to the prescript of Christ; and therefore in case any of their disciples converted, the true Church baptised them; because the former pretended baptism was not according to the Ordinance of Christ (and so no true baptism) it being the peculiar prerogative of Christ to appoint the seals of his own Covenant of free Grace and mercy with man.  
But the Anabaptists after their manner, object: 
Obj. I.   
We are regenerate, not only by Baptism, but also by the Word, Ephes. 5. 26. 1 Pet. 1. 23. but the Word is often repeated, and therefore so may baptism. 
We answer, 1 The word mentioned, Eph. 5. 26. is that, which coming to the element, makes the Sacrament, as Chrysostom well interpreteth, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. hom. 2. in Eph. 5.  by the Word. What Word? (saith he) why, this, In the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the holy Ghost: that Word which coming to the element makes the Sacrament, ought not to be more repeated than the Sacrament itself, because it is essential thereto.  
2 The regeneration of man, is only one, whose principal efficient cause is the holy Ghost: the means or instrumental causes, on God's part, are the Word and Sacraments; on our part, faith which the holy Ghost begetteth, increaseth, and confirmeth ordinarily by those external means. Therefore when they are baptised, who were before regenerate by the Word, as a spiritual feed, they have not need of any other regeneration, nor can they be twice regenerate; but then baptism is to them an obsignation and confirmation of their regeneration. 
R●n. 4. II. Vid. Aug. de bapt l. 4. c. 24.  So Abraham first believed (as so, was regenerate) and afterward was sealed. So Cornelius spiritual sanctification preceded in the gift of the holy Ghost, and then he received the Sacrament of regeneration, to confirm the same to him. But when the elect, who being baptised, die in their infancy, it is certain that they are regenerate by the Sacrament, without the ministry of the word preached unto them, whereof they are not capable, who yet without regeneration, could not enter into the Kingdom of God, John 3. 5. And if the baptised Infant live to be capable of teaching, and so receive the word, as that it begets in him actual faith, repentance and obedience to God, than that word is as Sincere milk, to nourish and confirm, not to regenerate, but to promote the degrees of regeneration, producing that faith and the fruits thereof sowed in baptism, to a clearer and more evident maturity. So was it in Isaac, who was first regenerate by the seal of the righteousness of faith, which was after he came to years nourished and confirmed by the word preached unto him: So that though the word in the ordinary dispensation thereof, be often repeated, and doth by many degrees promote our regeneration, and cause us to grow to a better stature and strength, according to our measure in Christ, of which we have continual need, yet it follows not thence, that baptism may also be iterated; no more, then that a man may be often born into the world, because he is often fed, and groweth up by degrees, and divers accessions to his stature.   
Though corporal generation or birth, 
Object. 2.  be naturally but one, yet may it be supernaturally iterated: Yea, so shall it be in the resurrection which our Saviour calleth Regeneration● 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Matth 19 28. 
We answer: 1. The present question is concerning regeneration in this life, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in seeulo no●.  not of that which shall be in the new age, as the Syriac hath it; that is, in the world to come.  
2. Christ there calleth the resurrection regeneration, to teach us who have received the first fruits of the Spirit, in our regeneration, that admirable thing which shall come to pass in our resurrection; 
Sic enim caro nostra regenerabi●ur per incerruptionem, quemadmodum est anim a nossra re●e●erat● per fidem, Augustin de C. D. l. 10. c. 5:  for so shall our flesh be, as it were born again by incorruption, as our soul is now regenerate by faith in Christ.  
3. That regeneration in the end of the world shall be but once; therefore by proportion, regeneration in this world by baptism, must be, can be but once.   
The spiritual death to sin, 
Object. 3.  is by many acts of regeneration, as examination of ourselves, daily renewing our repentance, beating down our bodies by fasting, prayer, humiliation, and rising again to newness of life in our increases of faith; and growth in holiness is by sundry acts of the Spirit regenerating, and making our endeavours effectual in the use of the means, as hearing, praying, receiving the Sacrament: In and by these is regeneration; 
A●●●s ●. ●●.  therefore not one, nor only once: Add hereto, that we are baptised into remission of sins, which being daily, we have need of daily remission, and therefore of Baptism. 
We answer: 1. That dying to sin, and rising to newness of life, are the certain effects of regeneration; and therefore it may conclude, that where these are, and their several acts appear, there undoubtedly is Regeneration: But it can no more conclude divers Regenerations, than the divers acts of a living man, can prove that he had several Generations or Births, because these prove that he liveth.  
2. Our need of daily pardon for our daily sins may conclude our daily need of repentance, 
Maith. 6  as our Saviour taught us; but it concludes not any necessity to iterate our Baptism, but rather the contrary, 
●●r. 31. 34.  because the Covenant of God once sealed to us in Baptism (for the free remission of all our sins, through the inestimable and never dying-merit of Christ's death, into which we are implanted by Saptism) is unchangably perpetual; and the condition of our comfortable assurance of pardon, cannot be iteration of our Baptism, but renewing of our repentance, and amendment of our lives, which demonstrate our faith to be lively. See Jer. 3. 12, 13. Ezek. 16. 60. Nor doth that hinder which some object; Some hypocrites receive the seal, therefore they have need to receive it again, that they may obtain the fruits thereof, which believing they shall have; It follows not, that they ought to be baptised again, but that they ought to be sincere, and to repent of their hypocrisy, and then the seal formerly received, shall be effectual for them to Remission of sins and Salvation.   
Spiritual death in sin, 
Object. 4.  is by many acts; and Regeneration is a rising again from the same; which in the regenerate, who also often fall, must and is often to be iterated; therefore Regeneration may and must be iterated, and consequently, so must Baptism, the Laver of Regeneration. 
We answer; 1: The acts of Regeneration are many, but that proves not pluralities of Regenerations, more than many acts of life prove many lives of one and the same person, as we said.  
2. As many wounds, or other concurrent causes of death, conclude not many deaths of one and the same person, so 'tis here; many sins wound and spiritually destroy the soul, yet are there not more deaths than lives of one man; for death is a privation of life: So that our often falling into sin, concludes only a need of frequent renewing our repentance; and hath been showed.   
That which the Apostles of Christ did, 
Object. 5.  that we may do in the work of the Ministry: But they rebaptised, as may appear Acts 19 4, 5. therefore we may rebaptize. 
We answer. 1. This main argument which the Anabaptists have, is built, as the rest, upon a mere mistake of that Scripture S. Luke thus relateth, Then, said Paul, John verily baptised with the baptism of repentance; saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this (to wit, that which John spoke) they (that is, the people mentioned verse 4. which heard those words of John B.) were baptised; that is, by John B. or his Disciples, not by Paul; for he is only said, verse 6. to have laid his hands upon them, that they might be confirmed in their receiving the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, of which those Disciples to whom Paul there spoke, had not before that time, so much at heard, verse ●.  
2. There was no difference in substance or signification between the Baptism of John B. and that which was administered by the Disciples of Christ, 
Vid, d●ctissimum A. R v●t. sum co●tro●●r. To. 2. q. 2. tra. 3. pa●e 26, 27.  as hath been showed.  
3. It is not said in the cited place, that Paul baptised them; but only, that he laid his hands on them (as we noted.) Add hereto, that his self saith, 
1 Cor. I. I4. 15 Acts 18. 8  That he baptised only Crispus and Gaius, and the household of Stephanus; but besides, he knew not whether he baptised any other. Now Crispus was a Corinthian, Gaius a Macedonian, 
Acts 19 29.  and Stephanus of Achaia, I Cor. 16. 15. but 'tis apparent that these Disciples mentioned Acts 19 were Ephesians, verse I. and Ephesus a City of Asia, Rev. I'II. therefore he baptised them not; and so here was no rebaptising.  
4. These words (When they heard this) do not at all relate to the speech of Paul there historified, but unto the preaching of John B. for if otherwise, it would follow, which the Papists affirm, that John's baptism was not the same with the Baptism of Christ; and consequently, that Christ whom John baptised, and we, baptised by the successors of Christ's Disciples, are not baptised with one and the same baptism; 
Council. Trident. Bellarmin, To. 3 de Sacram. bapt, l. 2. c. 20. Vasquez. in 3. Th●. Aquin. T●m. 2. q. 66. a. 2: disp. 140. N. 18. P. Lombard. l. 4. dist. 2. D. Aquin, part. 3, etc.  whereas Christ bore the same circumcision which the Jews, and for substance the same baptism with us Gentiles, that he might declare himself the Saviour both of Jews and Gentiles.   
The Lord's Supper doth no less signify the blood of Christ for our Salvation, 
Object. 6.  then doth the water of Baptism; nor less represent his death, then doth baptism, in which we are implanted into the similitude of his death and resurrection: 
Rem, 6. 4. 5.  But the Lord's Supper is often to be administered and received; and therefore so is Baptism. 
We answer: 1● There is in Scripture express command for often administering and receiving of the Lords Supper, I Cor. II. 24. 
Verse●●, 6.  This do in remembrance of me— As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lords death till he come: show us any one such warrant for rebaptising, and this controversy is at an end.  
2. The Lord's Supper proposeth not any new Covenant with God, but confirmeth that to us, which he made with us in our baptism: But baptism is the Initiatory Seal of our entering into Covenant with God (as it was in circumcision) which Covenant is but one.  
3. The virtue and efficacy of baptism in the elect, extendeth itself to the whole life of the regenerate, and is, as it were, a fountain of living waters, perpetually running to cleanse away the pollutions of sin; so that there need not new or more baptisms, but a daily renewing of our repentance, to which we were in our covenanting with God, at first baptised. As Ambrose saith, after baptism there remaineth no remedy but true repentance.   
Cyprian and the Council of Carthage; 
Obj. 7.  held, that those who were baptised by heretics, upon their return to the Church, aught to be rebaptised. 
We answer: 1. The question being proposed in the first Council of Carthage, Whether those who were once baptised, might be rebaptised; all the Bishops answered, God forbid, God forbid; we resolve and determine, that all re-baptizings, are unlawful, and far from sincere faith and catholic discipline. The business which troubled the Churches in Cyprians time was, Whether baptism administered according to the lawful form of the Catholic Church (that is, with water, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost) though by an Heretical Minister, 
Vniversi Episcopi dixerunt absit, absit: illicit●● esse sa●cimus rebaptizationes omnes, & sa●is esse ●ienum à sincerá side & Catholicâ disciplinâ— Concil. I. Carthag. cap. I. Severin. Bin. Concil. To. I.  were invalid, and therefore to be iterated. Cyprian, 
Cyprianus affirmabat cum aliis Orientalibus Episcopicunum esse baptismam, qui extra unam Ecclefiam Catholicam, u●● 〈…〉— (●●ii dicebant) i●●●● baprisina, r●tum validum, & nequs quain reiterandum ●● quem Minister haereticus juxta formam à Christo praeseriptam & ab Ecclesi● usurpatam, contuliss. Been ●. T. V. de●t qui vult Augustin. ad Vincent. ●p●18. & de bapt. contr. Donat. 1. 6. c. 2. Hieronyirum contr. Luc●ferian. Baptisnum autem non esse quo haretici utuntur. Cyprian 1. etc. Stephan. 1. 2. ep. 1. quis enim potest dare quod ipse n●n habeat? ●●, Cypr. l. 1. ep 12. quod semel s●mitur nec rurs●s iteratur. Cyprian. l. 2. ep. 3 & Bin. q. s.  with other Eastern Bishops, affirmed, that there is but one Baptism, which is not to be found out of the Catholic Church. The other orthodox Bishops determined, that baptism which an heretical Minister administered according to the form prescribed by Christ, and practised by the Church, was valid, and not to be iterated. So that indeed, neither Cyprian, nor the rest of that Council, did maintain rebaptising, but held that there could be no true or valid baptism out of the Catholic Church; or that it was not baptism which Heretics administered. Against rebaptising, Cyprian speaks clearly, L. I. Ep. 12. on that John 4. 14, applying it to baptism; Which, saith he, is once received, and not again iterated: And in the Canons of the Apostles, there is a severe caution against rebaptising, If any Bishop or Elder shall again baptise him who had truly received baptism, let him be deposed.  
2. We must distinguish between Heretics (as hath been said) whereof some are such, as that though they err in some fundamental point or points; yet they hold the true form of baptism. Some so err concerning the holy Trinity, as that in such error they cannot have with them the true form and essence of baptism: Now there may be true baptism administered by the first sort; and such as are baptised by them, returning to the true Church, must repent, but not to be rebaptised: But those who were pretended to be baptised by the second sort, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. Apost. Can. 46. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophy●a●●, in loh. 3. videat qui vult de his, Epiphan. haeres. 〈◊〉 Pneumat●inach●s. ●nit. & haeres. 76. N. 6.  as Arians, denying the Deity of Christ, or those Pneumatomachi, Eunomius, and others, blasphemous against the holy Ghost, in case they came to the true Church, they were to be baptised, because there can be no true baptism, where the essentials thereof are wanting; as the element, and the word constituting the Sacrament; to wit, In the Name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost: Baptising such as have not so been baptised, is no rebaptising, seeing the first pretended was truly none. 
Praeter Ecclesi● consuetudinem. etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, pi●hen. expos. s●●● ath, l. 3, To 2. N. 13.  Otherwise, the ancient Church did not rebaptize a repenting Apostate, though he had fallen into the errors of Arrians, Eunomians, or the like, after that he had been baptised by the true Church; and the reason thereof was, that which Chemnitius well observed; 
See 1 Cor. 6. 11. & 12. 13. ●al 3. 27.  as on God's part, the Covenant which he made with the circumcised Israelites, remained firm and ratified, unto which after their falling into sin, they returned by repentance, so the Corinthians and Galathians having fallen, were recalled by S. Paul, and remitted to the promise and consolation of their baptism formerly received: Therefore as Circumcision was not, so ought not baptism to be iterated.    

CHAP. VII.  
Protestants arguments against the dangerous practice of Rebaptising.  
1. BAptism is the Sacrament of Regeneration by our implantation into Christ. 
See Concil. Nicen. can. 19 Concil. Arelat 1 Can 8. Concil. Carthag. c. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. Nazianz. orat. 40. itemque orat. 25. inquie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— Regeneratio spiritualis una est, sicut generatio carnalis una est. Aug. tract. 12. in Joh.— Quomodo uterus non potest repeti, sic nec baptismus iterari. Prosper. p●●● Augustin. tract. 11 in Job. vid. & Chrysost. in Hebr. 6. hom. 9 & Theoplylact. ib.  But we cannot be twice regenerate (for regeneration presupposeth a precedent natural birth, which can be but one: nor can we be more often regenerate or born a new, then born naturally) therefore we ought not to be twice baptised. The major is evident, Tit. 3. 5. The minor is also evident in reason. Add hereto, that whereas we are by nature children of wrath, Ephes. 2. 3. enemies to God, Rome 5. 10. and so without a new birth, aliens from the Kingdom of God, John 3. 5. but being implanted into Christ by baptism, we become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a new creature, 2 Cor. 5. 17. Gal. 6. 15. Now as one and the same creature can be but once created (except that either the created essence of a man is destroyed by sin, which the sin of the Devil cannot do; or that a man may have pluralities of essences by several creations of one and the same person, which no reason can suppose) of neither can we have any more than one regeneration: Therefore we ought to be but once baptised.  
2. God's faithfulness in his Covenant sealed, cannot become void by man's infidelity; neither is his Covenant of peace momentany, but perpetual, which is sealed in baptism; 
Rome 3. 3. Rom. 11. 29. 2 Tim. 2. 13.  so that still we may return unto it by true repentance: 
Concil. Eliberit. Can. 46. & 69. & 73. Concil. Carthag. 1. Council. Arelateus. c. 6. 23. Concil. Nicaen. 2. vid & Bart. Carranz, sum. Concil. pag 673. 679. Roth●●mag. 1633. ●●● aliud remedium constitutum esse post baptismum, quam paenitentiae solatium●● Ambros. ●10. 1. Ursin. de relig, Christ. pa● 2. Conclus. 13.  See Isa. 54. 10. and so they who sinned after baptism, though notoriously and scandalou●●, were not rebaptised by the ancient Church, but upon their repentance received again into holy communion; and it is truly observed by some, that baptism being once received, confirmeth and assureth the penitent of their sins remission, and that the efficacy and virtue thereof extendeth itself to all our life; and therefore neither aught it to be iterated, nor deferred unto the end of our lives, as if it so only cleansed men from their sins, upon condition that they never fall into any sin after their baptism received; which cannot be in this frail state of flesh and blood subject to so many temptations and innate infirmities: Therefore after the Apostle had showed us how being implanted into the similitude of Christ's death and resurrection, we ought not to suffer sin to reign in our mortal bodies; 
Rom. 6. 11. Chrys. in Rom. 6. ●● 11.  he saith not, Let not flesh and blood, the natural man live any longer, or any more be active, but, Let not sin reign, etc. for Christ came not to destroy our nature, but to correct our depraved will and affections.  
3 There is not in all the New Testament any one precept or example for rebaptising; therefore it ought not to be done: the constant judgement and practice of the Church of Christ being to the contrary: it is neither commanded in the institution of baptism, nor in any Scripture admitted: nor is it tolerable by any necessary consequence, as is the contrary. John's baptism and Christ's were one, whatever Jesuits pretend to the contrary: Apollo's knew only John's baptism, Act. 18. 25. that is, the doctrine of John Baptist; we read not that Apollo's or any other mentioned in Scripture, was rebaptised; no not any of John's Disciples coming to Christ and his magistery, which had surely been done, had Christ's baptism and john's been different in substance; and had it been done, we should have had in Scripture either some express proof for the same, or something so laid down, that we might by good consequence have gathered the same, which nowhere appeareth: but (as hath been said) the Apostle recalleth penitent sinners once baptised, unto the comfort of that which they had once received in baptism, 1 Cor. 6. 11. 1 Cor. 12. 13. & Gal. 3. 27.  
Circumcision was only once administered, 
Gen. 17. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in pactum secu●●  but was perpetual and everlasting; and under the Law sinners were to return unto the Lord by true repentance; compare Jer. 11. 3, 4. Jer. 4. 1, 2. etc. with Jer. 18. 8 etc. Ezek. 18. 31, 32. Isa. 55. and the principal cause why circumcision was not iterated, was Gods divine ordinance and institution; the impressed character was secondary: on Gods part it ever remained sure, to which after their forsaking his covenant, into which they had been once sealed, he recalled them not to a susception of a new, or the same seal iterated, but only to repentance, as to humble them, so to show that the fault and failing of the fruits and effects thereof (which should have appeared in their newness of life) was wholly on their parts, not on Gods, who is unchangeable and the same for ever. So hath he appointed it in our sins after baptism. I further add, that those Christians which had apostated to the most pernicious heresy of Arrians denying the deity of Christ by the judgement of the Catholic Church, if they returned to her, were not to be rebaptised, but to be received again into the Church and communion thereof by repentance, as hath been proved.  
5 All they that are baptised into the similitude of Christ's death and resurrection, are but once to be baptised; 

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrys. in Rom. 6. hom. 11. ineadem sententia est Basilius de S. S. c. 14. sicut semel Christus crucifixus est, sic baptismiss iter andus non est; una enim morte sa●, omnes redemit, ut amplius mori non oporteat; quod videns Ecclesia intellexit, non iterandum baptismum. Aug. de verâ & fals. poenit. c. 3. intemque de verb. Diu.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. to. 1. haeres. 59 l. 2. N. 5. Si Christus tantum semel mortuus est, & nos tantum semel baptizari convenit, Alex. Alens. to. 4. de sacrament. Baptis. q. 8. Mem. 12. resol.— Donatum sunt hae sententiae latae, quod confessus sit se rebaptizasse, etc. quod ab ecclesia alienum est. Optatus, l. 1. de schism. Donat idem lib. 5. de circumcisione dicit— semel enim factum servat salutem: si iterum fiat, potest afferre perniciem: sic & baptisma Christianorum etc. confert gratiam; si repetatur, facit vitae jacturam. de hoc lavacro dixit, Qui semel lotus est, non habet iterum necessitatem lavandi: qui semel dixit, prohib●it iterum fieri— haec sententia generalis est, non specialis— ibsit ut lotum revocemus ad sontem— absit ut iteremus quod semel est, aut duplicemus quod voum est; semel ergo lavacrum inimus, semel delicta diluuntur, quia ea iterari non oporter. Tertul de bapt. c. 15.  
Baptisma salutaris aquae significatur, quod semel scilicet sumitur, nec rursus iteratur. Cypr. l. 2. ep. 3. ad Caecilium, vid. & Augustinum ep. 173. Crisp.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— Epiph. quo. sup.  
juxta fores templi, in latere quod opponitur meridiei— ingressus templi ad Orientem era● more primum occurrebat etc. Vatabl. in 1 Reg, 7. 39— Ezek 36. 25. Ephes. 5. 25. A● 2. 38. 1 Pet. 3. 21. Rom. 8. 1.   but all they that are baptised according to Christ's Institution, In the name of the Father, and the Son, & the H. Ghost, are baptised into the similitude of Christ's death and resurrection; therefore they are but once to be baptised: and thus the Church hath ever clearly judged. The major is proved, because Christ died and rose again but once: Rom. 6. 3, 4, 5, 9, 10. we being therefore baptised into the similitude of his death and resurrection, aught to be baptised but once, seeing that pluralities of baptisms or baptizings cannot answer in similitude to his death and resurrection, who died and rose again but only once for our justification, Rom. 4. 25. Heb. 8. 25, 26, 28. Again, we are buried with Christ by baptism, Rom. 6. 4. but Christ was but once buried; therefore neither ought we to be baptised any more than only once. How then shall we be renewed after our falling into sin? the Apostle saith Gal. 6. 1. Restore such a one— but how? he saith no● baptise him again: no, but godly sorrow (saith he, 2 C●● 7. 10.) worketh repentance to salvation: for we must still remember that baptism is the ordinary gate and entrance into Christ's Church: which stands like that brazen Sea at the entrance into the Temple, 1 King. 7. 39 in which our sins are washed away and remitted by Christ, so, not that they should be no more, but that they shall be no more imputed: and therefore all this life long, we have need of daily repentance (because we daily fall into some sin) repentance being a condition of Godspronouncing pardon to the sense of our consciences, which he sealed to us in our baptism: and so we may understand that which Christ said to Peter, Joh. 13. 10. He that is wased needeth not; save to wash his feet. We are washed from our sins by baptism (because, though we are, in respect of the meritorious cause cleansed from them, only by the sacred blood of Christ, 1 Joh. 1. 7. 1 Pet. 1. 19 Heb. 9 14. Rev. 1.5. yet baptism being the ordinary external seal and instrumental cause, 
Eph. 5. 26. Ti●. 3. 5. 1 Pet. 3. 21. Baptismo quidem homo totus abluitur, sed dum isto posica vivit in secalo, humanis affectibus terram velut pedibas calcans, etc. undedicat dimitte nobis debita nostra, ac sic etiam mandatur ab eo, qui pedes l●it discipulis suis, nec desinit interpellare pro nobis. Aug. tract. 37. in joh.  for the application thereof, as also in respect of the analogy between the sign and the thing signified, that is often ascribed to the sign, which is proper to the thing signified, to wit, the blood and merit of Christ sealed to us in baptism: therefore we need no more clearing by iteration of baptism, but only, as it were, washing our feet, that is, our vicious affections and failings, by daily repentance, that it may please God to pronouce to our consciences, the remission of our sins which grieve and displease us.  
There is but one Lord, one faith, one baptism Eph. 4. 5. That which the holy Ghost testifieth is but one (as one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism) no man may multiply, iterate or make more: But the holy Ghost testifieth that there is but one God, one Faith, one Baptism: Therefore no man may iterate or make them more: neither is it any better than a mere illusion of holy Scripture to distinguish between the Sacrament and the administration thereof, by saying there is but one baptism, but there may be many baptizings of one and the same person; the Apostle saying there is but one not only in the unity of substance, dispensation, and effect, but also in respect of lawful use, or reception by one and the same person; 
Baptisma●●●●cam haptizat● omnes in Christo regenerans est; sicut unus Deus, acfides unica ●●omnibus fide●ter confitendum. quod celebratum in aquâ, in nomine Patris, & filii, & Spiritus sancti, credimus tam adultis, quim paroulis c●muniter perfectum remedium ad sasutem. vid notas in council. Viern. Oecumen. 15. Severin. Bin. Concil. to 2. 
— Denique vos qui baptisma quasi libentèr duplicare contenditis, si datis alterum baptisma, date alteram fidem: si dais alteram fidem, date & alterum Christum: si datis alterum Christum, date alterum Deum. Uoum Deum esse negare non potestis, we in Marcionis foveas incidatis: ergo Deus unus est; de uno Deo unus est Christas. Qui rebaptizatur, jam Christianus fuerat: quomodo dici potest iterum Christianus & c? Optatus. ●●ntr. Parm. Donatist. l. 5.   otherwise he must contradict himself, who saith we are baptised into the similitude of Christ's death, which is but only one and once suffered. Indeed it is said of the other seal, as oft as ye do this, 1 Cor. 11. 26. but not one word in Scripture can be found more than once baptising: but the Apostle mentioning baptism, joins it with things incapable of multiplication, or plurality (one Spirit, one body of Christ, the Church, one hope of our calling, metonymically put for the thing hoped for, that is, eternal life, which is essentially but one, one Lord, one Faith, that is, one doctrine of faith, Gal. 1. 6, 7, 8. Jud. 3 or objectively, one truth of God, one Christ) showing that there ought to be no more baptisms than faiths, Christ's, or Gods; if therefore (said Optatus) you give another baptism, give another faith: if ye give another faith, give another Christ; if ye give another Christ, give also another God, etc. You see to what damnable absurdities rebaptising drives unto.  
That whereby men crucify to themselves the Son of, 
See that which hath been said, part 1. animadvers, on liberty of prophes. p. 244 245, Num 32, 33.  God afresh, and put him to open shame, may by no means be done: But to rebaptize (or to be willingly rebaptised) in the Apostles sense, is to crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and to put him to open shame: therefore it may by no means be done. This point the Apostle layeth down Heb. 6. 4, 5, 6. It is impossible for those who were once enlightened (saith our Translation) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉  who have been once baptised (saith the Syriac) to renew them again to repentance, etc. (that is, baptismal repentance) the baptism of repentaence, as it is called Act 19 4. and so Heb. 10. 12. Call to remembrance the former days in which after ye were illuminated, Gre. 〈◊〉, which the Syriac (the best and nearest Interpreter of the New Testament) rendereth, in which ye were baptised: So the Greeks were wont to call baptism 〈◊〉 illumination: possibly because persons converting from darkness of Idolatry, were ordinarily enlightened, by being taught the doctrine of the Gospel, (see Mat. 4. 16. Luk 2. 32. Ad. 26. 18. so the Hebrew ●●● in one signification importing taught, is rendered by the LXX illuminated) or also in respect of extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost in the knowledge of the mysteries of the Gospel, and unstudied tongues, with other admirable enlargments of heart, then flourishing in the Church. Now those who are described v. 4, 5. who have been once baptised, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the holy Ghost, and have tasted the god word of God, and the powers of the world to c●me, if they shall fall away (saith our Translation) Gre ●●●●●●●●●, and falling away; which (and) the Syriac omitteth, rendering the sense (as others also) non possum iterum p●●care, ut den●ò renoventur ad resipiscentiam, & ●●● crucifigant, etc. they cannot so sin (that is, un● death) that they should again be renewed to repentance, and crucify afresh etc. that is in a second baptism: where no●e by the way, that this place of Scripture so much wrested by the enemies of truth, against the comfortable doctrine of the Saints perseverance, maketh mainly for it: for the ●●●stle saith not, that those who are described, v. 4, 5. de, ●●● may fall away; but that it is impossible, isto supposito, to he renewed, because in such a supposition the merit of. Christ's Cross being abolished and made void, by whic●, they were renewed, it must needs follow, that so Christ should be crucified afresh, and be put to open shame, tha●●● they might be renewed by a second and new merit of his Cross; which seeing it is impossible to be, the Apostle will infer that it is impossible that these here described v. 4, 5. should finally fall away. 
De Dieu. q. f. 2 Tim. 2. 19  The foundation of the Lord remaining, sure, and having this seal, The Lord knoweth who are his, whose prescience cannot possibly be deceived in electing any who shall fall away. But to return to our purpose; the work 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to themselves, is very considerable. The Son of God they cannot now possibly crucify afresh, nor put him again to open shame (who sitteth at the right hand of the glory of the Father) had they the malice of the Jews and power of the Romans, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉  ` (who once crucified him) to help them: yet in iterating on themselves baptism, the sign of heir implantation into the similitude of his death, they crucify to themselves (that is, as much as in them is) the Son of God. chrysostom excellently expresseth it, Baptism (saith he) is the Cross; for therein our old man is crucified with him. Again, we have been planted together in the likeness of his death; as therefore Christ may not be crucified again (for that were to put him again to open shame;) so neither may we be baptised again for if death have no more dominion over him; if he be risen (in his resurrection) a conqueror over death, etc. and should again be crucified, than all these things were mere fables and mockeries: therefore he that rebaptizeth himself, doth again crucify him. But what is crucifying again? As Christ died on the Cross, so do we in baptism, not in the flesh, but to sin— therefore there may be no second washing: for if there be, there may be a third, and a fourth; for the first is made void by the second, and that by another, even to an infinite.  
Where there are all the essential parts of baptism rightly administered according to the commission given by Christ to his Apostles, there baptism cannot be made void or no true baptism, by any thing accidental, circumstantial, or less than essential, neither expressly nor by any necessary consequence any where in holy Scripture forbidden. But in baptising of Infants of Church-privi●edged Parents. by sprinkling or washing with water, in the ●●● of the Father, and the Son, and the holy Ghost, there are all the essential parts of baptism, according to Christ's commission given to the Apostles, (to wit, the Element and the Word which constitute the Sacrament.) Therefore that their baptism is not, neither can be made void, or no true baptism, by, or in respect of Infant-age, or of only washing or sprinkling them with water (which are things circumstantial, accidental, less than essential, and no where expressly, or by necessary consequence forbidden in holy Scripture.) So that whatever Anabaptists pretend in their eager pursuit of their opinion, that they do not rebaptize, supposing that there preceded no essential or true baptism in regard of the persons being baptised in their Infancy, or because they fancy dipping the whole body to be essential to baptism, and so necessary, that without it they think there can be no true baptism, (neither of which have any ground in Scripture) and whereas Christ is the Saviour of every age, sex, and condition; therefore male and female, aged and Infants have right to the seal, as hath been ●shewed; it highly concerneth them seriously to consider how dangerous a thing it is, upon a mere opinion to pull off the seals of their Disciples salvation, under pretence of putting on a new (unwarrantable) seal, to renounce their Saviour, whom they put on in their lawful baptism, at least sacramentally; to make more baptisms than faiths and Saviour's, into the similitude of whose death and resurrection, all Christians are baptised; and to crucify again to themselves the Son of God, and to put him to open shame. Alas, they discern not Satan's mischievous Legerdemain, who like a cunning finger-jugler, hereby takes from them the true seal of redemption and salvation by Christ, put on all his who are baptised, by pretending and seeming to put them on a new, better, or more perfect one.  And now Brethren, I commend you to God, & to the Word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified. Act. 20. 32. Glory be to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will towards men. Luk. 2. 14.  
FINIS.