A Modest Plea FOR INFANT'S BAPTISM.  
Wherein the Lawfulness of the Baptising of INFANTS is defended against the ANTIPAEDOBAPTISTS: And the Infants Need for it, Benefit by it, Capableness of it, and Right unto it, Is fairly shown from Grounds of Scripture, the Tradition of the CHURCH, and the Institution of CHRIST: With Answers to Objections.  
By W. W. B. D.  Commendaverim Charitati vestrae causam eorum, qu● pro se loqui non possunt. D. Aug. Ser. 8. de Verb. Apost. 
CAMBRIDGE, Printed by John Hayes, Printer to the University: and are to be sold by Henry Dickinson, Bookseller, 1677.   

To the Right worshipful Mr. Robert Cole Alderman of Grantham; And to the worshipful The Twelve Comburgesses his Brethren; And to all the worthy Commoners of that ancient Corporation WILLIAM WALKER Wisheth all temporal Prosperity, and eternal Felicity.  
Right Worshipful, etc.  
THe singular Favours, Which you have showed to me, do merry a grateful acknowledgement from me. In testimony therefore of my obligations, I dedicate unto you this Treatise. May it prove, what I design it, a lasting monument of your generosity, and my gratitude. Through God's blessing on the conjoined erdeavours, pious care, and prndent conduct of Magistrate and Ministir, your Corporation now is, as Jerusalem of old was, as a City that is at unity in itself. A rare blessing that, at all times, but especially in dividing times. Few Corporations in England cawboast the like. God continue that happiness to you, and to yours after you from generation. Thereto if these Papers of mine be in any measure contributory, as I do most sincercly wish it, so I shall most hearty rejoice at it; as being one who takes a great pleasure in the Prosperity of your Corporation, and no less in being serviceable in any manner, or measure to it. So begging your kind acceptance of my good meaning in this Dedication, and wishing a perpetuation and inorease of Unity, and Amity, and all the blessed Consequents thereof among you, I present these Papers to your favour, and remain  
Grantham School Aug. 1. 1676. Your most humble Servant, WILLIAM WALKER.   

The Preface to the READER.  
OF all Dissenters from the Church of England, none seem to lie under stronger Prejudices, than the Antipaedobaptists; as having so seemingly fair Pleas to make, both for Themselves, and against their Opponents, and that both from Scripture Text, and Ecclesiastic Practice, as few of their fellow Dissenters can parallel. With the more favour and kindness, in my thoughts, are their Persons, precisely considered as such, to be treated; and with the more fairness and clearness ought those Endeavours, which are undertaken for the removal of their Prejudiees, to be managed. And this may be a sufficient Account for that Prolixity, which some may think there is, and for that Plainness, which I have studied there should be, in these ensuing Papers: especially if I shall add thereto this Consideration, that the Persons lying under these Prejudices, and whose rescue from under the captivity of Error, is the wish of all good Christians, are mostly such, as are to be spoke to in Vulgar language, and Familiar speech, as not having had those advantages of a learned education, which should make them capable to sound the depths of profound performances, unravel the wind of intricate discourses, and keep pace in understanding, with a high tide of big words, and a rolling torrent of strong lines: in which way to him that speaketh they will be but as Barbarians, and he that speaketh shall be but a Barbarian unto them.  
Whence by the way I shall take occasion, to admonish those that read Books only for the elegance of the language, and cannot relish the wholesome food of so●●● matter, unless it be served up in the savoury sauce of a piquant Phrase, and set out with the specious garnish of a florid style, to proceed no further; as being not likely to find herein that sparkling briskness of Expression, nor pleasing flavour of Elocution, which suits the Tastes of their delicate palates; as also to advise others of deeper learning and profounder knowledge, not to expect from me new discoveries of hitherto unrevealed mysteries, and fresh-sprung mines of as yet unravished and unrifled notions: whose design in these Papers is not at all to teach the Learned, but to instruct the Ignorant; and that in all humility and submission, as being conscious to myself of my manifold ignorances', and imperfections, and seeing, even what I see, but through a glass, and that darkly.  
And further to prevent any man's sinning against God, by rashly judging or uncharitably censuring me about the quorations in these Papers, which are many, and large; I declare that my ends in making them were to give strength, and credit to the cause I maintain, by showing it espoused by persons of reputation for learning and judgement in their several ages; and to free myself from the imputation of novelty, and singularity in any thing maintained by me; and that I made them so large partly to prevent suspicion of insincerity in my deal, and partly to furnish some with apposite testimonies, Who may not have those conveniences of consulting Authors that I have had.  
And let not any one think these quotations needless, because the Antipae do baptists reject all authority but that of Scripture. For I writ not only for the conviction and conversion of them, but also for the satisfaction and confirmation of others. Of whom some may have such a value for tradition, as to be much confirmed by it, others may think it so necessary, as not to be satisfied without it. And for their sakes according to the advice in Vincent. Lirinensis, I have been willing to fortify the 
●ape igitur magno study, & sumkind attentione perquirens à quam pluribus sanctitate, & doctrinâ prastantibus viris, quonam modo possim certa quâdam, & quasi generall ac regulari viâ Catbolicae fidei veritatem ab haereticae pravitatis falsitate discernere, bujusmodi semper responsum ab omnibus fere retuli. Quod five ego, sive quis alius vellet exurgentium baereticorum fraudes deprehendere, laqueosque vitare, & in fide sanâ sanus, & integer permanere duplici modo munire fidem suam Domino ad●uvante deberet. Primò scilicet divine leg is authoritate, tum deinde Ecclesiae Catholicae traditione. Hic forsitan requirat aliquis: cum sit perfectus Scripturarum Canon, sibique ad omnia satis, superque sufficiat, quid opus est ut ei Ecclesiasticae intelligentiae jungatur autoritas? Quia videlicet scripturam sacram pro ipsâ suâ altitudine non uno codemq: sensu universi accipiunt, sed ejusdem eloquia aliter atq: aliter alius, atque alius interpretatur: ut pene quot homines sunt tot lllinc sententiae erui posse videantur. Aliter namque illam Novatianus, aliter Photinus, aliter Sabellius, aliter Donatus exponit, etc. atq idcirco multum necesse est propter tantos tam varii error is ansractus, ut Propheticae & Apostolice interpretationis linea secundum Ecclesiastici, & Catholici sensus normam dirigatur. In ipsa item Catholica Ecclesia magnopere cur andum est, ut id tene amus quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est, hoc est etenim vere proprieq, Catholicum, &c, Vinc. Lirin. advers. baeres. cap. 1. 2, 3.  cause I maintain, not only with the authority of divine Law; but also with the tradition of the Catholic Church.  
And even the Antipaedobaptists themselves are willing enough to flourish their writings with humane testimonies, and to plead tradition too, if for them. Indeed I observe none to be against tradition but those that think it to be against themselves, or to reject the evidence of humane testimony, who do not fear to be condemned by it.  
And because the judgements or rather fancies of men as to Authors are so infinitely various, that one esteems that as gold which another despises as dross; and values as wheat, what another rejects as chaff; therefore I have endeavoured to obviate that variety of judgements with a diversity of Authors: producing those of the Middle, and Modern ages, as well as those of the Ancient, and Primitive; Schoolmen as well as Commontators; Historians as well as Fathers; Civilians as well as Divines; and Polemical as well as Didactical Writers. So that the Readers which do not like of all may please themselves with what they have most fancy too, leaving the liberty which themselves make use of, unto others; who as being of different tastes may think their leave as good as their take, and relish that best which they disrelish most.  
And because there is no one Prejudice that holds a stronger possession of our Antipae dobaptists, than that which arises from that bright evidence, which they have, of the baptising Adult Persons in all the Ages of the Church, and of many's deferring either to be baptised Themselves, or to baptise their Infants, in several Ages of it, and those especially that were nearest to the Primitive Times; and the removal of that Prejudice may be a fair Introduction to their depositing of all the rest, therefore I will endeavour, in my entrance, to remove that. And if I can show that the Delays of Baptism, which they so speak of, in the Ancient times, were upon other Grounds, and on different Accounts from those that our Antipaedobaptists allege in the case, than that plea of theirs from the practice of baptising Adult Persons, and deferring the Baptism of Infants, will neither serve their Hypothesis, nor disserve ours.  
The Grounds, as I understand, on which our Antipaedobaptist refuse to baptise their Infants, and defer their baptising to ripeness of Age, are because, as they suppose, there is no command in Scripture for it; And because there is no example in Scripture of it; either of which if there found, they would hold it lawful; and because they find neither of them there, they hold it unlawful.  
Now if it appear that the unlawfulness to baptise Infants, for want of a Scripture command or Example for it, was none of the Grounds on which the Ancients did defer their baptising, and that never any such thing was in the Primitive Times pretended or pleaded by any, to justify or excuse that delay, than I hope the case will be clear, that their delays of Baptism on other Grounds, can asford no protection to the Hypothesis our Antipaedobaptists, who deny Baptism to Infants, upon the Account of the unlawfulness of it.  
That never any such pretence or plea was made by any in the primitive times (even for five hundred years) against Infant's Baptism I rationally presume, because I see none yet produced by any of the Learnedest of our Antipaedobaptists, who have, I believe, searched through, and through, all the writings of the Fathers, and Primitive Historians, and ransacked every page, and rifled every passage in them, for some patronage to their Hypothesis. And as they are quick sighted enough to have espied it, so they would have been careful enough, if there had been any, to have produced it.  
And upon the most curious search, that I have been able to make for it myself, as far as the circumstances I am under would permit me, I sincerely profess, I have not been able to find any. What I have found urged, or but binted at, as a ground or reason for any one's delaying either his own, or any Infants baptising, I shall fairly give an account of, and then leave the Reader to judge, what advantage our pleaders against Infant's Baptism upon the account of the unlawfulness of it can make therefrom; or rather what a miserable fallacy they put upon themselves and others, whilst they allege the Primitive Practice of deferring Infant's Baptism, in justification of their denying Baptism to Infants, upon the account of the unlawfulness of it for want of a Command or Example in Scripture, whereas it was never in the Primitive Times denied to any Infant upon that account; nor was that ground ever urged or alleged by any in those days, as a reason, or so much as pretence for their deferring to baptise their Infants; nor did any ask, as our Antipaedobaptists now do, What Scripture have you for it? Where did Christ ever command it? or where did any Apostle practice it?  
Now in order to the showing on what Accounts Baptism was in Ancient Times so oft, and so long deferred, I must premise, that some did voluntarily defer their own baptising; and some had their Baptism deferred by others; the former were Adult; the later Infants. And of the Reasons or Occasions of both I will speak distinctly.  
And First, Those that delayed their own baptising had several Reasons, and Pretences for it.  
(1.) Some did it out of a fear of sinning after baptism, and so forfeiting the grace of it, and 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 647. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. ib. p. 649. Sed mundus rursus delinquit, quo male comparetur diluvio. it, aque igni destinatur, sicut & homo qui post baptismum delict a restaurat. Tertull. de Bapt p,259. ed. Rigalt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Nyssen, de Baptismo, p. 221. Indeed 'twas very usual in those times (notwithstanding the Fathers did solemnly and smartly declaim against it) for persons to defer their being baptised till they were near their death, out of a kind of Novatian principle, that if they fell into sin after Baptism, there would be no place for repentance, mistaking that place of the Apostle, where 'tis said, that if they who have been once enlightened (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Ancients generally understand of Baptism.) shall away, 'tis impossible to renew them again unto repentance. Dr. Cave Prim. Christian. par. 1. ch. 10. pag. 309.  being certainly damned without ●hope of recovery even by repentance, especially when they considered the pronenese of their own nature to sin, and the occasions and temptations to sinning, that they should meet withal in their converse with the world, as appears from sundry passages in Gregory Nazian. Greg. Nyssen. and Te●tullian.  
This fear, how specious soever the pretence of it be, did to Gregory Nazianz. seem the fear of a mad man, or a fool; and as the Church of England positively determines against 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Nyss. De Bap. pag. 221. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 647. Not every deadly sin willingly committed after Baptism is sin against the Holy Ghost and unpardonable. Wherefore the grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as fall into sin after Baptism. Artic. 16. of Ch. of Engl. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 647. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. ib. p. 649. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Gr. Nyssen. de Bapt. 219. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; D. Basil. Exhort. ad Baptis. Tom. 1. p. 480.  the ground of it, so both he, and Gregory Nyssen show the vanity of it; and conclude it better to contract, or relapse into some sin, through converse with the world, than to die unbaptised; and St. Basil, from the experience of ability to resist sin before Baptism, encourages to deposit the fear of being overcome by it after baptising.  
(2) Some deferred their baptising out of the love of the world, and the pleasures of it, and a loathness to part either with their sins, or their pleasures, which they thought, upon their Baptising they must clearly 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Nyss. de Bapt. pag. 221, 222. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Basil. Exhort. ad Bapt. p. 482. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. ib. pag. 482. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. ib. p. 481. Ti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Id. ib. 480. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 648. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. ib. p. 450.  renounce, and wholly part withal; so that their Baptism would be to their disadvantage, in regard they must lose so much pleasure and profit for the present, as came by their sins, and get nothing the more for it afterward; they that went last into the vineyard receiving as much as they that went in first: which Reason is alleged and answered by Greg. Nyssen, St. Basil, and Gr. Nazianzen.  
(3) Some deferred their baptising out of an unwillingness to take upon them the yoke of Christ, and submit to the severity of the Gospel 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Bafil. Exhort. ad Bapt. p. 477.  Rule: which St. Basil intimates and replies unto.  
(4) Some deferred their baptising even till their deathbed, on an opinion that by that means they should secure their salvation having Heaven immediately opened unto them, and themselves admitted into the joys of the just. And because they desired to have it then, they in the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Nyssen. de Bapt. p. 222. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Nazianz. Orat. 40. p. 652. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; D. Basil: Exhort. ad Bapt. p. 482. Quando quis propterea peccat, ut sanctum baptisma in novissima sua exspir atione suscipiat, for tassis non adipiscitur; Novi multos qui hoc passi sunt, qui spe baptismatis mulsa peccabant, etc. Gratian. 3. parte de cousecratione, dist. 4. fol. 453. Col. 2.  mean time thought, that God in his mercy would accept of the desire of baptism for their being baptised. The vainness of which hope is disputed against by St. Basil, Gr. Nyssen and Gr. Naz and the dangerousness of its miscarrying shown by Gratian.  
(5) Some deferred their baptising out of want of leisure for it (as they pretended) through multitude of businesses and throng of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; D. Basil. Exhort. ad Bapt. p. 479.  employments, whose pretexts and excuses St. Basil doth inveigh against with much earnestness.  
(6) Some again deferred it out of supinety and laziness, and a cartless negligence, as both St. Chrysostom and Greg. Nazianz. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Chrys. Hom. ad Baptizand. Tom 6. p. 852. Edid. Savil. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 654.  intimates, in bestowing the title of slothful careless persons on them for it.  
(7) Some for the deferring of their baptising pleaded the insufficienoy of their knowledge as yet, and thereupon their willingness to continue still (one year after another) 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; D. Basil. Exhortat. ad Bapt. p. 476, 477. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr: Nyssen. de Bap. p. 218.  in the state of Cateohumen; whom St. Basil chides for that pretence; ask when they will have knowledge enough to become Christians? and letting them know, that having been so long fed with Milk, it is now time they were weaned, and fed with stronger meat: and so Greg. Nyssen. also.  
(8) Some pleaded inconveniency of the present time, when they were pressed to be baptised; and put it off till this, that, or the other time. One would be baptised at Candlemass, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Or. 40. 654. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Basil. Exhort ad Bapt. p. 475, 476.  another at Easter, a third at Whitsuntide. Against which pleas St. Basil urges that man's whole life (and then sure Infancy also) is a feason for baptism, so that it can never come amiss.  
(9) Some would be baptised but in this or that Place, this City, or that River, as Jerusalem, or Jordan, (where Constantine desired, and designed to be, and St. Basil was baptised) and so deferred their baptising till they might come thither; and to excuse their deferring to go pleaded the length of the way, and the dangerousness of the journey. In answer to which Gr. Nyssen 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Nyssen. de Bapt. p. 219. Debemus fratres dilectissimi (vobis Catechumenis loquor) gratiam baptismatis ejus (sc. Christi) omni festinatione suscipere, & de fonte Jordanis quem ille benedixit benedictionem consecrationis baurire, ut in eum gurgitem in quem se illius sanctitas mersit, nostra peccata mergantur.— Sed ut eadem fonte mergamur, non nobis Orientalis petenda est regio, non fluvius terrae Judaicae. ubi enim nunc Christus, ibl quoque Jordanis est. Eadem consecratio quae Orientis flumina benedixit, occidentis fluenta sanctificat.— D. Ambros. Serm. 41. Tom. 3. pag. 268. Nulla distinctio est, mari quis an stagno, flumine an sonte, lacu an alveo diluatur. Nec quicquam refert inter eos quos Joannes in Jordane, & quos Petrus in Tiberi tinxit, nisi & ille spado, quem Philippus in vid fortuitâ aquâ tinxit, plus salutis aut minus retulit. Igitur omnes aquae de pristinâ originis praerogatiuâ Sacramentum sanctificationis consequntur, invocato Deo. Tertull. de Bapt. p. 257. Ed. Rigalt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 657. See Dr. Cave Prim. Christianity Part. 1. chap. 10. p. 313.  alleges the Eunuches standing upon no such circumstances; St. Ambrose and Tertullian pleads a no preeminence of one river above another in this respect, every river being a- Jordan where Christ is; and Gr. Nazianzen exhorts to break through all impediments to obtain Baptism, even to run through fire and water to it.  
(10) Some would be baptised but by such or such a Person, a Bishop, and he a Metropolitan too, and one of Jerusalem, and one well descended; or, if a Presbyter, one that is unmarried, and of the Angelic order; and 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Nazianz. Orat 40. p. 656.  so deferred their baptising upon that pretext; which nice curiosity Gr. Nazianzen gravely and largely rebukes them for.  
(11) Some protracted their Baptism upon exception taken at the mixed company they were to be baptised with, whereof many were to them unsuitable in quality, and unequal in dignity, whom Greg. Nazianzen gravely exhorts to an humble condescension in that particular; and that from the example 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. pag. 656, 657.  of Christ, into whom they were baptised, who humbled himself to a far lower degree than so, for for their sake taking upon him the form of a servant; and from the no difference that there is amongst Christians considered as Christians.  
(12) Some were apt to put off their baptising, on pretence of not having their Relations present, whom they desired to have with them when they were baptised: whom Gregory Nazianzen quickens to a present acceptance 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Ocat. 40. p. 655.  of the Grace offered without staying for their friends, for fear of some sad intervening accident, which should bring those friends to a fellowship with them in their sorrows, whom they would have had partners with them of their joys.  
(13) Some hung back from being baptised upon the account of the chargeableness of it, in regard of a Present that was then to be offered; a splendid Robe that was to be worn; and a Treat that was to be given to the Minister that baptised them: which considerations Gregory 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 655. Nyssen. de Bapt. p. 215.  Nazianzen rejects, as too minute and trifling to come in competition with Baptism, which is of a higher concern than to be omitted on so slight accounts, assuring them that Themselves would be an acceptable offering unto Christ, and their good life a pleasing entertainment to himself.  
(14) Some checked at Confessing of their sins at their baptising, and on that account delayed to be baptised; whom Greg. Nazianzen exhorts not to be trouble at it, in consideration that it was they way 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 657.  of John's baptising; that the shame of that in this world, was the way to escape eternal shame for it in the world to come; and that it was a clear argument of the truth of their hatred and detestation of sin, thus to triumph over it, and expose it unto shame.  
(15) Some stuck at the Exorcism that ushered in Baptism, and on that account made no great haste to be baptised; which Medicine Greg. Nazianzen wishes by no means to refuse, as being the touchstone for trial of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Nazianz. Orat. 40. p. 657. Est autem Exorcismus, conscripta verbarum series, in quâ is qui baptizat, diabolum, Denomine adjuratum, ab co, qui baptizatur, excedere ac procul fugere jubet. Nicetas in Gr. Naz. Orat, 40. p. 1066. See Dr. Cave Prim. Christianity Part. 1. c. 10. c. 316.  the sincerity of him that comes to Baptism.  
(16) Some (as a worthy Author of our own notes) deferred their baptising in imitation of the way that was taken with the young Heathens converted to Christianity, who were instructed in the 
Yet though this abuse of Baptism prevailed not upon that opinion only (viz. that all their Actual as well as Original sins were washed away in Baptism, and so had the less to answer for, if they were baptised towards the later end of their days) but upon the occasion which was taken of educating and instructing Infidels in the Faith, for some good time before they were baptised, which custom divers born of Christian Parents imitated; yet we find none that the Church wilfully suffered to die without Baptism, who were descended of true believers, or had been competently instructed in the Faith of Christ— Scrivener, Course of Divinity, pag. 196.  faith for some while before their baptism, and continued, like them in the state of Catechumen for some good time before they would be baptised.  
(17) Some deferred their baptising, in imitation of the Example of Christ, and would not be baptised, till of that age that he was of, when he was baptised, viz. thirty years old, or thereabouts, (about which Age, whether on that principle, or for some other reason, or occasion, were baptised, St. Ambrose, St. Austin, and St. Hierom). Which pretence of theirs Greg. Nazianz. very largely and solidly refutes; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 658, 659.  showing that Christ had no need of any baptismal purgation; that he was in no fear by any danger for want of it; that he had particular reasons for his forbearance proper to him, and incompetent to them; and that there is no necessity of copying out all Christ's actions in our imitations, by several instances.  
(18) Some forbore baptism out of a fear of being reproached for Tritheits (the owners and worshippers of three gods) because they were to be baptised in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Against which fear Greg. Nazianzen encourages his Auditors, by proposing himself to be their Champion in the defence 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 699.  of the Catholic Doctrine of a Trinity of Persons in the Unity of the Divine Essence; and offering to interpose himself between them and danger in that war; and, so they might reap the good of it, to receive all the blows that should be given in that encounter.  
(19) last, if I may have leave to conjecture, some forbore being baptised out of fear of persecution for their Religion. How probably this is conjectured will appear, when it is considered how difficult, or rather impossible it was for any in those days, under persecuting Tyrants, to hold or enjoy any place of power, profit, or honour, either in Court, City, or Army, or even life itself, that was known to be a Christian; and how ready an expedient it was towards the holding of such places, and enjoying life and liberties, and avoiding all persecution upon the score of Christianity, by remaining unbaptised; since they could not be proved Christians, that were never christened. And now having shown the Reasons why several above the Age of Infants did themselves delay their own baptising, it follows secondly that I show upon what Reasons the baptising of children in their Infancy was delayed by others.  
Now to this it may be said in General, that it is reasonable to suppose, that on what accounts the Adult delayed to be baptised themselves, on the same they delayed the baptising of their children, (unless where the case was altered by some particularity of circumstance); and so it came to pass that the baptising of many Infants was deferred till they came to riper years.  
But there are further more Particular accounts to be given of the delaying of Infants, more nearly relating unto them.  
First, some were as yet Heathens themselves, unconverted to Christianity, when their children were born: and no marvel if they would not make their children Christians, who themselves were Heathens. And the same is the case of such as, though in heart and purpose Christians when their children were born, yet kept off from being baptised.  
(2) Some Infants owed the delays of their baptising to their Parent's tenderness and cautiousness, who forbore to baptise them, for fear they should be too weak either to endure the present severities of baptism, especially as than mostly administered, by a total immersion (and in some places three times) into the water; or to avoid the after defilements, that would be contracted by them, when they were baptised, through the imbecility of their nature, and the power of temptations; whom Greg. Nazianz. checks for womanly weakness, and littleness of faith; unlike 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 648. Vide Eliae Cretens. notam in locum. Of the Trine Immersion see Dr. Cav●, Primitive Christianity, Part. 1. c. 10. P. 322. Also Greg. Notes ch. 39 p. 171. and of the Ancients Apostol. Canon 49. Dionys. de Eccl. Hierarch. cap. 4. Tertull. advers. Praxeam. p. 659. Ed. Rig. & de Corona Mil. p. 121. D. Athanas. q. 94. de Interp. Parab. Script.  therein to Hannah, who dedicated her Samuel unto God before he was born, and consecrated him to his service as soon as he was weaned; advising to arm and fortify their Infants against all fears, with that great and good Amulet of the Trinity, by baptising them into the Faith, of it.  
(3) Some were apt to delay their Infant's baptism upon the account of their being insensible at their baptising, of what was got or lost, by being or not being baptised; (perhaps also on a supposition, that the Infants had no perception of any inward operation, that baptism had upon them; which some, that were baptised at full years, felt 
† The ancient Christians speak of high Illuminations wherewithal God pleased then to grace Baptism; I make no question but they spoke as they felt, and that they talk no● of a strange change then wrought which never was— Dr. Patrick, of Baptism, pag. 42. , and St. Cyprian in particular testifies of himself, (l. 2. Ep. 2.) Whom Gregory Nazianzen nevertheless advises 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 658.  by all means to baptise their Infants, especially in case of urgent danger; telling them, it were better that their children were sanctified without the sense, than died without the seal of baptism: arguing for the baptising of the Infants of Christians, though insensible of baptism, from the eircumcising of the Infants of Jews the eighth day, though insensible of circumcision.  
(4) last, some might be of the mind of Tertullian, and Gregory Nazianzen (who in this case have something of singularity in their opinions) and think it might be more for their children's 
Itaque pro cujusque personae conditione ac dispositione, etiam atate, cun●latio baptismi utilior est: pracipuè tamen circa parvalos.— Ait quidem Dominus, Nolite illas prohibere ad me venire. Veni ant ergo, dum adolescunt, veniant, dum discunt, dum quo veniant, docentur: siant Christiani quum Christum nosse potucrint.— Norint petere salutem, ut petenti dedisse videaris. Tertull. de Bapt. pag. 264. Ed. Rigal. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 658.  advantage, if they were not baptised till they could be able to answer to, though they could not fully understand their Catechisms; and in their own names desire to be baptised, and might upon that account, unless in case of necessity, defer their Baptism: the contrary whereto will (I hope) be abundantly manifested in these ensuing Papers.  
And these are all the Reasons that, in my little converse with the ancient Writers, I have found, of any's deferring either their own, or their children's Baptising; amongst all which there is not one, that so much as borders upon any unlawfulness in Infant's Baptism.  
And now so many reasons being alleged for the delaying of Baptism; so many shifts used for the putting it off, in the Primitive Times; and yet the Lawfulness of its being administered to Infants never once questioned all the while, the Vlawfulness of it never urged; it is a plain case, that those Times had no such thoughts of Baptism as these have. For had they thought Infants baptism unlawful for want of a Scripture command for it, or example of it, when any had been exhorted to an early baptising of their children, how easy, and how unanswerable an answer had been ready at hand? Christ never commanded any such thing as Infant's baptism; the Apostles never practised any such thing as the baptising of Infants; there is neither Precept for it, nor Example of it in Holy Scripture, and therefore it is unlawful, and we dare not do it. But in regard there is in all those times not the least appearance of any such objection made against it, or of any such plea pretended for the deferring of it, it is plain they thought there was either precept for it, or example of it in Scripture, or both; or else thought that want of either, or both, did not make it unlawful, and so did not defer it upon account of the unlawfulness of it. And so all our Antipaedobaptists great boast of Antiquity, for the baptising of only Adult believing Persons, and against the baptising of Believers Infant children, affords them but little roast, there is not the least strength added to their cause thereby, nor weakness brought upon ours. And I wish those ignorant ones that are deluded with the great noise, and gay show of it, to take notice hereof, that they be no longer deceived thereby.  
And now this grand Prejudice being (as I hope it is) removed, I shall no longer detain the Reader from the Treatise itself, than to desire him to join with me in prayer to God, to bless it to the end for which it is designed.  

A Prayer.  
GRacious Lord God, who are not willing that any should perish, but willest that all should be saved and come unto the knowledge of the Truth; and hast sent both thy Prophets, and thy Apostles, thy Son, and thy Spirit, to convince men of Error, and bring them unto the Truth, be pleased graciously to bless this Treatise, and make it useful unto that end. Dispose the minds of those ignorant and deceived one's that shall read it unto a readiness to receive the truth therein held forth in the love of it. Open blind eyes, & soften hard hearts, that they may discern the Truth when it shall be proposed to them, and have kindly impressions made by the power of it upon them. Remove from them all prejudicated opinion and self-conceit, all passionateness and worldly interest, and every thing that may hinder the operation of thy grace, in the declaration of thy truth, upon them. And make this Treatise effectually instrumental to the confirmation of such as stand in the truth, to the satisfaction of th●se that doubt of it, and to the restauration of such as are fallen from it; that so it may turn to the glory of thy Name, and the benefit of thy Church, in the healing of breaches, and saving of souls. Grant this, O God, for the sake of Jesus Christ, thy Son, and our Saviour. Amen.   

The Litany.  
That it may please thee to give to all thy people increase of grace, to her ●eekly thy word, and to receive it with pure affection, and to bring forth the fruits of the Spirit;  
We beseech thee to hear us, Good Lord.  
That it may please thee to bring into the way of truth all such as have erred, and are deceived;  
We beseech thee to hear us, Good Lord.  
That it may please thee to strengthen such as do stand, and to comfort and help the weak hearted, and to raise up them that fall, and finally to beat down Satan under our feet;  
We beseech thee to hear us, Good Lord.  
Lord have mercy upon us.  
Christ have mercy upon us.  
Lord have mercy upon us.  
Our Father, which art in heaven, etc.  
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost.  
As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be world without end. Amen.    

ERRATA.  
PAg. 3. l. 15. read Infants to make. p. 48. l. 24. especially being lie. p. 51. l. 12. for him. p. 62. l. 25. Christ's is. p. 75. Sect. 4. marg. l. 4. add Sedul. p. 83. Sect. 5. marg. l. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 84. marg. l. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 93. l. 29. (he. p. 103. l. 5. very grace. p. 108. marg. l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 122. marg. l. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 136. marg. l. 1. vitium & depr●— p. 144. l. 20. neglect it. p. 146. marg. l. 2. pertinere. l. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 146. l. 7. was in our. p. 156. l. 6. as by a means. p. 157. marg. l. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 158. marg. l. 4. nativiton. l. 22. per ejus virt— l. 26. virginem. p 180. l. 9 baptising few or no. p. 185. l. 25. done by either— p. 199. mar. l 8. Matth. 28. 19 p. 207. l. 16. old, who. p. 208. l. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. marg. l. 8. relinquere. p. 213. l. 9 that will have. p. 237. l. 23. Frisingensis. p. 271. marg. l. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 273. l. 14. nor are. p. 310. l. 29. initiation. p. 327. l. 8. Jaylor's. 399. l. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 409. l. 22. r. Heterodox. p. 415. m. l. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 419. marg. l. 10. tulisse. p. 421. marg. l. 3. adoleri. p. 423. marg. l. 14. Ac ne   

A MODEST PLEA FOR Infant's BAPTISM.  

CHAP. 1. The Text. The Occasion of the Words. The Doctrine gathered from it, and proved.  LUKE 18. 16. Suffer little Children to come unto me, and forbidden them not. 
§. 1. THese words were spoken by our Saviour to his Disciples. The occasion of them was this. Certain Persons came, and brought their Children also, to Jesus, desiring that he would touch them, (v. 15.) that is, as St. Matthew relates it, put his h●nds upon them and pray, (Matth. 19 13.) This action of theirs was so far disliked of by our Saviour's Disciples, that they rebuked them, and would have chid them away. But this carriage of his Disciples towards them our Saviour did very much dislike of. Indeed St. Mark tells us, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he was much displeased thereat, (Mark 10. 14.) And in that displeasure, when he had called the Infants unto him, he spoke unto his Disciples these words, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbidden them not.  
§. 2. So that the words are an Obliqne Rebuke given by our Saviour unto his Disciples, for going about to hinder the coming of little Children unto him: and a direct command to permit their coming unto him for the future; and that Command backed with a direct Prohibition, forbidding their ever after hindering of them to come. And they brought unto him also Infants, that he should touch them: but when his Disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbidden them not; for of such is the kingdom of God. From whence I gather this Point, That little children are to be suffered to come unto Christ, and ought not to be forbidden coming unto him.  
§. 3. This Doctrine is so near the very words of our Saviour, and those recorded by three Evangelists, and that with so great concord, that in the Original, there is no difference among them, save in the order of the words, and in the variation of a Tense (St. Matthew using 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Aorist, whereas St. Mark and St. Luke use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Present Tense, which difference in show is really none indeed, the Aorist being ordinarily used for the Present Tense) that it will not be much needful to prove it by any other medium, than what the Text itself will afford; and that is this. What our Saviour commanded should be permitted, and forbade should be hindered, that aught to be suffered, and ought not to be forbidden. But our Saviour commanded that little children should be permitted to come, and forbade they should be hindered from coming to him. Therefore little Children are to be suffered, and ought not to be forbidden to come unto Christ.  
§. 4. Yet for the opening of the Point three things I shall endeavour to clear: (1) What we are to understand by the Children that are to be suffered to come unto Christ. (2) Of what children it was that our Saviour gave command that they should be suffered to come to him. (3) What coming of those children unto Christ it is, that is to be suffered, and ought not to be hindered.   

CHAP. II.  
Of the Children that are to be suffered to come to Christ; Infants.  
§. 1. FOr the First, the little Children, that are to be suffered to come to Christ; it is evident that they are Infants. 
Insantem autem accipimus septem annis minorem: haec enim aetas quicquid videt ignorat. Wesenbecii Parat. in Pandectas Juris civilis. Digest. lib. 48. Tit. 8.  The Original word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used in the Text, being a Diminutive from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, properly signifies a child under seven years of age, as 
* Arraignment of Anabaptism. p. 44. & 232.  Mr. Cragge from Hypocrates and Beza, observes. And indeed it is spoken of our Saviour, at that time when the Wise men came to him, and found him with his Mother at Bethlehem (Matth. 2. 11.) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they found the young child.  
§. 2. Again in Mark 10. 16. it is said of these little children, that Jesus took them up in his arms; which is a clear indication of their being children of a small age, as well as stature, very infants.  
§. 3. Lastly, it is expressed in the verse before my Text, that they were Infants. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
One Translation renders it babes. And so in 1 Pet. 2. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is new born babes.  And they brought unto him also Infants, or, even Infants, or, very Infants. Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Eustathius tells us, is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a new born child and brought up at Nurse. So that of Infants we are to understand it that our Saviour spoke, when he said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbidden them not.   

CHAP. III.  
What Children are to be suffered to come unto Christ.  
§. 1. FOr the Second, Of what Children it was that our Saviour commanded, that they should be suffered to come to him: it may be a question, whether our Saviour did mean, what he said, only of those particular Infants then brought to him, but by his Disciples kept back from him; or whether his meaning in those words were not of an indefinite extent, so as that the concernment thereof may reach unto our children, as well as unto them. And to that my Answer is, that (at least as I conceive) our Saviour's words were not a Particular Order of concernment only to the then present Infants, but were of a concernment so general, as to reach down even unto our Infants also, at this distance from that time and place.  
§. 2. For first, Suppose the next day more Infants, or other Infants the same day, had been brought for the same end, that those were, unto Christ, is it imaginable, that the Disciples of our Saviour, would have again rebuked them that brought them, and so have stood in need of a new Rebuke from our Saviour for so dealing with them, and a new Command to suffer them to come to him? If this cannot with any reason be imagined, than it is most clear, that the words of our Saviour were of concernment unto more Infants, than those particular Ones, at that time brought unto him. And if they concerned any more besides them, than who can tell how many more besides them they did concern? Yea what can with any colour of reason be said, why the concernment of them should not be universal?  
§. 3. But secondly, There is nothing either in the Words of our Saviour, or in the Reason used by our Saviour, restraining the concernment thereof unto those Particular Infants.  
§. 4. First there is nothing in the Words of our Saviour. For they are Indefinite: and an Indefinite Enunciation it tantamount to an Universal. There is not an Individuating Particle in the whole Speech to determine the concernment thereof to these particular Infants. His Words only are, Suffer little children to come unto me. He doth not say, Suffer only these little children to come unto me. Take the words as they are in the Greek, and they only are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, little children, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these little children. In St. Mark. 10. 14. the words are, Suffer the little children: but the Particle the here is at most but an Emphatical note, intimating that the littleness of children should be no hindrance to their coming to Christ: but that even the little, the least of children, should be permitted to come to him as well as elder bigger persons: It is not an Individuating Pronoun singling out these from all others to be the only children that should be suffered to come to him. And in the Liturgy the words have no such Emphasis upon them, being only, Suffer little children to come unto me, just as here the same Greek words in the Text are rendered.  
§. 5. Secondly, there is nothing in the Reason used by our Saviour restraining the concernment of his words to those Particular Infants: his words being, not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of these but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of such as these, is the kingdom of Heaven. Such as th●se, is an expression very far from being restrictive exactly unto these. Nothing here then restraineth the concernment of our Saviour's words unto those Particular Infants: rather here is something that enlargeth the concernment thereof to an Indefinite number of Infants. And that is the Consideration of our Saviour's fetching the Reason for the permission of children's coming to him, not from some consideration, which was of particular concernment to these Children; but from such an Head as was of general concernment unto all other Infants as well as these. He saith not, Suffer little children to come unto me, for they are children of my near kindred, special friends, favoureres, or benefactors, for whom I have a singular respect: but, Suffer little children to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of God; q. d. these and all Infants of their age, are so qualified as they ought to be, who are to be the Subjects of my kingdom, into which there is no entrance for any, except they be converted and become as little children, (Matth. 18. 3.) and therefore suffer them, and, by a parity of reason, all others too that shall be brought to me, no less than them, to come unto me.  
§. 6. Thirdly, there is something in the Context, that clearly shows, that our Saviour's words are more properly of concernment unto other Infants, than to these. And that is the Point of Time, when our Saviour spoke these words: and that was, after he had called the Infants unto him, and not before. For so it is evidently in the beginning of the verse, But Jesus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having called (i. e. when, or after that he had called) them (i. e. the Infants themselves, and not his Disciples, nor those that brought the Infants) he said, etc. It is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the neuter gender, which agrees with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Infants: not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mascuculine gender, which it should be if it referred either to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Disciples, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that brought the Infants. And therefore Beza renders the Text, Jesus verò quum puerulos advocasset, dixit, But Jesus, when he had called the Infants, said, etc. Now to make the concernment of our Saviour's words to be proper to those particular Infants, is to render our Saviour's command perfectly needless. For what need were there of his bidding his Disciples to suffer those to come to him, that already were at, and with him. Yea suppose he had only called them, and they were not yet come, who can imagine, that it were needful to give any further command to his Disciples to suffer those to come at him, whom he had but just then called unto him? It is therefore of Infants in general, and not of those particular Infants only that he spoke.  
§. 7. Yet Fourthly, Our Saviour's speaking these words upon that particular occasion, doth not necessarily restrain the concernment of his words unto those particular Infants. Acts of justice, and acts of Grace, are of general concernment, though the occasions of them be particular; unless there be something in the circumstances of the acts, that may lay a restraint upon their concernment. And the Apostle hath notably taught us to draw general conclusions from particular expressions, (in Heb. 13. 5, 6.) He hath said, I will never leave thee nor for sake thee. So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper. The promise of not being forsaken of the Lord, was a particular one, made upon a particular occasion, unto a particular person, namely Joshua, (Jos. 1. 5.) And yet saith the Apostle (so general is the concernment of it, that) we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper. And thus, were the occasion of this Speech of our Saviour never so particular, yet how fairly is this general conclusion drawn therefrom? Christ gave order, that little children, when they were brought, should be suffered to come to him, and not be forbidden. Therefore little children should now, and at all times, be suffered, and should not be forbidden to come unto Christ: especially since, as there is the same need for our children, that there was for those children, to come to Christ; so there is the same mercy in Christ now, to move him to receive our children, that there was in him then, to move him to receive theirs: and there is no circumstance in all the action debarring our children of his mercy, and restraining it unto theirs.  
§. 8. But it is time I should proceed to speak to the Third, and show what coming of little children unto Christ it is, that is to be suffered, and ought not to be hindered.   

CHAP. IU.  
What coming of little children unto Christ is to be sufferedm and ought not to be hindered.  
§. 1. NOw to clear this, we must show that the Phrase of coming unto Christ is capable of various interpretations.  
§. 2. And first it notes an approach, or access of any person unto Christ, as exhibiting himself corporally present in place. Thus those Saducees came to him, that came to pose him, (Matth. 22. 23.) And this is the ordinary and proper signification of the Phrase. And in this sense those Infants spoken of in the Text, did come to Christ. Their being brought to him, was a coming of theirs to him. When the Disciples rebuked those that brought them, our Saviour commands that they [the children] should be suffered to come unto him.  
§. 3. But in this sense, now, our children cannot come unto Christ. Christ is not where corporally present upon earth, that children may be carried to him, or in this sense come at him. In Heaven indeed he is corporally present: but thither children cannot be carried, thither children cannot come. Wither I go ye cannot com●, saith our Saviour, (John 13. 23.) i. e. not till after death; nor then neither, but in spirit, till the resurrection of the dead. For flesh and blood (unchanged) cannot inherit the kingdom of God, (1 Cor. 15. 20.) So that the words taken in relation to children now, are not to be understood properly. And therefore unless we mean not to have our children come at Christ, we must go seek out some other meaning of the Phrase, and find out some other way by which they may come to him.  
§. 4. Secondly, therefore the Phrase may be taken Figuratively. And so sometimes in notes a becoming, or a being made a Disciple unto Christ. And so, when our Saviour saith (Matth. 11. 28.) Come unto me all ye that labour, his meaning is, become disciples to me: for so it follows (in ver. 29.) Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me. Where he offers himself to be a Master to such as should come to him. And in what other sense than this can we understand that (in John 3. 26.) Behold the same baptizeth, and all men 
Omnes currunt ad baptismum illius. Alcu. in Aqui. Au. Cat.  come unto him. That is, Jesus by Baptism receiveth proselytes, and there is great recourse unto him for that end, many persons become his Disciples by receiving his Baptism. And to th●s agrees the Paraphrase of Nonnus upon the place. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Non. in loc.  All the citizens make haste desiring to partake of his divine washing, i. e. to become his Proselytes, to be made his Disciples by Baptism. And in accordance with this sense is the same Phrase interpretable, (John 5. 40.) Ye will not (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) come to me, (i. e. become my disciples, believing on me, and being baptised by me) that ye may have life. And 
See Dr. Ham. on John 6. 37. Similitudo sumpta à discipulis quos pater magistro tradit, quique volentes eum frequentant. Grot. ap. Poli. Synops.  so again (in John 6. 37, 44, 65.) In all which places the phrase of coming unto Christ, implies a becoming disciples to him, being made his Proselytes.  
§. 5. So then, to become a Disciple to Christ is in one sense to come to Christ. And if children may be made Disciples to Christ, then there is a way left, whereby they also, as well as elder persons, may come to Christ.  
§. 6. And that they may, is very fairly hinted even in this Text: the words which our Saviour useth to express the coming of these Infants to him by, being the very words, as is observed, 
Dr. Hammond.  of which that name is composed, by which such as became Disciples to Christ were anciently called, viz. Proselytes. His words are, Suffer the little children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (or, as St. Matthew relates them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to come to me, q. d. to become my Proselytes: for so were they called, that from Gentilism did (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) come over unto Judaisme before Christ's time: and from either Gentilism or Judaisme came over unto Christianity, in, or after the days of Christ. And by those words of St. Athanasius, wherein he mentions some other books, besides the Canonical ones, that were by the Fathers proposed to be read (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e.) to those that as yet came to, and were desirous to be catechised, i. e. instructed or taught the word of piety, or the principles of true religion, a Proselyte seems to be described. And the word itself (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proselyte) we have indiverse Scriptures. (Matth. 23. 15.) Ye compass sea and land to make one Proselyte, i. e. to get and gain one Disciple. So Acts 6. 5. & 2. 10. & 13. 43.  
§. 7. And it is fully confirmed by the Reason, which our Saviour gives for this his Command of suffering the little children to come unto him, and Prohibition of any man's hindering them from coming, in the latter end of the verse, for of such is the kingdom of God. Which what other sense can it have than this, Little children have in them such qualifications; as ought to be in every one, that belongs to my kingdom, that is, in every Disciple of mine, every Proselyte unto Christianity: and therefore let even them also, as well as others, come to me, be made my Disciples, admitted as Proselytes unto, and received as Subjects into the kingdom of God: it being most reasonable that they should be received into the kingdom of God, who are such as the kingdom of God consisteth of. So then Children may become Disciples of Christ, be made his Proselytes. And if children's being brought to Christ was looked upon by him as their coming to him; why should we not think that their being brought to him to be his Disciples will be looked upon by him as their coming to him to be his Disciples? Since him that cometh to him he will in no wise cast out, (John 6. 37.)  
§. 8. O but, the doubt still remains, which way may our children become, or be made Disciples to Christ. I answer by being baptised in the Name, and with the Baptism of Christ. As Baptism was one Ceremony by which before Christ's time Heathens were made Disciples unto Moses, so Baptism was the only Ceremony by which, both in and after Christ's time, both Heathens and Jews were made Disciples unto Christ. And this is evident as in the former part from what was customary among the Jews: (as we shall see afterwards) whence that Baptism, by which men were admitted Members of the Church of the Jews was called Baptismus ad Proselytismum, The Baptism of men for Proselytism, or bringing them into Discipleship: so in the latter part from what is said by our Saviour himself (in Matth. 28. 19) Go ye therefore, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, disciple ye, or, make Disciples of all nations, bring in all nations to be my Disciples, baptising them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Where the baptising them is expressly laid down as a means of their being made Disciples unto Christ, or Christians. And accordingly the Persian Interpreters explain baptising to be making Christians. 
Bibl. Polyglot.  Baptise them, say they, that is make them Christians; who what are they else but Disciples to Christ? And so Tertullian 
De Bapt. c. 18.  says of little children, siant Christiani, let them be made Christians, for let them be baptised, as soon as they shall be able to know Christ. As therefore men were made Disciples to Moses by being baptised into Moses, (John 9 28. 1 Cor. 10. 2.) so are they made Disciples to Christ by being baptised into Christ. And therefore making and baptising Disciples go together, John 4. 1. Jesus made and baptised, that is, (as if the words had been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) made by baptising more Disciples than John: accordingly as our Saviour said to his Disciples (Matth. 28. 19) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, make Disciples baptising (i. e. by baptising) them.  
§. 9 And whereas it may be said, that Baptising is not enough to make a Disciple without ●eaching, because our Saviour joins Teaching to Baptising, saying, Go make all nations Disciples baptising them and teaching them. I answer, that indeed men are made Disciples both these ways, by baptising, and by teaching: and that there must be both these before one can be a complete and perfect Disciple; but that by either of these ways alone, without the other, a man may be entered into discipleship, made an initial (if I may so speak) or an imperfect disciple. And there is no necessity from our Saviour's words, that there must be both, before one can be a Disciple in any measure or degree. For our Saviour doth not say conjunctly make disciples baptising and teaching: but without any conjunction, baptising them, teaching them. So that where either of these is, there a Person may become, or be made a Disciple, though not so complete and perfect, as where there is both.  
§. 10. Forasmuch then as to be made a Disciple to Christ is to come to Christ; and to be baptised with the Baptism of Christ is to be made a Disciple to Christ; and our Children may be baptised with the Baptism of Christ, here is a fair and a clear way opened for our children to come to Christ. And since they cannot any other way but th●s come at him, this way they are to be suffered to come to him, and ought not to be hindered from so coming: unless we mean to cross our Saviour's command, who, not determining their coming to this, or that particular way, but leaving it open and free for them to come to him any way that they may come, expressly giveth forth order that little children should be suffered to come to him, and not be forbidden.   

CHAP. V.  
The Interpretation of the Text vindicated, and Infant's Baptism further proved.  
§. 1. NOw interpret the words any other way, and I cannot imagine how the Reason, which our Saviour gives, why Children should be suffered to come to him, (viz. because they are such as the kingdom of God consisteth of) should not be impertinent, either to his Command to suffer them to come, or else to the Occasion of his giving of that Command.  
§. 2. First, interpret the words of coming to him by way of bodily approach whilst he was corporally present upon earth: and so indeed those Infant's might and did come to him. But how was their being such as the kingdom of God consisted of, a Reason of their being suffered so to come? For if there were any force in that Reason, then by the same Reason, none but such as the Kingdom of God consisted of should have been suffered to come to Christ. Which as it is contrary to Practice; for there were suffered to come to Christ such as the kingdom of God ought not to consist of, viz. such as sought the death and destruction of Christ: so likewise it is contrary to Reason; for how should Christ by his preaching have converted such as were not of his kingdom, considered according to their present state, if they might not have been suffered to come to him, but must have been forbidden coming? So that of a mere bodily access unto Christ's corporal presence the words are not interpretable: such an interpretation crossing our Saviour's Reason that he gives for these words.  
§. 2. Again, interpret the words of coming to him where he is now corporally present in heaven: and so, supposing children may come to him, and supposing them such in some respect, as that Kingdom of God consisteth of, so the Reason will have some pertinency to the Command of our Saviour to suffer them to come; such not being to be denied reception into that kingdom of God, as that Kingdom of God consisteth of. But then how will our Saviour's Command be pertinent to the present Occasion of his speech? No question being made by his Disciples at that time about the final estates of children dying in their Infancy; and the whole matter being that they denied admission of some Infants brought by others unto Christ to be touched by the Imposition of his hands, and to be prayed over by him, probably in order to their being made his Proselytes by baptism: at which denial of theirs he being angry, gave order that the children should be suffered to come to him, namely for such purpose as those than came, in all likelihood to be by his Imposition of hands and Prayer consigned over unto Proselytism, and should not be hindered from coming to him.  
§. 4. And what were a declaration of children's capacity for glory, and fitness to come to Christ, when he should be corporally present in Heaven, if they died in their infancy, to this matter? especially at a time when Christ was not corporally present in Heaven, but lived in body here below upon the earth.  
§. 5. Again a Command so given, as this was, would suppose an ability in those, to whom it was given, to do contrary unto that Command, namely, to hinder Children from reception into the Kingdom of God, notwithstanding their greatest capacity for that kingdom. But that was neither then in the power of his Disciples, nor now is in the power of any man on earth. Supposing children dying in their Infancy to belong to the kingdom of glory, it is needless to command any man to suffer them to come to that kingdom.  
§. 6. So that neither of a Spiritual access of these children unto Christ, where he is now corporally present in glory are these words interpretable: such an interpretation of our Saviour's words rendering them impertinent to the occasion of them. And I hope none will say that our Saviour did at any time speak impertinent words.  
§. 7. And therefore not being able to imagine any other way by which our Children may come, and yet may be hindered from coming unto Christ, but that One way, which hath hitherto been insisted on, namely by being made Disciples to Christ, by being baptised into the Name and Faith of Christ. I conclude that this way our children ought to be suffered to come to Christ, and ought not to be hindered from so coming.  
§. 8. And now, the Point being thus explained, and the Explication thereof thus vindicated, I appeal to Common Reason, whether or no there be not here that, which the Antipaedobaptists of these days do with so much insolency demand of us, viz. a fair and clear Scripture Ground for Infant's Baptism. If Children may come to Christ, and must by the command of Christ be suffered to come to him, and there be no other way of their coming to him but by Baptism: what can be more plain, than that in commanding that they should be suffered to come to him, he commanded that they should be suffered to be baptised, and forbade that they should be hindered from Baptism.  
§. 9 And by this time I hope it appears with how good judgement our Church hath appointed this passage of Scripture, (which, as H. D. tells us, was called (of old) the Scripture 
Treatise of Baptism, pag. 177.  Canon for Infants-Baptism, and upon which (as he saith) much stress hath been laid since to prove the same) to be read in the Congregation at the baptising of Infants; namely, as containing in it a fair ground, and a clear proof for Infant's Baptism: which I hope you do by this time see to be no such scriptureless thing as our Antipaedobaptists do pretend.  
§. 10. Yet lest any man should think this Collection alone to be too weak a ground to bear that weight we lay upon it, (though by the way I must say, that a Consequence from Scripture rightly made is a ground good enough to bear any weight that can be fairly laid upon it, and as valid to all intents and purposes as if it were express Scripture itself, that being eminently contained in the Scripture, what ever it be that may be fairly drawn from it: and that we have no better ground than a Consequence from Scripture to build other Points of our Christian Faith upon, every way as weighty and material as Infant's Baptism is,) yet, I say, I shall for your better settlement in the belief of this Catholic truth, confirm it unto you by this one further Reason.  
§. 11. That by which Children may have Benefit; for which they have Need; of which they are Capable; and to which they have Right, that they ought to be suffered to have, and ought not to be denied the having of. But Children may have Benefit by Baptism; they have Need for Baptism; they are Capable of Baptism; and they have a Right unto Baptism. Therefore they ought to be suffered to have it, and they ought not to be denied the having of it.  
§. 12. That Children ought to be suffered to have, and ought not to be denied that, whereby they may be Benefited; for which they have Need; of which they are Capable; and to which they have a Right, I suppose it not needful to prove. For Charity will give them that Benefit for which they have need: and Justice will not deny them that Right of which they are Capable. I shall therefore forthwith proceed to make it out unto you, that Children may have Benefit by Baptism; have Need for Baptism; are Capable of Baptism; and have a Right unto Baptism. And these things I shall show you severally and in order, beginning first with the Benefits that Infants may have by Baptism.   

CHAP. VI  
Baptism beneficial unto Children in regard of their early consecration thereby unto God.  
§. 1. IT will be found upon search, that Baptism is beneficial unto Children more ways than one.  
§. 2. And First, by Baptism they are offered and presented, dedicated and consecrated unto God. Baptism is a consecration of the Baptised unto God, who are thereby Sanctified to his service. Hence that of St Paul to the Corinthians, (1 Cor. 7. 14.) The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean, but now are they holy, i. e. separate from the common unclean condition of Heathens, and by Baptism admitted into the community and relation, and state of Christians, who are Saints by calling, as being called to be Saints, that is Holy Ones, and by their very 
1 Cor. 1. 1.  calling consecrated unto God, and obliged by their Naming of the name of Christ, who is named upon them at their baptising, to departed from iniquity, (2 Tim. 2. 19)  
§. 3. Hence as Beza 
Nam Baptismo consecramur Deo, quoniam ibi nostra adoptio in Christo per Spiritum Sanctum Sancitur. Bez. in Match. 28-19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, just in Martyr. Apolog.  of late said, By Baptism we are consecrated unto God, in as much as our Adoption in Christ is there ratified by the Holy Ghost: so Justine Martyr of old, going to give an account of the primitive way of introducing persons into the Church by Baptism gins his relation thus, Now will I set forth after what manner we did dedicate [or offer up] ourselves to God, when we were renewed through Christ.  
§. 4. And as our Church in the baptising of Infant's designs a Dedication of them unto God: so did the Ancient Church too. Whence that 
Grant that whosoever is here dedicated unto thee by our Office and Ministry, etc. Office for Infant's Baptism. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Nazian. Orat. 4. de Bapt. Quibus tamen ad Consecrationem remisionemque Originalis peccati prodest eorum fides à quibus offeruntur D. Aug. Quinquag. Hom. Serm. 50.  advice of Gregory Nazianzen; If thou hast an Infant, let not iniquity get time; let it be sanctified in infancy, let it in the tender age be consecrated by the Spirit. Where certainly it is the Baptismal Sanctification and Consecration that he speaks of, and by the Spirit he means Christian Baptism: the Spirit, which is one part of Baptism, as Water is the other (which too our Saviour joins both together John 3. 5. saying, Except a man be born of Water, and the Spirit, etc. and by both means one thing, viz. Christian Baptism) being put for the whole: even as Water which is the other part of Baptism is by St. Paul (Ephes. 5. 26.) put for the whole, saying, that he might sanctify and cleanse it by the washing of Water, that is, of Christian Baptism.  
§. 5. Now for children, even in their Infancy to become by the designation of their Parents Gods own portion, and to be made Holy unto the Lord, this certainly cannot but be for the children's good. For as much as being appropriated unto God in a nearer relation, they will be respected by him with a dearer affection.  
§. 6. When any Thing is offered unto God in sincerity, God kindly accepts of it. You may see instances in Abel's offering the firstlings 
Gen. 4. 4.  of his flock; Noah's offering of every clean 
Gen. 8. 20, 21.  beast and fowl; David's 
2 Sam. 2. 2 Chron. 7. Hagg. 2.  designing; Solomon's building; and the Jews repairing a House to serve God in. So when any Person is offered and consecrate unto God in integrity of heart, God usually blesseth both the offerer, and offering. You may see instances in Abraham's offering 
Gen. 22.  his Son Isaac in sacrifice to God; in Samsons 
Judg. 16.  being made a Nazarite unto God from his mother's womb; and in hannah's consecrating her Son 
1 Sam. 1.  Samuel to the Service of God.  
§. 7. So that for our children to be by us offered, and consecrated unto God and his service is the way to entitle them to God's favour, and to derive on them his blessing. And that's reason enough, were there no more, why we should baptise them, and by so doing entitle God more nearly to them, entering them into the Catalogue of his more peculiar possessions, listing them as Tyros into the number of his soldiers, and enrolling them into his family as his more immediate servants. Whereupon our Church in her Office for the Baptising of Infants, not only gives the baptised Infant a Cross in his forehead, as a badge and cognizance of his Profession, and Relation; but also prays to God for him, that he would receive him for his own child by Adoption.  
§. 8. Not to add, that so early a Consecration of them unto God, and to his service, so timely a Dedication of them unto piety and holiness, is not without a great probability of being very influential on them in their future lives, in the way of a preservative of them from impierty and iniquity: natural conscience, that light set up in the soul by the Author of Lights, being likely to suggest unto them, in their first approaches to understanding and reason, what a shame it will be for them to give themselves unto wickedness, when they are men, who were dedicated unto holiness, when they were children; to addict themselves in their Age to the Devil, who in their Infancy were consecrated unto God. Whence doubtless it was that Greg. Naz. advised the giving to the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Naz. Orat. 4. de Bapt.  Infant the Trinity (i. e. doubtless, Baptism into the Faith of the Trinity) that great and good phylactery, or preservative: there being no more likely means to preserve them from the after debauches of judgement or conversation, than the sense of a foregoing consecration to Truth and Purity by being baptised into the Faith of the Holy Trinity, early instilled by a Carachetical infusion of the due notices of it into a child in his Infancy; whereby he is as it were prepossessed for God and Goodness, before any possession can be gotten of him by Satan and wickedness.   

CHAP. VII.  
Baptism Beneficial unto Children in regard of their being brought thereby into Covenant with God.  
§. 1. SEcondly, by Baptism Infants are brought into Covenant with God. Baptism is to us, as Circumcision was to the Jews, a Ceremony of our initiation or entrance into Covenant with God. And as then all circumcised ones were, so now all baptised one's are brought into Covenant with God, by a mutual stipulation and contract explicitly or implicitly made between them, and God; whereupon they become Gods, and God becomes Theirs, upon 
Baptismus significat nunc in Ecclesia pactum illud, quod primum ab omni Christiano cum Deo initur. Flacci Illirici Clavis Script. Voc. Baptismus. See Mr. Servieners' Course of Divinity. l. 1. par. 1. cap. 40. pag. 193. Sparks Brotherly Pèrswasion to Unity. c. 11. Mr. hooker's Eccl. Pol. l. 5 §. 64. Gr. Naz. tells us that Baptism in brief doth import 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Orat. 40. Jam verò is qui baptizatur, secundae vitae meliorisque vivendi rationis & instituti pactum cum Deo init, priori & flagitiosae vitae nuncium remittit— Nicetas in Orat. 40. Greg. Nazianz.  Covenant-terms, even the terms of the Gospel which is the New Covenant; they promising God to be His, and he promising them to be Theirs; they to believe, and obey him, and he to pardon, and save them.  
§. 2. Hence all along in the Primitive Church, and 
See Dionys. Are op. Eccles. Hierarch. ch. 4. Hocker Eccles. Polit. l. 5. §. 63.  so downward we read of stipulations, promises, contracts, covenants made by the Adult persons that were admitted to baptism: and of no admission of any such to be baptised without such stipulating, contracting, and covenanting. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Basil. l. de Spir. Sancto. c. 12.   
§. 3. And because of 
Parvuli allo profitente baptizantur, qui adhuc loqui vel credere nesciunt, Gratian. 3 par. de Consecr. dist. 4. Cum pro parvulis alii respondent, ut implicatur ●rga eos celebratio sacramenti, valet utique ad eorum consecrationem, quia ipsi pro se respondere non possunt. Id. ib. Hooker Eccl. Pol. l. 5. S. 64 p. 338.  the incapacity of Infants to such Covenant in their own persons, Therefore that they might not for want of one circumstance go without all those mighty advantages which might amount and accrue to them from their being persons in Covenant with God, they were by the piety and charity of the Church allowed the benefit of having others to transact in that affair for them, and make those stipulations, contracts, and covenants in their names, which themselves could not make in their own persons. 
* Prositeor me huic puero suasurum cum intelligere sacra per aetatem poterit, ●ivinis meis institutionibus, ut & nuncium remittat adversariis, atque ab eye desiciat, & profiteatur exolvatque divina promissa. So Dionys. Areop. expounds the Undertaking of the Surety for the Infant. Eccles. Hier. c. 12. See Dr. Sparks Brotherly Persuasion, ch. 11. Quid enim necesse est sponsores etiam periculo ingeri? Tert. de Bapt.  Which Transactors on their behalf were called Sponsores, Susceptores, Fidejussores, i. e. Promisers, Undertakers, Sureties, because of their promising, undertaking, and engaging, that the children should be brought up, in the knowledge of that Faith, into which they were baptised, and, as much as in them lay, to the performing of that Covenant, into which they were entered at their baptism. And of this engaging of Sureties for Infants in this case Tertullian is a clear witness for his time, whilst, as thinking it better to defer the baptising of Infants for a while, he asks what necessity there was of Sureties being run into hazard upon that account.  
And accordingly 
† Vos ante omnia tam mulieres quam viros, qui filios in Baptismate suscepistis mon●o u● vos cognoscatis fidejussores apud Deum extitisse pro illis, quos visi estis de sacro fonte suscipere, etc. Gratian. 3 pars dist. 4. Ab hoc igitur qui puerum i● sancta vita instituturum se esse pollicetur exigit pontifex, ut ita dicam, abrenunciationum prosessionem sanctasque professiones- Dion. Areopag. Eccles. Hier. cap. 12. Dr. Sparks Brotherly Persuasion, c. 1●.  Gratian put all those, whether Women or Men, who had performed the office of Godfathers and Godmothers to children at their baptising, in mind, that they had rendered themselves Sureties unto God for them, whom they had done that office for. And Dionys. the Areopag. an Author of great Antiquity, if not altogether so old as the Apostles days, declaring the manner, as well as ground, of the Churches admitting Infants to Baptism, saith that the Priest requires of the (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) surety that promises to bring the child up in holiness of life, to make the abrenunciation, and professions (usually made at the admission of Adult Proselytes to baptism); which he makes by saying, Puer abrenunciat & profitetur, The Child renounces and professes.  
§. 4. Now if it be, as it cannot but be, a mighty advantage to be one in Covenant with God; (for so one is entitled to the divine protection, and benediction,) then must Baptism, by which our children are brought into Covenant with God, be mighty Beneficial to them. For long before they can be able to do any thing on their part towards the performance 
See Hooker Eccl. Polit. l. 5. S. 64.  of the Covenant, he is doing his part of it towards them, even protecting 
Donec voluntatis usum, & facultatem deliberandi renatus quisque recipiat, à charitate dei separari non potest. Securus interim degit sub protectione & advocatione Domini Dei sui. D. Bern. Serm. de Baptismo.  them, and blessing them with such blessings as in respect of their state and condition they are capable of; and he continues so to do all the while that they do nothing on their part to the violation and frustration of the Covenant between them.  
Hoc [sc. intelligere] quamdiu non potest valebit Sacramentum ad ejus tutelam adversus contrarias potestates: & tantum valebit, ut si ante rationis usum ex hâc vitâ emigraverit, per ipsum Sacramentum commendante Ecclesiae charitate, ab illâ condemnatione, quae per unum hominem intravit in mundum, Christiano adjutorio liberetur. D. Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifacium.   

CHAP. VIII.  
Baptism beneficial to Children in regard of the Vow they are brought under by it.  
§. 1. THirdly, by Baptism Infants are brought under the obligation of a Vow. That vow is the vow of renouncing the Devil and all his works; of believing in God; and serving him.  
§. 2. This profession and abrenunciation is altogether 
Professio & abrenunciatio in baptismo adultorum prorsus necessaria est. Melanst. Consil. Theol. part. 2. p. 327. Tum eum jubet tertio Satanam, ut ita dicam, insufflare, & praeterea quae defectionis & abrenunciationis sunt, profiteri: eique ter abrenunciationis solennibus verbis propositis cum toties illud conceptis verbis pronunciavit, ipsum orientem transfert. Dionys. Hier. Eccles. c. 4. Aquam adituri, ibidem, sed & aliquanto prius in Ecclesiâ sub Antistitis manu contestamur nos renunciare diabolo & pompae & Angelis ejus. Tertull. de Coron. Mil. c. 3. Cum aquam ingressi Christianam fidem profitemur, renunciasse nos diabolo, & pompae, & Angelis ejus ore nostro contestamur, etc. Tert. de Spect. c. 4. Primùm interrogetur Paganus si abrenunciat diabolo, omnibus pompis, & omnibus damnosis ejus operibus atque fallaciis cunctis, ut respuat primum errorem, & sic appropinquet ad veritatem. Gratian. 3 part. dist. 4. Communia vota sunt ea, quae in baptismo promisimus, scilicet, ut non peccaremus, & diabolo & operibus ejus abrenunciemus. D. Bern. de Modo bene Vivendi, Serm. 62.  necessary in the baptism of Adult Persons, as Melancthon tells us. And it hath been of Ancient and General use in the Church, as is apparent by the testimonies given to it by Dionysius Areop. Tertullian, and many others.  
§. 3. And this profession and abrenunciation, Infants, because they cannot make it in their own Persons, are by the Church allowed to make by others in their names. Hence the young Catechumen is taught to say, that his Godfathers and Godmothers did promise and vow three things in his name, First that he should renounce the Devil and all his works, etc. And that Infants, though unable either to repent or believe, are baptised because they promise them both by their sureties. And this hath been an Usage of long standing in the Church: to be sure 'tis as old as, if not older than Dionysius' time, as I shown before. 'Tis mentioned by Gratian, who saith of little Ones, that they are rightly called believers, who after a manner do confess the faith by the words of them that bear them; and by their words also do renounce 
Parvuli fideles rectè vocantur, qui fidem per verba gestantium quodammodo consitentur: & per corundom verba diabolo & mundo abrenunciant. Gratian. de Baptismo dist. 4. cap. 7.  the Devil and the world.  
§. 4. And the profession and abrenunciation so made by others in the name of Infants is by the Church looked on, and accepted of, as if made by the Infants themselves in their own persons. This Child, (saith our Church to the Sureties after the baptising of the Infant) hath promised by you his sureties, to renounce the Devil and all his works, to believe in God, and to serve him;— and, it is your parts and duties to see that this Infant be taught, so soon as he shall be able to learn, what a solemn vow, promise and profession he hath here made by you. And so it hath been looked upon anciently. Whence the profession and abrenunciation made by the Surety 
Eccl. Hierar. c. 12.  in the name of the Infant, is by Dionys. Areop. interpreted, as made by the Infant himself, Puer abrenunciat & profitetur, saith he, The Child renounces and professes. And so Nicolaus de Orbellis saith, When the Surety in the person of the little one answers I believe, the sense is as if the little one had said, I am here ready to receive the Sacraments of the faith (i. e. I suppose, to take upon me the obligations 
Cum patrinus respondet Credo, in personâ parvuli, sensus est quod sacramenta fidei prastò sum recipere, & quum veniam ad adultam aetatem, actu credendo fidei consentiam. Nic. de Orb. 4. Sent. dist. 6. qu. 6.  to believe) and when I shall attain to ripeness of age I will by an actual belief consent unto the faith.  
§. 5. And as it is looked upon as made by them, so also as obligatory unto them. Hence to the Question. Dost thou not think that thou art bound to believe and to do as thy Godfathers and Godmothers have promised for thee? the Catechumen is taught to answer, yes verily, and by Gods help so I will. And in the office of Confirmation, the before baptised Infants being grown up to more maturity, and coming to renew the solemn promise and vow that was made in their name at their baptism, and to ratify and confirm it in their own persons, do acknowledge themselves bound to believe, and to do all those things which their Godfathers and Godmothers than undertook for them.  
§. 6. And well may a Promise and Vow of that Religious nature with the Baptismal one be looked upon as obligatory; being made under such solemn 
Fidem Deo dedimus in Baptismo, quod quandoque Patres nonnulli sponsionem, juramentum, promissionem, cautionem, chirographum, professionem, contestationem, ejerationem, votum nominaverunt. Lorin. in Ecclesiasten. c. 5. v. 3.  and awful circumstances, to the Church, to God, before Saints, before Angels, with the sacred address of Public prayers, supplications, intercessions, and thanksgivings, upon proposal of high temporal, and eternal advantages, that any person of ingenuity, who had any sense of honour in him, coming to understand what circumstances he stood in, would be ashamed ever to turn renegado to so sacred a Profession, and blush to renounce so solemn an Abrenunciation: which till it be done, and done with a suitable solemnity to that of the first transaction, I humbly conceive the Obligees mere silence in the case is to be presumed upon as his consent, and his noncontradiction to be taken for an Interpretative confirmation.  
§. 7. And though the Baptised Infant be under no Scriptural injunction in the case, yet there are many weighty considerations, whereby he is obliged, as soon as he comes to understanding, to take upon himself, stand to, and make good in his own person that Promise and Vow made for him and in his name by his Sureties at his baptising.  
§. 8. As first, that he do not disparage the Church his Spiritual Mother's Wisdom, who has contrived this way for bringing him within the number of its Members; and making him a partaker of its Privileges.  
§. 9 Secondly, that he be not refractory to the Church's Authority, who declares him bound to perform this Vow, and expects, and requires from him the performance of it.  
§. 10. Thirdly, that he may show himself grateful to the Church for her Charity in admitting him into the enjoyment of the so many advantageous Privileges of a Church-Member upon the engagement of others for him, when he could not engage for himself, nor understand what was for his own good.  
§. 11. Fourthly, that he show not himself ungrateful to his Sureties in slighting that so great and important a kindness of theirs to him, as it was in itself, and aught by him (and all baptised Infants) ever to be esteemed, to transact so highly concerning an affair for him, and out of a mere intuition of good to come to him thereby, without the least prospect of advantage from it to themselves, more than the hope of a reward from God for a charitable work to man, to engage themselves both to God and Man on his behalf.  
§. 12. Fifthly, that he do not unworthily expose his Sureties to danger on any account before God or the Church, with whom they dealt, contracted, and undertook; and to whom they are Pledges for his Fidelity, and Sureties for his Good Behaviour; which what, or how great it is, is not my concern here to inquire: but some, it seems, Tertullian thought there was, when in consideration 
Quid enim necesse est Sponsores etiam periculo ingeri? Tertul. de Bapt.  thereof he was willing, rather that the baptising of the Infants should for a while be deferred, than they thereunto unnecessarily exposed.  
§. 13. Sixthly, that he do not ungraciously grieve his Parents by a dissolute throwing off so advantageous an engagement as their pious care and tender respect to his present and eternal welfare had made them solicitous to bring him under.  
§. 14. Seventhly, because to do otherwise would argue him to be a person (malae indolis in Tertullia's phrase) of an ill nature, of a wicked disposition: for none but persons of evil nature and untoward disposition would be so ungracious, as to disannul such a Vow, and violate such an Obligation. The foreseen possibility whereof made Tertullian 
Quia possunt proventu malae indolis falli. Tert. ut supra.  hang a little the other way from the baptising of Infants, so early as whilst they should need Sureties, for fear of their Sureties being deceived and endangered by their defection or prevarication.  
§. 15. Eigthly, that by performing the Vow made for him, he may be qualified to receive the Benefit whereto the performance of that Vow doth entitle him: which is so great, that it is at once his happiness to have made it by others, and his interest to perform it by 
Licet autem nullus per votum alterius obligetur: ca tamen quae sunt de necessitate potest patrinus pro parvulo promittere, & sic ipsum obligare, cooperante ad hoc bono quod parvulus recipit per patrinum. Nic. de Orb. 4 Sent. dist. 7. qu. 8.  himself. And though no adult person can be obliged by the vow of another, yet (as we are told by that acute Schoolman Nicolaus de Orbellis) those things which are of necessity the Godfather may promise for the Infant, and so oblige him, through the cooperation thereunto of that Good which the Infant receives by his Godfather; just as the Guardian hath power in the Infancy 
See Hooker Eccles. Polit. l. ●5. S. 64. pag. 339.  of his Pupil to make contracts for him, to which contracts, if made for his advantage, he is obliged to stand; as none can say, but the Baptismal contract made by the Surety for the Infant, is highly advantageous to him. And 
Sicut parvulus potest consequi salutem ex fide alienâ per Sacramentum Baptismi: sic congruum est ut possit obligari ad ea quae sunt fidei obligatione alienâ. Haec autem fit per Anadochum i. e. patrinum: cui proponuntur rudimenta fidei: & obligatio observandi quae sunt fidei: quae ex personâ pueri respondet, profitetur, & ipsum puerum licet ignorantem & non consentieutem obligat. Et hoc quidem fieri potest in his quae sunt de necessitate vitae, & per quae conditio parvuli melioratur, & ad quae generaliter omnes tenentur. Sicut etiam tutor pupilli potest obligare pupillum in his quae sunt necessaria ad conservationem temporalium secundum leges humanas: multo magis patrinus quasi tutor spiritualis obligare potest parvulum in his quae sunt necessaria ad vitam spiritualem aeternam. Secus tamen in his quae non sunt necessitatis, sed supererogationis, sicut ingressus religionis & peregrinationis. Ad haec enim parentes parvulos obligare non possunt. Nunc autem credere, & quae fidei sunt observare, necessaria sunt ad vitam spiritualem, ad quae omnes tenentur, qui voluerint salvari, etiamsi ex voto non obligarentur. Ideo ad haec potest parvulus ignorans & non consentiens obligari per alium: quia per hanc obligationem conditio pueri non fit deterior, sed melior. Haec est sententia Alex. & Tho. Gabr. Bicl in l. 4. Sentent. dist. 6. q. 3. l. E. Obligatur autem Tutor pupillo— & hunc vicissim aliis in solidum obligat. Wesenbecii Oeconomia Codic. l. 5. p. 529.  the same is the judgement of Gabriel Biel also.  
§. 16. Ninthly, because without performance of the Vow there will be no receiving 
Parvulus autem qui baptizatur, si ad annos rationales veniens non crediderit, nec ab illicitis abstinuerit, nihil ei prodest, quod parvulus accepit, Gratian, de Baptismo d●st 4.  of the blessing; he forfeiting all the advantages of a Covenant, that performs not the condition of the Covenant. So that he is obliged to the performance of this Covenant, though not by a Law, yet by that which hath the force of a Law, even Necessity, not of the Precept, but of the Means, there being no other way of obtaining the end without it. For as he that believes, and is baptised, shall be saved: so he that believes not, whether baptised or unbaptised, shall be damned. Mark 16. 16. So that some Obligation there lies on the little one baptised in his Infancy, to make good, when he comes to years of discretion, that Vow, which was by his Sureties made for him in his name at his baptising.  
§. 17. Now how readily well tutoured children do set about the performance of this Vow, 
Deinde ubi adoleverint, eo ad s●rium Dei colendi studium non mediocriter stimulantur, à quo in filios solenni adoptionis symbolo accepti fuerint, antequam per atatem eum agnoscere Patrem possent. Calv. Instit. l. 4. cap. 16. S. 9  when once they come to the use of Reason, and are made acquainted with it, and their obligations to it, daily experience shows us; whereas were they let alone, and left at liberty, unengaged to the undertaking of it, they would not, a great many of them at least, especially as the world goes now, be so easily and so willingly drawn to undertake it. It would not be much less labour to bring the child of a Christian, than of a Heathen to be baptised. And there would need as many, and as earnest exhortations unto Baptism to be made now by our Ministers, as we read to have been formerly made by the Fathers.  
§. 18. For a child then to be so early as in its Infancy, when it was incapable of all regret or reluctancy, entered into so happy an engagement as the Baptismal Vow is, is sure, to speak modestly in the case, no unbeneficial thing to him. He is bound to liberty; entered into a service which is perfect freedom; engaged to an easy, rational, honourable observance, which shall be rewarded with an infinite, eternal, glorious recompense: only obliged to be holy, that he may be happy; vowed to be Gods, that God may be his.   

CHAP. IX.  
Baptism beneficial to Children in regard of the care that by others is taken of them upon it.  
§. 1. FOurthly, by Baptism Infants are brought under the care of others for their instruction in the Faith of Christ, and education in the Fear of God.  
§. 2. What would man be, if left to himself? to be of any, or no religion as himself listed; and if of any, to be of this or that religion, a Christian or a Heathen, a Jew or a Turk, as himself should think good. 'Tis hard to say where he would pitch, what would he be at in such a case; especially by the pravity of a corrupt nature inclined, as well as by the subtlety of a cunning Devil tempted, and by the witchery of an alluring world enticed to that which is worst.  
§. 3. Happy therefore is he, who, whilst the infancy of his years denies him as well discretion 
Non nihil rursum emolumenti pueri è suo Baptismo capiunt, quod in corpus Ecclesiae insiti, aliis membris sunt aliquanto commendatiores. Calvin. Instit. l. 4. c. 16. S. 9  to direct, as power to dispose of himself, hath other persons, whom age and experience have taught wisdom, to direct and dispose of him; so that he is not left to the wild ramblings of his own unor ill-guided fancy, but he is set into, and steered in a right course, by the prudent conduct of others stayed and well governed judgement, piously educated in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and solidly instructed in the true Faith, and right Worship of Jesus Christ.  
§. 4 And the more of such pious Tutors, and prudent Governors, and judicious Overseers as there are to care for him, the greater happiness it still is to him. For there is the better ground of hope, that he shall be afforded towards his future happiness, the present advantages of a religious and virtuous education. And being trained up in the way that he should go, when he is young; it may well be hoped that when he as old, he will not departed from it, Prov. 22. 6.  
§. 5. And as the prospect of this was (as we are informed from the Author of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy) one principal ground of the primitive Church's admission of Infants unto Baptism, upon the undertaking of Sureties for them, to whose care and managery for information and instruction in faith and manners she did from thenceforth commit them: 
Aiunt enim, id quod verum est, pueros, si in sancto instituto ac lege instituantur, ad sanctam animi constitutionem perventuros esse, ab omni errore solutos ac liberos, & sine ullo impuro vitae periculo. Hoc cum ●n mentom venisset divinis nostris praceptoribus placuit admitti pueros hoc sancto modo, ut naturales pueri, qui introfertur, parents, tradant filium alicui corum qui initiati sunt, bono pucrorum in divinis r●bus informatori: ac deinceps ei puer operam det, ut divino patri, sponsorique salutis. Dionys. Areop. Eccles. Hier. c. 12.  so the Venetians a wise people in other things, show not the least of their wisdom in this, that they confine not themselves to the number of three or four Godfathers and Godmothers, as with us, but have more, many more, even as many as they list; insomuch that sometimes (as my Author 
* Lewis Lewkenor observations on the Venetian Commonwealth, out of Francisco ●ansovini.  informs me) there have been an hundred and fifty at the Christening of the Child together in the Church.  
§. 6. Herein then is a great Benefit that Infants have by being baptised in their Infancy, that they have thereby the care of several persons engaged for their instruction, and education; not only their Fathers and Mothers, by Nature and Divine Imposition; but also their Godfathers and Godmothers, by Charity and Ecclesiastic injunction: who when they do their duty to a child, 'tis rare if there be not in some measure a performance of their engagement to him when a man. And if there might be instances of the ineffectualness of this care in some few; yet is it reason all should be brought under that care; since it is effective and beneficial in many, and it cannot be beforehand told, to what one it will not finally prove to be effective and beneficial.  
§. 7. And if ever there was need of Godfathers and Godmothers in the world to be Sureties for children's pious, and virtuous education (unless I take my measures wrong, and judge amiss of the face of affairs) there is need of them now upon that account; and need of as many as (if not more than) there ever were: whilst our children are like to live in days, which whether they shall be Haltionian days of peace and tranquillity, or boisterous days of trouble and persecution, is a secret to us: but, to be sure, perilous times, times wherein it will 
2 Tim. 3. 1.  be a hard thing for a man, much more for a child, to keep upright, and walk with an even foot, without being warped and swayed aside from the ways of Truth and Godliness, one way or other; either corrupted in his Faith by the false persuasions of erroneous Believers, or debauched in his manners by the evil conversations of vicious Livers. Which consideration I leave to be thought on by those that are wise.   

CHAP. X.  
Baptism beneficial unto Children in regard of their being thereby united unto Christ.  
§. 1. FIfthly, by Baptism Infants are made members of Christ; united to him as members of his body. Hence the little baptised Catechumen is by our Church taught to say, that therein he was made a member of Christ. Christ is to be considered two ways, Personally, so as he is one in himself, and Mystically, so as he is one with his Church, that Body whereof himself is the Head. In this latter sense Infants are by Baptism made Members of Christ, that is, they are admitted into Fellowship with him, as members [little parts] of his mystical Body, the Church.  
§. 2. This benefit Men have by Baptism. For as many of you as have been baptised into Christ, 
This was the listing, espousing, Covenanting, Engrafting, implanting Ordinance; Believers being expressly said hereby to be planted into Christ, Gal. 3. 27. and baptised into Christ, Rom. 6. 3. And which baptising and planting into Christ is no other but an orderly entering into the Visible Church or Body of Christ. H. D. Postscript to Treat. of Bapt. p. 44.  have put on Christ, Gal. 3. 27. What is it to be baptised into Christ? Why sure to be made partakers of Christian baptism. And what is it to put on Christ? why sure to become united unto Christ, to be joined to the Lord, (as a man becomes united with, and joined to that which he put on) to become a member of Christ. Whence Primasius thus glosseth this Text, Toti ejus membra per baptismi sanctificationem essecti, being wholly made members of him by the sanctification of Baptism. And St. Chrysostom describing a Baptised person, 
Omnis ●rgo homo Dei indatus Christum, fuge omnia quae sunt incentiva carnalium libidi num. Non solum autem haec baptizatis dissero, & praedico, sed etiam baptizandis praecipio. D. Chrys. Hom. de Militia Christianâ. Ad hoc datur baptismus ut aliquis per ipsum regeneratus incorporetur Christo, factus membrum ipsius, Aquin. 3. q. 68 a. 1.  does it by the Periphrasis of a man of God, that hath put on Christ. Avoid (saith he) O man of God, who hast put on Christ, all the incentives of carnal lusts. Who he means by that Periphrasis appears by what follows. And these things I do not only discourse and preach to them that already are baptised, but enjoin them that are to be baptised. Accordingly Aquinas saith, To this end is baptism given, that a man being regenerated thereby he may be incorporated into Christ, being made a member of him. Because they are members of him that are baptised, saith St. August. 
Quia membra ejus saint, qui baptiz antur. D. Aug. S●rm. 119. de Temp.  For by one Spirit (as St. Paul saith) are we all baptised into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, bond or free, 1 Cor. 12. 13. One b●●y. What body's that? Why, the mystical body of Christ, the Church. Baptised into that. What's that? why sure, entered or ingraffed into it, made members of it by Baptism: the Spirit as the principal Agent using Baptism as his Instrument for that end. Hence saith 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Occumen in 1 Cor. 12. 13.  Occumenius on the place, we are made one (that is, one body) by one spirit, and the same laver, or washing; that is, by Baptism. By the Spirit as the principal efficient of, by Baptism as the instrumental Agent in, that Union.  
Hence is Baptism by St. August. called, Ecclesiae ja●ua, and porta gratiae, & primus introitus 
D. Aug. de Cate. chizand. rudib. l. 2. c. 1.  sanctorum ad aeternam' Dei & Ecclesiae consuetudinem, the gate of the Church, and the door of grace, and the first entrance of Saints to an eternal Society with God and the Church. So St. Bernard calls it Sacramentum initiationis & intrantium Christianismum investituram, the Sacrament of Initiation, and the Investiture of such as enter into Christianity. And by the Council of Florence it is called 
Primum omnium Sacramentorum locum tenet baptismus, quod vitae spivitualis janua est ● per ipsum enim membra Christi, ac de corpore efficimur Ecclesiae. Council Flor. apud Caranz. sol. 391.  the gate of spiritual life, in as much as by it we are made members of Christ, and to be of the body of the Church. And hence very significantly Baptisteries or Fonts are said to have been placed at first without, but after within the Church, near the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Porch of the Church, to signify undoubtedly the Sacrament there celebrated, namely Baptism, to be a Rite of initiation, or entrance into the Church, as it were that door, by which they that are baptised are let in, and have admittance unto the privileges of Christians, which is to be Members of Christ.  
§ 3. This benefit, I say, Men have by Baptism. And why not Infants? whom the Scripture no where shuts this door of grace against; whom it not where excludes from this benefit by it. In consideration whereof St. Aug. proceeds to say of the Baptism of Infants, that it is of efficacy, and doth avail 
Ad hoc valet baptismus, ut baptizati Christo incorporentur. D. Aug. l. 1. de Bapt. Parvul. Haec gratia baptizatos quoque parvulos suo inserit corpori. D. Aug. l. 1. de Pecc. Merit. & Remiss. c. 9 Pueri, sicut adulti, in Baptismo efficiuntur membra Christi, Aquin. 3. q. 69. a. 6. Hac de causa insantulos baptizamus— ut ejus membra sint omnes— D. Chrysost. Hom. ad Neophytos.  to their incorporation into Christ. And again, that This grace doth engraft and put in even the little ones that are baptised into his body. So Aquinas, Children, as well as Adult persons, are made members of Christ in Baptism. And for this cause, saith St. Chrysostom, do we baptise Infants, that they may be members of him, that is, of Christ.  
§. 4. And the reason is the same for the one and for the other. Because it is not several Baptisms, but one and the same Baptism, that is administered unto the one, and unto the other. For there is but one Baptism for all. One, as well as the other, Men and Children, all that are baptised, are baptised into Jesus Christ, as the Apostle expresses it, Rom. 6. 3.  
§. 5. Now this being so, what can be more visible, than that Baptism is hugely beneficial to Infants. For being by Baptism made Members of Christ they have union with him, as the Members have with the Head: and by that Union much benefit is derived to them.  
§. 6. For first there is great honour comes to them thereby. The Members partake of the honour of the Head. To be the Members of such a Head, as is Head over all things (Ephes. 1. 22.) the Head of all principality and power (Coloss. 2. 10.) what an honour must this needs be to them? Like the precious ointment upon the head that ran down upon the beard, even Aaron's beard, that went down to the skirts of his garments, so the honourableness of Christ the Head hath a descending influence on his in●erior members, so as to render them also in some measure and degree honourable.  
By virtue of the Union of Christ's natural body with God, there is a great honour comes to that his body: so by virtue of the Union of the mystical body of Christ with Christ its Head, there is a great deal of honour coming also to that body of his. His natural body is not the mere body of a man, but the body of God; so his mystical body is not a mere humane body, but the body of Christ. (2 Cor. 12. 27.) As it is with an imp or scion that is taken off from any stock of a meaner kind, and ingrassed, or inoculated into a nobler stock, and partakes with the stock into which it is ingrassed of its honourable appellation: so it is with Christians; though by nature they be wild olive trees, yet being by Baptism engrafted into Christ the good olive tree, made members of his body, they do partake with Christ in some degree of that honour which is given unto him. They have his name called upon them by others (Acts 11. 26.) He himself is not ashamed to call them brethren, (Heb. 2. 2. 11.) Not the least Infant Christian, but is a Brother, a Branch, a Member of Christ: and so is honourable in its Relation to him, and hath an honourable respect due unto it upon account of the Union that it hath with him.  
§. 7. But secondly they do not only receive honour by Christ, but also influence from Christ, by virtue of their Union with him. The Head hath an influence upon the whole body, and every member of it. Sense and motion is by the animal spirits communicated to the whole body and every member of it from the head: so hath Christ an influence upon his whole body and every the least member of it. From him by his spiritual grace is communicated to his body, and every the least member of it, suitable to the manner and measure of its receptivity, a principle of sense of God and Goodness, and of motion to attain the enjoyment of the one by the practice of the other: which, though for a while it give forth no indications of its presence in them, yet will in due time exert its proper efficacy; and in the mean time it lies at the heart, like the sap at the root, predisposing it unto a future fructification. Of his fullness (saith St. John) we have all received, and grace for grace, (John 1. 16.) There is a fullness of grace in Christ for, and an influence of grace from Christ to, all that are in him. Of his fullness we all receive. By partaking of the root we participate of the fatness of the olive tree, (Rom. 11. 17.) There goes virtue from him to all that are his. Not the least member of him but has an influence of grace from him. There is from him an emanation of quickening efficacy to the smallest Infant member in him: being united to him, it partakes with him according to its condition and capacity; and that seminal grace communicated by him to the Infant at the instant of its beginning to be one in and with him, will in time bring forth its fruit; unless stifled, ere it bud, by the luxuriant rankness of vicious dispositions, too thickly growing in a depraved nature, and too early ripened by a corrupting education.  
§. 8. Thirdly, they are interessed in the care of Christ for them. The head cares for all the body, and for every member of it: so doth Christ the head of his Church, take care for his whole Church, and for every the least person of it. And if ye observe it, the first instance of Christ's care for his Church in his charge to St. Peter, was for his Lambs, his little members, that could least care for themselves; and then follows his care for his sheep. He first saith, Feed my lambs: and then after, Feed my sheep, John 21. 15, 16, 17. After whose example St. John his bosom disciple gins his Epistle with little children; and then goes on to fathers and young men, 1 John 2. 12, 13.  
§. 9 And sure 'tis worth something, and that no small matter neither, to have such a one as Christ taking care for our Infants; and taking such a care for them, as a head takes care for the members of that body that is united to it. Oh how they are continually in his eye, and in his heart! what tender regard he has to them! what melting affections for them! How kind he was to little children, and how careful of them whilst on earth is set forth with an illustrious splendour, here in the Text, and Context. He called them to him, he commanded access for them, he rebuked those, (though the darlings of his affections his disciples) that would have kept them from him; and because he had them much in his heart, he took them near to it, in his arms; he gave them the Imposition of his hands, and the Benediction of his mouth, would have both hand, tongue and all, concerned, and be active too, in the promoting of their spiritual interest. And can we think, he, that had so much kindness for them on earth, hath no care for them now in heaven? Did he throw off all respect to them, when he removed hence from them? Did he lose the affectionateness of his humanity by the glorification of it? Is he less good, for being more great? If nothing of this, not the least apex of it may be imagined, we may then be secure of his care for our children. And if to be under the care of so discerning an eye, so wise a head, so strong a hand, so tender a heart, as Jesus Christ is, be a felicity, as most undoubtedly it is, and that a great one, considering the infinite advantages consequent thereunto for protection, preservation, provision, improvement of natural faculties, endowment with spiritual abilities, initiation in grace, and consummation in glory, than the beneficialness of Baptism to Infants, who are thereby brought under all this care, is beyond dispute: and there is reason enough in that, if there were nothing else to move us to it, to baptise our Infants. If we would have Christ to have this care for them, it should then be our care to baptise them.  
§. 10. Fourthly, they are interested in the care of the Church for them. They that are united to the Head, are united to the Body. They that are united to Christ, are united also to the Church. Communion with the Church follows Union with Christ. And as it were to intimate this, we are sometimes said to be baptised into the head, and sometimes into the body; sometimes into Christ, and sometimes into the Church: for as much as all comes to one; because Christ and his Church, the Head and the Body are all one; and he that is united to, and hath communion with either, is united to, and hath communion with the other.  
§. 11. Hence our Church in her office of Baptism declares the baptised Infant to be grafted into the body of Christ's Church; and gives thanks to God for incorporating him into his holy Church; as she had prayed before that he might be received into the Ark of Christ's Church.  
§. 12. And as the Head takes care for all the members; so the members also take care one for another, (1 Cor. 12. 25.) they rejoice, and suffer one with another, and have the same ca●e one for another, and they most especially are cared for by the rest, who are in least capacity to take any care for themselves.  
§. 13. Now as to the case in hand, great truly is the care of our Church for her little members, her baptised Infants. She cares for their maintenance, cares for their inheritance, cares for their education, cares for their instruction, that they may be virtuously brought up to lead a godly and a Christian life; in order whereunto she not only gives both so grave an admonition to the Sureties for children at their baptising, to remember that it is their parts and duties to see that the Infants be taught, so so●n as they shall be able to learn, what a solemn vow, promise, and profession they had there made by them, and so strict a charge to call upon them to hear Sermons, and provide that they may learn the Creed, the Lords Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and all other things, which a Christian ought to know and believe to his souls health, and be virtuously brought up, that the Sureties sometimes are apt to think there is too much of this care taken by the Church, because so much is laid upon them; and they are ready to be at Tertullia's question, Quid necesse est sponsores periculo ingeri? and ask, what necessity is there for the Godfathers being so deeply charged? but also lays severe injunction upon the Curates of every Parish diligently upon every Sunday and Holy day to instruct the children sent to them in a Catechism 
That most excellent Catechism in the Liturgy Dr. Hammond, of Idolat. §. 67. En verò & Catechismum: brevem quidem illum, sed in cujus brevitate nihil desideres. B. Andrews in his Opera Posth. p. 86.  of her providing for that purpose, and that a most excellent one for that use, short indeed in itself, yet wanting in nothing necessary or fit to be known for instruction to salvation; and that under the heaviest penalties that are in her power to inflict, a sharp reproof for the first offence, Suspension for the second, and excommunication for the third: and under the like penalties takes care that Parents shall send their children, servants, and apprentices, to the Church at the times appointed, and that they also do then come thither, to be instructed in that Catechism; and by such instruction fitted and prepared for Confirmation, at which time they are with their own mouth and consent openly before the Church to ratify and confirm what their Godfathers and Godmothers promised for them in their Baptism: which excellent course were it regularly and conscientiously on all hands observed, the Primitive Discipline would return again into the Church, and there would not be occasion for such outcries of the Antipaedo baptists against Infant's Baptism.  
§. 14. Now if to have not only the Natural Parents of a child, but Godfathers and Godmothers also, who are a kind of spiritual Parents, Fathers and Mothers in God, to it; nor them only, but the Ministers also of the Parish; nor him only, but the whole Parish also; nor that only, but the Bishop 
See Dr. Jackson, Tom. 3. l. 10. c. 50. §. 6.  of the Diocese, and even the whole Church engaged, and that not by mere nature, or charity, but by office and duty, to a respective care for it, be not for the benefit of it, I would be taught what is. And being so, it is a further instance of the beneficialness of Baptism unto Infants, and still a stronger inducement to us to bring our Infants unto Baptism.  
§. 15. Yet fifthly, by virtue of this Union of Infants with Christ and his Church his Body by their being baptised thereinto, they are interested in all the Intercessions of Christ for his Church, and in all the Supplications of the Church unto God. Whether Christ pray to his Father for his Church, or the Church pray to God for herself, Infants that cannot pray for themselves, are prayed for thereby. Christ excludes not baptised Infants from the benefit of his Intercessions: for he intercedes for his Body, and they are members of it. Nor doth the Church exclude them from the benefit of her Supplications: for she prays for all her Members, 
Publica est nobis & communis oratio: & quando oramus, non pro uno, sed pro populo toto oramus, quia totus populus unum suraus D Cyprian. de Orat. Dom. Unusquisque cret Dominum non pro se tantum, sed & pro omnibus sratribue, sicut Dominus Jesus orare nos docuit, ubi non singulis privatam precem mandavit, sed communi & concordi prece orare pro omnibus jussit. D. Cyprian. l. 4. Ep. 4.  and they are some of them. Not a Christian in the world that says Our Father, but prays at the same time for every baptised Brother.  
§. 16. Now this sure must needs be a Benefit to them to be prayed, and so prayed for. O the potency, I had almost said the omnipotency of prayer! what can it not do with? what can it 
Mane ergo & ora dilecta, multum enim oratio potest, D. Chrysost. de Poenitentia. Hom. 9 Preces, quae cum rectae sint inessicaces esse non possunt. Both. de Cons. Phil. l 5. pros. 6. Inter omnia quae humana fragilitas faccre potest unde placcre Deo valeat, plerunque valet oratio, si cum pura conscientia & cordis humilitate fiat. Hugo de S. Vi●ore Allegor. l. 10. c. 4.  not obtain from God? St. James tells us, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it avails, prevails, can do much, and that whilst it is but the single prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a (that is, one) righteous man, Jam. 5. 16. With that key Elias shut and opened heaven, first against, and then for rain, Jam. 5. 17, 18. This we are sure of from Sacred History. And, if Ecclesiastic History may be credited, by Prayer Greg. B. of Neocaesaria 
† Euseb. Eccles. Hist. l. 7. c. 24. ex Intepret. Rusfini.  turned a Pool of water into dry ground, and removed a mountain to make a plain. By prayer James B. of Nisibis 
* Histor. Tripartit. l. 5. c. 45.  overcame a power of armed men; and, what is more, Aaron and Phine as encountered and conquered even an angry God, Numb. 16. Psal. 105. Whereupon St. Hierom 
‖ Quod autem dicit, & non obsistas mihi, illud ostendit, quod preces sanctorum Dei irae possunt resistere. D. Hieron. in Jerem. 7. 16. , observes, that the prayers of Saints are able to withstand the wrath of God. And St. Ambrose 
† Qui rectè vivunt juxta Evangolium facilè poterunt impetrare quae postulant, D. Ambros. in 1 Thess. 5. 25.  concludes that they that lead a right Gospel-life, may easily have, what they will ask. Which is but St. John in other words, who saith, Whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight, 1 John 3. 22.  
§. 17. And if it be thus powerful, when single; what is it, when social? when there is a pious conspiracy of fervent prayers from consenting hearts and concurring tongues, all at once making as it were assault upon the Almighty, with the holy violence of a strong importunity to extort a petition from him. He loves to be thus wrestled with, and worsted, if I may so say. 'Tis an acceptable force that this way is put upon him: and he is not able 
‖, The Prince and People of Niniveh (saith Mr. Hooker) assembling themselves as a main army of Supplicants, it was not in the power of God to withstand them. I speak not otherwise concerning the force of public Prayer in the Church of God, then before me Tertullian hath done. Apol. 1. 39 We come by troops to the place of Assembly, that being banded as it were together, we may be supplicants enough to besiege God with our prayers. These forces are unto him acceptable. Eccl. Pot. l. 5. §. 24.  because not willing to deny any thing that is thus sought of him. Our Saviour saith (Matth. 18. 19) If two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them, of my Father which is in heaven. Hereupon St. Ignatius 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as! Ign. Ep. ad 1 phes.  argues, If the prayer of one or two be of so great prevalency, how much more will the prayer of the Bishop and the whole Church be prevalent! St Augustin 
* Impossibile est ut multorum preces non exaudiantur. D. Aug. Ser. 44. ad Fr. in Eremo ,. and St. Ambrose 
* Multi enim minimi dum congregantur unanimes siunt magni, & multorum preces impossible est ut non impetrent. D. Ambros. in Rom. 15. 30.  and after them Aquinas 
‖ Pro justis est orandum triplici ratione. Primo quidem quia multorum preces facile exaudiuntur: unde super illud, Rom. 15. Adjuveritis me in orationibus vestris, dicit Gloss. Bene rogat Apostolus minores pro se orare, Multi enim minimi dum congregantur unanimes siunt magni: & multorum preces impossibile est quod non impetrent, illud scilicet, quod est impecrabile. Aquin. 22 daes. q. 83. a. 7. ad tertium. Vid. D. Cyprian. de Simpl. Praelat. , conclude it impossible that such prayers should fail of audience, and acceptance, and not obtain what they petition for, provided they do but petition for what is possible to be obtained.  
§. 18. And no marvel the social prayers of unanimously consenting, and fervently competitioning Supplicants should be so powerful with God, when they have one among them, and concurring in the petition with them, whom God always hears, even the Son of his own love, the Lord Jesus Christ, the head of his Church, which he is always with, and always will be, even unto the end of the world, and even where two or three of them are gathered together in his name. And indeed his presence with them himself assigns for the reason of their prevalency with his Father, (Matth 18. 20.) Again I say unto you, that if two of you shall agree on earth, as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my Name, there am I in the midst of them. The prevalency of the Church's prayers is from the concurrency of Christ's petitioning with them, when they pray.  
§. 19 Now hereupon it follows, that it cannot but be a mighty benefit to Christians, each to have the prayers of other, and all the prayers of the Church for them all. And hence are our desires both of one another's private prayers, and also of the Churches public prayers, especially upon any extraordinary emergency. And if we, who can pray for ourselves, do think the prayers of others beneficial to us, as we do think them, or else we should not desire them, how can we then but think they are beneficial to our children? who have the more need of the prayers of others, as they are the less able to pray for themselves; and for whom the prayers of others are by so much the more likely to be effectual, as they do the less to hinder their effectualness.  
§. 20. Prayer then being so powerful a deriver of all manner of blessings on the parties prayed for; and Baptism being the means of bringing our children within the Communion of so many and such prayers; we cannot but think Baptism highly beneficial to them; even to that measure and degree, as upon that one account alone, if there were no other besides, to be induced to baptise our children.   

CHAP. XI.  
Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard of their being made thereby the children of God.  
§. 1. SIxthly, by Baptism Infants are made children of God. This sense our Church hath of it. Hence immediately after the Baptising of the Infant it renders thanks to the heavenly Father, for that it hath pleased him to receive that Infant for his own child by Ad●ption. And in her Catechism teaches the little Catechumen to say, that in his Baptism he was made the child of God.  
§. 2. The Apostle St. Paul speaking to the Galatians, whom he had declared to be the Sons of God, (Gal. 3. 26.) saith unto them, At many of you as have (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whosoever ye are, whether men or children, for as he names neither, so he excepts not either that have) been baptised into Christ, have put on Christ (ver. 27.) And he saith it as a Reason of what was said before, even of their Sonship. Ye are all the children of God by Faith in Jesus Christ, For as many of you as have been baptised into Christ, have put on Christ. His reasoning seems to lie thus. They that put on Christ, that is receive Christ, they are the children of God. Those that are baptised into Christ, they put on Christ, and do receive him. Therefore they that are baptised into Christ are the children of God.  
§. 3. It is Faith indeed that qualifies for Baptism. The Adult is qualified by his own Faith; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Basil. de Spir. Sancto, c. 12. Tom. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Just. Mart. Resp. ad Orthod. q. 56.  Infants by the Faith of those that bring them to, and undertake for them at their baptising. They are vouchsafed the good things that come by baptism through the faith of those that bring them to be baptised, saith the Author of the Answers to the Orthodox in Just. Martyr, speaking of Infants. And upon the account of their faith, were the Infants anciently admitted to baptism, and baptised as Believers 
Non quod vel ipsi quando baptizantur fide careant, sine qua impossibile est vel ipsos placere Deo: sed salvantur & ipsi per fidem non tamen suam, sed alienam. Dignum nempe est, & ad dei spectat dignitatem, ut quibus fidem aetas denegat propiam gratia prodesse conced at alienam, etc. D. Bern. Ep. 77. ad Hug. de S. Victore. Absit ut ego dicam non credentes infants. Jam superius disputavi. Credit in altero, quia peccavit in altero: dicitur credit, & valet; & inter fideles baptizatos computatur, etc. D. Aug. Serm. 14. de Verb. Apost. . But as many as, whether upon the account of their own, or others faith, are baptised into Christ, whether they be men or children, they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sons of God.  
§. 4. And this sense the Ancients had of this thing, namely the efficacy of baptism for the regenerating of the baptised and putting them into the state of children of God. Hence Dionys. Areop. calls the Font, wherein persons 
De Eccl. Hier.  were baptised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
* Exhort. ad Bapt.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mother of Adoption; and calls our baptism 
Orate patrem baptismate nostrum.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a birth of, or from God; as 
† D. Ambros. in 1 Cor. 6. 11. Illic omnibus peccatis depositis abluitur credens, justificatur domini nomine, & per spiritum Dei nostri Deo filius adoptatur. Id. Ad cujus [sc. divini operis] potentiam referendum est, quod dum homo exterior abluitur, mutatur interior, & fit nova creatura de veteri, vasa irae in vasa misericordiae transferuntur, & in corpus Christi convertitur caro peccati. De impiis justi, de captivis liberi, de filiis hominum fiunt filii Dei. Ep. 84. l. 10.  St. Basil also calls it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 baptism of Adoption, & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of Adoption. Sedulius exhorts to pray unto God under the notion of our Father by Baptism. There (saith St. Ambrose speaking of baptism) the believer is washed, all his sins being laid aside, he is justified in the name of the Lord, and by the Spirit of our God he is adopted to be a Son unto God. And again to the power of that divine work (saith he) it is to be referred, that whilst the outward man is washed, the inward man is changed, and made a new creature of an old, vessels of wrath are translated into vessels of mercy, and a body of sin converted into into the body of Christ. Of wicked they are made righteous, of captives they are made free, and of sons of men they are made the Sons of God.  
§. 5. St. Cyprian saith it was foretold of God by his Prophet Isaiah (c. 43. v. 18, 19, 20, 21.) that among the Gentiles in places 
Praenunciavit illic per Prophetam Deus, quod apud Gentes in locis, quae inaquosa prius fuissent, flumina postmodum redundarent, & electum Deigenus, id est per regenerationem baptismi filios Dei factos adaequarent. D. Cypr. l. 2. Ep. 3.  where before there was no water, rivers should abound and wter the elect generation of God, that is, (saith he) those who by Baptismal regeneration are made the children of God. And to this sense some of the Ancients interpret the forecited Text, (Gal. 3. 26, 27.) In his confirmation he shows (saith Theophylact) how we are the Sons of God, namely by 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Theoph. in Gal. 3. 27.  baptism. And so Primasius, having put on the Son of God, and being wholly made members of him by the sanctification of Baptism 
* Filium Dei induti, & toti 〈◊〉 membra per baptismi sanctificationem effectis, filii Dei fi●is necesse est. Primas. in Gal. 3. 26.  ye must needs be the Sons of God.  
§. 6. This being then one effect of Baptism, that by it those that are baptised become the children of God; and it being as able to effect this in children as in men, as producing its effects not by any natural 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Basil. 81. § 5. c. 15 See Dr. Jackson. Tom. 3. l. 10. c. 50. Sect. 4.  efficiency, but by a supernatural efficacy, which can take place in children also, and not in men only; and children being no way debarred from having this effect wrought on them thereby, as being no where exempted therefrom by the Author of this Holy Institution, we do, and may well hence conclude that our children are by Baptism put into a state of Adoption 
* Hâc de causâ & ●am infantulos baptizamus, ut non sint coinquinati peccato, ut eis addatur san●litas, justitia, adoptio. D. Chrysost. Hom. a● Neophytos.  of children unto God.  
§. 7. Now this being so, an ordinary understanding will be able to conceive how beneficial baptism must needs be unto Infants in this respect. For it interests them in the fatherly love of God to them, and care for them. God loves them, and cares for them, and loves and cares for them as for his children, as for his sons.  
§. 8. Now of this love and care of God, to, and for them, the effects cannot but be many and good, as well in what he at present bestows on them, as in what for future he provides for them. Let what will, or can, come at, or of earthly friends or parents, Baptised Infants can never be wholly either friendless or fatherless. When they have neither Father, nor Friend on earth, they have still both a Friend and Father in heaven: Such a Friend and such a Father, as knows their needs, and will not suffer them to be too much under wants; such a Friend and such a Father, as looks after them, whilst they are not able to look after themselves, ●ay nor him neither; such a Friend and such a Father, as lays up in them an early stock of Grace, and lays up for them an eternal stock of Glory.  
§. 9 O the happiness of being an Adopted Son to God 'Tis a Relation big with felicities: both the Indies in one for richness and sweetness. 'Tis an honour beyond that of being of the blood of Nobles, the kindred of Princes, the sons of Kings, the heirs of Emperors. 'Tis a Magazine of stores for all manenr of provisions for this and for a better life; for earth, and for heaven. 'Tis a Tower of strength for safety and protection from the power, and malice of foes; from harm, danger, and fear of enemies. 'Tis a breast of Consolation under all adverse providences, sweetening every the bitterest cup, and sharpest stroke; turning our gall into honey, and filling our wounds with balsam. 'Tis a fountain of pleasure perpetually emptying itself into our bosoms in streams of the most soul ravishing delights and contentments. 'Tis heaven in Epitome, beatitude in quintessence; an interest in, and an earnest of an eternal inheritance.  
§. 10. Baptism then putting the Baptised into this state of Adoption of Sons to God, which appellation belongs to no unbaptized Person, and giving them also the spirit of Adoption, whereby they are enabled to 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrys. Hom. 1. de Poenit.  call God Father; this consideration, even alone and of itself, were sufficient to move any man, whose heart were not made all of rock, but had some, though the least regard to the good of his child, to baptise it, that so he might thereby both bring it into so glorious a relation, and entitle it unto so precious advantages. And yet there is more.   

CHAP. XII.  
Baptism beneficial unto children in regard of their being made thereby Heirs of Heaven.  
§. 1. FOr Seventhly, Infants are by Baptism made Heirs of the kingdom of heaven. And this follows upon the former. For Heirship follows Sonship. God's sons are all Heirs. So the Apostle reasons it, Rom. 8. 17. & Gal. 4. 7. If sons, than heirs, heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ. By the means that we become sons, we become heirs. Infant's therefore being made sons by Baptism, are by Baptism also made heirs. But heirs of what? why, of a kingdom, and even of that kingdom whereof Christ is an inheritor: for the sons of God are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, coheirs with Christ, heirs to the same kingdom, whereof he is an inheritor, and that is the kingdom of heaven. And accordingly St. Paul saith, According to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour, that being justified by his grace we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life, Tit. 3. 5, 6, 7.  
§. 2. This Instrumental efficiency towards the giving of entrance and admission into the kingdom of heaven, the Fathers do in the general ascribe unto Baptism. St. Basil saith it is that whereby we are 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Basil. exhort. ad Bapt.  carried to heaven, and entertained into that kingdom. Greg. Nazianz. saith it is that chariot 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Naz. Or. 40.  or vehicle, whereby we are carried unto God. St. Aug. saith, when a man goes forth from baptising then the 
† Quando homo de baptismo egreditur tune & ●anua coelestis aperitur. D Aug Serm. 29. de Temp. Felix sacramentum aquae nostrae, qua abluti delictis pristinae caecitatis in vitam aeternam liberamur, ●ert, de Bapt. c. 1.  of our water, whereby being washed from the delinquencies of our former blindness, we are freed unto eternal life. And by Greg. Nazianz. 'tis called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
* Greg. Naz. Orat. 40.  gate of the kingdom of heaven is opened to him. Tertullian calls it the happy Sacrament the key of the kingdom of heaven. So that it not only sends 
‖ Aqua baptismatis baptizatos ad regnum coeleste mittit, Greg. in Evang. hom. 17.  the Baptised to, but lets them into that kingdom.  
§. 3. And from a well-grounded confidence hereof undoubtedly it is, that our Church not only prays for the Infant to be baptised, 
Office of Publ. Bapt. of Infants.  that he may come to the land of everlasting life, and to the eternal kingdom which God hath promised; and be made an heir of everlasting salvation, and an inheritor of God's everlasting kingdom; but also gives assurance to the Sureties for the Infant, upon the word and promise of our Saviour, that he will give unto him the blessing of eternal life, and make him partaker of his everlasting kingdom, even the kingdom of heaven.  
§. 4. And in this her sense she agrees with the sentiment of the Ancient Church. For St. Chrysostom saith, For this cause do we baptise 
Hac de causâ infantulos baptizamus ut eis addatur, sanctitas, justitia, adoptio, haereditas. D. Chrysost. Hom. ad Neoph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Athan. q. ad Antioch. 114. Tom. 2. p. 377.  Infants that there may be added unto them holiness, righteousness, adoption, and an inheritance. And Athanasius grounding his inference on two Scripture-Texts, the one the words of our Saviour in my Text, Suffer little children to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven, the other the words of St. Paul, but now are your children holy, saith, That the baptised Infants of Believers do as undefiled and believing enter into the kingdom of heaven.  
§. 5. Yea so highly conducing unto an entrance into heaven both for Infants and others was 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Chrysost. Hom. 1. de Poenit. Quum vero praescribitur nemim sine 〈◊〉 Baptismo competere salutem ex illa maxime pronunciatione Domini qui ait, Nisi natus ex aquâ quis erit, non habet vitam, suboriuntur scrupulosi, etc. Tertull. de Bapt. Lex enim tingendi imposita est, & forma praescripta, Ite inquit, docete nationes tingentes eas in nomine patris, & filii, & spiritus sancti. Huic legi collata definitio illa, Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua & spiritu, non intrabit in regnum coelorum, obstrinxit fidem ad baptismi necessitatem. Itaque omnes exinde credentes tingebantur. Id. ib. Nisi enim quis renatus fuerit ex aqua & Spiritu Sancto non potest introire in regnum Dei. Utique nullum excipit, non infantem, non aliqua praeventum necessitate. D. Ambros. de Abrah. Patriarcha, l. 2. c. 11. Sine baptismo mortuos periisse non dubium est. Id. de Voc. Gent. l. 2. c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Nyssen, de Bapt.  Baptism anciently thought, that it was the opinion of some, that there was no entrance for either in thither without that; and this opinion of theirs was grounded on our Saviour's saying, that Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.  
§. 6. And even our own most modest and moderate Church cannot 
Beloved, ye hear in this Gospel the express words of our Saviour christ, that Except a man be born of water— whereby ye may perceive the great necessity of this Sacrament, where it may be had, Office of Bapt. of those of riper years.  but upon the same ground conclude some, and that a great necessity of Baptism in order to entrance into the kingdom of God.  
§. 7. And truly though, 
Whitaker Praelection de Eccles. Cathol. qu. 1. c. 4, 5. D. Bernard Ep. 77. ad Hugon. de Sancto Victore.  with Dr. Whitaker, and others, I do believe, that the mere want of baptism, where it cannot be had, is not absolutely exclusive of all unbaptized ones out of heaven, but only the contempt of it, where it may be had; yet two things may be observed from that Text (of John 3. 5.) which carry it high for a necessity of Infant's baptism, at least so far as to be an excuse for those, who gathered therefrom an absolute necessity of it.  
§. 8. The first is this, That the kingdom of God here, in the notion of it includes, not only Gods spiritual kingdom on earth, or the visible Church (which is all that the Anabaptists will have it to signify; and upon this design, because they would by this distinction avoid the force of the Argument hence for Infant's Baptism, for whose salvation they conclude it not necessary, that they be made members of the visible Church, as having devoted them all, without exception of any, to be eternally saved, if dying in infancy, though dying unbaptised) but it doth also in the notion of it include Gods eternal kingdom in heaven. Because the kingdom here that a man cannot enter into except he be born of water and of the spirit, is the same kingdom that (in ver. 3.) a man cannot see except he be born again. Now it is not true of God's kingdom on earth, that a man cannot see it, except he be born again of water and of the spirit, that is, baptised: for it is therefore called the visible Church, because it is a Church that may be seen, And seen it may be of such as desire to come to it, & join with it, before they be of it: for how else shall they desire to come to it? Seen also it is, and may be, of such as are of it; and even of those that do oppose, & fight against it. But of the kingdom of God in heaven it is most true, that except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot see that. Therefore that kingdom which a man cannot enter into except he be born of water, and of the spirit doth in the notion of it include the kingdom of God in Heaven.  
§. 9 And if the Kingdom of God here (in John 3. 3. 5.) be the same with that which is called (in Matth. 19 14.) the kingdom of heaven; which again St. Luke (in my Text) renders by that very same expression in St. John, the kingdom of God, than we shall find the Anabaptists, when it is for their turn, interpreting it of God's kingdom in heaven. For that very Text do they allege to prove that 
Confess. of Faith, Art. 10.  not any Infant dying in Infancy before the Commission of actual sin, shall suffer eternal punishment in hell for Adam's sin: for of such (as they please to speak) belongs the kingdom of God. And if it must be interpreted there (in John 3. 5.) of the visible Church, than it must be here also, in Luke 18. 16. and Matth. 19 14. And so then children will be such as belong to the Church Catholic, as members of it, of whom it is: and then why should they not be admitted into it, that belong unto it?  
§. 10. And if any thing be objected against this, because it is not said, of these, but of such as these, is the kingdom of God; the same will be objected against their coming into the kingdom of glory, which they entitle them to, (from Matth. 19 14.) because it is not there said, of these, but of such as these is the kingdom of heaven. And so it will follow, even by their own way of arguing, either that such as they, men resembling them in humility and innocence shall enter into the kingdom of glory, but not they: or that, if the such as they, hinder not but that they may enter into heaven, than the such as they cannot hinder, but that they may enter into the Church.  
§. 11. The second thing to be observed from this Text is this, That our Saviour in his expression of himself, useth such a word as can no way be restrained from reaching even unto Infants, and even unto the least of them; He saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, except a man, that is, a man of years and understanding be born again (for so those words may be capable of being rendered; and even the latter of them, which is of the more extensive signification is so to be interpreted in 1 Cor. 11. 28. where the subjectum recipiens, or person that is to receive the Lords Supper is spoken of, Let a man, that is a man of years and understanding examine himself, &c) but he saith here, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, except one, any one, be it who it will be, man, woman, or child, be born again, that is baptised, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.  
§. 12. Heaven then being the region of light, the paradise of pleasure, the habitation of joy, the mansion of peace, the seat of bliss, the rest of the Saints, the country of Angels, the court of God, a kingdom of glory, an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, where our solaces shall be pure, our happiness complete, and our life eternal: and Baptism being so highly conducible, if not absolutely necessary, to an entrance into heaven, the ready way for ourselves, and the only way that we know for our Infants, to get admission into that city of our God, and joy of our Lord; it necessarily follows, that Baptism must be highly beneficial to our Infants; and that we, if not upon the account of sin in them, with the Orthodox Christians, yet at least for entrance into the kingdom of heaven, with the Heterodox Pelagians 
* Parvulos etiam negant secundum Adam carnaliter natos contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate contrahere. Sic enim eos sine ullo peccati originalis vinculo asserunt nasci, ut prorsus non sit quod eis oporteat secunda nativitate dimitti: sed eos propterea baptizari. ut regeneratione adoptati admittantur ad regnum Dei, de bono in melius translati, non ista renovatione ab aliquo malo obligationis veteris absoluti, etc. D. Aug. de Haeres. c. 88 , should be moved to baptise them.   

CHAP. XIII.  
Baptism beneficial unto Children in regard of their being thereby made partakers of Grace.  
§. 1. YEt eighthly, to show the Beneficialness of Baptism to Infants, Baptism is a means of Grace to them: an instrument of conveying unto them, and making them partakers of the Grace of God; that is, so far, and in such manner, and measure, as they are capable of it.  
§. 2. To signify Baptism to be a means of Grace, Grace is one of the Names by which Baptism is called in the Writings of the Fathers. Whether out of a certain strange kind of joy (saith Gr Na.) 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— Id. ib.— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gr. Nyssen. de Baptismo.  or whether in consideration of the manifold benefits of it, we give it many names, we call it Gift, Grace, Baptism, Unction, Illumination, etc.  
§. 3. Now that Infants are in some degree and measure capapable, if not also sensible, of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Just. Mart. Resp. ad Orthod. 13.  God's grace and of divine impressions by the Holy Ghost, sure none doubts, that reads of John Baptists being filled with the Holy Ghost (that sure, signifies some Gifts and Graces of the Holy Ghost) from his Mother's womb, Luke 1. 15. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Just. Mart. Resp. ad Orthod. 13.  nay of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leapings for joy in the womb of his Mother, Luk. 1. 44. which sure could come from nothing but some divine impression made on his soul by the Holy Ghost, wherewith his Mother being at that time filled, it may well be thought he was not wholly empty, especially after so sensible an indication of it. Nor surely does any doubt, that what effect and operation Baptism hath upon elder persons, it hath also upon Infants according to their measure of capacity: inasmuch as they do not any thing to hinder its operation upon them: and there is nothing said, that deprives them of the benefit of its operation.  
§. 4. To the point in hand then. There is a twofold Grace of Gods imparted, and communicated in Baptism: first, there is the Grace of Justification; and secondly, there is the Grace of Sanctification. The Grace of Justification is Gods remitting to us the guilt of our sins. The Grace of Sanctification is Gods cleansing us from the corruption and pollution of our Natures and Persons, and enabling us to do acts of Righteousness and Holiness.  
§. 5. Now for the first of these, the Grace of Justification, that that is communicated in Baptism, is evident from the speech of Ananias unto Paul (Acts 22. 16.) bidding him, arise and be baptised, and wash away his sins, calling on the name of the Lord. And from Peter's exhorting the Jews (Acts 2. 38.) to be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, i. e. that they might thereby obtain the forgiveness of their sins.  
§. 6. Then for the second the Grace of Sanctification, that that also is communicated in Baptism is evident from that of the Apostle (in Tit. 3. 4, 5.) After the kindness of God our Saviour towards man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, i. e. by the Grace of Sanctification, which is a work of the Holy Ghost, usually begun in Baptism, and constantly wrought by it, in some measure in the party baptised, at least so far as amounts to the putting into him the first principle of it, whereby he is in time, and by degrees brought to a newness of condition, actually regenerated into a new creature.  
§. 7. Hence Peter unto the convert Jews (Acts 2.) promises upon their Baptism the gift of the Holy Ghost (v. 38.) Repent, and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is made to you, and to your children, etc. The promise. What promise? Why, the Promise of the gift of (that implies sure, if any thing more, yet however sanctification by) the Holy Ghost. By what means? why, by Baptism: for 'tis expressly said, Be baptised, and ye shall receive.  
§. 8. In 1 Cor. 6. 11. we have both these Graces together set down as the Consequents of Baptismal washing. And such were some of you; but ye are washed (the means in Baptism that laver of regeneration) but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of of Lord Jesus, and by the spirit of our God. As if he had said, ye are now new creatures, other men than formerly ye were: for ye have been baptised, and in your baptism have had conferred upon you both the Grace of Justification, by the Name of the Lord Jesus; and the Grace of Sanctification, by the spirit of our God.  
§. 9 And perhaps the same is intimated in that of the Apostle to the Ephesians. Husband's love your wives, even as Christ loved the Church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctific and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it unto himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish, (Ephes. 5. 25, 26, 27.) Here cleansing may note Justification: that Grace being expressed by that very word (1 John 1. 7.) where the blood of Jesus Christ is said to cleanse, that is to justify us from all sin. And then the Church of Christ, which consists of Persons of all sorts and ages, small and great, old and young that have been baptised into Jesus Christ, will have both Justification and Sanctification communicated and conveyed to it by the washing of water with the word, that is by Baptism, the water whereof is sanctified to that use by the word of God. And that will make it a glorious Church indeed, to be both justified, not having spot or wrinkle upon it or any such thing; and to be sanctified, being holy and without blemish.  
§. 10. And this sense of the thing our present Church hath: whilst in her office of Public Baptism she prays for the Infant to be baptised, that he may receive remission of his sins, and be sanctified by the Holy Ghost; and in her Catechism she teaches the Baptised Catechumen, that hereby, that is, by Baptism, we are made children of grace, that is gracious children, acceptable to, and accepted of by God; accepted by the grace of Justification, and made acceptable by the grace of Sanctification.  
§. 11. And this sense of it the Primitive Church of Christ also had. First, as to the Grace of Justification. Hence the Nicene Fathers in their Creed 
a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins. The Council of Florence saith 
b Hujus Sacramenti effectus est remissio omnis culpae originalis & actualis, Concil. Flor. , The effect of this Sacrament of Baptism is the remission of all sin, whether Original or Actual. St. Cyprian saith 
c Omnes, qui ad divinum munus & patrimonium baptismi sanctificatione perveniunt, hominem illic veterem gratiâ lavacri salutaris exponunt, & innovati spiritu sancto à sordibus contagionis antiquae iteratâ nativitate purgantur, D. Cyprian. de Habitu Virgin. Considerantes ac scientes, quod templa Dei sint membra nostra ab omni faece contagionis antiquae lavacri vitalis sanctificatione purgata, Id. ib. Unde genitalis auxilio superioris aevi labe detersâ in expiatum pectus ac purum desuper se lumen infudit, D. Cypr. l. 2. Ep. 2. In aquae baptismo percipitur peccatorum remissio. D. Cyprian. Praef. ad l. de Exhor. Mart. In aquae baptismo percipitur peccatorum remissio, D. Cyprian. Praef. ad lib. de Exhort. Martyr. , Our members are the temples of God, being purged by the sanctification of the vital laver from the dregs of the old contagion. St. August. saith 
d In Baptismo omnia debita, i. e. peccata prorsus dimittuatur nobis. D. Aug. 135 serm. de Temp. Ecce venturi estis ad fontem sanctum, diluemini in baptismo salutari lavacro regenerationis. Renovabimini, eritis sine ullo peccato; ascendentes de illo lavacro, omnia quae vos peccata persequebantur, ibi delebuntur, D. Aug. Serm. 119. de Temp. Baptizati sunt, deletisque omnibus peccatis ex hâc vitâ emigrarunt, D. Aug. lib. 13. de Civ. Dei, c. 7.— Ut hortandi sint homines tunc se potius interimere, cum lavacro sanctae regenerationis abluti universorum remissionem acceperint peccatorum. Tunc enim tempus est cavendi omnia futura peccata, cum omnia sint deleta praeterita, D. Aug. de Civ. Dei, l. 1. c. 27.  In Baptism all debts, that is sins, are forgiven us. St. Hierom 
e Quod [sc. baptisma] sicut priora peccata dimittit, sic in futurum servare non potest, nisi baptizati omni custodiâ servaverint cor suum, D. Hieron. contra Haeres. Jovin. c. 33. Omnia scorta, & publicae colluvionis sordes, impietas in De●m, parricidium in parents, incestus, atque extraordinariae voluptates utriusque sexûs mutatâ naturâ Christi fonte purgantur, D. Hieron. Ep. 50. ad Oceanum. Omnia nobis in baptismate condonata sunt crimina— Id. ib.  saith, that Baptism doth remit the former sins, though for the future it cannot save, unless the baptised do with all diligence keep their hearts. Tertullian 
f Felix Sacramentum a quae nostrae quâ abluti delictis pristinae caecitatis in vitam aeternam liberamur, Tertull. de Bapt.— deletâ morte per ablutionem delictorum, Id. ib.— baptismi carnalis actus, quòd in aquâ mergimur, spiritalis effectus, quòd delictis liberamur, Id. ib.  calls Baptism that happy Sacrament of water, wherein being washed from the faults of our former blindness we are delivered into eternal life. St. Chrysostom 
g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Chrys. Hom. 40. in Genes. Vel potius quod omnia remiserit per lavacrum regenerationis, Id. Enar. in Psal 7. Hinc ostenditur dogma magnum quòd perfectè purgantur à peccatis, qui baptizantur, Id. Hom. 40. in Acts 1. 19  calls Baptism a Circumcision not made with hands, wherein no labour is undergone, but the burdens of sins are laid down, and there is found forgiveness of all the sins, which have been committed in the whole time of our life. St. Bernard 
h Quae est gratia, unde per baptismum investimur? Utique purgatio delictorum, D. Bern. Serm. 1. in Coen. Domini.  asks, what is the Grace wherewith we are invested in Baptism? and answers, that it is the purging, (that is the pardoning) of our sins. Athanasius 
i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Athan. Apolog. 2, pro Christian. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Id. Dict. & Interpret. Parab. Script. q. 94. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [sc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. Respons. ad Orthod. q. 44.  saith, one end of Baptism is, that in [or by] the water we may obtain the remission of former sins. Greg. Nazianz. 
k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Nazian. Orat. 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. ib.  saith, that this Laver hath the virtue to blot out sins. St. Ambrose saith 
l Illic enim omnibus peccatis depositis abluitur credens, justificatur domini nomine, & per spiritum Dei nostri Deo filius adoptatur. D. Ambros. 1 Cor. 6. 11. , that there (i. e. in baptism) the Believer is washed, all his sins being put away, he is justified in the Name of the Lord, and adopted a Son to God by the Spirit of our God. And 
m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. D. Basil. Exhort. ad Baptism.  St. Basil, (to name no more) saith, it is to captives redemption, remission of debts, etc. And these may suffice to report the Church's sense as to the matter of Justification, which stands in the remission of sins: though others also 
n Beatos existimat, qui absque labore peccatorum remissionem acceperunt, quod sola baptismatis gratia largiri potest, Theodoret. in Psal. 50. Pollicetur peccatorum veniam, quae per sanctum baptism● mortalibus datur.— Theod l. 7. de Sacrificiis. Non reddit parentum peccata in filios, quia cum ab originali culpa per baptismum liberamur, jam non parentum culpas, sed quas ipsi committimus habemus, D. Greg. Mag. Expos. Moral. l. 15. c. 31, in 21 cap. Job. Sciendum est autem eos, qui post lavacrum in peccata incidunt, eos esse qui castigantur. Quae enim prius facta sunt dimittuntur, Quae autem postea fiunt expurgantur, Clemen. Alexandr. Stromatum, l. 4. Justificamur enim pe● Sanctum baptismum; mortem Christi annunciantes, & simul resurrectionem ejus confitentes, Cyril. Alexan●. Apolog. ad Theodes. Ad peccati namque ablutionem sufficit salutare, & sacrum lavacrum, abstergitque superiorum delictorum maculam, Cyril. Alex. l. 1. in Isai. cap. 1.  do attest the same.  
§. 12. Then as to the Grace of Sanctification, whereby we are purged from the corruptions of our nature, and endued with inward holiness, let St. Chrysostom 
a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. D. Chrys. Hom. 40. in Gen. Divinae autem gratiae lavacrum non corporis, sed animae maculam fordesque mundare consuevit, D. Chrysost. ad Baptizandos.  speak, and he will tell you, that the grace of Baptism heals without pain, brings us good things without number, and fills us with the grace of the Holy Ghost. And that the Laver of divine grace useth to cleanse not the spot and filthiness of the body but of the soul. St. Cyprian 
b Per Baptismum Spiritus Sanctus accipitur, D. Cyprian. l. 2. ep. 3.  saith, By baptism is received the Holy Ghost; i. e. in the gifts and graces of it: a thing frequently happening certainly in visible effects, and undoubtedly in invisible graces, to persons baptised by the Apostles. Tertullian 
c Igitur omnes aquae de pristinâ originis praerogatiuâ Sacramentum sanctificationis consequuntur invocato Deo. Supervenit enim statim spiritus de coelis, & aquis superest sanctificans eas de semetipso; & ita sanctificatae vim sanctificandi combibunt, Tertull de Baptismo.  saith, that the waters of baptism being sanctified by the Holy Ghost do conceive a sanctifick virtue. Primasius 
d Filium Dei induti, & toti ejus membra per Baptismi sanctificationem effecti, filii Dei sitis necesse est, Primes. in Gal. 3. 27.  saith, Having put on the Son of God, and being wholly made members of him by the sanctification of Baptism, ye must needs be the sons of God. And Greg. Nazianz. calls Baptism 
e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Greg. Naz. ib.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the purgation of the soul; and the waters of Baptism he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lustral or cleansing waters, saying that they were more cleansing than hyssop, than the blood under the Law, or the ashes of an heifer.  
§. 13. Baptism then being a means of making the baptised partakers of so excellent Graces of God, as the Justification of their Persons, and the Sanctification of their Natures, and so putting them out of a state of wrath and damnnation, into a state of grace and salvation, must needs be concluded to be highly beneficial to those that partake of it. What thing indeed in all the world can in the least come in competition for worth and excellency, for advantageousness and beneneficialness, with either of these two divine Graces? Who that understood what the Gild of sin is, and what the Punishment of damnation is, would not give the world, if it were his, to be acquitted from that guilt, whereby he should he obliged unto that punishment? And who that understood the just worth of internal holiness, or the true value of eternal happiness, would not think all the Jewels in the world, though all the pebbles and sands in the world were jewels, too mean a price for such a purchase as that grace, that should entitle unto that glory?  
§. 14. And that being so, what an inducement is here (O what inducement can be greater? what persuasion more forcible? what argument more strong? what obligation more powerful?) to draw us to the baptising of our Infants? what can we do better for them? what can we do so good for them? as to get them justified? as to get them sanctified? and to get them baptised? that they may both be justified, and sanctified.   

CHAP. XIV.  
Baptism beneficial unto Children in regard that by it they are consigned unto a Resurrection.  
§. 1. BUt Ninthly, every Grace itself doth not carry immediately and fully into 
Prime enim resurrectio, de●ine regnum. Tertull a tv. Martion. l. 5. 1 Cor. 15. 50.  Glory. There must be a rising before a reigning. Flesh and blood, in the condition it is here in, corruptible and mortal, cannot inherit the kingdom of God. There must therefore intervene a Resurrection from death, before there can be had a full Admission into life.  
§. 2. Now Baptism consignes the Baptised, and that whether Men, or Infants, (for there is no distinction, no exception made in this point of, or against, either, or other) unto a Resurrection; and that so effectually, that at present they are made capable, and hereafter, if they forfeit not the grace of their Baptism, they shall be partakers of it.  
§. 3. And in the sense and hope of this, our Church prays for the new baptised Infant, that as he is made 
Publ. Baptism of Infants.  partaker of the death of Christ, he may also be partaker of his resurrection, so that finally with the residue of God's holy Church he may be an inheritor of God's everlasting kingdom.  
§. 4. And the same sense of it the Ancient Church also had. This is sufficiently evident from 
Si autem quidam baptizantur pro mortuis; videbimus an ratione; certè illâ praesumptione hoc eos instituisse contendit, quâ al●i etiam carni, ut vicarium baptisma, profuturum existimarent ad spem resurrectionis; quae nisi corporalis non aliâs sic baptismati obligaretur. Quid & ipsos baptizari, ait, si non quae baptizantur corpora resurgunt? Tert. the Resurrect. car. nis.  the practice of those men (whom St. Paul speaks of, in 1 Cor. 15. 29.) who were baptised for the dead. For that practice of theirs argues thus much, that they thought that vicarious baptism (as Tertullian calls it) of theirs for the dead would be of advantage to the dead in order to their rising again. And that thought must be grounded on an opinion, that those bodies that were baptised, should be raised. Now this Ground the Apostle goes not about in the least to confute; but argues from their practice grounded on it to prove a resurrection: and to them doth it unanswerably. For if they thought their being baptised for others did conduce to the rising of those others, they must needs much more think that they that were baptised for themselves must be raised: now neither they that had been baptised by proxy, nor they that were baptised in their own persons, could possibly rise, if there were no resurrection. So that their Practice was a confirmation of the Apostles Doctrine.  
§. 5. Now this effect Baptism hath on the Baptised, by making them partakers of the Resurrection of Christ. In respect whereof we are said by the Apostle to be risen with him in Baptism (Coloss. 2. 12.) whence Baptism is called by St. Basil 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, D. Basil. Exhort. ad Bapt.  a power to the resurrection, and by Theodoret 
‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. , a participation of the Lords resurrection. And well it may, inasmuch as by it we are made partakers of the Lords death. Whence we are said, (in the same place) to be buried with him in Baptism; and (Rom. 6. 3.) to be baptised into his death. And if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection, (Rom. 6. 5.) In contemplation whereof Gregory Nazianz. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. An ignoratis, quod quicunque in Christum tincti sumus, in mortem ejus tincti sumus: consepulti ●rgo illi sumus per baptismum in mortem, ut quemadmodum surrexit Christus à mortuis, ita & nos in novitate vita incedamus. Ac ne de istâ tantum vitâ dictum putes, quae ex fide per baptisma in novitate vivenda est, providentissimè adstruit: Si enim complantati fuerimus simulacro mortis Christi, ita & resurrectionis crimus, Per●simulacrum enim morimur in baptismate, sed per veritatem resurgimus in carne, ●icut & Christus, Tertull. the Resurrect. Carnis Edit Rigalt. p. 415. We receive hereby a promise of resurrection unto life: though we by going into the water profess that we are willing to take up the cross and die for Christ's sake; yet on God's part this action of going into and coming out of the water again, did signify that he would bring such persons to live again. See this and much more in Dr. Patrick's Discourse of Baptism, pag. 32, 33, etc.  elegantly cries out, Let us then be buried together with Christ by baptism, that we may be also raised up with him; let us descend with him, that we may be also exalted with him; let us ascend with him, that we may also be glorified with him. And from this Sacramental conformity of ours to Christ by baptism in his death, Tertullian argues a real conformity that we shall have with Christ in our flesh in his resurrection.  
§. 6. Resurrection then, which is the hope of the living, and the comfort of the dying Christian, 
Et tamen non utique carni defendimus Dei regnum, sed resurrectionem substantiae suae, quasi januam regni per quam aditur, Tertull. Advers. Martion. l. 5.  being, as Tertullian calls it, janua regni, that gate of the kingdom that lets us into the actuality of enjoyment of all those invisible and incomprehensible, immortal, and immarcessible glories, which are laid up, and kept for us in heaven: and Baptism being that Ordinance of God, whereby he consignes men unto a Resurrection; whereby they have a title given to it, and are put into a capacity for it, and a certainty of it, so they shall infallibly obtain it, if they do not through the default of their own Infidelity or Apostasy fall from the grace of it, we cannot but think it highly beneficial to our children to be partakers of it. And that consideration of the Beneficialness of it even in that respect to them, should be a motive of weight and force with us, to persuade us to procure it for them.   

CHAP. XV.  
Baptism beneficial unto Children, in regard they are saved by it.  
§. 1. TEnthly and lastly, by Baptism Infants are saved.  
§. 2. Salvation is such a thing, that whatsoever doth effect that, or is but in any measure conducible to the effecting of that, must needs be acknowledged beneficial to them that are saved. Besides God the great Saviour of all men, there are several things to which a saving efficacy is ascribed: as Faith, the Word of Faith, the Ministers of the Word, Prayer, and amongst the rest Baptism. Whence are we Christians? 'Tis a question that St. Basil asks. To which, saith he, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉. Basil. de Spir. Sancto, c. 10.  any body will answer through faith. But how are we saved? Why, by being regenerated through the grace conferred in baptism; or (as his words are well enough capable of being rendered) through grace by Baptism.  
§. 3. Now this salvific efficacy of Baptism not for men, but infants also, might easily be inferred from the foregoing particulars: in as much as salvation consists but in the obtaining, and enjoying that mercy, Grace, and Glory, which Baptism qualifies them for, consigns, and entitles them to; and which they, upon due perseverance in the grace thereof, shall be made partakers of.  
§. 4. But there is a nearer way to be taken than such a repetition of particulars. Our Church saith, It is certain by God's word, that Children which are baptised, dying before they commit actual sin are undoubtedly saved. Children dying before the commission of actual sin are capable of no other means of salvation but Baptism, and, that which is joined with it, Prayer. Therefore by Baptism with the Prayer of Faith they are saved.  
§. 5. But is this certain by the word of God? Yes surely, by good argument drawn from it. For baptisin being the application of the blood of Christ to the party baptised for the taking away of that sin whereof he stands charged; and Infants being chargeable with no sin but that sin of the world, which is taken away by the blood of the lamb of God applied to them in baptism; it must follow, that being freed from that, they must be saved.  
§. 6. But we will go to Scripture-Text itself for proof. Our Saviour hath said, (Mark. 16. 16.) He that believeth, and is baptised shall be saved. Here we have salvation promised upon two performances; the one by us, the other upon us: that by us is Faith; that upon us is Baptism. Now as he that hath both these, is certainly saved: so no doubt at all of his salvation, that hath but either of these, so it be not his fault that he hath not the other. And if our baptised Infants have not the one, which is Faith, yet they have the other, which is Baptism.  
§. 7. Put case one believe, and be in no possibility of being baptised, who doubts now of his salvation? even just so, in case one be baptised, and be in no capacity to believe, there cannot reasonably be any doubt made of his being saved.  
§. 8. Our Saviour wrought many salvations for their bodies, who by themselves had made no application to him in a way of prayer or faith, upon the faith and prayer of others. And what doubt but he is as ready to work salvation for the souls of our Infants, though in no capacity of applying themselves to him by prayer or faith, even upon the faith and prayer of those that bring them to baptism? Had Christ mercy only for bodies? Or hath he not it much more for souls? Or hath he mercy only for the souls of men? and not also for the souls of Infants? And who ever restrained the efficacy of Faith and Prayer in the use of Means to bodily salvation, that it cannot prevail also for the saving of souls? theirs especially who as they can do nothing of themselves to advance it, so they do nothing of themselves to hinder it. All possible proper means then being used for their salvation, which is their baptising with the prayer of faith, there is no reason to doubt of their being saved. And therefore our Church having, after the recital of the Gospel appointed on that occasion, which contains this order of Christ's to suffer the little Children to come 
Doubt you not therefore, but earnestly believe, that he will likewise favourably receive this present Infant, that he will embrace him with the arms of his mercy, that he will give unto him the blessing of eternal life, and make him partaker of his everlasting kingdom, Pub. Bap. of Infants.  unto him, descanted a while on the good will of our Saviour to those children, proceeds from thence to exhort the bringers of the Infant unto Baptism, not to doubt of the salvation of it.  
§. 9 But further, as our Saviour said, He that believeth, and is baptised shall be saved, so one of our Saviour's Apostles said of him, that according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, (Tit. 3. 5.) that is by Christian Baptism, which consists of those two parts, the washing of Regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost. The words are a Merismus, a Rhetorical Figure of Speech, wherein instead of any Totum or whole thing, is set an enumeration of its parts. As when for the world, which God in the beginning did create, it is said, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, Gen. 1. 1. As the heaven and the earth, the two constituent integral parts of the world are put for the world there: so here the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost the two constituent integral parts of Christian Baptism, are put for Baptism. Just as when our Saviour (John 3. 5.) said to Nicodemus, Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, by naming the two constituent integral parts of Baptism water and the spirit, he meant Christian Baptism, which consists of those two parts, without which in the ordinary way of salvation, as far as that is revealed unto us, and without tying God in extraordinary cases unto ordinary means, there is no entrance into the kingdom of God.  
§. 10. And another of his Apostles doth positively and expressly say that Baptism doth now save us, (1 Pet. 3. 21.) Not that it hath any Physical virtue in itself in the way of a Natural Cause to effect our Salvation, but that it hath a saving efficacy for such end communicated unto it by God the Ordainer of it, who works the effect of it by the Cooperation of his Spirit with it, and that it doth exert its efficacy, and hath that effect, upon all such, as do not frustrate the grace of God bestowed on them, and wrought in them, in, and by it: which certainly our Children before the Commission of wilful actual sin do not do. And what is said more than so, of Faith, or the Word, or Prayer, or any other Grace or Means, which we call saving?  
§. 11. Nor let any here tell me, that the Apostle doth expressly deny this efficacy to that part of Baptism, which is the only part which Infants are capable of, namely the putting away the filth of the flesh, or the external washing with water.  
§. 12. For first, (not in the least to allow the external washing to be the only part of Baptism, which Infants are capable of; for who can tell in what manner the Holy Spirit can, or in what measures he doth insinuate himself, and communicate his grace, and exert his efficacies in very Infants? or who can deny any thing of all this to them!) the Apostle was a Jew; and wrote this Epistle to the Jews; and his meaning plainly is this, to deny (if he do deny any thing) the saving efficacy of that Baptism he speaks of, to any legal Jewish 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Just. Mart. Diolog. cum Tryph. p. 231. Edit. Paris. 1615. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. D. Chrysost. ad Illuminand. p. 854. l. 4. Tom. 6. Edit. Eton. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Naz. Orat. 40.  Baptism, all the efficacy whereof was the putting away the filth of the flesh, a ceremonial purgation from legal pollution, and to ascibe it unto the Evangelical Christian Baptism; which, from its being usually administered upon such Inquiry and Answer, as was made by, or exacted of, such as in those days offered themselves unto Baptism, who had no inducement to bring them to it, but the prompting of a good conscience, persecution for it being the only visible consequences of it, the Apostle elegantly calls (by a word that signifies both Enquiring and Answering) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Inquiry or 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 638. Dehinc ter mergitamur, amplius aliquid respondentes, etc. Tertull. de Corona Mil. p. 121. Edit. Rig. Quae ideo dicitur interrogatio, quod sicut in contractibus emens aut comparans sibi aliquid commodi certa ratione ac formulis interrogat emptorem, ac stipulatur ab eo quaerendo, An hoc aut illud mihi vendis ac tradis, & hac conditione ac precio, etc. cui contra venditor respondens affirmat: sic igitur etiam in Baptismo, cum Deus interrogando stipulatur ac obligat nos nostramque fidem & obedientiam, tum vicissim nos stipulando per fidem obligamus ejus paternum favorem ac gratiam. Flac. Illirici Clavis. v. Baptismus. This form of interrogation seems to have been very ancient in the Church, and the Apostle justly thought to refer to it when he styles Baptism the answer of a good Conscience towards God, etc. Dr. Cave Primit. Christian, part. 1. ch. 10. p. 315.  Answer of a good conscience toward God: or the good consciences Question or Answer unto God.  
§. 13. Secondly however, if what he saith were to be understood of the external washing with water in Baptism, yet his meaning is not to deny that saving efficacy he speaks of to that, but not to appropriate it unto that only; but to communicate it with that, whatever it be that he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether Inquiry, or Answer of a good conscience towards God. When our Saviour said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me; 
John 7. 16.  his meaning was not to say, that his doctrine was not his at all, but not h●s alone, but his Fathers also which sent him. So when he said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me, John 12. 44. his meaning was not to deny that he that believed on him, did not believe on him: but to affirm, that he that did believe on him, did not believe on him only, but also on him that sent him. So the Apostles meaning here is not to deny, that the putting away the filth of the flesh doth save us (viz. in its order, degree, and measure) but that not that only, or alone doth save us; but that, together with the Answer of a good conscience towards God made by, or for the Baptised.  
§. 14. And now after all this, what need I, or what can I add more, that may set forth the Beneficialness of Baptism to those that are Baptised, whether Infants or Others. What greater benefit than Salvation? What more beneficial than that that saves? If then to baptise our children be a means to save our children (and indeed that with our faith and prayer be all the means we can use in order to their saving) how should not the consideration hereof, if we desire (as how can we but desire?) they should be saved, move us to baptise them? Yea, how shall we free ourselves from the accusation of great uncharitableness, that I say not injustice, towards the offspring of our own bowels, if we may have, and do despise, or neglect the procuring for them this so beficial a means of their salvation?  
And thus I have dispatched the first Branch of my Argument: and have shown you, that Infants may have Benefit by Baptism, and what is the Benefit that they may have by it.   

CHAP. XVI.  
children's Need of Baptism in regard of its efficacy to take off the Gild of Sin.  
§. 1. I Now go on to the Second, the Need which Children have for Baptism. And in the showing of that I will begin with that, which Children have with them at their beginning, and is derived to them from their beginning, and that is, as it is usually called, Original Sin. And if it do appear, that Children are born infected with that Epidemical Malady of Original Sin; and that Baptism is a Means (the only ordinary Instrumental Means) by which they may be healed of that Malady, then certainly it will not by any reasonable man be denied, that Infants do stand in need of Baptism: unless haply it can be supposed, what yet is utterly unsupposeable, that one that is sick of a disease, whereof he will die without cure, hath no need of that Physic which is the only remedy by which he may be cured. We will first see what virtue there is in this Physic for the healing of that Malady; and then see how Children are infected with that Malady, that is to be healed with this Physic.  
§. 2. Now for the first what healing virtue there is in Baptism, by the Institution of its Ordainer, for the taking away of sin and 
In Sacramentis novae legis, quae derivantur à Christo gratia causatur instrumentaliter quidem per ipsa sacramenta, sed principaliter per virtutem Spiritus Sancti in Sacramentis operantis, Aquin. 12dae. q. 112. 1. Sacramenta ex sui institutione habent quod conferant gratiam, Aquin. 3. q. 66. 2. Conclus. Baptismus autem ab ipso Christo virtutem habet justificandi, Id. ib. 1.m.  guilt, I will give you an account of it, both from the Scriptures, and from the Fathers.  
§. 3. I begin with the Scriptures. And the first I take notice of to this purpose is that exhortation of St. Peter to the converted Jews, (Acts 2. 38.) where he speaks unto them to repent and be baptised every one of them in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission (that is, the forgiveness) of sins. From whence it is clear, that Baptism is a Sacrament, whereby Christ bestoweth and conveyeth remission of sins to those that are baptised. For else, why should he exhort them to be baptised for that end? Why should he exhort them to be baptised for remission of sins, if remission of sins were not given in and by Baptism?  
§. 4. And of so known an efficacy to this purpose was Baptism in the Apostles days, that Ananias (Acts 22. 16.) hastens Saul upon his conversion to be baptised for this end. And now (saith he) why tarriest thou? Arise and be baptised, and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord. Be baptised and wash away thy sins, that is, in order to the cleansing thee from thy sins use the means which God hath ordained for that end, be baptised.  
§. 5. And hence sure it is, and as having an apprehension, not to say experience, which every body must needs know St. Paul had of the virtue and efficacy of Baptismal washing towards this cleansing, that chosen vessel tells us (Ephes. 5. 25, 26.) that Christ gave himself for the Church, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word. By cleansing the grace of Justification is understood (1 John 2. 7.) where the blood of Jesus is said to cleanse us from all sin, that is, to justify us, to purchase for us, and procure to us the pardon of our sins. And so unquestionably it here signifies: especially being set in contradistinction to sanctification; and more so in the Original than in the Translation, which is, not, that he might sanctify and cleanse it: but that he might sanctifis it, having cleansed it: that is, that having forgiven its sins by the grace of justification, he might render it holy by the grace of sanctification, the one as well as the other being applied, conveyed, or communicated to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the washing of water with the word, that is by Baptism, 
Mundatum lavacro, hoc est baptismate. Theophylact. Oecumen.  the washing here spoken of. Now this, the cleansing, that is the remitting or taking off the guilt of sin from the Church being here by the Apostle ascribed unto Baptism, and that as the Instrument used by Christ for that end, who is therefore said to cleanse the Church by that washing, it is evident that by Baptism, as by an Instrument ordained and used by Christ for that end, the Grace of justification is conveyed and communicated to the party baptised. Thus the Scriptures of God say.  
§. 6. And thus say the Fathers of the Church also. St. Chrysost. saith 
* Divinae autem gratiae lavacrum non corporis, sed animae maculam, sordesque ●mundare consuevit. D. Chrysost. Hom. ad Baptizandos. , It is the use of the Laver of the divine grace to cleanse the spots and filth not of the body, but of the soul. And that they are perfectly purged from sins, who are baptised. Theophylact saith 
a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Theophyl. in John 5. 4. , that though the water of baptism 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chr. Hom. 40. in Act.  be simply water, yet when the grace of the Holy Ghost comes thereto, through calling upon God, it loses the diseases of the soul. And these we know are sins and corruptions. St. Cyprian, speaking of his own baptism 
b Scis ipse profecto & mecum pariter recognoscis, quid detraxerit nobis, quidve contulerit, mors ista criminum, vita virtutum, D. Cyprian, l. 2. Ep. 2. , calls it that death of sins, and life of virtues. Baptism is the Death of sins by the Grace of Justification, and the Life of virtues by the Grace of Sanctification. We are washed, saith 
c Lavamur igitur in Baptismo, quia deletur chirographum damnationis nostrae, & gratia haec nobis confertur nè nobis jam concupiscentia noceat, si tamen à consensu abstineamus. D. Bern. Serm. 1. in Coen. Dom.  St. Bernard, in Baptism, because therein the handwriting of our damnation is blotted out, [that is, our sin is pardoned,] and this grace is given us not to be hurt of concupiscence unless we consent unto it. St. Augustin 
d Quam causam si voluerimus admittere, eo usque progressu proveniet, ut hortandi sint homines, tum potius se interimere, cum lavacro sanctae regenerationis abluti universorum remissionem acceperint peccatorum. D. Aug. de Civ. Dei, l. 1. c. 27. Quod utique si fecissent [sc. ut Christum negarent] etiam hoc eye in illo lavacro dimitteretur, quod timore mortis negaverint Christum; in quo lavacro etiam illis facinus tam immane dimissum est, qui occiderant Christum, Id. ib. l. 13. c. 7.  tells us, that if that be admitted, which some contend for, that it were ones advantage to kill himself to prevent his falling into sin through pleasure or grief, it would come to this, that men were to be exhorted, then above all other times to kill themselves, when being washed in the laver of holy regeneration they had received remission of all sins. In which laver he saith, that sin, even that great sin of killing Christ himself was remitted. Hence Juvencus calls the waters of Baptism 
e Pergite & ablutos homines purgantibus undis Nomine sub sancto Patris, Natique lavate, etc. Javenc.  purging waters: and Lactantius 
f Cum primùm caepit adolescere, tinctus est [sc. Christus] à Johanne Propheta in Jordane flumine, ut lavacro spiritali peccata, non sua, quae utique nulla habebat, sed carnis, quam gerebat, aboleret: ut quemadmodum Judaeos suscepta circumcisione, sic etiam Gentes baptismo, id est purifici roris perfusione salvaret. Lactant. Instit. l. 4. c. 15.  calls the act of baptising the pouring on of the purifying dew; which by the way is a good instance of baptising by way of persusion or pouring on of water, so early as within three hundred years of Christ's time.  
§. 7. These instances, not to tyre you with more say, either of the same, or other Fathers to this purpose, are enough to secure you of the Catholickness of this Doctrine, which being found in, and founded on the Scriptures, hath been generally held by all Orthodox Writers. And therefore, having shown you, what efficacy there is in Baptism for the taking away of sin from the Baptised. I shall now proceed to show, that Infants are under the guilt of sin.  
§. 8. Only by the way let me observe, that the Scriptures and Fathers, which I have alleged, do not speak restrictively, either as to the sins remitted in baptism, but so as extending the remitting efficacy thereof unto all sin, Original, as well as Actual: or as to the Persons whose sins are in baptism remitted, but so as comprehending all Persons, to whomsoever sin may be imputed, whether Men or Infants.   

CHAP. XVII.  
children's Need of Baptism in regard of their being under the guilt of sin.  
§. 1. NOw as to the Point of Infants being under the guilt of sin, this also, as the former, I shall show, first from the Scriptures, and then from the Fathers.  
§. 2. The Scriptures that speak to the Point are many. Amongst them that of St. Paul (Rom. 5. 12.) is very notable. By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. The one man here mentioned is the Father of all mankind, Adam. The World into which sin entered by this one man is mankind: so then, if Infants be any part of mankind, any of the natural descendants from Adam, then by Adam hath 
Omnes enim unus fuerunt, D. Aug. 7 Serm. de Verb. Apost. Ecce primus homo totam massam damnabilem facit, Id. ib.  sin entered on, and passed through even to them: they through the imputation of his fault are concerned in his guilt, as having all been in him, when he sinned. Again, ver. 14. it is said, Death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, that is, (who can it be else but?) Infants, who die, not upon the account of any actual sin of their own, but upon the account of Adam's first sin. Again, ver. 15. Through the offence of one many be dead. Many? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the many, i. e. even all. Again, by the offence of one, i e. Adam, judgement, i. e. a sentence, came upon all men, and so on Infants, to condemnation. Again, ver. 19 By one man's disobedience many [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the many, i. e. even all] were made sinners: and so Infants, being no way excepted, are included; the sin of their first father being by imputation made theirs, and they accounted of as having sinned in him.  
§. 3. And unless all had sinned in Adam, what account of it can be given that all should die in Adam? 1 Cor. 15. 22. If Infants partake not in Adam's fault, why should they partake in Adam's 
Quod si nullum esset [sc. primi peccati originale contagium] profecto nulli malo parvuli obstricti nihil mali vel in corpore vel in anima sub tanta justi. Dei potestate paterentur. D. Aug. Cont. Julian. Pelag. l 3. c. 5.  punishment? Why should they have paid unto them the wages of sin, who were no way concerned in the work of sin?  
§. 4. And if all Infants be not conceived in sin, how then came David to be so conceived? was it only his particular mishap to be born under the guilt of his forefather's sin? Or rather is it not the common condition of all mere men that are born into the world?  
§. 5. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, John 3. 6. that is, such flesh as that is that it was born of; sinful flesh of flesh that is sinful; as that was of which we were all born: it being in his own likeness, not in the likeness 
Fatendum est primos quidem homines ita fuisse institutos, ut si non peccavissent, nullum mortis experirentur genus: sed eosdem primos parentes ita fuisse morte mulctatos, ut etiam quicquid eorum stirpe esset exortum, eâdem poenâ teneretur obnoxium. Non enim aliud ex eyes, quam quod ipsi fuerant nasceretur: pro magnitudine quippe culpae illius naturam damnatio mutavit in pejus: ut quod poenaliter praecessit in peccantibus hominibus primis etiam naturaliter sequeretur in nascentibus c●teris.— Quod est autem parens homo, hoc est proles homo.— Et quod homo factus est, non cum crearetur, sed cum peccaret, & puniretur, hoc genuit, quantum quidem attinet ad peccati & mortis originem, etc. D. Aug. the Civ. Dei, l. 13. c. 3.  of God, that our first father begot us; in his own likeness as vitiated and defiled by his transgression; not in God's likeness, the spotless purity, and unstained integrity of his first creation.  
§. 6. And if there be not one, that can bring a clean thing out of an unclean, (Job 14. 4.) how then can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean, that is born of a woman? Job 25. 4.  
§. 7. So then we must conclude with that of the Apostle (Rom. 3. 13) that all have sinned [all, young and old; Fathers and Children; Adam and his Posterity; He in himself, his Posterity in him; he actually, they Originally, nay and actually too, if living till capable of adding sin unto sin, actual to original] and so are come short of the glory of God, not only of that glory to which God had ordained us, the glory of happiness, but also of that glory in which he did create us, the glory of holiness.  
§. 8. And thus you see, that, (as the Apostle saith, Gal. 3. 22.) the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, Infants themselves not excepted; who dying before the commission of actual sin, would have had no need 
* Nam quis 〈◊〉 dicere, non esse Christum Infantum salvatorem, nec redemptorem? Unde autem salvos facit, si nulla in cis est originalis aegritudo peccati? D. Aug. de pecc. merit. & remiss. l. 1. c. 23. Quid necessarium habuit Infans Christum, si non aegrotat? D. Aug. Serm. 10. de Verb. Apost.  of Christ to save them, were they not under the guilt of so much sin as might condemn them.  
§. 9 Thus speak the Scriptures to the Point: let us now again see what the Fathers say to it.  
§. 10. Primasius saith, 
a Cum peccato concipimur, cum peccato nascimur, Primas. in Heb. 4. 15.  With sin we are conceived, and with sin we are born. St. Ambrose saith (and citys Psal. 51. 5. to prove it) 
b Omnes homines sub peccato nascimur, quorum ipse ortus in vitio est, D. Amb. de Poenit. l. 1. c. 11.  that all men are born in sin, and our very birth is in fault. Chrysologus saith, 
c Per peccatum primi hominis natura lethale vulnus accepi●, & caepit esse origo mortis, quae erat initium vitae, Petr. Chrysolog. Serm. 143.  Nature got a deadly wound by the sin of the first man, and that began to be the original of death, which was the beginning of life. St. Cyprian saith 
d Prohiberi [à baptismo] non debet infans, qui recons natus nil peccavit, nisi quod secundum Adam carnaliter natus, contagium mortis antiquae prima nativitate contraxit, D. Cyprian. l. 3. Ep. 8. , The Infant ought not to be denied baptism who being new born, hath no way sinned, but that it hath contracted the contagion of the old death by its first birth, that is, is guilty of Original sin. St. Gregory saith 
e Quia à statum rectitudinis primus homo peccando corruit, peccati poenam ad filios misit, D. Greg. in Psal. 51. 5. Peccatum quippe originale à parentibus trahimus, & nisi per gratiam baptismatis solvamur, etiam parentum peccata portamus, quia unum adhuc cum illis sumus.— ex originali peccato anima polluitur prolis, D. Greg. Expos. in c. 21 Job. l. 15. c 31. , Because the first man fell by sinning from his state of Integrity, he derived the punishment of his sin upon his children. St. Bernard saith 
f Dixi saepius vobis, nec ment excidere debet, quoniam in casu primi hominis cecidimus omnes, etc. D. Bern. Serm. in Coen. Dom. de Bapt. & de Sacram. Altar. & de Ablut. Pedum. A planta pedis usque ad verticem, non erat in nobis sanitas: erraveramus ab utero: in utero damnati antequam nati, quia de peccato & in peccato concepti, D. Bern. Serm. 2. in die Pentecostes. , In the fall of the first man we all fell, and thereupon were damned ere born, because conceived of and in sin. St. Augustin 
g Nos certe causam, cur sub diabolo sit qui nascitur, donec renascatur in Christo, peccati ex origine dicimus esse contagium, D. Aug. contr. Julian. Pelag. l. 3. c. 5.  saith, Why he that is born should be under the power of the Devil, till he be new born in Christ (i e. baptised) the cause, we say, is the contagion of sin by his birth, that is Original sin. Tertullian 
h Ita omnis anima co usque in Adam censetur donec in Christo renascatur; tamdiu immunda, quamdiu recenseatur. Peccatrix autem quia immunda recipiens ignominiam ex carnis societate, Tertull. de Anima, c. 39  reckons every soul to be so long in Adam, as till it be enroled in Christ; and so long defiled, as it is unenrolled; contracting the sully of sin from its society with the flesh. Athanasius saith 
i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, D. Athan. count. Arianos', Orat. 10. , when Adam transgressed, his transgression passed unto all men. Origen 
k Sciebant enim illi, quibus mysteriorum secreta commissa sunt divinorum quia essent in omnibus genuinae sordes peccati, quae per aquam & spiritum ablui deberent, Origen. l. 5. in Rom. & Hom. 14. in Luc.  speaks of it as a thing known to those, whom the secrets of the divine Mysteries were committed to, that there are in all the genuine pollutions of sin, which ought to be washed away by water and the spirit; and himself affirms, that there is none clean from pollution, no, if he be but of a days age. Gratian 
l Firmissime tene, & nullatenus dubites omnem hominem, qui per concubitum viri & mulicris concipitur, cum originali peccato nasci impietati subditum, mortique subjectum, etc. Gratian. de Consecrat. Distinct. 4.  bids believe it firmly, and doubt not in the least of it, that whosoever is conceived by the concumbency of man and woman, is born with Original sin, etc. Yea, Vincentius Lirinensis asks 
m Quis ante prodigiosum discipulum e●us Coelestium reatu praevaritationis Adae omne genus humanum negavit astrictum? Vinc. Lirinens. advers. Hares. c. 34. , who ever before Caelestius the prodigious Disciple of Pelagius denied, that all mankind was bound under the guilt of Adam's transgression?  
§. 11. And if all mankind be bound under it, than Infants sure, no small part of mankind, are not free from it. No, not they, nor any else are free, in the judgement of the Fathers, but all guilty, Jesus Christ alone excepted: whom God sent, not in sinful 
Solus per omnia ex natis de foemina Sanctus Dominus Jesus, qui terrenae contagia corruptelae immaculati partûs novitate non senserit, & coelesti majestate depulerit. D. Ambros. Com. in 2 Luc. Profect●o peccatum etiam major fecisset [sc. Christus] si parvulus habuisset. Nam propterea nullus est hominum praeter ipsum, qui peccatum non fecerit, grandioris aetatis accessu: quia nullus est hominum praeter ipsum, qui peccatum non habuerit infantilis aetatis exortu. D. Aug. contr. Julian. Pelag. l. 5. c. 9 Sine quo generalis velamine confusionis nemo filiorum hominum intravit in hanc vitam, uno sane excepto qui ingreditur sine maculâ. Emanuel is est. D. Bern. super Cantic. Serm. 78. Solus enim Deus sine peccato, & solus homo sine peccato Christus, quia & Deus Christus, Tertull. de Animâ.  flesh, but only in the likeness of it, Rom. 8. 3. and who thence is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the thing born holy, holy in its very birth, Luk. 1. 35.  
§. 12. Children then having so great a Malady upon them as Original sin is; and Baptism being that Remedy, yea the only ordinary one by which they may be freed 
* For if there be no Salvation for Infants in the ordinary way of the Church, but by Baptism, and this appear in Scripture, as it doth, than out of all doubt the consequence is most evident out of that Scripture That Infants are to be baptised, that their Salvation may be certain. For they which cannot help themselves, must not be left only to extraordinary Helps, of which we have no assurance, and for which we have no warrant at all in Scripture, while we in the mean time neglect the ordinary way, and means commanded by Christ. A. B. Laud. Confer. §. 15. Num. 4.  from this Malady; how can it then be, but that Children must have need of Baptism?  
§. 13. And truly with the Ancient Christians this consideration was of very great weight and force. Upon this account to be sure, what ever they did upon other accounts, they baptised their Infants. Why, saith Critobolus the Pelagian are Infants baptised? St. Hierom 
a Quare infantuli baptizantur? Ut eye peccata in baptismate dimittantur, D. Hier. Ep. 17. Tract. 2. par. 1.  answers, that their sins may be remitted unto them in Baptism. So Origen 
b Per baptismum nativitatis sordes deponuntur, propterea baptizantur & parvuli, Orig. Hom. 14. in Levit. , By baptism the filth of our birth is taken away, therefore are even Children also baptised. And saith St. Chrysostom 
c Praedicat Ecclesia Catholica ubique diffasa debere parvulos baptizari propter Originale peccatum, D. Chrysost. Hom de Adam & Eva. , It is a thing which the whole Catholic Church every where diffused doth preach, namely that Infants ought to be baptised because of Original Sin. But what stand I upon the testimony of single Doctors, when we have it from a Council, that upon the account of that Rule of Faith, as the Fathers in the Milevitane Council 
d Item placuit ut quicunque parvulos recentes ab uteris matrum baptizandos negat, aut dicii in remissionem quidem peccatorum eos baptizari, sed nihil ex Adam trahere originalis peccati, quod regenerationis lavaero expietur, unde sit consequens ut in cis forma baptismatis in remissionem peccatorum non vera sed falsa intelligatur, anathema sit; quoniam non aliter intelligendum est, quod ait Apostolus, Per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum, & per peccatum mors, & ita in omnes homines pertransit, in quo omnes peccaverunt: nisi quemadmodum Ecclesia Cathelica ubique diffusa semper intellexit. Propter hanc enim regulam fidei, etiam parvuli, qui nihil peccatorum in semetipsis adhuc committore potuerunt, ideo in peccatorum remissionem veraciter baptizantur, ut in cis regeneratione mundetur, quod generatione traxerunt, Concil. Milevitan. Canon. 2. apud Caranz.  call that Text of the Apostles (Rom. 5. 12.) By one man sin entered into the world, etc. understood, as they say the Catholic Church of Christ every where diffused did always understand it, of Original sin, are Infants, which could as yet commit no sin of themselves, truly baptised into the remission of sins, that that may be cleansed in them by Regeneration, which they have drawn upon themselves by Generation. And therefore St. Augustine saith 
e Non est superfluus baptismus parvuloram, ut qui per generationem illi condemnationi obligati sunt, per regenerationem ab eadem liberentur. D. Aug. Ep. 89. , The baptism of Infants is not superfluous [and then sure there is some need of it] that they who by generation are obliged to that condemnation, which came by Adam, may by Regeneration be freed from the same.  
§. 14. Unless then we will say with the Pelagian Heretics, that children have not in them the Malady of sin; or will contradict our Saviour, and say, that the sick have no need of a Physician, that is of a remedy for their malady; or will not allow Baptism to avail towards remission of Sin, contrary to the Scripture and the Fathers, I say, unless we will run upon some or all of these absurdities, we must needs grant, that Infants have need of being baptised, and so ought, upon the account of that need, to be admitted unto Baptism.   

CHAP. XVIII.  
children's need of Baptism further shown from the consideration of the evil nature, and evil consequents of Original Sin.  
§. 1. ANd truly he that rightly understands the nature of the Malady, will never dispute the need of a Remedy. Why? what's the matter? What so great evil is there in Original sin, or comes by it to those in whom it is, that there should be such need of baptising our children to disengage them from it? What? why let our Church speak to this in her Ninth Article, and she will tell you, that it is the fault, and the corruption 
Vitium est depravatio naturae cujus●ibet hominis ex Adamo naturaliter propagati, Art. 9  of the nature of every man that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam.  
§. 2. So then, by her doctrine, there is a fault chargeable on, and a corruption diffused in, every one, till he be freed therefrom by Baptism: every natural descendent from Adam is guilty of a fault, even of that first fault, whereby man fell from his innocency and happiness (from the happiness of his innocency) and so is liable to the curse of God; and he is also depraved and corrupted in his nature, vitiated with irrectitude and deficiency in the very principles of his composition.  
§. 3. Now by this means, as our Church saith, it comes to pass that man is far gone from original righteousness; far departed from 
Ab originali justitia longissime distet. ib.  that righteousness, which he was created in, when his mind, and will, and affections, and actions were all agreeable to the will of God; also that he is inclined unto evil even of his own nature; 
Ad malum naturâ suâ propendoat, ib.  prone and forward to it even by the genuine bent and proper sway of his own natural inclination; and also, that his flesh is ever lusting against the spirit, refusing, resisting, 
Caro semper adversus spiritum concupiscat. ib.  and rebelling against the suggestions, motions, and dictates of it.  
§ 4. Now the Consequent hereof is, that in every person born into the world i● deserveth 
In unoquoque nascentium iram Dei atque damnationem meretur, ib.  God's wrath and indignation; exposing every man to the curse of God, and rendering him liable unto 
Firmissimè tene non solum homines ratione utentes, verum etiaem parvulos, qui— sine Sacramento baptismi— de hoc seculo transeunt, sempiterno igne paniendos: quia 〈◊〉 peccatum propriae actionis nullum habent, originalis tamen peccati damnationem carnali conceptione ex nativitate traxerunt Gratian. de Consecrat. didst 4.  eternal damnation.  
§. 5. And well may this be, when (First) the Gild of this fault is such as to oblige all men to death. Death (saith the Apostle) passed upon all men, for that all have sinned, (Rom. 5 12.) viz. in Adam, in whom all were at his sinning. Whence we are even by nature children of wrath; (Ephes. 2. 3.) under a judgement (or sentence) unto condemnation, (Rom. 5. 18.) as being made sinners by our first father's disobedience, (Rom. 5. 19)  
§. 6. And secondly, when the corruption of our Nature, the evil consequent of that first sin is such, that it is a law in our members warring against the law of our mind, and bringing us into captivity 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  to that law of sin which is in our members, (Rom. 7. 23.) So that when we 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, adjacet. Hier.  would do good, evil is present with us, (at hand as it were, ready for us, to be done by us) Rom. 7. 21. and every imagination of the thoughts of our hearts is only evil continually; according to that representation which is given of man's depraved disposition, by him that the best knew what was in man, Gen. 6. 5. And when the mind is carnal, and so inimicitious as 
Rom. 8. 6, 7, 8.  to be even enmity against God, to such a height and degree, that it neither is, nor can be brought to be subject to the law of God, than they that are in the flesh cannot please God; and then no marvel if that carnality of their mind be in the consequent of it death to them. That any man is tempted so far as to be an actor in evil, and 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Jam. 1. 14.  every man is so, it is from his being drawn away (even haled out) of his own lust, the innate corruption of his carnal affection; and however if not violently forced, yet at least cunningly enticed, and alured away, with some bewitching bait presented to him with all the best advantages, and under the most winning circumstances by it. Now when once the teeming womb of lust hath 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ib. v. ●5.  conceived, and is become impregnated, it will not be long ere it bring forth, and make itself the mother of sin: and that, the right daughter of such a mother, presently becomes bigbellied too, and brings forth death, James 1. 14, 15.  
§. 7. Now what can any man stand more in need to be freed from, than such a Gild upon his Person, as obligeth him unto death? than such a Corruption of his Nature, as inclineth him unto all those evils that deserve and bring upon him damnation?  
§. 8. If Children were not under that Gild, or had not in them this Corruption, than indeed in these respects Baptism were not needful for them. But for as much as every age, (as 
† Omnis aetas peccato obnoxia, ideo omnis aetas Sacramento idonea, D. Amb. de Abrah. Patr. l. 2. c. 11.  St. Ambrose saith) is obnoxious to sin, inclinable to the commission, and liable to the punishment of it, therefore it is that 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, D. Basil. Exhort. ad Bapt.  every age (infancy and all) is proper for, and hath this Sacrament administered to it. Yea, and it hath a need of it: (for there is a need to be baptised, as there was a need to be circumcised; else why did John the Baptist say to Christ, that he had need to be baptised of him) and a need to be baptised, is more than a fitness for, or a capableness of baptism. Yea, for as much as there is no time of man's life free from fault, as the same St. Ambrose saith, there being deficiencies in our 
Nullum tempus vitae culpa vacuum, ergo nullum tempus vacuum debet esse tutclae. Id. ib.  compleatest performances, irregularities in our most regular actings, aversion from God in our first movings, therefore no time of our life ought to be without that guard from sin and temptation, which is by this Sacrament communicated in the grace of it to the party baptised. Hence that of Greg. Nazianz. If thou hast an Infant, let not iniquity get time [nor 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gr. Nazianz. Orat. 40. Ideo vivus oportet etiam infans baptizetur, ne obsit animae societas carnis peccati, quae participatâ fit ut nihil possit anima infantis secundum Spiritum sapere. D. Aug. de Genes. ad Lit. l. 10 c. 14. A quo [Sacramento, sc. Baptismo] nisi adjutus etiam juvenis carnalem concupiscentiam non domabit, Id. ib. Hoc [sc. intelligere] quandi● non potest, valebit Sacramentum ad ejus tutelam adversus contrarias potestates. D. Aug. Ep. 23. Bonifacio.  strength by that] let it be sanctified in its intancy, let it in its tender age be consecrated to [or by] the spirit. And that of St. Aug. Therefore ought the lively infant to be baptised, lest the fellowship of sinful flesh be a prejudice to the soul of the Infant, hindering it from favouring any thing according to the Spirit. And, that, without the help of that Sacrament carnal concupiscence will be too strong to be tamed by him in his youth. And that, till he come to understanding, the Sacrament, (that is the power and strength of the Grace communicated by it) will be able to defend it against the contrary powers.  
§. 9 What a cruelty than is it, considering these things, in those Parents towards the fruit of their own bodies, that suffer their little children to live in a sinful, and die in a damnable estate, not doing what in them lies, and God has put into their power to free them from the guilt of that sin, and deliver them from the power of that corruption, that they were born with. Is not the damnation of their Persons a thing to be feared? Is not the corruption of their Natures a thing to be lamented? Is not a rescue from the one, and a remedy against the other, a thing to be desired? O how can they find in their hearts to let them live under the tyranny of a rampant corruption, and let them die under an obligation to an eternal damnation! Surely if they had not lost even humanity in the midst of their boasts of high Christianity, they would have compassion for their tender ones, and let them have that relief against their Gild, and that remedy against their Corruption, which God, who sees their need, in his pity to them, has ordained and provided for them.   

CHAP. XIX.  
children's Baptism not to be neglected upon Presumption that God can or will save them without their being baptised.  
§. 1. TO talk of what God in his extraordinary grace can (and it may be hoped will) do for Infants dying unbaptised is a vain story. For though God can do all he wills, yet it follows not that he will do all 
We hold the same Necessity of Baptism, that the Fathers held, which is viâ ordinariâ: yet non altigando gratiam Dei ad media, no more than the Schoolmen do. B. Andrews Answ. to Perron.  he can. And though he hath not tied himself to means, yet he hath tied us. And though to expect the end, when we have desired, and sought the means, but cannot have it, may be an act of hope, yet when we may have the means, and do despise it, or neglect, still to hope the end cannot but be an act of presumption.  
§. 2. And it may be that God, having in his word declared the guilt that lies upon all, hath said nothing as to the case of Infants dying unbaptised, on purpose the more strongly to oblige parents 
Non autem latet quantum cordibus fidelium desidiae gigneretur, si in baptizandis parvulis nihil de cujusquam negligentiae, nihil de ipsorum esset mortalitate metuendum, D. Ambr. de Voc. Gent. l. 2. c. 8.  to baptise their children for the taking off that guilt from them; since their own reason will tell them, that in a case of doubtfulness it is wisdom to take the surer side (as the baptising of them in this case must needs be) not knowing by what sudden providence they may be taken away unbaptised, if the baptising of them be neglected.  
§. 3. And be it that God in his extraordinary grace may save them, which yet is more than any can positively say (and there have been some, & they no mean ones, that have thought the contrary; and however, that if they did escape the torments of the damned, yet they did not partake of the enjoyments of the blessed) yet sure it is safer, and much more prudent, to take a way that is revealed for their salvation, 
Nisi enim quis natus fuerit ex aqua & spiritu sancto non potest introire in regnum Dei. Utique nullum excipit, non infantem, non aliqua praeventum 〈◊〉 necessitate, D. Ambr. de Abrah. Patriarch. l. 2. c. 11. Neque credi fas est eos qui regenerationis non adepti sunt Sacramentum ad ullum beatorum pertineri consortium, D. Ambr. de Vocat. Gent. l. 2. c. 8. Sanè infantes quia hanc prohibente aetate non possunt habere fidem, hoc est cordis ad Deum conversionem, consequenter nec salutem, si absque baptismi perceptione moriuntur, D. Bern. Ep. 77. ad Hug. de S. Victore. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [i. e. non baptizatos infants] 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉— Gr. Nazianz. Orat. 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Just. Mart. Qu. & Resp. ad Orthod. q. 56. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Athanas. q. 1. 4. ad Antiochum.  than to venture their salvation on an unrevealed way; and whilst we neglect the ordinary means, to expect the●r being saved by extraordinary grace.  
§. 4. Did I say neglect the means? I doubt I should rather have said contemn the means. For how in this case to distinguish between the neglect and the contempt passes my understanding: especially when I find the use of it both in word and writing looked upon as ridiculous, and accordingly derided and contemned by neglecters of it; who may very well go to hell for their contempt of the means, though their children suffer nothing for the want of it: God being more merciful to their children than themselves are, and not suffering the children to perish through their parents neglect. Which yet methinks, they should have little hope of, when they remember, how in the time of Circumcision the parallel to baptism, the manchild was to suffer excision, cutting off from his people, that is from the Church of God, and that as being a breaker of God's Covenant, who was not at eight days old circumcised, Gen. 17. 14. who yet might be as little guilty of his Parent's fault in neglecting to circumcise him, as ours can be of any neglect of ours to baptise them. For what could a Jews child do at eight days old towards his own circumcision, more than the child of a Christian can at the same age do towards his baptism? I suppose the severity than threatened to the child, was designed chief to oblige the parent. And doubtless it would have been a great punishment to the parent to have his child through his neglect cut off from the communion with the Church, and from the means of grace, and from the hope of glory, if not forthwith from life itself: and no less would it be to us to have our children undone for ever through our neglect. O how must it not needs make our own hell the more hot, to find our unbaptized children there, if through our neglect of the means ordained by God to preserve them from thence, they should go thither? as, who is infallibly ascertained that they shall not?  
§. 5. And however it may prove at last, that our children be saved, though they die unbaptised, yet since we have no assurance of that, but rather some reason to fear the contrary, we shall be guilty of their undoing and damning, though they be saved, since as to what was to ourselves, we let them be undone and damned.  
§. 6. I will evidence this by a parallel case. There is said to be a thing called an Ecstasy or Trance, into which people do often fall, sometimes involuntarily, and sometimes at their own will; whereof Bodinus 
Bodin. Theatrum Naturae, lib. 4.  gives several instances. Now all the time that one is in an Ecstasy he seems to be no other but dead, no sense, no motion either of pulse or heart being perceivable in him. Whereupon some have been carried forth to burial as dead, who yet were not indeed dead, but in an ecstasy, and have revived at, or after their burial; and one instance hereof is given in that famous Scholar Joha●nes Duns Scotus, who was buried in an ecstasy, and revived after burial, though killed after his reviving by his struggling in his coffin for life. Now whilst one is in an Ecstasy he is not sensible of any wound, burn, or tearings, so that some of those things, that would at other times take away life, do not kill, such as drowning or hanging. An instance of the latter whereof happened not many years ago at Oxford, in a Maid recovered to life after hanging, and some other 
A particular account whereof was given in a Narrative set forth at that time.  violences used to her for her dispatch after her cutting down. Now put case a man is in danger of death by hanging or drowning, and I may, if I will preserve him from either; (in which case that act of charity becomes my duty) if I do not my duty to preserve him, I shall be guilty of destroying him, even though it please God in that instant (as I have read it hath happened in both these cases) to cast him into an Ecstasy, and preserve him. He might have been hanged or drowned to death for me, who would do nothing, when I might have done something (and aught to have done any thing, that reasonably I could) to have saved him; and so I am guilty even of his death, that did not die: just as Esther should have been of the Jews destruction, had she not done what she could to preserve them, though they had not been destroyed, but enlargement and deliverance had arisen to them from another place, (Esther 4. 14.) And just so, it being in our power to use a means for the preserving of our children from damnation, if we neglect it, we shall be guilty of their damning, though they be not damned. Because though it were God's mercy they should be saved, yet damned they might have been, and damned they had been for all us, who would make no use of the means ordained by God for their salvation.  
§. 7. And by this time I hope it sufficiently appears, that as upon the account of the Benefits coming to children by Baptism there is Reason for their baptising, so upon account of the Danger they are in by Original Sin, and the evil Consequents of it, from which they are wholly, or in a great measure rescued by Baptism, there is Need to baptise them.   

CHAP. XX.  
children's Need of Baptism shown from Six other Considerations.  
§. 1. ANd yet there are other accounts, which I shall name, and not much more than name, upon which Infants have need to be baptised.  
§. 2. And first, considering that there are Benefits derived to us, and descending upon us from Christ our Head by virtue of our Union with him as Members of him, which we, and our children have need of, and we cannot hope otherwise to obtain either for ourselves or for our children than by Baptism, Baptism seems to be in this respect a thing which both we and our children have a very great need of.  
§. 3. To instance but in his Influences upon, Care over, and Intercession for his Members. How shall we partake of those Influences of Grace, which flow from Christ to all his Members by virtue of their Union with him, if we be not united to him? How shall we come to be any thing bettered by the care of Christ over his Members, if we have no fellowship with him as Members of him? How shall we be concerned in Christ's Intercessions for his Body, if we be not incorporated into it as members of it?  
§. 4. What need then our Children have of Membership with Christ in order to their partaking of those Benefits that are derived from him to his Members; that need have they of being baptised into Christ, that by their Baptism they may be made the Members of Christ.  
§. 5. Again, our children being by nature born in sin, and consequently children of wrath, 
— In my Baptism, wherein I was made the child of God— Cat. of Ch. of Eng.— Being by nature born in sin, and the children of wrath, we are hereby made the children of grace. Ib.  how can it but be needful that by some means they should be made children of grace? That by Baptism our children are made children of grace, and children of God, our Church has told us. But how they shall become children either of God, or Grace, otherwise than by Baptism, we are not told. If any thing, the quite 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrysost. Hom. 1. de Poenitentia.  contrary. The name of Son is given to none but such as are baptised, if St. Chrysostom say true. What need then our Infants have to become Sons of God, that need have they to be baptised, that they may become his Sons.  
§. 6. Further Heirship follows Sonship. Whereby then we are made Sons, thereby we are 
— Baptism whereby I was made an inheritor of the kingdom of heaven. Church Catechism. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Just. Martyr. Resp. ad Orthodox. 44.  made Heirs. That as our Church hath taught, and I have proved, is done by Baptism. Whereupon it follows, that if we will be Heirs, we must be Sons, and if we will be Sons, we must be baptised. No baptism then, no Son of God, and then no Heir of his. Whereupon 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. Hom. 1. de Poenit. Qui ad divinum munus & patrimonium baptismi sanctificatione porveniunt— D. Cyprian de Hab. Virgin.  St. Chrysost. saith, that before baptism there is no receiving of patrimony, nor getting of inheritance. What need then our Infants have of getting an inheritance from God, that need have they to be baptised, that they may become his heirs.  
§. 7 Yet again, Baptism is the door of entrance into God's kingdom. Whence St. August. 
* Quando homo de baptismo egreditur tunc ei janua regni coelestis aperitur. D. Aug. Serm. 29. de Temp. Ex aqua & spiritu sancto oportet ut nascatur [homo] propter regnum Dei. D. Aug. 12. Tract. in Evang. Johannis.  saith, when a man goes forth from baptising, than the gate of heaven's kingdom is opened to him. And, that man must be born of water and the Holy Ghost for the kingdom of God. And this is grounded on what our Saviour saith, (John 3. 5.) Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, that is, be baptised, he cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Whence 
† Obstrinxit sidem ad baptismi necessitatem. Tertull. de Baptismo. Scripsit Augustin. duos libros de infantibus baptizandis contra haresin vestram, per quam vultis asserere baptizari infants, none in remissionem peccatorum, sed in regnum coelorum. D. Hieron. Dialog. 3. advers. Pelagianos. Forasmuch as all men are conceived and born in sin, and that our Saviour Christ saith, None can enter into the kingdom of God, except, etc. Ch. of Engl. Publ. Bapt. of Infants. So Bapt. of those of riper years. That Baptism is necessary to the salvation of Infants (in the ordinary way of the Church, without binding God to the use and means of that Sacrament, to which he hath bound us) is express in St. John 3. Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. So, no Baptism, no Entrance. Nor can Infants creep in any other ordinary way. And this is the received Opinion of all the Ancient Church of Christ. A. B. Laud. Confer. Sect. 15. Num. 4.  Tertullian inferred a necessity of baptism to all believers. And others have extended that necessity unto Infants; to whom the Pelagians themselves have allowed it, though not upon the account of Original Sin, yet for entrance into the kingdom of heaven: whereas our Church takes in both those considerations, as the Catholic Church ever did, in her admission of them unto Baptism, and grounds their baptising upon both, strengthened with Christ's command here in the Text to suffer little children to come unto him. So that no baptism, no entrance, even for Infants, into the kingdom of heaven; that is none according to the ordinary way, whatever there may be extraordinarily. What need then our Infants have of entering into the kingdom of God, that need they have of being baptised, that they may have entrance into that kingdom.  
§. 8. Fifthly, by baptism we are saved, (1 Pet. 3. 21.) But by what Baptism? Not any Jewish Baptism, which was only the putting away of the filth of the flesh; But the Christian Baptism, which washeth away the filth of the Spirit, to the enabling of the baptised with a good conscience to seek after God. Now this for the saving efficacy of it is compared to the Ark of Noah. By the one, as by a means ordained of God for that end a few were saved from among the rest of mankind that perished for sin: and by the other, as a means of Gods ordaining for that end, a few are saved from amongst the rest of the Sons of men that perish in sin. And as, we are sure, none then were saved without 
In aquâ nascimur, nec aliter quàm in aquâ permanendo salvi sumus. Tert. de Bapt. See Aquin. 3. q. 68 a. 1.  the Ark; so are none now, that we are sure of, saved without Baptism. As than none were, so none, that we know of, now are saved, but by water. What need then Infants have to be saved, that need they have of baptism for their salvation.  
§. 9 Lastly, Grace is necessary unto Glory. For without holiness no man shall see the Lord, Heb. 12. 14. Holiness is the operation of the Spirit of God, who sanctifies all the elect people 
Catechism.  of God, as our Church teacheth us. The spirit of holiness is by Baptism communicated unto Infants in order to their regeneration; for baptism is a birth not of water only, but of the spirit too, John 3. 5. Whence our Church prays that God would give his holy spirit to the Infant to be baptised that he may be born again, and gives thanks to God for the Infant that is baptised, that it hath pleased him to regenerate that Infant with his holy Spirit. 
Office of Publ. Bapt. of Infants. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Marc. Eremita. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Athanas. in illud Evang. Quicunque dixerit. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — D. Basil. Exhort. ad Baptism. Omnes quidem, qui ad divinum munus & patrimonium baptismi sanctificatione perveniunt, hominem illie veterem gratiâ lavacri salutar is exponunt, & innovati spiritu sancto à sordibus contagionis antiquae, itcratâ nativitate purgantur. Sed nativitatis it●ratae vobis major sanctitas & veritas competit, quibus desideria jam-carnis & corporis nulla sunt. D. Cyprian de Habitu Virg. Per batisma enim Spiritus sanctus accipitur— D. Cyprian, l. 2. cp. 3. Sed postquam undae genitalis auxilio superioris aevi labe detersâ, in expiatum pectus ac purum desuper se lumen infudit, post quam caelitùs spiritu buusto in novum me hominem nativitatis secunda reparavit, mirum in modum protinus confirmare se dubia, patere clausa, lucere renebrosa, etc. D. Cyprian, l. 2. ep. 2. Quip qui ne vim quidem aspiciendi sacra habeat ab ortu à Deo, sive baptismo, qui lucis & principium est & praebotor. Dionys. Areop. Eccles. Hierarch. c. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chry. ad Demet. de compunct. cordis Hom. Ed. Savil. Tom 6. pag. 148. Cum ergo innovamur baptismi lavacro, per virtutem ab originis nostrae peccatis atque autoribus separamur— D. Hilar, in Math. Can. 10. Omni homini renascenti aqua baptismatis instar est uteri virginalis, eodem spiritu sancto replente fontem, qui replevit & virignem— D. Leo Serm. 4. in Nativ. Domini. Ardoris vero spiritum dicimus, gratiam in Sacro sancto Baptismo, non absque spiritu nobis ingeneratam. Baptizati aeutem & loti sumus, non aquâ nudâ, sed nec cinere vituli emundati sumus, ad sclam carnis purificationem, quemadm. B. Paulus, sed spiritu sancto, & igne divino ac intelligibli, qui sordes vitiositatis in nobis deterit & absumit, & peccati inquinationem liquat & excoquit. D. Cyril. Alexand. l. 1. in Isa. c. 9  Whereupon Baptism is an effectual means of grace, as that must needs be, whereby is communicated the Spirit of grace, who where he is, is a principle of new life, infusing holy habits, and gracious dispositions, enabling to crucify affections, to mortify lusts, and to put forth acts of righteousness, and holiness. What need then our Infants have of Grace, that they may have Glory, that need they have of Baptism, that they may have grace.  
§. 10. And now these things considered, (not to add any thing more to the same purpose from other considerations; as either of the care that is taken for baptised Infants, not only by those particular persons that bring them, but by the Church also that receives them to baptism, and by God himself, to whom the Church doth by that action offer and consecrate them; or of that early Vow to, and Covenant with God to be his, which to their mighty advantage they are thereby brought into) it appears plainly enough that the baptising of Infants is so far from being a superfluous 
* Non est superfluus baptismus parvulorum, ut qui per generationem illi condemnationi obligati sunt, per regenerationem ab eadem liberentur. D. Aug. Ep. 89. Consuetudo matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernenda est, nec ullo modo superslua deputanda. D. Aug. l. 10. de Genes. ad Literam, c. 23. Dic mihi obsecro te, parvulis baptizatis Christus aliquid prodest, an nibil prodest? Necesse est ut dicat prodesse. Premitur mole matris Ec clesiae. D. Aug. de Verb. Apost. Serm. 14. † Primo igitur modo necessitatis [sc. sine quo non potest haberi finis] sunt tria sacramenta necessaria: due quidem personae singulari, baptismus quidem simpliciter; & absolute— Aquin. Sum. 3. q. 65. ar. 4. Manifestum est quod omnes ad baptismum tenontur, & sine eo non potest esse salus hominibus. Id. ib. q. 68 ar. 1. Quibus [sc. infantibus] propterea est Christi gratia necessaria, ut in Christo vivisicentur, qui in Adam mortui sunt: ut quia inquinati sunt generatione, purgentur regeneratione. D. Aug. de Verb. Apostol. Serm. 7.  needless, useless thing, as the Antipaedobaptiss, contrary to the judgement of the Catholic Church, do contend it to be, that it is, if not absolutely necessary †, yet highly expedient, useful to and needful for them: and therefore with little justice, and less charity is it by any detained from them.  
And thus I have dispatched the Second branch of my Argument for Infant's baptism. Wherein I have shown you, both that Infants have need for Baptism, and in what respects they have need for it.   

CHAP. XXI.  
Children not incapable of Baptism in regard of their bodily weakness, to receive, come to, or desire Baptism.  
§. 1. I Now go on to the Third, which is Infant's Capableness of baptism. Now a man may be in need of a thing, whereof yet in some respect he is incapable. But it is not so with Infants as to Baptism. As they have need for it, so are they also capable of it.  
§. 2. If they were incapable of it, it must be in regard of something either in Themselves, or in the Thing, or in the Law of God, that might hinder them. But in no one of these respects are they incapable, as I shall show in every particular severally.  
§. 3. And first there is nothing in the Infants themselves to render them incapable of Baptism.  
§. 4, It is true they are many times very weak of Body. Yet are they never so weak, but that they may be baptised. Nothing is there for them to suffer in Baptism, but what experience shows they may well enough endure.  
§. 5. They may, if healthful and strong, be well enough dipped into water (as the 
And then naming it after them (if they shall certify him that the child may well endure it) he shall dip it in the water— Office of Pub. Bapt. of Infants. Si quis Episcopus, aut Presbyter, non trinam mersionem unius mysterii celebret, sed semel mergat in baptismate, quod dari videtur in Domini morte, damnetur. Canon. Apostolorum, 49. In aquâ mergimur. Tertull. de Bapt. Nam nec semel, sed ter, ad singula nomina in personas singulas tinguimur. Tertull. advers. Praxeam.— Debinc ter mergitamur. Tertull. de Corona Militis. Ter quidem illum demergit [Hierarcha] atque in tribus ejus de mersionibus emersionibusque trium divinae beatitudinis personarum nomina appellat & invocat. Dionys. Areop. Eccles. Hierarch. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Athanas. q 94. de Interpret. Parab. Scripture. Quamvis tutius sit baptiz are per modum immersionis, quia hoc habet communior usus, potest tamen fieri baptismus per modum aspersionis, etc. Aquin. 3. q. 66. a. 7.  Church appoints) without any hurt or danger to them; but that the softness of this delicate age, makes us so full of vain fear, that we dare not venture the trial of that, which in former ages was the more common practice, and as adjudged the safer too, though it were to do it thrice.  
§. 6. And if they be weak and sickly, so as not to be able to endure dipping either thrice or once, (which, to avoid offence, I could wish more practised where there is no just necessity to decline it) yet however they may have some water poured on them (as the 
But if they certify, that the child is weak, it shall suffice to pour water upon it— Offic. of Publ. Bapt. of Infants.  Church in that case allows) as was anciently done on persons converted in their sickness, and baptised in their beds, and no hurt at all come to them thereby. And so they are not incapable of Baptism in that respect.  
§. 7. Yea, if any thing, their weakness should rather conduce to the hastening of their Baptism: lest they be, as sometimes they are prevented by death. What (saith Greg. Nazianz.) will you say concerning children, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Otat. 40.  that neither know the loss, nor are sensible of the grace of baptism? shall we also baptise them? Yes, by all means, in case of urgent danger. It is better they should be sanctified, (that is, baptised) when they have no sense of it, than that they should die unsealed and uninitiated. And so Aquinas, If they be children that are to be baptised, their baptising must not be 
Si pueri sint baptizandi non est differendum baptisma. Primo quidem, quia non expectatur in eyes major instructio, aut etiam plenior conversio. Secundo propter periculum mortis, quia non potest eis alio remedio subveniri, nisi per sacramentum baptismi. Aquin. q. 68 c. 3. Quarto, ut parvull si infirmari contingat, eodem●die, quo na●i sunt, baptizentur. Concil. Gerund. Cant. 4 to. D. Cyprian, l. 3. ep. 8.  deferred. And of two reasons that he brings the danger of death is one: because the Sacrament of baptism is the only remedy provided for their help. It was decreed by the Council of G●runda, that Infants in case of weakness, should be baptised the same day that they were born. And whereas Fidus a Presbyter was of opinion, that Infants were not to be baptised the second, nor third day after their birth, nor indeed till the eighth day, because till that day they were not anciently circumcised, St. Cyprian shows him, that not himself only, but a whole Council assembled together with him were of a far other mind, judging that baptism was not to be denied to any of the sons of men, and so not to any Infant, how young soever, but that they were to be admitted to it as soon as born.  
§. 8. Again, it is true, Infants cannot of themselves come to baptism. Why but yet they may be brought to it by others. Rather than that shall keep them away, St. Aug. tells us, our Mother the Church will lend 
Accommodat illis mater Ecclesia aliorum pedes, ut veniant D. Aug. Serm. 10. de Verbis Aposteli.  them other men's feet to come withal. And such is the mercy of our Saviour, that he looks upon them as coming to him, that are but brought to him by others. Suffer (saith he) the little children to come unto me. And yet they came to him no other way, but even as our Infants may come, that is by being brought to him. So long then as Infants may be brought to be baptised, so long they have a way of coming unto Baptism: and so they are not incapable of it in that respect neither.  
§. 9 It is true again, that they can neither seek after, nor desire their own baptism; a thing anciently expected from, and performed by adult Persons. But yet they can receive it, when, upon others desire, and seeking of it for them, it is administered to them. And so they are not, for that, incapable of it. There is nothing said in all the Scripture, that I know of, by which the inability of a subject to seek after, or desire, that, or any other mercy, renders him incapable of receiving it. Yea, it is part of the Gospel's grace, that God therein is found of those that seek him not; that Christ, unsought 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Chrysost. in Heb. 2. 16. Hom. 5.  to for it, came, and sought, and found, and saved that which was lost, pursuing after and taking hold on man's nature, when it was fast and far flying away from him towards its own perdition.  
§. 10. When our Saviour enlarged his Apostles Commission to the taking into Discipleship, not the nation of the Jews only, but all the nations of the world, he did not put it into this form, stand ye here still, and be ready to admit into discipleship all of all nations that shall come to you, and seek to you for baptism; but go ye, and disciple all nations, baptising them (q. d.) Depart ye hence into and amongst the Heathen nations of the world, and make them disciples by baptising them, admitting so many of them unto baptism, as shall accept that favour, and not refuse that grace, to be thereby made my disciples.  
§. 11. The children here in the Text that came, that is, were brought unto Christ, desired nothing at all of him in their own names. It were strange indeed that Infants, such as they were, should have any requests to make to him. And their not desiring of a mercy was no hindrance to their receiving of one. They came to him for entrance into the kingdom of God by baptism: as we gather from what he alleges as a reason why he would have them suffered to come to him. And he prepares them for such entrance, 
Dr. Hammond Quaere of the Bapt. of Infant's Sect. 22. & De Confirmat. c. 2. S. 5.  by vouchsafing them the Ceremonies leading on unto baptising; he laid his hands upon them and blessed them: whereupon in all probability followed his Disciples baptising of them.  
§. 12. And if such infirmities and impediments were real hindrances unto mercy stood in need of, how many of those that our Saviour in the Gospel had mercy on, and healed, had gone without their Cure? Then persons 
See Gilberti Voctii Theolog. Polit. part. ●. l. 2. Tract. 2. cap. 2. qu. 6.  born deaf, and dumb, or fools, though the children of parents in Covenant, should never be baptised, because they could never understand it, never speak for it, never desire it: which I think no sober Christian will say.   

CHAP. XXII.  
Children not incapable of Baptism in regard of their having sin in them, and yet not repenting of it.  
§. 1. FUrther, it is true, that they have Sin in them. But that is so far from being any real hindrance to their baptising, that it should rather be a motive to it, as indeed it is a reason for it; namely, that they may have their sin remitted by it. Baptism being a Sacrament especially ordained for the 
Sacramentum ad hoc specialiter in●●●tutum, ut per ipsum peccatorum sordes mundentur. Aquin. 3. q 68 a. 4. c.  cleansing away of the filth of sin, as Aquinas saith, and is further confirmed both by Peter's exhorting the Jews to be baptised for the remission of sins, Acts 2. 38. and Ananias exhorting Saul to be baptised and wash away his sins, Acts 22. 16.  
§. 2. Sin indeed in persons resolved not to forsake their sins, but to persist in sinning, may be an hindrance: but not in those that are not so resolved. And of 
Peccatoribus voluntatem peccandi, & in p●ccato perseverandi propositum habentibus baptismus minime conferendus est. Aquin. Sum. 3. q. 68 a. 4. 2.  Infants it cannot be said that they are so.  
§. 3. And if the forepast sins, many and great sins, of men's own acting be no hindrance to their baptising, as we see by the Persons baptised in the Scripture, of whom some had been Idolatrous Heathens, others Christ-killing Jews, etc. much less can that one sin, under the guilt whereof Infants do lie, not acted personally by them, but judicially imputed to them, hinder them from Baptism, as St. Cyprian reasons the case in 
Porro autem si etiam gravissimis delictoribus & in Deum multum ante peccantibus, cum postca crediderint, remissio peccatorum datur, & à baptismo, atque gratia nemo probibe●ur: quanto magis probiberi non debet infans, qui recens natus nil peccavit, nisi quod secundum Adam carnaliter natus contagium antiquae mortis primâ nativitate contraxit? Qui ad remissam peccatorum accipiendam hoc ipso facilius accedit, quod illi remittuntur, non propria, sed aliena peccata. D. Cyprian, l. 3. Ep. 8.  their behalf. And so neither in this respect are Infants incapable of Baptism.  
§. Yea, but they do not repent them of their sin, Nor is it required of them that they should. The Scripture no where has enjoined them repentance in order unto baptism; nor alleged their inability to repent as a bar to their admission thereunto.  
§. 5. Indeed we have Scriptures where grown men are exhorted to both together, to repent and be baptised; and where signs of repentance were showed by such as received baptism, Acts 2. 38. Matth. 3. 6. But still the Persons both exhorted unto, and showing repentance, were of age both to commit actual sins needing repentance, and to act that repentance that was needful for their baptising. But what is this to the case of Infants, who as they are not guilty of actual sin, so they are in no ability for repentance. Where there is no general rule, an argument from particulars is no farther argumentative, than to particulars under the same circumstances: which cannot be betwixt men and Infants, so as that what is enjoined to, or performed by the one, must be necessarily required of, and performed by the other. And so some men's being exhorted unto Repentance and Baptism both at once, and other men's confessing their sins (as a token of their Repentance) when they were baptised, is no argument, that therefore all Infants must do so too, or else not be baptised: and so no Infants baptised, because none can so do. The case, 'tis plain is not the same. And so whatever want of Repentance, or Non-profession of it may do to hinder Men from being baptised, it can do nothing to render Infants incapable of Baptism. Who as they have the guilt of sin brought upon them by another's disobedience, without their knowledge, so they have that guilt taken off from them by the obedience of another, without their repentance: which pardon is not only signed and sealed, but exhibited also, and given to them in and by Baptism.  
§. 6. And as to the Church, it is true indeed that of Adult sinners it requires a Personal Profession of Repentance before it admit them to Baptism. But for Infants that have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, it admits them to Baptism without any such Personal Profession. So there be but a Promise made of it for the future against the time that it shall be necessary, by Sureties for the Infants in the Infant's names, as the Scripture doth not require so much, so the Church doth not stand upon more. And so Infants 
Ab hac poenitenti● cum baptizantur soli parvuli sunt immunes. Nondum enim uti possunt libero arbitrio: quibus tamen ad consecrationom remissionem que originalis peccati prodest cotum fides, à quibus offeruntur: ut quascunque maculas d●lictorum per alios ex qui●●s sunt nati contraxerunt, aliarum 〈◊〉 incerrogatione ac responsione purgentur. T Aug. Quiaquag Homil. Serm. 50.  are not incapable of Baptism in this respect neither.   

CHAP. XXIII.  
Children not incapable of Baptism in regard of their not Believing.  
§. 1. YEa but, still it is objected that Infants do not believe, and therefore they ought not to be baptised.  
§. 2. To this Objection if St. Augustin were to answer, he would deny the Antecedent, and say that Infants do believe; and so would St. Bernard too. But how? Not by any 
Sed absit ut ego dicam non credentes Infants. Jam superius disputavi: credit in altero, quia peccavit in al●ero: dicitur credit, & valet, & inter fideles bapti zatos computatur, etc. Credunt infants. Unde credum? quomodo credunt? Fide pa●entum etc. D. Aug. Serm 14. de Verb. Apost. Accommodat illis Mater Ecclesia allorum pedes, ut veniant; aliorum cor, ut credant. Id. ib. Serm. 10. Non quod vel ipsi [sc. Infant's] quando baptizantur, fide omnino careant, sine quâ impossibile est vel ipsos placere Deo: sed salvantur per fidem, non tamen suam, sed alienam. Dignum nempe est, & ad Dei spectat dignitatem, ut quibus fidem aet●s denegat propriam, gratia prodesse concedat alienam. Nec enim omnipotentis justitia propriam putal ab his exigendam fidem, quos novit propriam nullam habere culpam. Porro alienâ opus est fide, cum sine sorde non nas●antur alienâ. D. Bern. Ep. 77. Nemo mihi dicat, quia non habet [infans] sidem: cui mater [Ecclesia] impertit suam. Magna est Ecclesia sides. Id. Serm. 66 supper Cant. In Ecclesia salvateris, per alios parvuli credunt, sicut ex aliis, quae in baptismo remlttuntur peccata traxerunt. Gratian. 3 part. de Conseerat. dist. 4.  faith in themselves, but by the faith of others, their Parents, or the Church. Nor would they think it any more absurd, to say that they believe through the Faith of another, than it is to say that they have sinned through the sin of another, or that they are made righteous through the obedience of another.  
§. 3. But though the Faith of the Parents, or Sureties, who are Believers, may be enough, and is to qualify Infants for an admission into Church-membership by Baptism: yet because I think it not enough to speak them Believers antecedently to Baptism, however they be reckoned in the number of the Faithful, after they be baptised; and that their immediate Parents saith shall no more be imputed unto them, and reckoned theirs, than their sins, as not having been by Almighty God made trusties in this behalf for their Children, as Adam was for his; therefore I shall not stand upon this.  
§. 4. Some others would answer that Infants have Faith in themselves, and that in the act. And truly as the Scripture no where denies this expressly, 
See Alting. Problem. Theolog. part. 1. Probl. 22. Becan. Manual. Controver. l. 2. c. 2. Phil. Melancthon. Consil. Theolog. part. 1. pag. 255. Hooker Eccl. Pol. l. 5. Sect. 64.  so it also affords an instance of little ones (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) very little ones that are said to have believed, Mat. 18. 6. and that by one who knew their hearts, and could not be deceived in them, even our Saviour himself.  
§. 5. Other some again would answer, that Infants have Faith in themselves, though not in the Act, yet in the Habit, or rather the seed and principle of it.  
§. 6. And truly that as God is able to infuse, so the soul of an Infant is capable to receive divine impressions and illuminations, I think is a truth none will question. And if any should, the filling of John Baptist with the Holy Ghost from his Mother's womb, and his leaping for joy, at the approach of his Saviour, in his Mother's womb, (Luke 1. 15, 44.) would put it out of doubt. Now this being so, who can tell but that the Infants of believers may through the grace of 
Sicut ergo ille, in quo omnes vivificabuntur, praeterquam quod se ad ●ustitiam exemplum omnibus praebuit, dat etiam sui spiritus occultissimam fidclibus gratiam, quam latenter infundit & parvulis, sic— D. August. l. 1. de Peccat. Merit. & Remiss. c. 9  God obtained for them by the prayers, not only of their Paren's in particular, but of the Church in general, have a principle of Faith inspired into them by the secret operation of that invisible Spirit of grace, who works how, and where, and when, and how far himself pleaseth. And where it is so in any one, who dares deny that person sufficiently qualified in point of Faith for Baptism? Can any man forbidden water that these should not be baptised, which have received the Holy Ghost, as well as w●? Acts 10. 47. And of what Infant of any one Believer can any man say that it is not so with him? And if there be never an Infant of any one believer of whom it can be absolutely affirmed that he is in respect of a divinely infused inwardly working principle of Faith utterly unqualified for Baptism, then why should any one be denied Baptism, of whom it cannot be said, but that he is in some degree and measure qualified for it?  
§. 7. But being under no necessity for the supporting of the cause I maintain, to assert these grounds, I shall no further insist thereon: but to the Objection against Infant's capableness of baptism founded in their want of Faith, give my Answer, that their not believing is no hindrance to their baptising.  
§. 8. It is no hindrance to their salvation, even in the judgement of our Anabaptists, who declare it as one Article of their Faith, That all children dying in Infancy (that is before they can act faith in their own persons, and be believers qualified for baptism according to their account) having not actually transgressed against the Law of God in their own persons are only subject to the first death, and that not any one of them dying in that estate shall suffer for Adam's sin eternal punishment in hell, which is the second death. It is no hindrance then to their salvation in their judgement, that they believe not. And why then should it be a hindrance to their Baptism? Is more required to their baptism, than to their salvation? to the means, than to the end?  
§. 9 But to make short work, where, or by whom is faith required of Infants in their own persons to render them capable of baptism? What one Text is there in all the Bible that saith either in particular, that Infants shall not be baptised, because they believe not; or in general that no persons whatsoever (whether capable or incapable of believing) shall be baptised, but those that believe? Let the Adversaries of Infant's baptism produce the place, and the controversy, I believe, will quickly be ended. We, all Paedobaptists, will readily yield all that shall of right be fit to be yielded to it, or unto them from it. But if the Scripture say no such thing either in words, or in sense, then for aught that as yet appears our Infants will be capable of Baptism, though they do not believe.  
§. 10. Why, but doth not our Saviour say, (in Mark 16. 16.) He that believeth, and is baptised, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be damned?  
§. 11. Yes. And what then? must not therefore our Infants be baptised because they do not believe? or not till they believe? No such matter. What is here said that makes believing a condition necessarily antecedent unto Baptism? It is neither said negatively, he that believeth not shall not be baptised, nor so much as affirmatively, he that believeth shall be baptised. But believing, and being baptised are made conditions, not the one of the other, but both of being saved. And now, in the name of God, what is here, that can possibly exclude Infants from baptising, for want of believing?  
§. 12. Yea, but believing is set before baptising. He doth not say, he that is baptised and believeth, but he that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved. And what then? Why then believing must go before baptising; and none must be baptised, but those that first believe.  
§. 13. To this I answer, that if the order of things must universally answer to that order of words, wherein the Scripture sets them down, than Repentance, which is a Fruit of 
Quomodo aget poenitentiam homo, qui necdum credit? D. Hieron. advers. Lucifer.  Faith, must go before Faith, whose Fruit it is: because our Saviour set repenting before believing, saying first repent ye, and then believe the Gospel, (Mark 1. 15.) Then the outward baptism of water must always go before the inward baptism of the spirit, because our Saviour said, Except a man be born (first) of water and (then) of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, John 3. 5. Whereas the contrary hereto fell out in the family and company of Cornelius, Acts 10. 44. which drew from Peter that question in ver. 47. Can any man forbidden water that these should not be baptised, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? Then the Ruler (in Luke 18. 22.) must have given nothing to the poor, till he had sold all he had, because our Saviour saith, (first) set all that thou hast, and (then) distribute to the poor.  
§. 14. But to show the weakness of this way of Arguing, it may be proved by this same Argument, and from the same Text, that Infants ought to be baptised. (And then let them judge what strength there is in this way of Arguing.) For as our Saviour sets believing before baptising; so he sets baptising before being saved. And if none must be baptised, but he that believes, because believing is set first; then none must be saved, but he that is baptised, because baptising is set first. And than what better argument can be made for Infant's baptism? They must be baptised if we will have them saved: because they cannot be saved without being baptised: for baptising goes before saving. And yet from the same Text, and by the same way of a guing, it may be proved, contrary to what the Anabaptists say of the Universal salvation of all Infants dying before the commission of actual sin, that no Infants are saved but those that believe, because believing is set before being saved; and not only so, but whereas it is not said, he that believeth not shall not be baptised, it is said, he that believeth not shall be damned.  
§. 15. And this may suffice to show though absurdity of this way of arguing to the order of things from the ordering of the words.  
§. 16. As to the thing itself, I think it will be granted them, that in Persons capable of believing or disbelieving the Gospel, faith, or at least a profession of it, is to go before baptising.  
§. 17. This we gather from the Apostles baptising no adult persons that we read of, without some evidence given of their believing.  
§. 18. Thus it was with the Converts in Acts 2. 41. with the Samaritans, Acts 8. 12. with the Eunuch, Acts 8. 37. with Cornelius & his family, Act. 10. 44. with Lydia and the Gaoser, Acts 16. 14, & 33. with Crispus, and his house, Acts 18. 8. And is to be supposed it was so with others, of whose believing before their baptising we read not, as of Gaius and Stephanas, 1 Cor. 1. 14, 16. And this at this day is, and ever hath been, the way of the Churches dealing with adult persons.  
§. 19 But the Argument will not hold from Men to Children. It follows not that because men that are capable of believing or disbelieving the Gospel are not baptised except they make profession of faith; that therefore Infants who are neither capable of believing nor disbelieving must profess faith, or not be baptised. Faith being required of the one, but not of the other.  
§. 20. When the Apostle commanded the Thessalonians, that if any would not work, neither should he eat, (2 Thess. 3. 10.) did he mean the Infants should not eat, that could not work? 'Tis plain he required working only of those, that were able to work, not of those that were unable. So in the case in hand, 'tis apparent that Believing is only required of men able to understand and believe, not of Infants neither able to believe nor understand. For by the words immediately foregoing, preach the Gospel to every creature, it is most evident, that it is of such persons only as the Gospel may be believed or disbelieved by, upon the preaching of it to them, that it is said, He that believeth, and is baptised shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be damned: not of such persons, as the Gospel cannot rationally be preached to, in order to the bringing them to believe by the preaching of it, in regard of their incapacity to understand it, and inability to believe or disbelieve it. And so Infants are utterly unconcerned in this Text. And as from it we plead nothing for them, so from it can nothing rationally be pleaded against them.  
§. 21. I have read that Men must be converted, and become as little 
Matth. 18. 2.  children, (I suppose for humility and innocency,) that they may enter into the kingdom of God. But I have not read that little children must be converted and become as Men (for understanding or Faith) before they can have entrance in God's kingdom. A profession of faith by persons of understanding in the names of the Infants is required by the Church: and upon that profession it baptises them. But that understanding and faith which is required in Adult persons as praevious to their baptism, is not by the Church required in Infants as necessary to their baptising. Nor can it be proved that ever it was by Christ, or any Apostle of his, exacted of them; as it cannot be proved, that ever Christ, or any Apostle of his, ordered the delay of their baptising till it might be in them.  
§. 22. And lastly, if Infant's baptism be an Apostolical Tradition, that is a thing delivered down to the Church to be practised in it by the Apostles, and Apostolical Persons, and as practised also by themselves, as there is better ground to believe it, than there is evidence against it, than the thing is out of question. They would never have baptised themselves, nor taught others to baptise, such as wanted faith, because incapable of believing, if mere want of faith, notwithstanding such incapacity to believe, did render them incapable of baptising. And if not believing did not in the Apostles Age and the Ages succeeding it make Infants incapable of Baptism: then can it not make them so in ours: there being no more reason for the one, than for the other.  
§. 23. And so here is nothing in the Infants themselves that renders them uncapable of being baptised.   

CHAP. XXIV.  
Children not incapable of being baptised in regard of any thing required of them, or to be done to them in Baptism.  
§. 1. SEcondly, There is nothing in Baptism required of, or to be done unto Infants, which hinders them from it, or renders them incapable of it.  
§. 2. Not the Thing signifying, Water, with the application of it by way of Immersion or Assusion. They may be dipped into water in case of strength; or they may have water poured on them, in case of weakness.  
§. 3. Not the Thing signified, The Blood of Christ, and the Grace of the Spirit. For what can hinder why they may not be sprinkled from the guilt of the sin of their Birth by the blood of Christ in the Grace of Justification? Cannot the blood of Christ satisfy for that guilt that lies upon Infants? Or cannot God apply the satisfaction made by the blood of Christ unto Infants? And what can hinder why they may not be cleansed from the corruption of their nature by the Power of the Spirit in the Grace of Sanctification? Cannot the Holy Spirit mortify those dispositions unto evil, which 
Parvulis datur gratia operans & cooperans per baptismum, sicut adultis: sed parvulis in munere non in usu. G. Biel in 4 l. Sent. dist. 4.  are in Infants? Or can he not infuse dispositions to goodness, into Infants? Is not the spirit of grace able to inoperate the grace of the spirit in Infants? Is not he able to give them a temper of heart capable to receive his Infusions? Is not he able to make Infusions of grace into their hearts suitable to their temper? No incapableness of Baptism then in Infants on these accounts.  
§. 4. Again, may not children as well as elder persons, be taken into Union with Christ? May not they be incorporated into him? What? no lambs in his flock, but all old sheep? No little members in his body, but all great ones? No babes in Christ, but all strong men? Cannot the water do the same for them? Cannot the spirit do the same in them, to unite them unto Christ, that is done by it either for elder persons towards their Union with him? Surely the application of the Water of Baptism to their Bodies, does as well signify and declare; and the infusion of the Spirit of Christ into their souls, does as well operate, and effect, their Union with him, as the Union of elder persons. For what should hinder? No incapableness then of Baptism in Infants on this account neither.  
§. 5. Again, look upon Baptism as the Door of entrance into the kingdom of Heaven, and so far are they from being incapable of that, that they are made a kind of standard to the capacity of others for it. For our Saviour not only saith, that of such [as infant's] is the kingdom of heaven, (Matth. 19 14.) which implies that they themselves are qualified for it, and have all things required in them for entrance into it: but also he saith (Matth. 18. 3.) Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven: which again implies, that Infants are duly qualified for an entrance into the kingdom of heaven (for why else must others be converted, and become as they are, that they may enter into it?) and not only so, but that none shall have entrance into it, but those that are so qualified for it as they are. And why they that are qualified for entrance into Heaven, should be unqualified for that which gives entrance into it, I see not. Is more required to Baptism, than to salvation? If not, than no uncapableness as yet appears in Infants for Baptising.  
§. 6. Further, Look upon Baptism as the Note and Badge of a Christian, and little children are as capable of wearing that as elder persons. They have witnesses of their baptising as well as others. They are received into the same Militia of the Lord Jesus, and have the same press-mark (if I may so say) that others have for his service. They have his name named upon them, and have their names enroled with the rest that are called by his name. And no incapacity is there in them for any thing of this; and so none in these respects for Baptism.  
§. 7. Lastly, look upon Baptism as the Seal of a Covenant entered into betwixt them and God, and they are not uncapable of it in that respect neither. If they be not incapable of the Covenant, then sure they are not incapable of the seal of the Covenant. He that has not denied them the greater thing, is it imaginable he should deny them the less? As the Apostle from Gods having given Christ for us argues to his giving all things else to us; (Rom. 8. 32.) so surely may we argue in this case, that if God have not made our children uncapable of his Covenant, than he has not made them incapable of the Seal of it. Why man then should be more severe to poor harmless babes, than God is, I cannot see; nor why man should withhold from them what God has not denied to them.  
§. 8. But perhaps it will be said, that they are uncapable of entering into the Covenant: and therefore uncapable of receiving the Seal of it.  
§. 9 Uncapable of entering into the Covenant? Now God forbidden. But why so? Because they can neither set any Seal to it; nor engage themselves by any promise to it; nor do so much as understand any thing of it, especially at the years, or rather days, that they are now usually baptised at.  
§. 10. But none of these hinders their entering into Covenant with God.  
§. 11. First not their inability to seal. For Contracts are not always sealed by both parties at the same time. We see it ordinarily in contracts made not only by Princes at greater distances of place, but by private persons at lesser distance. The contract is nevertheless interpretatively entered by both, at the sealing of the first, and continues firm and binding to the first all the while till the second have sealed also, he in the mean time acting nothing to the frustrating of it; and there is no new sealing required from the first at the sealing of the second. Be it then that Infants cannot personally set their seal to the Covenant at their Baptising, nor till their Confirming, may not God therefore set his seal to it in the mean time? May not God take them into Covenant with him, and make his promise to them, and set his seal to that promise, and bind himself to them for the present, because they cannot back again do the like at present to him, but must stay either till they can do that (and some will never be able to do it) or else there must be no Covenant betwixt them? sure no man of reason will say so. O, what a blessing 'tis to have God to have given his Covenant to our children, and to have solemnly sealed it, and to be acting pursuant to it for the good of our children in the mean time till they can personally seal to their own part themselves! And O, what a cruelty would it be to shut the door against so great a blessing to our children! And yet they do what can be expected from persons of their condition; they come, and are present at the sealing, and if they do not seal to God, yet they are sealed to, and also are sealed by God. And O the felicity of being one whom God hath sealed for his, or hath sealed himself to be his.  
§. 12. And yet their very coming to, and receiving the seal, in the charitable construction of the Almighty a sealing of theirs. He that takes their being brought to him for a coming of theirs to him, why may we not think he accepts of their receiving of his Seal as a counter sealing of theirs.  
§. 13. And besides, what cannot be done by them, is as much in this as in any other the like case, done by others for them: and so there is no incapacity in them on this account.  
§. 14. Secondly, their inability to stipulate for themselves hinders not.  
§. 15. It is true, they cannot explicitly in their own persons make that profession that is required 
Why then are Infants baptised, etc. Because they promise them both by their Sureties: which when they come to age, themselves are bound to perform. Ch. Catechism. See Dr. Stillingfleets Vindic. of A. B. of Cant. p. ●07.  of Adult persons. And as true it is, that such a personal explicit profession is not where required of Infants. But what they cannot do of themselves they may, I hope, do by others. And done it they have: and that doing of it is, and hath been allowed of by the Church for many ages, even from the very beginning for aught I know that any man hath to say against it.  
§. 16. And this contracting by others, is but what is ordinary in the affairs of mankind. The Tutors of Infants do it: whether appointed by the 
See above, ch. 8. Sect. 15.  Wills of Parents, or assigned by order of Law, And pity it were that for want of an Authentical Trustee to transact for them, they should miss of those advantages which by any beneficial contract m●ght accrue unto them. And as their own interest will lead them to espouse and own those contracts that are made for their advantage; so if a 
* A Parent may contract with God on his child's behalf, no otherwise then a Guardian doth in the behalf of a Minor, or one under age, which he cannot afterward retract when he is out of his Pupillage without injustice, and being liable to the Law, if the contract be judged to be to his behoof and benefit. Dr. Patrick's Discourse concerning Baptism, pag. 46. See the place and context both before and after.  Parent may contract with God on his child's behalf, as a Guardian doth in the behalf of a Minor; he will be bound in justice to espouse the contract, it being for his advantage. Yea, I am told the Law will compel them, to make good even those also that prove to be for their disadvantage, provided the contracts were made (bona fide) and not fraudulent dealing were used by the Contractors in the making of them.  
§. 17. Now to the making good of the Baptismal Contract made for Infants by their Sureties, the Infants are doubly obliged. First by the infinite advantages that come to them by it: which, unless they be fools or mad, they will hasten all that ever they can, as soon as they know it, further to assure unto themselves by a personal engaging in it. Secondly, by the forfeiture of all benefits by it (besides many other obligations before mentioned) upon their disavowing and disclaiming of it.  
§. 18. No profession then being required from themselves, and a sufficient one being made for them by others, they are not uncapable of entering into Covenant with God on this account neither.  
§. 19 And thirdly, that their want of understanding renders them not incapable of entering into Covenant with God is evident by one instance beyondexception, in Deut. 29. 10, 11, 12. Ye stand this day all of you before the Lord your God, your Captains of your tribes, your Elders and your officers, with all the men of Israel, your little ones, your wives, and thy stranger that is in thy camp, from the h●wer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy water, That thou shouldst enter into Covenant with the Lord thy God, and into his Oath, which the Lord thy God maketh with thee this day. See! even the little ones, as well as Elders and Officers were capable of entering, and did actually enter into Covenant with God, and into the Oath of God; their want of years and understanding to know the condition of the Covenant and Oath which they entered into, or to make profession of entering into it, not at all withstanding. So that want of years and understanding cannot render children incapable of entering into God's Covenant. And then much less can it render them uncapable of receiving the sign or seal of his Covenant.  
§. 20. And however that it cannot, is evident, because the Jewish Infant was capable, as of the Covenant itself, as we have seen before, so of Circumcision the sign and seal of the Covenant, which to receive at eight days old he was bound upon pain of excision. He that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every manchild in your generations. And the uncircumcised manchild whose flesh of h● foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people, he hath broken my Covenant, Deut. 17. 12. What he was so bound to receive, surely he was capable of. Now why the child of a Christian should be less capable of receiving one seal of a Covenant, than the child of a Jew was of another, I am yet to learn.  
§. 21. And so there is nothing in Baptism itself rendering Infant's uncapable of being baptised.   

CHAP. XXV.  
Children not incapable of Baptism by any Text of Scripture that forbids it, either directly, or by consequence.  
§. 1. ADmit Infants never so capable of Baptism in all other respects, yet if the Scripture do forbidden it, than it becomes unlawful for them to have it, and they upon that account become uncapable of it.  
§. 2. Thirdly therefore and lastly I affirm, that upon the diligentest search, that I was ever able to make, I could never find any Scripture that forbade it. Search the Scripture from end to end, and not one Text appears, wherein it is forbidden. As the Antipaedobaptists call but for one Scripture that commands it, and upon that say, they will yield to it: so on the other hand the Paedobaptists call for a Scripture that forbids it, and upon that say, they will not contend for it. But there is none, no not one: it would else have been shown ere this, being so much, and so long, called for.  
§. 3. Yea, though there be never a Scripture that expressly, and in terms forbids it, yet if there be but one, wherein by direct and evident consequence it is forbidden, (though our adversaries will yield nothing to all the many Scriptures, from whence we do by good consequence deduce it, because we produce not a Text, that doth in express terms command it) let it be shown, and we shall pay all due respect unto it: the Contest will instantly be given over by us, who seek not victory without truth, but truth, whether with, or without victory; we shall believe the baptising of our Infants unlawful, and upon the account of its unlawfulness, believe them uncapable of it.  
§. 4. But if there be no such Text in all the Scripture, as doth so much as by consequence forbidden the baptising of Infants, we must then beg to be excused, if we hold the baptising of them lawful, and upon the account of that lawfulness, think them not uncapable of it.  
§. 5. For if sin be a transgression of the law, as St. John defines it, (1 John 3. 4.) and where there is no law, there is no transgression, as St. Paul determines it, (Rom. 4. 15.) then can it be no sin, either to Infants to be baptised, or to others to baptise Infants, because no law is by either 
† For therefore any thing is unlawful, because it transgresseth a law. W. Penn. Eng. Present Interest, p. 24.  transgressed; there being none, that either forbids them to be baptised 
* It is an evidence that Infants are not to be excluded from Baptism, because there is no divine Law, which doth prohibit their admission into the Church by it. Dr. Stilling fleet. Irenic. p. 7. , or forbids others to baptise them; therefore their baptism is lawful, and they upon the account of its lawfulness are capable of it.  
§. 6. And put case we should grant, that there were no Text in Scripture whereon to ground it, yet would it not follow thence, that it were unlawful. For the mere uncommandedness of a thing doth not infer the unlawfulness of it: a thing is not therefore unlawful, only because it is not commanded. To make a thing necessary indeed, there must be a law for it; and to make a thing unlawful, there must be a law against it. But to make a thing only lawful, it is not necessary there be any law for it, it is sufficient that there be no law against it. If then we cannot prove it necessary, because the Antipaedobaptists say we have no law for it, they cannot prove it unlawful, because we are sure they have no law against it. It remains therefore that it be lawful; and that our children, upon the account of the lawfulness of it, be capable of it.  
§. 7. Why but our Saviour sets Teaching before Baptising (Matth. 28. 19) saying to his Disciples, when he commissionated them to be his Apostles to all the nations of the world, for the gathering of a Church out of it, Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Well, and what then? Why then, saith the Antipaedobaptist, none must be baptised before he be taught, and so taught as that they do learn. And this because Infants are incapable of, therefore they are uncapable of baptism.  
§. 8. This Argument of theirs is like that former, which they drew from our Saviour's setting believing before baptising; which how weak it was I hope I need not so soon remember you. And granting all they can fairly pretend to from this Text, it will not hence follow, that Infants are uncapable of Baptism: as I shall hope to make appear upon a due and through consideration of the words.  
§. 9 Our Saviour here enlarges his Disciples Commission to go and preach, and make Disciples, not in one nation only, as formerly: but in all nations; teaching and baptising them (suppose we read the words so) Well: what can this mean other, than that those of the nations, that were capable of teaching, should be taught and baptised: not excluding from baptising, those that for the present were only capable of so much discipulation (if I may so speak) as was performed by baptising, but as yet were not capable of any teaching. And what makes this against Infant's Baptism? There is not an exclusive Particle in the whole Text.  
§. 10. But to proceed, this we will grant, that if the order of Teaching and Baptising 
See Dr. Stillingflcets Vindic. A. B. of Cant. p. 107.  be considered in their reference to the conversion of all nations, or any one whole particular nation unconverted, teaching is to go before baptising. But this is not from the naked consideration of the setting of the words, Teaching, and Baptising; as if the order of the words were inviolably to be observed in the order of things (and if any have so thought and argued, I cannot in that excuse them from a shortness of discourse) but it is from the otherwise unpracticableness of the things 
* Non enim potest fieri ut corpus baptismi recipiat Sacramentum, nisi ante anima fidei sus●eperit veritatem. D. Hieron. in Matth. 28. 29.  themselves. For as no Adult person will be brought to be baptised before he be taught what baptism means, and why he should be baptised: so the Church will admit no Infants to baptism, but those that are the children of baptised persons, or at least are undertaken for by such as are baptised. Suppose our Saviour had set baptising before teaching (as he might, had he pleased) and said, Go ye therefore and baptise all nations in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them what I have commanded they should know and do; who would have scrupled to begin his work with teaching, notwithstanding the order of the words? as imagining that none that understood themselves, would ever be baptised before they were taught. It is therefore not from the order of the words, but from the orderliness of the things, which cannot otherwise be effected, but in this way and order, that this course is, and must, in such case, be taken. Now if so, than the whole force of the Antipaed obaptists argument from the mere consideration of the order of these words (teaching set before Baptising) which yet is all they have in this point to urge from them, is utterly vanished.  
§. 11. But when once some in a nation have been taught, and have received the faith, and have been baptised into it, than it follows not, that the same course must necessarily still be taken with every si●le person in it, that was proper for, and was taken with the whole of it: but that all that any way, and in any degree, are capable of baptism, may respectively according to their capacity be admitted to it, though they be wanting in some thing, which others of greater capacity have, and is requisite in them, to make them capable of it. And to argue from what is requisite in Men before the conversion of a nation, to what is requisite in children after the nation is converted is fallacious. For it does not follow, Thus it was with the Adult Men of the nation before any of it were converted: therefore thus it must be with the Infant Children of the Nation after the conversion of their Fathers: more being required of Men, than of Children; of Men that can receive, or reject the Gospel, than of Children that can neither reject it, nor receive it. Men are not to be admitted to baptism, but upon those accounts, in respect whereof they are to be qualified for it. Children are to be admitted to baptism upon those accounts in respect whereof they are qualified for it; and not to be rejected upon those accounts in respect whereof they are not qualified for it: unless it had been positively and particularly required of them that they should be so qualified, or not be baptised. Why should any require from Infants so much as is required of Men to qualify them for baptism, when the Scripture hath not required of them so much? Why should any make Infants entrance into the kingdom of Heaven, straighter than God himself hath made it? Why should any keep them out, whom God has a mind to let in? Why should any keep them from coming to Christ, whom Christ hath commanded should be suffered to come unto him?  
§. 12. Our Saviour saith, Go teach all nations baptising them: but he doth not say, Baptise none of those nations before they be taught. Some must be first taught, that all may be baptised; not none baptised but those that are first taught. He saith, teach all nations baptising them: but he doth not say, whether the teaching, or the baptising shall be first. No, he determines neither to be first or second, but according as their discretion should think fit. He says not so much as Teach and Baptise, but only Teach baptising. Which therefore enforceth neither to be first, but according as the nature of the things may require, and the condition of the persons admit. Suppose he had said, Go ye therefore and convert all nations preaching to them my Gospel: who would ever have imagined it to have been his command, that the Apostles should first convert the nations, and then preach the Gospel to them? and that because the words were so set (converting before preaching) therefore none were to be preached to, but those that were first converted? St. B●sil gives the Text this gloss, he commanded 
Tà 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Basil. adv. Eu●omium, l. 5.  the Gentiles that had believed, and had been taught, to be baptised in the name of the Trinity. Can any man from the order of the words here (believed set before taught) gather hence that St. Basil thought persons were first to believe and then to be taught, or that none were to be taught but they that first believed? It is unimaginable. And if this way of arguing be most fallacious and absurd, as it is, than such is that of the Antipaedobaptists; (whereto this is exactly parallel, and every way the same) when they argue from the order of the words to the order of the things. But what will they say to Gregory Nazianzene, who inverts the order of our Saviour's words, & sets Baptising before Teaching: 
* Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 40. p. 670, 677.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Had this Father understood of any force in the order of our Saviour's words to signify the order of the things, he would not have inverted it: or had he intended any such force in the order of his own words, that is, had he intended by setting teaching after baptising, to express such teaching as was to come after baptising; he would then have put the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not only after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but after the whole sentence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. There cannot be any force therefore in arguing from the order of the words to the order of the things: and yet in this argument of twisted hairs doth the great strength of these our Samsons lie.  
§. 13. Yet further, if this Argument have any force in it, than it is clearly for us, and against them. For you plainly read here in the 19 th' verse the word Baptising. And the first word of the 20 th' verse following is Teaching. So than if the things, must go according to the order of the words, then Baptising must go before Teaching. And so this Text is so far from making against Infant's baptism, that it makes clearly for it, even by the Antipaedobaptists own way of arguing.  
§. 14. By which way of arguing, if allowed for good, it were easy to prove that John the Baptist did first baptise his Disciples before he taught them; because (in Mark 1. 4.) his baptising is set before his preaching. For so 'tis expressly there said, John did baptise in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. See, first he baptised, and then he preached; and so by his example, especially according to their way of arguing, men may at least, if yet they ought not to be baptised, before they be taught.  
§. 15. And so, whereas it is said, that those that John did baptise, were such as confessed their sins, yet it may be said, that his baptising (at least according to their way of arguing) went before their confessing. For so it follows (in ver. 5th) There went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jurusalem, and were all baptised of him in the river of Jordan confessing their sins. See ● first ye have his Baptising, and after, their confessing. Which that it was really the Holy Baptists order of proceeding, though it be not concluded from the order of the words, yet may seem probable from what was the custom of the Jews, as the learned in their customs say, namely, 
See Dr Lightfoots Horae Hebraicae, pag. 41.  to admit men unto Proselytism or Discipleship by Baptising them. Either way our business is done. For if he did not baptise them before he had preached to them, and they had confessed to him; then the Argument from the order of the words to the order of the things is not good. But if he did baptise them before his preaching and their confessing, then here is a Scripture instance of Baptising before Teaching and confessing, which justifies our practice, and gives an utter overthrow to the whole Hypothesis of the Antipaedobaptists in this matter.  
§. 16. And as for the word Teaching, which goes before Baptising (in the 19 th' verse) several very learned Persons 
* They mistranslate the words: for Christ saith not, Go teach all nations— for his words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Go make Disciples among all nations.  do affirm, that it is not so properly there rendered Teaching. The word that properly signifies Teaching comes after baptising (in the 20 th' verse) and is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to teach, whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doctrine or teaching, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Doctor or Teacher. But the word 
Dr. Featly, Dippers dipped, pag 40. The Phrase which is there used in the original, is a singular one, not duly expressed by our English Teach. It is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make Disciples, or receive into Discipleship all nations— Dr. Hammond Quaere of the Baptising of Infants, pag. 196 See his Defense also, p. 46. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, i. e Discipulos facite. Introducite per Baptismum ut doceantur. Dr. Lightfoot, Horae Hebraicae, p 323. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Discipulate, aut discipulos reddite, Vatablus. Discipulate, i. e. discipulos reddite, Lucas Brugensis. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, non est docere, sed discipulum facere, Wendelin Thcolog. l. 1. c. 22. Explic. Thes. 11. Teach them, that is, make them my Disciples, etc. Mr. Perkins, cited by H. D. pag. 4. Edit. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Locutio est Hebraica: nam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 discipulus: unde formant verbum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 facere discipulum & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sicri discipulum Thus Cameron declares the propriety of the word, though he is not of opinion that it is used in that propriety here, but saith simpliciter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; docere; and so makes a Tautology in the words, which yet he endeavours afterward to salve by a distinction; but in vain.  that (in the 19th Baptising, and is rendered teaching, is another word, namely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which coming from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a disciple (as that from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to learn) according to its variety of construction signifies to be a Disciple to another, or to make another a Disciple.  
§. 17. With a Dative case of the Person it signifies to be a Disciple to another. Plutarch in the life of Isocrates speaking of Theopompus and Ephorus' being Isocratess' Scholars, so expresseth it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. But Disciple or Scholar unto him was The pompus, and Ephorus. St. Matthew expresses joseph's being a Disciple to Jesus by the same Phrase, Matth. 27. 57— There came a rich man of Arimathea, named Joseph, who also himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was Jesus disciple, i. e. Disciple or Scholar to Jesus. So Justin Martyr in his second Apology speaks of some of sixty, and seventy years old, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from their infancy, or ever since they were children, had been disciples to Christ. Yea, and in the forenamed place of Plutarch, without any Dative case expressed, but absolutely set, it signifies to be a Disciple. And I, saith he, will teach you my whole art, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, if you will be my Scholar, or will learn.  
§. 18. But with an Accusative Case of the Person it is used to signify to make another a Disciple. So Justin Martyr speaking of the Gentiles, which before the coming of Christ, were like an unbroken colt, that had never born either saddle or yok●, saith, that when Christ was come 
Discipulos suos ablegavit, & per ipsos eas in disciplinam suam recepit. The Lat. Translat. of Justin.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; he sent by his Disciples, and Discipled them, or made them Disciples. And according to this import of the verb active 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an Accusative Case to enter one into Discipleship, the Passive verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an Accusative Case, and the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signify to be entered into Discipleship, to be taken in to be, or to become Disciples. Hence Justin Martyr speaks of 
Dialog. cum Tryphone Judaeo Seions indies adhuc nonnullos disciplinam suscipere in nomen Christi sui & viam seductionis relonquere, Latin. Translat.  Gods deferring his judgement now as of old he did in the days of Elias, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as knowing that daily some were entered into discipleship to the name of his Christ, (i. e. became Christians) and forsook the way of error. With a Dative case also put without a Preposition St. Basil useth the word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to become a disciple to the Lord. But we need not 
Basil. de Bapt. l. 1.  seek so far an instance of this interpretation of the word, when the elegant Evangelist in his History of the Acts of the Apostles (cap. 14. utr. 21.) has given us one; And when (saith he there) they had preached the Gospel to that city, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and had made a good many Disciples, they returned again to Lystra—. Our Translation I very well know renders it, had taught many: but that (with humblest reverence to the Translators) I conceive not to be so right a rendering of it. For that sure, teaching, was expressed before in the word preaching. For what is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to preach the Gospel, but to publish, declare, and teach it? And if the word be so rendered, the sense will amount to thus much; and when they had taught that city the Gospel, and had taught many; which is a mere tautology. The meaning then plainly is, that after they had taught the word of the Gospel to that city in their preaching, and by that had prevailed with a good many of them to undertake the profession of the Gospel and become Disciples unto Christ, they accordingly made Disciples of them by baptising them, and perhaps, nay probably, some more besides the very persons taught, even the children, and servants of those that had been taught, as was usual before with those that became proselytes to the Jews religion. And so our Saviour's word here (in Matth. 28. 19) is to be rendered as if he had said, ye have formerly made disciples only of Jews, now enlarge your pains to the making disciples of Heathens also, and those of all the nations of the world; make even all heathens disciples. That must be all of them which should in any measure be capable of being made Disciples. And such, 'tis known by the rules and practices of the Jews, amongst whom our Saviour lived, and to whose customs and practices he very much conformed, were not only men of years, and understanding, but their children also upon the undertaking of others for them. And so by our Saviour's order the Apostles were to make disciples not only of the grown men of the Heathens, if they should offer themselves to discipleship, but also their little children too, if they would bring them also to be disciples to him. And disciples to Christ they might be, by being brought by their parents to Christ's School, and entered into the relation of his Scholars, though they neither knew their Master as yet, any more than any of ours, whom we put to a strange School, do at first know their Master, whom they never saw before; or whom we put to a Master, whom they have never seen at all, by agreeing first with him for their teaching, and so entering them into the number of his Scholars, and then, after, sending them to be taught; nor knew any thing of that which they were to learn of him, any more than any of our children, that are put to a first, or a strange Master, do know what he will learn them, till he have set them a lesson; whose Disciples or Scholars yet they are in respect of their relation to him, though as yet they have learned nothing from him. Or as he becomes a Member of a College, and a Pupil to a Tutor, who goes not personally up to the University, but has his name only sent up, and entered in there, as a Pupil to that Tutor, and a Member of that College.  
§. 19 Yea, 'tis the observation of a Person very learned in the manners and customs of the Jews, that among them, as among us, and all Nations, men are not therefore taught, that they may be made Disciples, but are therefore made disciples that they may be taught. An instance whereof he citys out of Bal Schabb. fol. 31. 1. which is of a certain Heathen, that came to Hillel the great, saying unto him, Make me a Proselyte, that you may 
Proselytum me fac, ut me doceas. Dr. Lightfoot, Horae Hebr. on Matth. 28. 19  teach me.  
§. 20. And yet a little further to manifest the impropriety of rendering the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here in this place by Teach, first let it be considered, how improperly it is followed first by the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and then by the Participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
§. 21. First, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how improperly is that rendered, Teach baptising? What must that mean? Teach by baptising? But how shall they be taught by baptising, who have not first been taught what baptising means? Or must it mean teach and baptise? Then it must also, when we come to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, be rendered, teach and teach. Must it be teach when ye baptise? That's the best of it. But then also it must be, when ye come to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, teach when ye teach. How improper is every way! But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make Disciples baptising them, teaching them, or by baptising them, and by teaching them; what can be more proper? baptising and teaching being the two things by which men are made Disciples.  
§. 22. Secondly, let it be considered, that if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signify teaching, then there will be a needless Tautology committed in so few words. Go ye therefore and teach all nations— and teaching them. One might have served, and the first is perfectly needless. But not so, but highly important if it be rendered, dis ipulate, or make Disciples.  
§. 23. 'Tis frivolous to make a distinction between the Verbs, and their significations, as if the first sign fied to teach the faith, and the second to teach manners; the Verbs having no such distinct imports in their significations. They that have such a distinct use of the words ought to show that use in Authors. Till than it must go but for a novel device of their own. And that it is no better may appear from 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ac Edoctus Evangelium regni continud fidem in cordis penetralibus concepit D. Basil. Exhort. ad Baptism. Tom. 1. p. 483.  that of St. Basil, where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used for the teaching before baptism, and particularly the baptism of the Eunuch by Philip, and comprehends all the teaching he is read to have had. Yea, and in this place of St. Matthew what ever can be implied in the first Verb, is expressed in what follows in the second Verb, which reaches to all things whatsoever Christ had commanded them. Unless any will say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports the teaching of somewhat that Christ never commanded his Apostles, something that neither concerns faith nor manners: for these were the things that Christ commanded his Disciples to act themselves, and to teach others the acting of.  
§. 24. So again, to make such a distinction between the Verbs, as if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signify, teach those that are not Disciples to make them so; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must signify teach them that are Disciples after they are made so, is also frivolous. For put 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 together so signifying, and so distinguished: and what will they amount to? why thus much. Teach those, that are not Disciples to make them so teaching (or, by teaching) these that are Disciples after they are made so. How uncouth, if intelligible, a construction is this! and how unpracticable the thing in itself, when understood! How should a single Apostle travelling all alone into a strange place teach those that had never heard of the Gospel by his teaching those that had received it? or must he carry Disciples always along with him to, and set up School in every strange nation, that Heathens hearing him teach Christians, might by such hearing become Christians also? How is this imaginable to have been the meaning of our Saviour? How impracticable in the Apostles first onsets on the Heathen nations to make them become Christians? When Churches were settled, then indeed something of this might be (though none sure ever thought that to be the design of our Saviour in his commission) but how this could be before any Church were either settled, or so much as begun to be gathered, (and there must be a first beginning to gather before there could be a Church) is past imagination. And besides the Histories of those times show the course was otherwise. But now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make disciples of Heathens, or make Heathens disciples, teaching (or by teaching) them to observe all things that I have commanded you; how clear is the interpretation! how genuine the sense! how practicable the thing in all times and places! how agreeable to the design in his commission! how nothing else but the very mind of Christ in his word!  
§. 25. In a word, admit the word that comes here before baptising were the same with that, which doth come after it, namely, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teach, or did here properly signify teaching, as it doth not; how easily may it hence be gathered, That baptism may be either before, or after teaching, according to the condition of the Person to be baptised; after it in those that are capable to be first taught; before it in those that are not as yet capable of teaching: after it to men, before it to children.  
§. 26. And in confirmation hereof it might be said, that this hath been the very way of the Church of ●hrist in all the ages of it, first to teach men, and then to baptise them: but first to baptise Children, and after teach them: letting them at present have that means of grace, which at present they are capable of, and affording them afterward what remained, assoon as they should become capable of it.  
§. 27. But having no authority to change any word in the Text of our Saviour, nor reason to be over liberal in my concessions, I abide by what was said before, having added this ex abundan i, more than was needful, to show the weakness of the Antipaedobaptists way of arguing, even upon the utmost advantage they can desire to be given them.  
§. 28. And by this time I hope it appears, that there is nothing in the word of God which renders Infants uncapable of being baptised.  
§. 29. And if so, than we have enough, though we had no more, for Infant's baptism. For Baptism being that, by which our children may have so much good as we have shown they may have, in the first branch of our Argument; and being that, whereof they have so much need, as we have shown they have, in the second branch of it; with what either charity or justice can they be denied it? being they are so capable of it, as we have now shown them to be in the handling of this third branch. Sure children are not the only persons in the world that may neither have acts of justice nor charity shown towards them? And what should hinder us from doing for them this good, for which they have so much need? Neither is the pains so great, nor the trouble so much, nor the charge so heavy, but we may afford it them. What will we do for them, that will not do so little as this comes to, to baptise them? Are we not free and at liberty to do it, if we will? Is there any restraint laid upon us from doing it by the Law either of God, or Man? If neither spoke for it, as indeed both do, yet to be sure neither speaks against it, and so we may do it, if we will. And what can be pretended against doing so much good, where we see there is so much need?  
§. 30. Do it then, Brethren, for your Children, because it is so much for their good. Do it, because that of that good they have so much need. And do it, because it is an act both of Justice, and Charity, which they are as capable of receiving, as you at liberty for performing. Never stand hunting for Scripture for it, so long as there is no Scripture against it: but reckon it your duty to bring them to Christ, whom Christ hath permitted to come unto him, and whose coming to him Christ hath forbidden any man to hinder, saying, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbidden them not.  
§. 31. And more than this I need not say to move any reasonable man to the doing of it.  
§. 32. And yet above and beyond all this, I shall show you in the fourth and last place a Right that Children have unto Baptism, and then it cannot but be a wrong to hinder them from being baptised. A Right, I say, our Children have unto Baptism; and that upon a threefold account; the Constitution of this Church; the Custom of the Catholic Church; and the Institution of Christ; as I shall show in order.   

CHAP. XXVI.  
Our children's Right to Baptism by the Constitution of this Church, and Custom of the Catholic Church.  
§. 1. I Begin with our children's right to baptism by the first, the Constitution of this present particular Church.  
§. 2. And as that hath told us in her 27th Article of her Doctrine, That the Baptism 
Baptismus parvulorum omnino in Ecclesid retinendus est, ut qui cum Christi institutione optimè congraut. Artic. Relig. 27.  of young children is in any wi●e to be retained in the Church, as most agreeable with the institution of Christ: so it hath provided in her Liturgy a double Office for the Baptising of Infants, the one fitted for Public Solemnity, the other adapted to Private Necessity; and hath ordered the Curates of every Parish to be often admonishing the people, that they defer not the baptising of th●ir children longer than the first or second Sunday next after their B●rth, or other Holy day falling between; unless upon reasonable cause, which must be great too, and to be approved by the Curate. What the Church than not only allows, and permits them to have, but ordains and appoints their having of, that by the Constitution of the Church they have a Right unto; and they cannot, without injustice to them, be deprived of it; unless perhaps any shall think it no injury to wrong them of any spritual advantage, whereas it is a great one to rob them of any temporal one, when as contrarily, if the one be a robbery, the other is a sacrilege.  
§. 3. But because the present Church is a Party, and will not be allowed to be a Judge by her Opposers, therefore I will proceed to show a second Right that children have unto Baptism, and that is by Prescription from the Custom and Practice of the Catholic Church of Christ. And sure they that will not be Members of our Particular Church, will yet be willing to be Members of Christ's Catholic Church. And if so they be, then sure they will not oppose, nor gainsay, but submit unto, and be regulated by, the Custom and Practice of it; unless they mean to become guilty of Schism, in separating from that Church, whereof they pretend themselves to be Members.  
§. 4. Now as to Church custom and practice, 'tis in that, as in other customs and practices. It hath the obligation of a Law. Common usage, we say, is common Law in England. So 'tis in civil Customs, and so too in Ecclesiastical. Where Authority from the Scripture fails, there the Custom of 
Ubi Authoritas deficit, ibi Consuetudo ma●orum pro lege tenenda est. D. Aug. ad Casulan. In rebus de quibus nihil certi statuit Scriptura divina, m●s populi Dei, vel instituta majorum pro lege tenenda, D. Aug. Ep. 86. Consuet ido autem etiam in civilibus rebus pro lege suscipitur, cum deficit lex: nec differt, Scriptura an ratione consistat, quando & legem ratio commendet. Tert. de Coron. Mil. In iis quae Scriptura, nec jubet, nec prohibet, illud est sequendum, quod consuetudo roboravit— Id. Ib. Exigis ubi scriptum sit in actibus Apostolorum; etiamsi Scripturae auctoritas non subesset, totius Orbis in hac parte consensus instar praecepti obtinet. Name & multa alia quae per traditionem in Ecclesiis observantur auctoritatem sibi scriptaelegis usurpârunt, veluti in lavacro ter mergitare caput, etc. D. Hieron. advers. Luciferan. Quis— quis Catholici dogmatis & moris sensum, divinitus per loca & tempora omnia dispensatum contemserit, non hominem contemnit, sed Deum. Vincent. Lilinens.  the Church is to be held as a Law. So St. Augustine saith; and so have others of the Ancients both thought and said. Whence that conclusion of the Council of Nice, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ancient usages should continue in force. And if so, than Infants will have a Right to Baptism, as good as any ever had to any thing on this account.  
§. 5. And that it should be so, namely, that the Custom and Practice of the Church should have the force of a Law, either to justify a Church Practice, or to give Right unto a Church Privilege, will be no wonder sure to him that considers that the Apostle both hath made the Custom of the Church a Rule for Church-members to walk by, (1 Cor. 14. 40.) in saying, Let all things be done decently, and in order. (For by Decency there he means agreeableness to the custom of the Church, which, as our Learned Paraphrast saith, is the rule of decency:) and hath also himself made use of Church custom as an argument for the refutation of such as should contend for the decency of women's public praying, that is, being present at, and joining in the ivine service, with their heads uncovered, 1 Cor. 11. 16. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such customs, nor the Churches of God. Which words of his we may sitly use to Opposers of Infant's Baptism. They contend for the deferring of the Baptising of Infants, even of all Infants, though they be the children of believing Parents, till they be grown men; and hold it unlawful for any to be baptised before. But that is a novel opinion, and practice of their own. We have no such either opinion or custom, nor the Churches of God.  
§. 6. And the stronger still will Infants Right unto Baptism from the Custom of the Church be (which Custom yet must needs be granted to have a great force, when an Apostle, that could impose by an Authority Divine, would argue from a Custom of the Church) if it shall appear that this Custom of the Church hath been grounded upon Apostolical Tradition, or Practice: especially being the Apostle hath given express order to stand fast to, and hold the Apostolical Traditions, whether by word or by writing, 2 Thess. 2. 15. and to mark them which walked so, as they had the Apostles for an example, Phil. 3. 17. I will therefore first show, that the Practice of this Particular Church to baptise Infants has been the Practice of the Catholic Church: and then proceed to show that Practice of the Church to have been grounded on the Tradition of the Apostles, and put fair to show it to have been the Practice of the Apostles also.   

CHAP. XXVII.  
The Catholic Churches Custom to Baptise Infants.  
§. 1. NOw to show that it hath been the Custom and Practice of the Universal Church of Christ to baptise Infants, as it will be useful unto you, and also delightful, because you will see that what we hold and do in this case, is no other but what hath been held and done in and by the Catholic Church in all the ages of it, ever since that first wherein the Apostles lived: so it shall neither be irksome nor unpleasing to myself, because I shall hope thereby to contribute something toward the conviction and satisfaction of those that are doubters, and dissatisfied in the point. Wherein my progress shall be retrogressive, beginning below, and carrying my Catalogue upwards; to the Primitive Times from the Present; whereas other usually begin above, and bring it downward to the Present from the Primitive: it being not material which way it is done, but suiting better with my design to have it done this way.  
§. 2. And for this present Seventeenth Century now current, we need no other but our own eyes to be our witnesses of the daily Practice to baptise Infants, both in our Church at home, and other Churches abroad, as well Protestant as Popish.  
§. 3. And as little need almost have we to seek for witnesses in the Century next foregoing, there being many no doubt yet living, who were baptised Infants themselves within the compass of that Century, if they do not also remember the baptisms of others. However at home our Articles of Religion first agreed on in the reign of Q. Elizabeth, Anno 1562, declaring that Infant's baptism is in any wise to be retained in the Church as most agreeable to the Institution of Christ; and our Liturgy compiled before in the reign of K. Edward the Sixth, Anno 1549, wherein is contained the office for the public baptising of Infants is to us a sufficient evidence for it, without seeking further. To which for neighbourhood sake, we may add the Confession of the Faith of Scotland, in the year 1582, wherein they confess and acknowledge that baptism appertaineth as well to the Infants of the Faithful, as unto them that be of full age and discretion.  
§. 4. And for the Churches abroad their Confessions show their belief and practice in this case. The Council of Trent in the fifth and seventh Session of it (Anno 1546, & Anno 1547) 
Si quis parvulos recentes ab utcris matrum baptizandos negat— Antthema sit. Concil. Trident. Sess. 5. apud Caranzam. Si quis dixerit par vulos, co quod actum credend● non habent, susccpto baptismo inter fideles ●omputandos non esse— Anathema sit. Id. ib. Sess. 7. con. 13.  anathematizes those that either say that children ought not to be baptised; or that being baptised they ought not to be reckoned amongst believers; or that it is better wholly to let their baptising alone, than that, not believing by any proper act of their own, they should be baptised upon the account of the faith of the Church. And that gives sufficient evidence for the Church of Rome.  
§. 5. Then for the Protestant Churches, the Harmony of the Confessions of Helvetia, Bohemia, 
Printed at Cambridge 1586.  Belgia, Auspurge, Saxony, Wittenberg, 
We condemn the Anabaptists who deny that young Infants born of faithful parents are to be baptised. For according to the doctrine of the Gospel, Theirs is the kingdom of God. And they are in the Covenant of God. And why then should not the sign of the Covenant be given to them? The latter Confession of H●lvetia. In which holy Font we do therefore dip our Infants, because that it is not lawful for us to reject them from the company of the people of God, which are born of us— Former Confess. of H●lvetia.— Young children also who are reckoned in the number of God's people in like sort are by this Ministry to be benefited towards the attaining of salvation, that they likewise may be consecrated, and dedicated to Christ, according to his commandment, when he saith, Suffer ye the little ones— For these causes do our Ministers without any doubt, and boldly baptise children— Bohemia.— Seeing that God doth together with the Parents account their posterity also to be of the Church, we affirm that Infants being born of holy Parents, are by the Authority of Christ to be baptised. French Confess.— We by the same reason do believe that they [Infant's] aught to be baptised, and sealed with the sign of the Covenant, for the which in times past the Infants amongst the Israelites were circumcised, that is by reason of the same promises made unto our Infants, that were made unto others. Confess. of Belgia. They teach that young Infants are to be baptised.— They condemn the Anabaptists, which allow not the baptism of Infants— Confess. of Auspurge. We also baptise Infants, because it is most certain, that the promise of grace doth pertain also to Infants.— Confess. of Saxony. We acknowledge that Baptism is to be ministered as well to Infants, as to those that are grown to full age. Confess. of Wittemberge. Seeing that Baptism is a Sacrament of that Covenant, which God hath made with those that be his, promising that he will be their God, and the God of their seed— therefore our Preachers do teach, that it is to be given to Infants also— Confess. of sweveland.  Sweveland, with the French Confession, all unanimously declaring for Infant's baptism, though some on one ground, and some on another, evidently enough shows what was believed and practised by those parts of the Church in that age.  
§. 6. To these I shall add the Confession of the Churches of the Valleys of Piedmont assembled in Angrogne (Anno 1532) in the 17 Artic. whereof they say,— we have but two Sacramental Signs left us by Jesus Christ; the one is Baptism, the other is the Eucharist, which we receive, to show that our 
Sir Sam. Morland History of Piedmont. p. 41.  perseverance in the Faith is such, as we promised when we were baptised being little children. Also a Confession presented to Ladislaus K. of Bohemia (Anno 1508) by his Subjects, falsely called Waldenses; and after to Ferdinand 
Id. ib. pag. 53.  K. of Bohemia, (Anno 1535) in the 12 Artic. whereof, They likewise teach, that children are to be baptised unto salvation, and to be consecrated to Christ, according to his Word, Suffer little children, etc. And whereas the Waldenses are charged to have rejected the baptism of little Infants, they in their Book entitled the 
Luther's Forerunners, l. 1. c. 4. p. 10. & 15. of part 1.  spiritual Almanac, sol. 45. quit themselves (as my Author faith) from this imputation as followeth. The time and place of those that are to be baptised is not ordained, but the charity and edification of the Church and Congregation must serve for a rule therein, etc. And therefore they to whom the children were nearest allied brought their Infants to be baptised, as their parents, or any other whom God had made charitable in that kind. Again, in the Book of the Doctrine of the Waldenses and Albingenses (ch. 3.) 
Id. ib. part 3. pag. 43.  their judgement and Practice is thus delivered, And for this cause it is that we present our children to Baptism; which they ought to do, to whom the children are nearest, as their parents, and they to whom God hath given this charity. It is confessed that they did in process of time grow to deser the baptising of their Infants for some while: but that was not from any opinion of the unlawfulness 
Id. ib. part 1. pag. 15.  of Infant's Baptism: but partly because their own Ministers were many times abroad employed in the service of their Churches; and partly out of detestation of some humane inventions held by them to be pollutions added to that Sacrament as administered by the Priests of the Church of Rome, by whom for some certain hundreds of years they had been constrained to suffer their children to be baptised.  
§. 7. So that it is needless to appeal for further evidence to the Conference at Mompelgu●t; 
* Anno 1529.  or the Articles of Smalkald, 
† Anno 1536.  or book of Concord; 
* Anno 1580.  much less to the testimonies of single persons, though men of note and eminence in their generation, such as Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, Zan●hy, or any other of the many writers on this Subject in that Age. Who were by so much the more moved to write on this Subject in regard of an Opposition then made to Infant's Baptism by the Anabaptists, who as Melancthon saith were then 
Melancthon loc. Comm. de Bapt.  nuper nati, newly come up, whereas before there was great quietness in the Church about that Point.  
§. 8. Yet, to show that Infant's Baptism was not the practice of the more Western parts of Europe only, but of the Eastern too, and of those that followed the Greek Church, as well as those that followed the Latin, I will give two or three evidences of th●s practice among the Russians, Ruthens, and Moscovians.  
§. 9 In an Epistle written to David Chytraeus (dated 8 Kal. Aug. Anno M. D. LXXVI.) 
De Russorum, Moscovitarum & Tartarorum Religione, pag. 240.  the Author relating the manner of baptising among the Russians, saith the Priest useth to pour a whole gallon of water upon the Infant. Alexander Gaguin saith of 
Ib. pag. 232.  the Ruthens, that they baptise their Infants by immersion. These receiving the Faith about the year 942, and retaining it firmly ever since, are an Instance of Infant's Baptism, not for this Century only, but for all the time from their first conversion. And the same is testified of them by Johannes Sacranus, Canon of Cracow, 
Ib. pag. 193.  who writing his Book in the year 1500, is a witness in this case as well for the foregoing, as present Century. And Johannes Faber writing to Ferdinand King of 
Ib. pag. 176.  the Romans Anno 1525) concerning the Moscovites, who, as themselves say, received their religion from St. Andrew, and are very firm to what they have once received, saith that they baptise their Infants by a threefold immersion, if he be strong, else by pouring on of water. Now this Relation, if true, and why it may not be so I cannot tell, speaks not only for the Century, the Relator writ in, but for time before; how much 'tis uncertain, but for aught I know, for all the time since their first conversion, which reaches up to the very Apostles days.  
§. 10. And to show that Infant's baptism was not the practice only of Europe but of other parts of the world, and so hint at (that which some other better read in History may be able sully to make out) a Catholickness of it in respect of Country's professing Christianity as well as Times, I will give you a brief taste from Mr. Brerewoods' Inquiries, how it was about this Century, and God knows how many Centuries before, whether from the beginning or no, in this Point with the Eastern and Southern parts of the world where Christianity is professed. And to begin with the Christians of St. Thomas so called, as being supposed to 
Chap. 20.  have been by his preaching converted to the Christian Religion, inhabiting in India in great numbers about Coulan, and Cranganor, Maliapur, where St. Thomas is supposed to lie buried and Negapatan. These baptise their Infants, though not indeed till they be forty days old, except in danger of death. Next the Jacobites are a sort of Christians who inhabit in 
Chap. 21.  Syria, Cyprus, Mesopotamia, B●bylon, Pal●stine, and under other titles are said to be spread abroad in forty kingdoms. And these all baptise their Infants, signing them first with the sign of the Cross, which they imprint into their face or arm with a burning iron. Then the Co●hti or Christians in Egypt, where Religion was planted 
Chap. 22.  in the Apostles days, these baptise their children, though not afore the fortieth day, ●o not in case of death. The Hab●stine Christians inhabiting the 
Chap. 23.  midland of Africa do also baptise their Infants: but their Males not till forty days after their birth, and their Females not till eighty, except in peril of death. The Armenian Christians are spread in 
Chap. 24.  multitudes over the Turkish Empire, but chief in the Armenia's the Greater and Lesser, and in Cilicia. And these also baptise their Infants. Lastly, the Maronites are a sort of Christians inhabiting 
Chap. 25.  Aleppo, Damascus, Tripoli of Syria, Cyprus, and mount Libanus. And these too baptise their Infants, but their Males not till forty days after their birth, and their Females not till eighty days after it. So that from all the Quarters of the world where Christianity is professed witnesses come for Infant's baptism.  
§. 11. But not more fruitful was this Century for Testifiers to this Truth, than some of the foregoing are barren; not from the rarity of the practice, or opinion of men against it, but from the scarcity of Writers in those Ages, whose works are extant, and from the little or no opposition made to it. Yet in the barrenest and darkest of Ages, we shall find a sufficiency of light and evidence, to carry up this Practice through them to the Primitive Times.  
§. 12. In the middle of the Fifteenth Age (about Anno 1452) we find Nicolaus de Orbellis giving his testimony to this Truth. 
Yist. 4. 4 Libri Sent. qu. 5.  For to the question whether the effects of baptism be alike in all, he answers by way of Distinction; saying that the Baptised are either Infants or Adult: and that if the Comparison be of an Infant with the Adult, the effect is unequal, the advantage on the Adults side. And upon the question, whether the Infants of Infidels may be baptised against the 
Ib. qu. 7.  wills of their parents, he determines that though a private person may not compel in that case, yet a Prince may. And also he gives reasons why the Infants to be baptised 
Ib. qu. 8.  should be Catechised, though they be not able to apprehend any instruction, which is a sufficient indication both of his opinion and of the Church's Practice in that age. As for the Catechising he speaks of, that none trip at that, it is nothing but the ask and answering to the questions solemnly used in bapti in by the Godfathers. For he tells ye what the Godfather means, when in the Person of the Infant he answers, I believe. And the Reasons for this he draws partly from the Church, partly from the Godfathers, and partly from the Infants.  
§. 13. Towards the latter end of this Century, about the year 1487 flourished Gabriel Biel; and he as the Author newly mentioned, 
Omnes parvulirite baptiza●i rem & Sacramentum sus cipiunt: sed Sacramentum tantum qui fictè, & sine side & contritione accedunt. Gabriel Biel, in 1 Sentent. d. 4.  discoursing of the different effects of baptism in persons of different age and disposition, concludes thus. All Infants rightly baptised receive the thing and the Sacrament: but those (he means adult ones) that come feignedly, and without faith and contrition receive only the Sacrament. 'Twere lost time to stand upon it hence to prove his being for Infant's Baptism.  
§. 14. But before either him, or De Orbellis, flourished Thomas Waldensis, who died Anno 1430. And saith he, who ever we be that are baptised into 
Quicunque baptizati sumus in Christo Jesus, in morte ipsius baptizati sumus. Ergo & parvuli qui baptizantur in Christo, quoniam in morte ipsius baptizati sunt, peccato moriuntur. Tho. Walden de Sacram. Tom. 2. q. 101. Fol. 104. Col. 2. Quod parvuli ad baptismum delati si praeveniantur morte peribunt. Id. ib. q. 99 Fol. 101. Col. 3.  Jesus Christ are baptised into his death. Therefore even the Infants that are baptised into Christ, because they are baptised into his death, do die to sin. The same Author holds that Infants brought to baptism yet dying before they be baptised, do perish.  
§. 15. Yea, and even in the beginning of it, (about Anno 1401) flourished Nicolaus Gorranus. And he delivers his sense as to this matter in the words of Beda, and the Ordinary Gloss, Treating on Mark 7. 29. Vade, exiit daemonium, Go thy way, the devil is gone out of thy daughter, he saith, And as saith Beda, hence we have an example, that, as that daughter was healed by the faith of her Mother, as the Centurion's servant (Matth. 8.) by the faith of his Master, so are Infants by the faith of their Parents. Whence saith the Gloss, Here we have an example of the Catechising and baptising of Infants: because by the Faith and Confession of the Parents in baptism, little ones who are neither able to understand nor act any thing either of good or evil, are freed from the devil. The Catechising here, 'tis plain, is no other but that we have newly spoke of. And by the way if Walafridus Strabo were the Collector of the Ordinary Gloss, as Isaackson from Trithemius and Trifingensis affirms, than it is apparent, that, how much soever his Authority is pretended against Infant's Baptism, either he was not against it, or if he were, he was against himself; Which further appears from what Mr. Obed Wills in his Answer to 
Infant Bapt. Asserted, c. 7. pag. 24.  Henry Danvers shows, namely, that declaring his own opinion upon the matter, he saith, that it was a sign of the growth of Religion (after a diligent search) to take up the practice of Infant Baptism; and amongst other Testimonies citeth the Fathers in general for it, in opposition to the prolonging of Augustine's Baptism, till he was Adult: And concludes at last thus— Wise Christians baptised their Infants, being not as some heretical persons, opposing the Grace of God, and contend that Infants are not to be baptised. So that by the way here we have gleaned up a witness for the Ninth Century before we come at it; even Wal●fridus S●rabo, the man so much cried up by our Antipaedo baptists for a propugner of their opinion, and an impugner of Infant's Baptism.  
§. 16. We will now step on to the Fourteenth Century. And in the very first year of it (Anno 1300) appears 
* Cum secundum Scripturam & sidem parvuli trahant originale [peccatum] ad ejus dele●ionem, quia necessaria est ad salutem, sunt baptizandi [par vuli]: quia tempore legis Evangelicae baptismus institutus est in remedium contra illam culpam.— Ad illud argumentum Qui non crediderit, condemnabitur. Respon. Quod potest intelligi de adultis, per illud quod pr●eccdit Qui crediderit & baptizatus fuerit. Vel potest dici, quod qui non crediaerit noc actu nec habitu condemnabitur— Par euli au●em etsi non possune habere actum credendi, possunt tamen habere habitum Joh. Duns Scot in l. 4. Sententiar. Dist. 4 qu. 1.  Johannes Duns Scotus a witness for Infant's Baptism. And saith he, whereas according to Scripture and Faith Infants bring along with them original sin, for the blotting out thereof, because that is necessary unto salvation, are Infants to be baptised, because in the time of Gospel baptism is instituted as a remedy against that guilt. And to the Argument from Mark 16. 16. Qui non crediderit— He that believeth not shall be damned, he answers, that may be understood of adult ones, in as much as there goes before it, Qui crediaerit— He that believeth and is baptised. Or it may be said, He that believes neither in act nor in habit shall be condemned— But Infants, though they cannot have the act of believing, yet they may have the habit of saith.  
§. 17. Go we now on to the Thirteenth Century. And here we have Bonaventure (about Anno 1260) giving witness to the baptising of 
Hoc quotidie contingit in pueris qui baptizantur, qui se ante annos diseretionis moriantur, in altcrius side gratiam suscipiunt, qua per meri●um Christi salvantur. Bonaventura de Vita Chrsti, c. 23.  Infants in this Age. For speaking of believing by the Faith of others, he saith, This is a thing which falls out daily in the children that are baptised, who if they die before they arrive at years of discretion, do by the faith of another receive that grace, whereby they are saved through the merit of Christ.  
§. 18. Here also we have Aquinas (about Anno 1255) giving a full and clear witness. For unto the 
Sed contra est, quod Dionys. dicit ult. cap. Eccl. Hierarch. Divini nostri duces scilicet Apostoli probaverunt insantes recipi ad baptismum Aquin. Sum. 3. q. 68 Artic. 9 Pucri baptizandi sunt, cum sint originali peccato obnoxii, & ut à pueritia enutriti in religione Christiana firmiùs in ea perseverent. Id. ib. Conclus. Ipse autem Dominus dicit, Joh. 3. Quod nisi quis— Vnde necessarium fuit pueros baptizari, etc. Id. ib. Corp. Artic.  question, whether Infants are to be baptised, he answers assirmatively, that they are. And his opinion he grounds on the Authority of Dionys. Areop. affirming that the Apostles did allow of it, that Infants should be admitted unto baptism. Which he also confirms from the Need they have of it by reason of their obnoxiousness to original sin; from, the Necessity there is of it in order to their obtaining of salvation, because of Christ's having said, Nisi quis renatus fuerit— That except a man be born of Water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God; and lastly from the Conveniency of it in order to their being brought up to, and persevering in the Christian Faith.  
§. 19 In this Century Pope Greg. the Ninth, who was elected about Anno 1227, and died Anno 1241, declares, that the Sacrament 
Sacramenium baptismi utiliter confertur parvulis; licet non credant, nec intelligant, etc. Greg. 9 Decret. l. 3. Tit. 41. De Baptismo & ejus effectu, cap. 3. fol. 296, 297.  of Baptism is usefully given to Infants, though they be defective both in faith, and understanding. He also both answers objections against Infant's Baptism, and lays down grounds for it. Circumcision is one; and Except a man be born again, etc. is another.  
§. 20. In the same Century (about Anno 1251) the Centuriators of Magdeburg quote a Synodal Constitution, written by the Bishop of Nemans, wherein 'tis ordained, that in case of such danger of death, that 
Et in libro Synodali ab Episcopo Nemansensi conscripto dicitur: Praecipimus itaque utinfans quam cito natus fueris, si pe●iculum sibi mortis ammineat, ita quod Presbytero nequeat praesentari à circumstantibus masculis baptizetur, etc. Cent. 13. c. 6. Col. 594.  the new born babe cannot be presented to a Priest, he shall be baptised by any Man that is present, and if no man be present, then by any woman present, and at last by the Father or Mother, if there be no body else to baptise it.  
§. 21. They cite also for this Age 
* Ecclesia orat pro parvulis baptizaxis, non quia dubium sit ipsos salvari sed ut innua●ur quod boc non habent ex suis meritis vel natura, sed de sola gratiâ. Hug. in Psal. 27.  Hugo saying, That the Church prays for the baptised Infants, not as doubting of their salvation, but as intimating that they have not this from their own either merits or nature, but from grace only.  
§. 22. As also Guli●lmus 
† Pucris verd propter periculum onortis est statim dandus: nec est disserendus, quia ●ton potest ●is aliter subveniri. Gulielmus. De Tempore baptizandi. Sed tertius est baptismus fluminis five aquae, quo sid●les quotidie & pucri baptizantur & regenerantur. Id. de Baptismo & ejus partibus, cap. 2. Quandoque datur per immersionem, ita quod totus puer immergitur in aqua. Quandoque etiam datur per aspersionem, quando puer aspergitur. & super eum aqua infunditur. Id. de ritu baptizandi, cap.  saying, That by reason of danger of death baptism is instantly to be administered to children, and not to be deferred, because there is no other way of affording them help. Which same Author speaking of the three sorts of Baptism, viz. that of the Spirit, that of Blood, and that of Water, saith of this last. That is it, wherewith daily Believers and Infants are baptised and regenerated. As also speaking of the several ways of baptising, he saith, sometimes the whole child is dipped in water, and sometimes water is sprinkled upon him.  
§. 23. And the Synod of Colonia 
* Statuimus ut ills qui baptizat, dicat haec verba, Petre, etc. Item Saccrdos ●andem formans doceat mares & foeminas observare; cum in necessitate baptizant infants, etiam parentes si alii defuerint. Synod. Colon. sub Rudolpho, Cont. 13. c. 9 Col. 944.  under the Emperor Rudolphus order the Priest both in what form he shall baptise himself, and teach others, whether Men or Women, or Parents themselves for want of others, to baptise Infants in case of necessity.  
§. 24. Ascend we now one step higher unto the Twelfth Century. And here we find Peter Lombard the Master of the Sentences a Witness for Paedobaptism. All little ones 
Sacramenium & rem simul suscipiunt omnes parvuli, qui in baptismo ab originali mundantur peccato. Namque quod omnibus in baptismo remittitur peccatum per baptismum August. evidenter dicit, In Enchirid. c. 43. P. Lombard, l. 4. dist. 4. (Anno 1145.)  (saith he) receive at once both the Sacrament and the thing, who are cleansed in baptism from Original Sin. And to countenance his assertion he citys St. Augustin as speaking to this purpose. And again (in his 8 Book on Ch. 13. of Revel. as he is quoted by Mr. Wills, p. 144.) All that are baptised (saith he) whether little ones or great ones, receive in their foreheads the sign of the Cross. Little ones then as well as great ones were in his time baptised.  
§. 25. Here also we have Gratian (about Anno 1140) telling us, That Infants may be baptised upon the 
Aliorum side & professione parvuli baptizentur. Gratian. De Consecrat. dist. 4. Parvulis in baptismate offerentium prodest sides. Id. ib. Aliorum fides in baptismate parvulos salvat. Id. ib. Praeter baptisma Christi parvulis nulla salus promittitur. Id. ib.  account of the Faith and Profession of others. That the Faith of those that bring Infants to baptism is profitable to them. That the faith of others saves Infants in Baptism. That but by the Baptism of Christ no salvation is promised to Infants. And by these and other like passages, which he quotes from August. Isidor. Leo, etc. he shows both his own opinion o● Infants Baptism; and the Practice of the Age he lived in to be for it.  
§. 26. Here comes in also Petrus Cluniacensis (about Anno 1130). And saith he by way of question; The Infants of the Jews are 
Salvantur parvuli Judaeorum Sacramento Circumcisionis: & non salvabuntur parvali Christianorum Sacramento baptismatis? Petr. Cluniac. l. 1. contra Petrobrusianos, Ep. 2. Unde quia non potuit u●bra corpore, fig●ra veritate aliquo pa●io excellentior apparere, necessario vos op●riet consiteri Christianorum parvulos salvari baptismate: cum fateamini Judaeorum parvulos salvari Circumcisione, Id. ib.  saved by the Sacrament of Circumeision: and shall not the Infants of Christians be saved by the Sacrament of Baptism? And again, Because the shadow could not by any means appear more excellent than the body, nor the figure than the truth; ye must needs confess that the Infants of Christians are saved by Baptism, when ye confess that the Infants of the Jews were saved by Circumcision.  
§. 27. Higher up in this Century (about Anno 1120) flourished St. Bernard: and his very complaining 
Irrident nos, quia baptizamus infants, etc. D. Bern. super Caat. Serm. 66. Col. 996. k. etc.  of some men's scoffing at the baptising of Infants, without adding what he pleads on their behalf, is a sufficient evidence of his opinion, and the Church's practice in that Age.  
§. 28. After all which it is needless to tell you from the Centuriators of Magdeburg. how Tyrius (l. 22. c. 7.) makes mention of 
Centuriat. Magd. Cent. 12. cap. 6. Col. 872. lin. 53. etc.  the baptising of Infants; or how An●onius (l. 5. c. 57) relates Lewis King of France's causing his new born Son Philip to be presently baptised; or how the baptising of El●nor and Joan the little daughters of the Queen of England presently after their birth, is to be read in the C●ntinuator of Sigebert.  
§. 29. From hence let us take another step upwards into the Eleventh Century. And in that Age the Centuriators tell us they baptised 
Cent. 11. cap. 6. Col. 260.  Infants, even presently after their birth, if weak. And then instance, from Schatnaburgensis, in the Empresses Son baptised within three days after his birth by reason of his weakness, and the fear of his death; as also in a Son of the Queen of Moguntia who was baptised presently after his birth, and died presently after his baptism, and was buried at Hartisburg. And to the baptising of Infants St. Anshelm 
* About An. 1086. Hinc ostendimur mortui esse peccato, quia in Christ morte baptizati sumus: profecto & parvuli qui baptizantur in Christo, peccato meriuntur. qui in morte ipsius baptizantur. D. Anshelm in 6. ad Rom. Nec par●uli de quibuslibet sanctis justisque procreati originalis peccati reatu absoluuntur, nisi in Christo fuerint baptizali. Id. in cap. 7. jae ad Corinth.— Per sidem scilicet & confessionem parentum in baptisms liberantur a●iabolo parvuli, qui necdum per se capere, vel ali quid b●ni mali possunt facere. Id. in 15 cap. Matth.  in that Age gives testimony, saying that even the little ones truly who are baptised into Christ do die unto sin, because they are baptised into his death.  
§. 30. Hence advance we to the Tenth Century, And in that the Centuriators also tell us 
Cent. 10. c. 10. Col. 292, 293, 294, 295.  they baptised Infants. And they instance from Bonsinius in St●phen the Son of Geysa Duke of Hungary, who had Theodatus Prince of Apulia for his Godfather, whom the Infant afterward called Tata, which signifies Father. Also (from Helmoldus) they tell us of the Emperor Otho's being Godfather to a little Son of Herold King of Denmark at his baptising; and from Vincentius, of a bastard got by Edgar King of England on a Nun, and baptised an Infant, though not till the seven years' penance imposed by Dunstan on his Father were ended. And of Infants being held in the right arms at their anointing after Baptism. And to the baptising of 
Parvulos baptizandos Smaragdus docet: Sinite parvulos venire ad me, talium est enim regnum coelorum. Hanc enim sanctam, puram & innocentem infantiam per baptismi gratiam casta mater gignit Ecclesia. Smarag. in Ep. Pet. c. 2. ap. Centuriat. cent. 10. c. 4. Col. 188. Hoc verbum fidei tantum valet in Ecclesia, ut per ipsum credentem, offerentem, benedicentem, tingentem, etiam tantillum mundet infantem, quamvis nondum valentem corde credere ad justitiam, & ore confiteri ad salutem. Id. ibid. Col. 187.  Infants Smaragdus (about Anno 990) gave witness, grounding his opinion (as they tell us) on our Saviour's words in my Text, Suffer little children to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of God; and saying further, that this holy, pure, and innocent infancy is begot by the chaste Mother the Church through the grace of Baptism.  
§. 31. From the Tenth ascend we to the Ninth Century. And here we have Hincmarus' Bishop of Rheims severely rebuking another 
Cen. 9 c 4. Col 40. Hincmarus Archiepiscopus Rhemenfis Scribit. Anno 860. Alsted. Theol. Polem.  Hincmarus Bishop of Laudum to whom he was Uncle for denying baptism to Infants. The account on which he denied it (that 
Cent. 9 cap. 4. Col. 443.  none stumble at that) was not any opinion of the unlawfulness of Infant's Baptism. But as the Centuriators tell us he did it ob suas privatas injurias, stirred up thereto by his private injuries, for which he excommunicated all the Priests of his Church; and interdicted them the saying of Masses, baptising of Infants, absolving all Penitents, and burying the dead. For which he was condemned in a Synod 
Cent. 9 c. 9 Col. 443.  at Acciniacum called by Carolus Calvus (Anno 870) and forced under his own hand to promise obedience to his Sovereign and Metropolitan. After which by the Synod of Trecas 
Ib. Col. 447.  called by Pope John the the Ninth under Carolus Crassus he was restored (Anno 878). However the Bishop of Rheims resented the other Interdicts, it seems he most highly resented the interdiction of Baptism to Infants, pleading for it from Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament, and in particular this Text of mine, Suffer little children to come unto me: and then expostulates with his Cousin, saying, And do you hinder little ones to be offered unto the Lord? 
Ait illis Sinite parvulos venire ad me, & nè prohibi critis eos. Et tu prohibes offeri domino parvulos? Cent. 9 c. 4. Col. 140.  And then tells him how from the time of the Nicene Council he had never any where heard of such a thing done: and that he ought to have been afraid to do that alone, which never any Christian had dared to do. And then he backs the practice of baptising Infants with the Authorities of Pope Siricius, the African Council, St. Leo, and St. Gregory.  
§. 32. In the same Century flourished Haymo Bishop of Halberstad 
Anno 850. Alsted. Theol. Polem. Parculi in baptismate mundantur. Ilaymo super 5. ad Rom. ap. Cent. 9 c. 4. Col. 143.  Cousin to Bede, and Scholar to Alcuinus. And he expressly saith, that little children are cleansed in Baptism.  
§. 33. Somewhat before him (Anno 830) flourished Rabanus Maurus, first Abbot of Fulda, 
Alsted. Theol. Polem.  and then Bishop of Ments, a man of such learning, that as Alsted saith, neither had Italy any like him, nor Germany any equal to him. And this so learned a man gives testimony in this Age for Infant's baptism, saying, Plainly not man ought to doubt, but that in Baptism, before the Infant rise from 
Sic planè nemo du● bitare debet, quod in alveo baptismi. priusquam Infans 〈◊〉 fonte surgat, Spiritus Sanctus in cum qui nascitur adveniat, etsi non videatur,— Raban. de Sacram. Euchar. c. 10. apud Centur. 9 c. 4. Col. 144.  the Font, the Holy Spirit comes into him that is born, though his coming be invisible.  
§. 34. In this Century (about Anno. 850) flourished also Walafridus Strabo. really a witness for Infant's Baptism, how much soever he be appealed unto as a witness against it. His testimony I have before produced in the Fifteenth Century: and therefore shall not here repeat it: but shall conclude this Century with what I find of this matter in Sir Roger Twisdens Historical Vindication of the Church of England; namely, that whereas it had been formerly ordained by the Laws of Ina, that children should be baptised within 30 days after birth, and some Priests were negligent performers of that duty, therefore by the Laws of Ed. and Guthrun, it was ordained, That such 
Guthrun about Anno 880.  as were not prepared, or denied the baptising of them should be punished.  
§. 35. From the Ninth let us now step up to the Eighth Century. And in this Age the Centuriators quote Carolus Magnus for a 
Cent. 8. c. 4. Col. 219.  witness to Infant's Baptism. And with honour may such an Emperor be quoted, as 
Plosc. Histor. p. 231.  was esteemed Imperii sui fortissimus & doctissimus, the learnedest Scholar as well as stoutest Soldier in his Empire. And saith he, we hold one baptism, which is to be celebrated in the same 
Baptisma unum icnemus, quod iisdem Sacramenti verbic in infantibus, quibus etiam in majoribus est celebrandum. Carol. Mag. l. 3. de Imaginib. cap. 1. Cent. 8. c. 6. Col. 347. Apud Christianos fidelium quotidie baptizantur filii. Daniel Ep. ad Bonif. Gratia fidei renatos in fonte baptismatis etiam parvulos, atque ipsa parvula aetate desunctos superna ad gaudia perducit. Beda, l. 4. in Cantic. Canticor. ap. Cent. 8. c. 4. Col. 218. l. 40, etc.  words of the Sacrament at the baptising of Infants as of elder persons.  
§. 36. In this Age also they quote an Epistle of one Daniel to Boniface, wherein that Author saith, That among the Christians the children of the Faithful are baptised every day.  
§. 37. Also from Bede (l. 4. in Cantic. Canticor.) they quote this saying of his, That the Grace of Faith doth bring to the joys of Heaven even the little children that are born again in the baptismal Font, and that die in their very infancy.  
§. 38. From Regino they tell us how the Saxons coming to Lippa, were baptised by 
saxons ad Lippam venientes, una cum uxoribus & paruxlis catervatim in nomine Trinitatis baptizantur. Regino, l. 2. ap. Cent. 8. c. 6. Col. 344. l. 19, etc.  troops together with their wives and little children in the name of the Trinity.  
§. 39 Lastly, they tell us that baptised Infants were carried home from their baptising by their own mothers. And instance in Maria the Empress' 
Baptizati infantes à suis matribus demum reportabantur. Sic Maria Augusta, Uxor Leonis, una cum baptizato filio suo in aulam ex templo redit, & in itinere paupcribus munera projicit. Diaconus, l. 21. Rer. Roman. ap. Cent. 8. c. 6. Col. 34. l. 46.  wife of Leo, who returned from the Temple to the Court with her baptised Son, and by the way as she went bestowed largesses on the poor.  
§. 40. These are sufficient evidences for Infant's Baptism in this Century.  
§. 41. Pass we on to Century the Seventh, and in that Age also we have evidences of Infant's Baptism. For the Centuriators tell us that in the Eighth Council of Toledo, and in the Sixth Council of Constantinople, there is mention made of the baptising of Infants; and among other things there are these expressions to that purpose, we baptise Infants even before they be capable of reason. 
Infants etiam nondum rationis capaces baptizamus. Et, Parvulo agrotanti nullo modo baptismus denegetur: si quis neglexcrit ejus morientis animam, ille pro ea reddet Deo rationem. Concil. Tolet. & Constantinop. ap. Cent. 7. c. 6. Col. 146. Exceptis his qui propter aetatem loqui nondum possunt. 1. l. ib. Lin. 38.  And, by no means let baptism be denied to a sick little one: if any shall neglect the soul of him dying, he shall give an account for the same unto God. They tell us also that in that Council of Constantinople, it was ordained that none should receive either Chrysin or Baptism, till he could say without Book the Creed and the Lords Prayer, except such as by reason of age were not able to speak.  
§. 42. Before both these Councils, it was decreed (according to the determination of Greg. 1.) by the Fourth Council of Toledo (Anno 681) that whether an Infant were dipped in 
Concil. 4 Toletan. Can. 5. Caranz. fol. 235.  baptism thrice or once, he should be accounted baptised; the third appearing of the Infant from under the water being expressive of the Resurrection after three days, and significative of the Trinity; and the single immersion giving an intimation of the Unity of Substance in the Trinity of Persons.  
§. 43. They tell us of Priests killed in the temple together with Infants at baptism, from Sabellicus. 
Foro Popilii quoq● in templo trucidat● leguntur Sacerdotes cum infantibus inter baptizandum. Sabellicus Enneadis octavae, l. 6. pag. 180. apud Cent. 7. c. 6. Col. 145.   
§. 44. And as Pope Leo granted that in case of necessity baptism might be administered on 
Leo Pap● tamen concessit necessitate urgente, omni die baptizari, ut refert Hareman Schedel, atate sexia, pag. 176. Sic quadragesima post partum, quosdam infantes baptizatos legimus, ut Dagoberti filium in Galliis. Regino, l. 10. Quinquagessima verò Heduini filiam, quae nata fuit, in die Paschatis, & baptizata in die Pentecostes, Beda l. 2. c. 9 ap. Cent. 7. c. 6. Col. 145.  any day, so they tell us of Infants which they had read were baptised on the fortieth day after their birth; and instance in the Son of Dagobert in France; and to that from Beda mention a Daughter of Heduins born on Easter day, and baptised on Whit sunday.  
§. 45. And as Heribert was Godfather to Dagoberts' Son at his baptism; so was King Lotharius. 
Idem [sc. Rex Lotharius] & Meroveum, Regis Theoderici filium, infantem de baptismo suscepit. Nauclerus generatione, 21. Heribertus' Dagoberei filium. Regino, lib. 1. Magdeb. Cent. 7. c. 6. Col. 147.  Godfather to Meroveus Son of King Theoderic baptised an Infant.  
§. 46. And now supposing enough said for this Age, I shall close it up with the Law of Ina before mentioned, whom I take to have flourished 
Leg. Inae, c. 2. p. 1. cited by Sr Roger Twisden, Vindic. of Ch. of Engl. p. 97. from Jorvalens. c. 2. Col. 761.  in this Century (about Anno 689), which was, That children should be baptised within 30 days after birth.  
§. 47. Ascend we now to the Sixth Century. And in the end of this appears as a witness for Infant's Baptism, Pope Greg. 1. who was chosen Pope Anno 590, and died Anno 604. and so, as several more who have lived within the compass of two Centuries, may pass as a witness for both. And he, as the Centuriators tell us, witnesseth that it is free to baptise Infants the same hour they are born in case of danger of death. He also forbids 
Item liberum esse infantes mox in ipsâ horâ, si est periculum mortis baptizare, Gregorius testatur, l 12. Epist. 10. apud Magd. Cent. 6. c. 6. Col. 367. l. 21. Presbyteri baptizatos infantes signare bis in front Chrysmate non praesumant. Id. l. 3. c. 9  Priests to presume to sign baptised Infants twice in their foreheads with Chrysm.  
§. 48. In the second Synod of Matiscon (Anno 599) it being observed, that Christians 
Decernimus ut extra tempora decreta baptismi nullus filios suos baptizet, nisi infirmitas nimia, vel dies extremus compulerit filios suos baptismum suscipere. Conc. Matisc. c. 3. Omnes omnino 〈◊〉 die quadragesimo cum infantibus suis ad Ecclesiam observare praecipimus ut impositionem manus, etc. Synod. Matisconensis, ap. Magdeb. Cent. 6. c. 9 Col. 613.  did not observe the solemn set day for baptising of their children, but baptised them at other times, so that there were scarce found above two or three to be baptised at Easter, that custom was prohibited, unless in case of extreme infirmity, and necessity, and an order was given for the attendance of all with their Infants at the Church on the solemn festival to receive their imposition of hands, Chrysm and Baptism.  
§. 49. The Second Council of Braccarum (Anno 580) ordered the Bishops to signify throughout their Churches, that if they that 
Placuit, ut unusquisque Episcopus per Ecclesias suas hoc praecipiat, ut hi qui infantes suas ad baptismum offerunt, si quid voluntarè pro suo offerunt voto, suscipiatur ab eyes, etc. Concil. Bracarense, Can 7. ap. Magd. Cent. 9 Col. 354. & Caranz. fol. 250.  brought their Infants to baptism pleased to offer any thing voluntarily, it should be accepted, but that nothing should be extorted from those whose poverty rendered them unable to make any offering; lest thereby they should be discouraged from bringing their children unto baptism, and they dying unbaptised their loss should be required at their hands through whose violence this was occasioned. This Synod placed by Alsted in the year above mentioned, is placed by the Magdeburgenses in the seventh Century (Anno 610); and so if it witness not for this Century, it will for that. And the Council of Vivense ordained the very same, as H. D. informs us from Vossius de Bapt. p. 179.  
§. 50. Isidor Hispalensis whose time is placed by Alsted, about Anno (596) is of this judgement touching Infants dying without baptism, That for Original Sin alone newly born Infants do suffer pains 
Pro solo peccato originis luune in inferno nuper nati infantuli poenas, si renovati per lavacrum non fuerint. Proinde pro hac causa nuper natus damnatur infans, si non regeneratur, quia originis noxitate perimitur. Isidor. de sum. bono. cap. 23. apud Magd. Cent. 7. c. 4. Col. 98. Mag. Cent. 6. c. 6. Col. 331.  in hell if they be not renewed by baptism. What his judgement was as to the baptising of Infants is not to be questioned, when this was his judgement of those that died unbaptised. He is quoted by the Magdeb. for the Seventh Century; but placed by Alsted in the Sixth: and so will serve for the one or the other. The Centuriators tell us that some having in the time of Gregory made some change in the dippings of Infants, Isidore notes that Gregory did earnestly reprove them for not dipping them but once, or else thrice.  
§. 51. Justinus the Emperor, who reigned about Anno 570, Ordained (as H. D. tells us) concerning the children, which in regard of 
Treat of Bapt. 2 Edit. p. 112.  their years cannot receive Divine Doctrine, that they shall without delay be made worthy or partakers of Baptism. And Justinian the Emperor who reigned about Anno 530, Ordained, That children should be admitted to Baptism, 
Justinian. Novel. Institut. 44. ap. 11. Danvers Tre at. of Bapt. p. 112. Edit. 2.  and that those that were come to their full growth, should be taught before they were baptised.  
§. 52. Johannes Maxentius a Monek and Priest of Antioch, (Anno 520) thus writes, in the Confession of his Faith: Therefore do we believe that little children newly born are 
Propterea & recentes ab utero parvulos, non tantum ut adoptionem mereantur filiorum, aut propter regnum Coelerum (sicut Pelagii, & Caelestii sive Theodori Mansuestini disciputi, etc.) said & in remissionem peccatorum eos credimus baptizari, nè pereant in aeternum, Maxent. ap. Magdeb. Cent. 6. c. 6. Col. 227. l. 4, etc.  baptised not only that they may obtain the adoption of sons, or for the kingdom of Heaven (like the Disciples of Pelagius, & Coelestius) but for remission of sins also, that they may not perish for ever.  
§. 53. The Council of Gerunda (about Anno 517, or 520 as some) decreed, That little children 
Ut parvuli, si infirmari contingat, codem die quo nati sunt, baptizentur. Concil. Gerund. Can. 4. ap. Caranz. fol. 179.  in case of weakness should be baptised the same day that they were born.  
§. 54. Not to be endless in testimonies, the Magdeburgenses tell us from Adonis, and Gaguin, how Androvera wife of Chilperic was forced upon a surprise to be both Witness and 
Adonis in Comment. 4 aetatis, & Gaguinus, l. 2. narrant, Androveram Chilperici uxorem infidiis circumventam, ipsam natae suae filiolae baptizandae testem & commatrem extitisse. Cent. 6. cap. 6. Col. 332. lin. 28, etc.  Godmother at the baptism of her own little daughter. And thus much for this Age.  
§. 55. Go we on to the Fifth Century. And here we meet with plenty of evidences of Infant's Baptism.  
§. 56. The Council of Milevis (Anno 418) in the time of Pope Innocent, and the Emperor Arcadius (as the Centuriators tell us) 
Item placuit, ut quicunque parvulos recentes ab uteris matrum baptizandos negat: aut dicit in remissionem quidem peccatorum eos baptizari, sed nihil ex Adam trabere Originalis peccati quod regenerationis lavacro expictur: unde sit consequens ut in cic forma baptismatis, in remissionem peccatorum non vera, sed falsa intelligatur, anathema sit. Quoniam non aliter intelligendum est quod Apostolus ait: Per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum, & per peccatum mors, & ita in omnes homines portransiit, in quo omnes peccaverunt: nisi quemadmodum Ecclesia Catholica ubique diffusa semper intellexit. Propter hanc regulam fidei, etiam parvuli, qui nihil peccatorum in semetipsis committere potuerunt, ideo in peccatorum remissionem veraciter baptizantur, ut in cis regeneratione mundetur, quod generatione traxerunt. Synod. Milevitana ap. Magdeb. Cent. 5. c. 9 Col. 835. Caranza fol. 123.  decreed, an Anathema to him that should deny baptism to new born Infants. The ground of their decree they make to be Original Sins being drawn from Adam by all, and death by sin, and that according to that sense, which the Catholic Church diffused every where, ever had of that saying of St. Paul's, By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men; for that all had sinned. For which rule of Faith even little ones (say they) which in themselves were uncapable as yet of committing of any sin, are therefore baptised into the remission of sins, that what they have drawn upon them by generation, may be cleansed in them by regeneration.  
§. 57 In like manner say the Fathers in the Fifth Council of Carthage in the same Century, whosoever denies that Infants are by the baptism of Christ freed from perdition, and 
Quicunque negat parvulos per baptismum Christi à perditione liberari, & salutem percipere sempiternam anathema sit. Council Carthag. 5. ap. Magdeb. Cent. 5. c. 9 Col. 825.  receive life eternal, let him be Anathema. And in this Council St. Augustin was Precedent, as at the Former he was present, a Bishop in it.  
§. 58. Pope Innocent the First confirmed the Decree of the Milevitan Council from 
Illud verò quod eos vestra fraternitas asscrit praedicare, parvulos aternae vitae proemiis etiam sine baptismatic gratia posse donari, persatuum est.— verum ut superfluorum hominum prava doctrina celeri veritatis possit ratione discindi, proclamat hoc Dominus in Evangelio dicens, Sinite infants, & nolite eos prohibere à me: talium enim est reguum Coelorum. Innocent. Rom. pontiff. patrib. Concil. Milev. apud Magdeb. cent. 5. c. 9 col. 844, 845.  our Saviour's saying, Suffer little children to come unto me, etc. and saith, that their opinion, who held that children might obtain eternal life without being baptised, was a very foolish one. This Pope died Anno 417.  
§. 59 Theodoret, who flourished about Anno 430, asks, if this were the only effect of baptism, 
Si enim hic solus esset baptismi effectus, cur pueros baptizamus, qui peccatum nondum gustarunt? Theodoret. 2 Tom. Divin. Decret. Epit. l. 5. pag. 407.  why do we baptise Infants, who have not as yet tasted of sin? Why do we baptise them? is a clear proof of their baptising them.  
§. 60. Pope Leo advanced to the Papacy, about the year 440 was for having the solemn times for baptising observed, yet so as 
Non interdicta licentia, qua in baptismo tribuendo quolibet tempore periclitantibus subvenitur.— Ut in mortis periculo in obsidionis discrimine, in persecutionis angustiis, in timore naufragii, nullo tempore, hoc vere salutis singulare remedium cui quam denegemus. Leo. Ep. Deuret. 4. cap. 6. pag. 15, 16.  not to interdict the liberty granted of baptising those that were in danger of death at any time; for at no time to any such would he have baptism dedenied.  
§. 61. Isidore the Pelusiot, about the year 410, in consideration of the Angel coming to kill Moses because of the childs not being 
Isid. l. 1. Ep. 125. ap. Dr. Ham. Def. of Inf. Bapt. c. 1. p. 4.  circumcised, concludes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Let us make haste to baptise our children.  
§. 62. Paulinus flourished about the year 420, and he Poetically describing the effects of baptism on the baptised Infant, saith, Then 
Ind parens sacro ducens de fonte Sacerdos, Infants niveos corpore, cord, habitu.  the Priest brings the Infants out of the Font white as Snow, in body, in heart, in habit.  
§. 63. I will conclude this Century with St. Augustine, who lived in the beginning of it, and in the latter end of that next before it, and so may witness for both, as also may St. Hier. and St. Chrys. whom some reckon in the one, and some in the other century, I suppose because they lived in part of both. And this Father is so copious in his testimonies that 'tis hard to know where to begin, or when to make an end of enumerating them: but I will be sparing.  
§. 64. In his fourteenth Serm. de Verb. Apost. he saith, Let no man doubt but that Infants are to be baptised, when it is not doubted of 
Baptizandos esse parvulos nemo dubitet, quando nec illi hinc dubitant. qui ex altera parte aliqua contradicunt. Sed nos dicimus eos aliter salutem & vitam aeternam non habituros nisi baptizentur in Christo: illi autem dicunt non propter salutem, non propter vitam aeternam: sed propter regnum Coelorum. D. Aug.  even by those that in some respect speak against it. He means the Pelagians, who would not allow, that Infants should be baptised for Salvation, as having done nothing that deserved damnation, but yet allowed it for entrance into the kingdom of Heaven. Which riddle of theirs was a novelty never heard of in the Church before, as he there saith. Indeed it had been a dangerous thing in St. Augustine's 
Serm. 14. de Verb. Apostoli. Timetis dicere, non baptizentur, ne non solum facies vestrae sputis oblinerentur virorum, verum ctiam capita sandaliis muliercularum committigarentur. D. Aug. contr. Julian. Pelag. l. 3. c. 5. Infants autem propterea baptizantur, cum sint innocentes, ut anima rulis nata in corpo●e signum habeat mortis evictae nè possit ab ea teneri. D. Aug. Quaest. ex Nou. Test. Tom. 4. q. 56. Ideo vivus oportet etiam insans baptizetur, nè obsit animae societas carnis peccati, etc. D. Aug. l. 10. de Genes. ad literam, c. 24. Tom. 3. fol. 138. A. Ideo non est supersluus baptismus parvulorum, ut qui per generationem illi condemnationi obligati sunt, per generationem illi condemnationi liberentur. D. Aug. Hilario Ep. 89. fol. 78. B. C. Tom. 2. Nam propter illas cupiditates, cum quibus nati sumus baptizantur infants, ut solvantur à reatu propaginis malae quam habuerunt. D. Aug. Serm. 45. de Temp. Vide eund. l. 4. contra Donatistas'. c. 24. fol. 88 Tom. 7. & Bonifac. Ep. 23. Tom. 2. fol. 18. K. & Enchirid. c. 42. Vide & Magdeburg. Cent. 4 Col. 658. l. 10. & Col. 655. lin. 6. & Cent. 5. c. 4. Col. 375.  time for any one to have denied Infants baptism for fear of having the men spit in his face, and the women beat their sandals about his ears.  
§. 65. And now being so near let us step up from St. Augustine, to his Contemporaries in the Fourth Century, St. Hierom, St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, etc.  
§. 66. St. Hierome (to begin with him) being asked, why Infants 
Critob. Dic quaeso. & me omni liberae quaestione, quare infantuli baptizantur? Attic. We eye peccata in baptismate dimittantur. D. Hieron. l. 3. contra Pelag. Nisi forte existimas Christianorum filtos, si baptisma non receperint, ipsos tanium reos esse peccati, & non etiam scelus referri ad eos qui dare noluerint, maxim illo tempore quo contradicere non poterant, qui accepturi crant, sicut è regione salus insantum majorum lucrum est. D. Hieron. Ep. ad Laetam. Baptisma unum tenemus: quod iisdem sacramenti verbis in infantibus quibus etiam in ma●oribus asserimus esse celebrandum. D. Hieron. Exposit. Fideiad Damasum. Ep. 42.  were baptised, answers, that their sins might be forgiven them. He was born Anno 332, and died Anno 420.  
§. 67. St. Ambrose (about the year 374) on that saying of our Saviour, Except a man be born again of water and of the Holy 
Nisi enim quis renatus fucrit ex aqua & Spiritu Sancto non potest introire in regnum Dei. Vtique nullum excipit, non infantem, non aliqua praeventum necessitate. D. Ambr. de Abr. Patriarch. l. 2. c. 11. Hinc evacaatio baptismatis parvulorum, qui sola adoptione donari, nullo autem reatu dicerentur absolvi. D. Ambr. l. 10. Ep. 84. pag. 217.  Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God, observes that our Saviour therein makes no exception of any, not the Infant, not him that is prevented by any necessity. And speaking of some, that made Adam's sin no otherwise hurtful to posterity, than by the example of it, he presseth them with this absurdity that would follow thereon, that hereby the baptism of Infants would be evacuated, who could only be said to have adoption given them, but not to have any guilt forgiven them. Likewise on Luke (as Dr. Hammond notes) by Jordan's being driven back, he saith are 
Per quae in primordio naturae suae qui baptizati fuerint parvuli à malitia resormantier. D. Ambr. in Luk. ap. Dr. Ham. Def p. 103. Non autem latet quantum cordibus fidelium d●fidiae gigneretur, si in baptizandis parvulis, nihil de oujusquam negligentia, nihil de ipsorum esset mortalitate metuendum. D. Ambros. de Vocat. Gent. l. 2. c. 8. cujus titulus est, Quare tanta multitudo non regeneratorum infantium à perpetua alienetur Salute. Tom. 2. p. 32. 33. Nolite ergo à Christo arcere infants, quia & ipsi pro Christi nomine subiêre martyrium. Talium est enim regnum Coelorum. Vocat eos Dominus. & tu prohibes? De ipsis enim ait Dominus, Sinite eos venire ad me. D. Ambros. De Virginib. l. 3. Tom. 1. pag. 93. Nec frustra scriptum est, Nemo mundus à sorde, nec infans cujus unius diei vita est super terram. Et. Quis inquit, poterit facere mundum de immundo conceptum semine? Non tu qui solus es? Propter quod sicut nunc in Ecclesia manet constitutio salvatoris dicentis, Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua & Spiritu Sancto, non intrabit in regnum Coelorum ● itae sacratissime era● in lege praecautum, ut natus puer nisi die circumcideretur octavo exterminaretur anima ejus de populo suo nullum in haereditate Israel habitura consortium. D. Ambros. l. 10. ep. 84. ad Demetriad. Virg. Vide & Magdeb. Cent. 4. Cap. 5. Col. 239. lin. 7, etc.  signified the mysteries of baptism, by which the little ones that are baptised, are reform from their malignity to the first state of their nature. Yea, that St. Ambrose affirms Paedobaptism to be a constitution of our Saviour, is affirmed by A. B. Laud. Conf. Sect. 15. p. 55.  
§. 68 The Third Council of Carthage about the year 397, decreed that nothing should 
Non est aliquid ab his exigendum qui infantes suos ad baptizandum adducunt. Caranza. fol. 99 Nam de infantibus baptizandit, qui necdum baptizati nascuntur, quoties necessitas exegerit. Regula Ecclesiastica per beatum Siricium prolata demonstrat dicens. Ita infantibus, qui non lum loqui potuerunt per aetatem, vel his quibus in qualibet necessitate opxs fuccit, sacri undâ baptismatis omni volumus celeritate succurri, n● ad nostram perniciem ●cndat animarum, ●i negato defiderantibus fonte salutis, exiens unusquisque de seculo, & regnum perdat & vitam. Hincmar. apud Magd. Cent. 9 c. 4. Col. 140. lin. 34, etc.  be exacted from those that brought their Infants to be baptised.  
§. 69. Siricius Pope of Rome, who died Anno 388, is by Hincmarus produced as an Author for Infant's Baptism: as saying that he would have baptism administered with all speed to Infants, who as yet are not able to speak for want of age, as also to those that are in any necessity, to prevent (and it is worth marking what he saith in this case) its tending to the destruction of our souls, if any through our denial of baptism to them departed unbaptised, and lose at once both kingdom and life.  
§. 70. St. Chrysostom (who died Anno 407) saith, For this cause (namely because of the so 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Chrys. Hom. ad Neophytos apud St. Augustin. l. 1. contra Julianum Pelagianum, cap. 2.  many benefits as there are by baptism) do we baptise little children, though they have not sins; that is, not any actual sins of their own, as St. Augustin shows his meaning to have been from the right rendering of the words, against the Pelagians, who misrendred them, as Dr. Hammond shows. Def. of Infants Bapt. pag. 103. Where as the words of St. Ch●ys●stom declare the practice of the thing, so St. Augustine's interpretation clears the meaning of his words. Again, in his fortieth Homily on Genesis speaking of Baptism, as of the Christian Circumcision 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Chrysost. Hom. 40. in Genes. Tom. 1. Edit. Savil. p. 328. l. 4, etc.  he saith it hath no determinate time, but 'tis lawful both in the first age, and in the middle, and in old age itself, to receive this Circumcision made without hands. Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as Dr. Hammond notes, signifies childhood, as being applied to the time of circumcision, which was on the eighth day; and given then, as the Father notes, for two reasons; 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. D. Chrys. Hom. 39 in Genes. Edit. Savit. Tom. 1. p. 222. lin. 10, etc. Ideo ergo praedicat Ecclesia Catholica ubique diffusa debere parvulos baptizari propter originale peccatum, quia filios procreare ex praecepto Dei venit, cupiditas verò quae facit silios procreare ex poenâ peccati venit, etc. D. Chrysost. Hom. de Adam. & Eva. Tom. 1. Col. 447. B. Illud etiam quod circa baptizandos in universo mundo sancta Ecclesia, sive sint parvuli, sive juvenes, uniformiter agit, non ocioso contemplemur intuitu. Id. ib. Col. 448. Adducit quispiam infantem adhuc ubera sugentem, ut baptizetur, & statim Sacerdos exigit infirmâ aetate pacta conventa, & assensiones, etc. Id. in Psal. 14.  one because then the trouble of circumcising was the easilier born, the other to signify, that what was done, did nothing conduce to the soul, but was only for a sign. For what could (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 foregoing) an Infant of eight days old reap of advantage to his soul by things which he had neither knowledge nor sense of.  
§. 71. Gregory Nazianzen flourished about the year of Christ 370, and died in the year 
Magdeb. Cent. 10. c. 10. col. 97. & ib. c. 6. col. 416. & ib. c. 4. col. 238.  389. And he having in his Oration on Baptism gone through all the ages of man, showing that it belongs 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—  to every age and sort of life, comes at length to Infancy; and then touching that delivers his mind 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. ib.  thus, Thou hast an Infant, let not iniquity get time, let it be sanctified in infancy; let it in the tender age be consecrated, etc. Where by sanctifying he means baptising. Vid. sup. c. 6. Sect. 4. And again, saith he, what will you say concerning those that are yet children, and neither know the loss, nor any sensible of the grace of baptism, shall we also baptise them? Yes by all means, if any danger press; 'tis better they should be sanctified when they have no sense of it, than that they should die unsealed, and uninitiated. See Dr. Hammond urging this, and other passages of this Author. Def. of Inf. Bapt. pag. 101, 102. And as for this Author's willingness that Infants should stay till they be about three years old before they be baptised, (which the Magdeburgenses tell us is to be accounted a singular opinion of his own,) that nothing prejudices ours, or profits the Antipaedobaptistical Cause; as Dr Hammond shows; loc. sup. cit. For at three years old they are still Infants, and if they have attained to speech, yet have not attained to reason, at least not to that measure of it, thought necessary by the Antipaedobaptists to qualify for Baptism.  
§. 72. In this Age also, about the year 326, flourished St. Athanasius. And to the question concerning the final estates of Infants dying 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Athanas. q. 114. ad Antiochum. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. q. 94. de Dict● & Interpret. Parabol. S. Script.  unbaptised, he answers, that in as much as the Lord saith, Suffer little children to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven; and in as much as the Apostle saith, now are your children holy, it is manifest that the baptised Infants of believers do enter as unspotted and faithful into the kingdom of heaven; But that their unbaptized Infants, as also the Infants of heathens, have not entrance into that kingdom, as neither on the other side do they go into punishment, having not committed actual sin. And as in this passage he declareth his own belief as to the final estates of Infants dying, whether baptised, or unbaptised; so in another he intimates the practice of this age to be to baptise Infants, and by that particular way of Immersion, whilst he declares the signification of that Immersion to have respect to the death and resurrection of Christ, after three days. For whereas saith he, we thrice dip the Insant in the water, and bring him up again, this signifies Christ's death, and resurrection after three days. This Father's Authority is referred to by the Magdeburgenses also Cent. 4. c. 6. Col. 416.  
And let this suffice for the Fourth Century.  
§. 73. Ascend we now up to the Third Century. And about the middle of that (Anno 248) was St. Cyprian made Bishop of Carthage; and ten years after (as Dr. Hammond notes) he suffered martyrdom. He in the year 257 sat in Council with 66 Bishops. In that Council was debated a question proposed by Fidus. The question was, not whether Infants might be baptised at all; (that was no question then, that I see) but whether they might be baptised the 
Quantum verò ad causam infantium pertinet quos dixisti intra secundum vel tertium diem quo nati sunt constitutos baptizari non oportere, & considerandam legem esse circumcisionis antiquae, ut intra octavum dient eum qui natus est baptizandum & sanctificandum non putares, long aliud in concilio nostro omnibus visum est. In hoc enim quod tu puta●as faciendum esse nemo consensit, sed universi potius ●udicavimus, nulli hominum nato misericordiam Dei & gratiam dene gandam. D. Cypr. Ep. ad Fidum, l. 3. Ep. 8. Porro autem si etiam gravissimis delictoribus & in Deum multum ante peccantibus cum postea crediderint, remissa peccatorum datur, & à baptismo atque gratia nemo prohibetur, quanto magis prohiberi non debet infans. qui recens natus nil peccavit nisi quod secundum Adam carnaliur natus contagium mortis antiquae primâ nativitate contraxit? Qui ad remissam peccatorum accipiendam hoc ipso faciliùs accedit, quod illi non propria remittuntur peccata, sed aliena. Et ideo frater charissime haec fuit in concilio nostra sententia, à baptismo atque à gratiâ Dei (qyi omnibus misericors, & benignus & pius est) neminem per nos debere prohiberi. Quod cum circa universos observandum sit, atque retinendum, tum magis circa infantes ipsos & rec●ns natos observandum putamus, qui hoc ipso de  nostra ac de divina misericordla plus merentur, quod in primo statim nativitatis suae ortu plorantes ac flentes, nihil aliud faciunt, quam deprecantur. Id. ib. This is referred to by the Magd●b. Cent. 3. c. 4. col. 49, etc. 6. col. 125. & ib. c. 9 col. 205.  second, or third day after birth; or whether, as in circumcision, so in baptism, the eighth day were not to be expected. To this Question St. Cyprian in his Epistle to Fidus returns in Answer the judgement of the Council upon the Case. So that, by the way, his Testimony is not a single witness, but the Testimony of a Council, and that of above threescore Bishops in conjunction with him. And what's their judgement? We all resolved upon the case, that the mercy and grace of God (and consequently that means of Grace, which was under debate, namely baptism) was not to be denied to any child of men. And, if saith he, no man be hindered from Baptism, and Grace (i. e. from the Grace of Baptism) how much more ought not an Infant to be forbidden. And again this was our determination in Council, that no man ought by us to be kept back from baptism and the grace of God, which being to be observed and held about all, much more do we think it ought to be so about Infants and new born children. This, and more to the purpose, speaks the Father in that Epistle.  
§. 74. In the same Century, but somewhat before Cyprian, flourished Origen, who died (Anno 254). And he hath several passages in him to our present purpose. Little ones (saith he in his 14 th' Homily on Luke) a●e baptised 
Parvuli baptizantur in remissionem peccatorum. Quorum peccatorum vel quo tempore p●ccaverunt? aut qu●modo potest ullalavaeri in parvulis ratio subsistere, nisi juxta illum sensum de quo paulo ante diximus: Null●s mundus à sorde, nec si unius diei quidem fuerit vita ejus super terram. Et, quia per baptismi sacramentum nativitatis sordes deponuntur, propterea baptizantur & parvuli. Nisi enim quis renatus, etc. Orig. Hom. 14. in Luc.  into the remission of sins. Again, how can any account of baptising little ones hold, but according to what was said a little before, None is clean from pollution, no not if he but of a day old. And again, By the Sacrament of baptism the defilements of our nativity are put away; therefore are even the little ones baptised. So in his 8th Homil. on Levit. Let it be considered what the cause is, when the baptism of the Church is given for the remission of sins, that baptism should according to the observation (or custom) of 
Addi his etiam illud potest, ut requiratur quid causae sit, cum baptisma Ecclesiae in remissionem peccatorum detur, secundum Ecclesiae observantiam etiam parvulis baptismum dari: cum utique si nihil esset in parvulis quod ad remissionem deberet & indulgentiam pertinere, gratia baptismi superflua videretur. D. Origen. Homil. 8. in Levit.  the Church be given to little ones. See ch. 28. §. 4. His Authority is referred to by the Magd. Cent. 3. c. 4. Col. 57  
§. 75. In this Age may the Author of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy going under the name of Dionysius the Arcopagite be conveniently placed. And here Dr. Hammond places him; though the Magdeburgenses put him into the fourth Century, as others into the first. And saith he, when it came into the mind of our divine Guides what influence 
Hoc cum in mentem venisset divinis nostris praeceptoribus placuit admitti pueros hoc sancto modo, ut naturales pueri qui introfertur parents, tradant filium alicui ●orum, qui initiati sunt, bono puerorum in divi nis rebus informatori: ac deinceps puer ei operam det ut divino patri sponsorique sanctae salutis. D. Areop. Eccles. Hier. cap. ult. Notandum est quid dicat pater hic de baptizandis infantibus. Max. Scholin l. B. Dion. de Eccl. Hierarch.  a pious education would be likely to have on children towards a holy conversation, they ordered that Children should be admitted, namely to baptism after this holy manner, etc. He had a little before propounded and answered this question, why children as yet unable to understand divine things should be made partakers of the sacred birth from God. By that sacred birth, as is evident in the thing itself, is meant Baptism; and that it is so, we are further instructed by Maximus his Scholiast on that place. Here saith he is to be noted what the Father saith touching the baptising of Infants.  
§. 76. And about the same Age it is also supposed was the Author of the Constitutions going under the name of Clemens Romanus; whose Authority what it is I do not 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Clem. Rom. Constit. l. 6. c. 15.  well know: but that it is full for the baptising of Infants the following words do make it appear. Baptise (saith he) your Infants and bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.  
§. 77. And let these Witnesses suffice for the Third Age. Step we now up into the Second Century, that which immediately succeeds the Age wherein the Apostles lived. And here the Centuriators 
Centur. 2. cap. 4. Col. 48.  tell us, that it is no where read that Infants in this Age were excluded from Baptism; yea rather that Origen affirms the Church to have received from the Apostles a tradition to baptise even Infants. But if this satisfy not I will endeavour to find out witness even for this Age also.  
§. 78. And Tertullian, who lived in the latter end of this and in the beginning of the following Century, and so may at once speak for both; though he be produced as a witness against it, yet even his witness against it is an evidence for it. For whiles he pleads for a delay of baptism, especially that 
Itaque pro cujusque personae conditione ac dispositione, etiam cunctatio batismi utilior est: praecipue tamen circa parvulos. Tertull. de Bapt. Quid festinat innocens aetas ad remissionem peccaterum? Id. ib.  of little ones, he tacitly declares that Infants than were baptised, though sooner than he thought convenient. And when by way of reproof he saith, (Quid festinat, etc.) Why does that innocent age make haste to the remission of sins (that is unto baptism, wherein sins were remitted)? he plainly confesseth that that age did (festinare) make haste thereto. What need else was there of his question? what reason for his reproof? And even in saying that the delay of baptism is (utilior) more profitable, he tacitly implies that the hastening of it is (utilis) not without its profit. And can we think but that he was really for the baptising of the Infants of Christians, 
Adco nulla ferme nativitas munda est, utique Ethuicorum. Hinc enim & Apostolus ex sanctisicato alierutro sexu sanctos procreari, tam ex seminis praerogativa, quam ex institutionis disciplina. Caeterum, inquit, immundi nascerentur, quasi designates tamen sanctitati ac per hoc etiam saluti, intelligi volens filelium filios; ut hujus spei pignore matrimoniis, quae retinenda censuerat, patro●inaretur. Alioq●in meminerat Dominicae definitionis, Nisi quis nascetur ex aqua & spiritu, non ibit in regnum Dei, id est, non erit san●lus. Ita omnis anima cousque in Adam censetur, donec in Christo recenseatur: tamdiu immunda quamdiu recenseatur. Tert. de Anima. c. 39 Quum verò praescribitur nemini sine baptismo competere salutem, ex illa maxime pronunciatione Domini, qui ait, Nisi natus ex aqua quis erit, non habet vitam— Tertul. de Bapt. p. 261. Edit. Rigalt. Lex enim tinguendi imposita est, & forma praes●ripta, Ite, inquit, docete nationes, tinguentes cas in nomen Patris, & Filii, & Spiritus Sancti. Huic legi collata definitio illa. Nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aquâ & spiritu, non intra●it in regnum Coelorum, obstrinxit fidem ad baptismi necessitatem. Itaque omnes exinde credentes tinguebantur. Tert. ib. pag. 262.  what ever he thought as to the Infants of Heathens, who saith they are designed to holiness and by this to salvation? But how are they designed to holiness? why by Baptism sure enough. For saith he, Except one be born of water, and of the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God; that is, saith he, he shall not be holy; every sold being to be reckoned in Adam till it be enroled into Christ, and so long unclean, as it is unenrolled; in which his meaning I conceive is, that one is in that state of nature wherein he first was born, till he be baptised into Christ, and a child of wrath through the uncleanness of his natural birth, till he be made a child of grace by baptismal regeneration. Can we think but he was for the baptising of Infants who saith it is prescribed, that none is capable of salvation, without baptism, especially being the Lord hath positively said, Except a man be born of water, he has not life; and who, from a comparison of this Definition of our Saviour's with that Law which he gave for the discipling of nations by baptising them, gathers a necessity of baptism to salvation, upon the account of which necessity believers were baptised. And if they were baptised themselves and upon the account of a necessity of baptism unto salvation, then surely they would have so much charity for their children as to baptise them, and not leave them in a state of perdition. It is plain therefore that he was rather for than against Infant's Baptism.  
§. 79. And as he was for the baptising of Infants, so was also Irenaeus, in the same Age, but before him, one that had been an Auditor of Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna, and is by St. Hierom looked on as a man of the Apostolical times, and so a most competent witness, as Dr. Hammond argues, of the Apostolical 
Def. of Inf. Bapt. c. 4. §. 2. pag. 96.  doctrine and practice, especially being as Tertullian saith a most accurate searcher of all doctrines, and one that sealed his belief with his blood, being martyred at Lions in the year 197. And what saith he? Why he saith, that Christ came to save all by himself, all, 
Omnes enim venit per semetipsum salvare, omnes inquam qui per eum renascuntur in Deum, infants & parvulos, & pucroes, & juvenes, & seniores. D. Irenaei advers. Haeres. l. 2. c. 39 p. 192. See Dr Haem. Bapt. of Inf. Sect. 40.  I say, who are born again unto God by him, Infants, and little ones, and children, and young men, and elder men. Here it is plain that Infants, and little ones, and children are in the number of those that are born again unto God through Christ. Now that by being born again un●o God is meant by being baptised I suppose none doubts that has read, and understands (as the Catholic Church hath ever understood) that of our Saviour (John 3. 5.) Except a man 
Quod verbum Christi ad Nicodemum intendie aquam sensibilent, is a position of Thom. walden's. de Sacramentis. Tom. 2. q. 102. fol. 104. col. 2.  be born again of water, and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God; or is acquainted with the Scripture notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 regeneration, the laver whereof is Baptism.  
§. 80. In the same Age flourished Hyginus Bishop of Rome, and about the same time being martyred (Anno Dom. 144). And he, as Platina affirms out of the ancient Records, 
Voluit unum saltem Patrimum, unamque Matrimam baptismo interest: sic enim eos appellant, qui infants tenent dum baptizantur. Platina in Vitâ Hygini.  appointed that there should be at least one Godfather and one Godmother present at Baptism. Now who he meant by Godfather and Godmother Platina informs us, while he tells us that so they call those that hold Infants when they are baptised. Godfathers and Godmothers appointed to be at the baptising of Infants supposes Infants baptised.  
§. 81. Lastly, Justin Martyr, or who ever wrote that Ancient piece, entitled, Quaest. & Respons. ad Orthodox. stating the difference 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. S. Just. Martyr. Quaest. & Resp. ad Orth. 56. pag. 424. Edit. Paris. 1615.  between Infants dying baptised, and unbaptised, saith it is this, that the baptised obtain the good things that come by baptism, but the unbaptized obtain them not. A proof this clear and full as can be desired, of the baptising of Infants in that Age, the age wherein that Author lived, the very next to that of the Apostles, if Justin Martyr were that Author. To which it is not now needful I should add any thing, unless I should add what follows in the same Author touching the Baptised Infants, namely, that they are vouchsafed the advantages of baptism through the faith of those that bring them to be baptised.  
§. 82. And thus I have shown you, that it hath been the Custom and Practice of the Universal Church of Christ in all the Ages thereof, from the present to the Primitive Times, even up to that very Age wherein the Apostles lived, to baptise Infants.   

CHAP. XXVIII.  
Infant's Baptism a Tradition Apostolical.  
§. 1. I Am now to examine how this could come to be practice of the Universal Church. And truly it can be no other but the Authority of the Apostles Tradition, or Practice in their own Age. The Apostles some way by word or writing, taught 
Vniversa Ecclesia, quae Apostolicam proximè secuta est, infants baptizavit. Igitur dubium non est, quinmota Scripturae authoritate, & praxi Apostolicâ hoc secerit. Wendelin. Thelog. Christ. l. 1. cap. 13. Explic. Thess. 11.  others so to do, or did so themselves, and so made themselves an example for others to do the like, or both; or else it is not imaginable how such a practice should not only be received so generally into the Church, and so early too, but continue also in it through all Ages, down from their time to our own, without interruption. I will therefore speak of both. And first of Tradition.  
§. 2. Tradition notes the delivery of a thing to be received into our belief or practice. 
See Dr. Ham. Bapt of Inf. Sect. 99, 100  That, where 'tis genuine and Apostolical, is of mighty moment in religious concerns. And that, if any, is truly such, which hath been received and owned for such by the Church in all the Ages of it, from the primitive to the present times, either openly in profession, or tacitly in practice.  
§. 3. To this is referred the Sanctification of the Lords day. To this is referred the admission of Women to the Lords Table. To this is referred the Canon of Scripture. And to this is referred the Baptising of Infants.  
§. 4. Let no man whisper you in the ear (saith St. Augustin) with any other doctrines. 
a Quid de parvulis pueris, si ex Adam aegroti? Name & ipsi portantur ad Ecclesiam— Nemo ergo vobis susurret doctrinas alienas. Hoc Ecclesia semper habuit, semper tenuit, hoc a ma, orum fide percipit: bu● usq●● in sin●m perse●●renter ●●●●dit. D. Aug. Serm. 10. de Vow. Apost.  This the Church hath always had, hath always held; this from the Faith of our Fore elders it hath received, and this it keeps perseveringly unto the end. And for as much as the Universal Church doth maintain it, being always held in the Church, and not brought into it by any Councils decree 
b Quod uni●●rs●z t●n●t ●●●l●sia, not Conciliis institutum, sed semper retentam est, non nisi A●●boritate dpo●l●lica traditum re●issime creditor. D. Aug. de Bapt. ●o●tra Donat. l. 4. c. 24.  therefore it is most rightly behaved in St. Augustine's judgement to be delivered by Authority Apostolical; 
c Co ●su●tu●o ●amcn matris Ecclesiae in bapti●●an 〈◊〉 parvulis n●quaq ●amspernenda c●t, ni que ull● m●d● superslu● dep it in●●, ne'er omnino cred●●da, nis●●●●stolica esse traditiv. D Aug. l. 10. de Genes. all Literan, c. 2●. This reading isasser●ed and vindicated by Dr. S●illing fl●●●. Vindic. of A. B. of Cant. part. 1. c. 4. p. 108.  nor saith he is it to be believed, to be any other but an Apostolical Tradition; which, it seems, it was so apparent then to be, that the P●la 〈…〉 s themselves upon that account did yield that Infants were to be baptised, though they would not yield it upon the account of any original sin in them: because (saith he) they cannot go against the Authority of the Universal Church delivered 
d Parvulos baptizandos esse con●●dant, quia contra authoritarem universae Ecclesiae proculdubio per Dominum & Apostolos traditam venire non possunt. D. Aug. l. 1. de pecc. merit. & remiss.  without doubt by the Lord and his Apostles. And accordingly Origin testifies, that the Church did receive from the Apostles 
e Ecclesia ab Apostolis traditionem susccpit etiam parvulis baptismum dare. Origen. l. 5. in ●p. ad Roman.  a Tradition for the baptising of Infants. And so when the Author of the Ecclesiastic Hierarchy reports Infant's Baptism to have been brought down to his Time from ancient Tradition 
f Hoc quoque de hac re dicimus quod divini nostri ponrisices à veteribus acceptum [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] nobis tradiderunt. Aiunt cnim, id quod ctiam verum est, pucros si ●n sancto instituto ac lege instituan ●ur, ad sanctam animi constitutionem perventuros esse, ab omni errore solutos ac liberos & sine ullo impurae vitae peri●●lo. Hoc cum in mentem venisse● divinis nostris praeccptoribus [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] placuit [〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉] admitti pueros hoc sancto modo, Dionys. Areopag. l. de Eccles. Hierarch. cap. ult. , and saith, that when it came into the mind of our divine Guides, that children being brought up in a holy law would lead their life in holiness, it pleased them that Infants should be admitted to it after that holy manner there by him described, Maximus his Scholiast interprets those Divine Guides to be the Apostles. And so Ph. Meloncthon 
g Baptismum infantium constat à veteribus Scriptoribus Ecclesiae probari. Nam Origines & Augustinus scribunt ab Apostolis receprum esse. Melancthon. Concil. Theolog. part. 1. p. 59  names both Origen and Augustin, as avouchers hereof. And whereas the Antipaedobaptists in Mr. calvin's time made the simple believe, that for many years together after the resurrection of Christ Infants Baptism was unknown, in that saith he, they telled a most soul lie, for as much as there is no so ancient writer as doth not of a certainty refer the original thereof unto the Apostles 
h Quod autem apud simplicem vulgum disseminant, longam annorum seriem post Christi resurrectionem praeteriisse, quibus incognitus erat paedobaptismus; in co faedissime men●iuntur: siquidcm nullus est scriptor tam verustus, qui non cjus origin●m ad Apostolorum scculum pro certo reserat. Calvin. Instit. l. 4. c. 16. Sect. 8.  Age.  
§. 5. So that I shall no further labour by the Testimony of Ecclesiastical Writers to prove the Tradition to have been Apostolical: but rather go on to make it evident to you from the Testimony of the Sacred Scriptures that it was the Practice of the Apostles (a thing done by some, or all of them) to baptise Infants. Not that I can produce any Text, which expressly saith they did so; (that must not be expected from me out of these writings which we have of the Apostles; one such express testimony would end the strife on all hands) but that I shall name some Scripture Texts, from which it may very probably at least be gathered, if it cannot be demonstratively concluded, that they did baptise Infants. And yet by the way, me●hmks even a probable Intimation of any Apostolic Practice from the Scriptu●e, backed with so full and positive an Affirmation of it by the Catholic Church as hath been produced, should be enough to sway the judgement, and carry the Assent of any modest nquirer thereinto; next to, if not as good as a Demonstrative Argument.   

CHAP. XXIX.  
Infant's Baptism an Apostolical Practice.  
§. 1. Now for Practive: We read in the Scripture of several housh Ids baptised at once; as Lydia and her household, Acts 16. 15. and the Jailor and his household, ib. 33. and the household of Stephanas, 1 Cor. 1. 16. and all these by St. Paul. And it is not to be doubted, but the other Apostles walked in the same steps with him, and did as he did, receiving unto Proselytism whole households by baptising them. And no marvel if they did sometimes baptise whole households, who were commissionated to baptise all nations.  
§. 2. Now though it be not expressed there were any Infants in those, or any of those houses: yet first it is very strange there should be none in any of them: as if the grace of God had delighted to take place and dwell chief in barren families, who should be in least probability of propagating it to posterity, at a time when its propagation seems to have been the design of all the persons in the Trinity: and secondly, if there we●e any, it is certain, that being not excepted, they were baptised. Which probability, though the Antipa dobaptists, who cannot deny it, do yet think they sufficiently con●ute, by laughing at it, is not so altogether improbable, nor will be found so to be, when it shall appear, that it was the manner of the Jews to baptise the Infants of the Proselyte Converts, as well as themselves; and that the Christian Baptism founded therein made no variation therefrom in that particular. Of which more anon.  
§. 3. But to come to that which I chief purpose to insist on St. Paul tells the Corinthians 
See Dr. H●mmond of Inf. Bapt. Sec. 31. to Sec. 39 and Defence of Inf. Baptism, pag. 101. & pag. 58. to pag. 66.  (1 Cor. 7. 14.) that the unbelieving husband had be●n sanctified by the nife, and the unbelieving wife by the husband: and that otherwise their children had been unclean, whereas now, saith he, they are holy. Now this Text rightly rendered, and understood, is a full evidence for Insants' Baptism by the very Apostles themselves, or those whom they themselves appointed to baptise, which comes all to one. The word, which in the English we render is sanctified, is, if rightly rendered hath been sanctified. So the Tense of the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, being the Preterperfect Tense, clearly shows it to signify. And the sense of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath been sanctified, is, hath been baptised; sanctification the effect of baptism being put for the act of baptising by a Metonymy of the effect.  
§. 4. And from this use of the word by the Apostle here in this place I presume it is, that it is so ordinary with Ecclesiastical Writers to express baptising by a word that signifies to sanctify: whose so expressing it is a confirmation of this way of understanding it. Thus Greg. Nazianzene speaking of children in some danger of death, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat 40. p. 658. Edit. Paris. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. ib. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Id. ib. pag. 648. Timeat ne post agnitionem Dei, ●ujus signaculo jam praenotatus est, si non dignus agnitione percepta inveniatur, indignus etiam sanctificationis munere judicetur. D. Chrysost. Homil. de Militia Christiana. F●lium ●●i induti & totin us membra p●● baptismi sandis●●ationem effecti, Fitii Dei sitis nece●le est. Primas. in Gal. 3. 23.  intra 〈◊〉 diem eam qui natus est, ba●● andum & san lisicanlam non put 〈◊〉, long aliud in ●●●●ili, nostro omni'us ●isum est. D. Cypr. l. 3. cp. 8. Baptismum repeti Ecclesiasticae regul●e prohibent, & semel sanctificatis nulla deinceps manus it●rum consecrans praesumit accedere. D. Cypr. S●rm. de ●●lat. ped. Baptiz●●i & sanctificari in Ecclesia Catholica vero & unico Ecclesia Catholica vero & unico Ecclesiae baptisms oporteat D. Cypr. l. 1. ●p 6. Johannes Baptista non tam peccata dimisit, quam baptisma poenitentiae fecit in peccatorum remisionem, id est in suturam remissionem quae est post ex Christ sanctificatione subsecuta.  enim ante pracursor domini ipse, sit & baptisma ejus praevium domini baptismatis fuit. D. Hieron. advers. Luciferian. Igiur omnes aquae de pristina originis prarogativa Sacramentum Sanctificationis consequuntur invocato Deo. Super●enit enim statim Spiritus de C●elis, & aquis superest sanctificans de sen●tips● & ita sanctificata vim sanctificator combibunt. Tertull. de Baptismo. Denique apud Auguitinum duodecimo ejusdem. libri capite (abi Paulinum illud expen●it, 1 Cor. 7. Sanitaficatus est ●ir insidetis in uxore, & sanctificata est malier insidelis in sratre, alioqui filii vestii immundi essent, none autem sancti font) magnus haec commentatur antistes. Aut sic est accipiendum, que madmodum & nos alibi, & Pelagius, cum candem ad Corinthios epistolam tractaret, exposuit, quod exempla jam praecesserant & virorum quos ux●res, & foeminarum quas mariti lucrisecerant Christo, & parvulorum, ad quos facienlos Christimos voluntas Christiana etiam unius parentis evicerat. Voss. Hist. Pelag. l. 1. c. 4. S. 3. p. 14.  though he were not over hasty for their baptising, yet saith, 'tis better they should be sanctified [that is baptised] when they have no sense of it, than that they should die unsealed and uninitiated. And for others, where there was no danger, he advises their stay from being baptised for about three years, and then advises (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) to sanctify them souls and bodies by that great Sacrament of consummation. Again, if thou hast an Infant, let not iniquity get time (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) let it be sanctified, that is, baptised in Infancy, let it in its tender age be consecrated by [or to] the Spirit. St. Chrysostom tells the Candidate of Baptism, that if he be not found walking worthy of that profession wh●ch he made, when he was consigned unto Baptism, he may well be afraid of being judged unworthy even of the gift of Sanctification, that is of being baptised. Hence Primasius speaks of being made members of Christ by the sanctification of Baptism. So when St. Cyprian speaks of the new born Infants being to be baptised and sanctified, that is (by the Figure Hendiadys) sanctified by Baptism. So again saith he the rules of the Church do forbid baptism to be repeated: and to them that have once been sanctified, that is baptised, no hand presumes to come to consecrate them over again. So St. Herom saith John Baptist preached the Baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, that is, that remission which afterward followed upon the Sanctification, that is the baptism of Christ. Where what he means by Sanctification is plain by what follows a little after. For saith he, as John Bapt was himself the forerunner of Christ, so was his Baptism the leader on unto the Baptism of Christ. Hence Tertullias saying of Infants, that if either of their parents were sanctified, that is, were a baptised Christian, the Infants were holy; namely, so far as to be capable of baptism (as the children of Parents that were both mere Heathens were not) Candidates of holiness, that is of baptismal Sanctification, such as were in the next capacity for baptism, and as it were stood for it. And hence his calling Baptism Sacramentum sanctificat on●●, the Sacrament of sanctification.  
§. 5. And this notion of the word may, for aught I see, be admitted in 1 Cor. 1. 2. Unto the Church of God, which is at Conin●h, to them that are sanctified, as we read it, but according to the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to them that have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, that, say I, may be baptised into Christ Jesus, being separated from the community of the polluted world, and received into the communion of the called Saints, that Church of Christ, which he so loved, as to give himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it by the washing of water by the word.  
§. 6. And this notion of sanctisying for Baptism may come from the Jews using the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which signifies to sanctify) for 
Dr. Hammond Infant. Bapt. §. 35.  washing. Whence the High Priests washing his hands and feet ten times on the expiation day are called his ten sanctifications.  
§. 7. Well now supposing that the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sanctifico) which we render to sanctify, doth sometimes signify to baptise, and particularly in this place hath that signification (there being no other so commodious a rendering of it here as that, nor any that will not be exposed to more objections than that; especially theirs, who interpret the Holiness of Children in this Text of 
Confut. of Ins. Bapt. by Tho. Lambe. p. 32. See Mr. Stevens Precept for the baptising of Infants, p. 5.  their legitimacy, and their uncleanness of Bastardy, as if all children were illegitimate and Bastards, that were born of Parents whereof one at least were not a Christian) I say supposing the word (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and sanctifico) here to have the signification of Baptising, as we have showed it elsewhere to have that signification, it will easily follow from hence that Infants were baptised in the Apostles days. For the reasoning of the Apostle is this. The unbelieving husband hath been sanctified, that is, brought to be a believer and to be baptised, by, that is through the means, the instruction and conversation of the believing wif● dwelling together with him, gaining him to the Faith through her persuasion and good conversation. And the same hath also been found to be effected upon the unbelieving wife by the dwelling of the believing husband together with her. In consideration whereof he had advised the believing husbands still dwelling with his unbelieving wife, and wife with husband, ver. 12, 13. Upon this experience a hope hath been grounded that your children though now they be not actually believers, yet shall be brought to be believers by the means of their living in the same Families with you that are believers, and by being instructed by you in the Christian Faith as soon as they shall be capable of understanding it. And upon this hope they have been made holy by a Visible sanctification (as Aquinas hath it) that 
Aquin. Sum. 3. q. 68 Ar. 2.  is baptised, or sanctified by baptism, separated by that Sacrament from the common unclean condition of Heathens, and taken into the Communion of Saints, Persons holy by design, relation, and vocation. And else, but for this hope they had not been sanctified, nor made holy by baptism: even as the children of Heathens are not baptised, nor so made Holy, because there is not the same reason for their coming hereafter to be Christians, that there is for yours: who therefore now upon this hope are in that sense Holy. Let that hope therefore move the believing husband to continue with his unbelieving wife, and the believing wife to continue with her unbelieving husband, which hath moved us to baptise the children of those of you, whereof either Parent is a Christian, even the hope that those that now actually are not believers, shall hereafter be brought actually to believe through the instruction and conversation of the believers with whom they coinhabit and converse.  
§. 8. Well now, Children, as it appears by this Text, were made holy in the Apostles 
See Dr. Ham. Def. of Inf. Bapt. ch. 3. §. 1. p. ●2, &c  Times Those children were Infants, who alone are capable of being baptised capable of being baptised by the benefit of their Parents Faith. The Hol●ness of those children imported their being baptised. That Baptism was administered by none but the Apostles or Persons ordained and appointed by the Apostles for that work. Hence it follows, that Infants were baptised, as in the Age, so by the Hands, or by the Appointment, of the Apostles themselves. Than which nothing needs be required further for the justifying of Infant's Baptism.  
§. 9 And now it having appeared to be the Custom and Practice of the Universal Church of Christ to baptise Infants; and that Custom and Practice being grounded on the Tradition, and derived from the Practice of the Apostles themselves; it follows that Infants have as good a Right unto Baptism by Prescription from thence, as any person can have to any thing else by that Title, which yet in many cases is as good as any other.  
§. 10. And now, for God's sake, tell me why Infants should now be denied that which they have always had? why should they now be forbidden coming to Christ, who in all the Ages of the Church, even up to that wherein the Apostles lived have had free access unto Christ, and have been suffered to come to him, and that by Baptism? Why should we be less careful of our children's concerns than in all former ages others have been? why should not we be as vigilant to preserve their Rights, and this especially, as others before us? We need not doubt their Title nor question their Right, having so good a Prescription for it. Either Prescription can give no good Right to any thing, which yet we see it doth in many: or else children having sixteen hundred years' prescription to plead for it, have a good Right unto Baptism.  
§. 11. And yet is not that all the Right the little Children have unto Baptism. For I shall now proceed to show you a Third Right, that they have unto it: and that is by the Institution of Christ himself.   

CHAP. XXX.  
children's Right to Baptism by the Institution of Christ.  
§. 1. ANd truly if it can appear that Infant's Baptism does come within the Institution of Christ, and that Christ in his instituting of Baptism to be a Sacrament of the Gospel did either include Infants in it, or not exclude them by it, I cannot see what any sober modest inquirer can further want for his satisfaction in this point. Unto that therefore I shall immediately hasten my discourse.  
§. 2. And if any man think that the Institution of Baptism is set down in Matth. 28. 19 or Mark 16. 15. and from the circumstances of those Texts define the Subject of Baptism, as if those only were to be baptised, that are such as those were that are there expressly mentioned, namely persons capable of hearing and learning, believing and disbelieving the Gospel preached to them, and so exclude Infants from baptising, because incapable of these things, I shall humbly assume the boldness to believe that to be a mistake, and to affirm that Baptism was by our Saviour instituted, that is ordained, appointed and made a Ceremony of admission of Proselytes into his Church long before.  
§. 3. The Particular time indeed when he did institute it cannot be affirmed with so great certainty. Aquinas grounding in St. Augus●●nes 
Sum. 3. q. 66 a. ●. Ex quo Christus aquis immergitur, ex co omniam pec●nta a luit aqua. D. Aug. ib.  saying, that from the time of Christ's being dipped in water, water did wash away the sins of all, is of opinion that Baptism was instituted a Sacrament by Christ, when himself was baptised, though the necessity of using of it was not enjoined till after his passion and resurrection. But Nc●l. de Orbell: saith, 
* Baptismus fuit à Christo in ●it●tus ante p●●onem ipsius: cum ante lilam dis●ipuli baptizarent baptismo Christi, Joh. 3. Quan vi● hora pracisa institu●i●nis non have atur ex Evangelio, non enim fuit institutus quando Christus baptizatus est à Johanne, tamen Christus tune de dicavit q●am tanquam materiam l. doneam bapt●smoex taitu suae mundissima carnis. Nic. de Orbell. list. 3. 4 Sent. q. 3. de Baptismo, fol. 7, 8. † Bapti●mi Insinuatio fuit Facto, quan lo fait Christus baptizatus insinuans no●esse baptizandos. Verbo, quando Nicedemo dicit, Joh. 3. Nisi quis renatus fuerit. Guiller vorrilong. sup. l. 4. Sent. de p. 3. a●t. 3.  that he did not then institute it, but only did by the touch of his most ●ure flesh dedicate water as a fit matter for, baptism. Nor will Cluitlerm. ●orrilong, allow that act to be the institution of baptism, but only an insinuation by Deed that we should be baptised; a● his saying to Nicodemus, Joh. 3. Except a man be born again, etc. was an Insinuation of it by Word. And Mr. Calvin 
* In co jam plusquam pu●riliter labintur qu●d primam Baptismi institutionem inde derivant, quem ab exordio praedicationis suae Apostolis Christus administrandum man●averat. Calvin. Inst. l. 4. c. 16. S. 27.  saith, Christ commanded his Apostles to administer it form the very beginning of his own preaching: and that it is a great piece of childishness to fetch the Institution of baptism from those Texts. And truly, though the precise hour of its institution be not infallibly to be declared from the Gospel, yet from the Gospel it is most evident that it was instituted by Christ before his resurrection or passion: and then those words in Matth. 28, a●d Mark 16, cannot be its institution. And that of John 4. 1. will put it out of doubt, where long before our Saviour's Resurrection or ●eath even while John Baptist was yet alive, we read of our Saviour's making and baptising disciples, that is receiving disciples by Baptism. Which Ceremony yet he himself did not, after the taking in of his Apostles to be his Disciples administer by himself but by his Disciples. Now certainly they did it, not of themselves, but by his Institution; which is nothing else but his prescribing and appointing the use of it to that end whereto it was to be used. Whence it is said of those whom his Disciples baptised, that he baptised them: that being reckoned as done by him, that was done by his appointment. Now if it were practised by the Disciples of our Saviour, and by his appointment in his life, then could not those words in Matth. and Mark, be the Institution of it, which were not spoken by him till after his death. But that must be the time, when ever it was when our Saviour instructed, empowered and appointed his Disciples to baptise, and the words what ever they were whereby he did instruct, empower, and appoint them to do it, must be the words of Institution. And accordingly the learned Gabriel Biel decides the Case, saying that Baptism was not instituted 
Institutus est ergo baptismus prius, quando baptizandi officium discipulis commissum fuerat: licet quan ●o & ubi determinatè ex Scriptura non sit certum. Gab. Biel.  when Christ was baptised; nor in that saying of his to Nicodemus, Except a man be born again; nor in the last of Matihew, when he commanded his Disciples to Go teach all Nations, etc. nor 
in 4 lib. Sent. dist. 3. qu. unica.  in the last of Mark, when he said, He that believeth and is baptised; nor on the Cross, when out of his side came blood and water; nor when he sent his disciples by two and two preach: but before, when the office of baptising was committed to his Disciples, though when and where that was done, is not determinately certain out of the Scripture. And so those Texts can be of no force in the world against Infant's Baptism, so 
Sed propugnaculum omnium munitisimum in ipsa Baptismi institutione se habere gloriantur, quam ex capite Matthaei ultimo petunt, etc. Calvin. Inst. l. 4. c. 16. S. 27. Inexpugnabilis baec ratio, qua tantopere considunt. Id. ib. S. 28.  as to gather thence, that by the Institution of our Saviour Infants are excluded from Baptism. And then one of the Antipaedobaptists strongest supports of their Error is fallen to the ground.  
§. 4. Well but what were those words then? I answer, they were a Confirming of that Commission, which the Disciples of our Saviour 
Baptismi Confirmatio fuit, facto, quando non solum sanguis sed aqua exivit de latere ejus. Verbo, quando post resurrectionem misit eos dicens, Decete●omnes gentes baptizames eos, etc. Guillerm. Vorrilong. sup. l. 4. Sent. dist. 3. art. 3. fol. 123. b. col. 1. Caterum Apostoles non jam ad sol●s J●●●os mictit s●d ad om●●● gen●●. Theophyl. in loc.  had formerly received, and an Enlarging of it to a giving of them power to become his Apostles, Legates, or Ambassadors to foreign Nations; so as that, whereas in his life they were only to go to the people of the Jews (Matth. 10. 5, 6.) after his death they were to go unto the Gentiles, even into all the world, to preach the Gospel to the whole creation, and make Disciples of all nations.  
§. 5. But where then is the Institutjoin of Baptism set down? and in what form of words was it instituted? I said before, it was not where particularly set down in Scripture when the Institution of Baptism was. Nor is it, that I can meet 
Institutio autem baptismi fuit (1) Fac●o, quando Christus venit in in Ju●●am, Joh. 3. & baptizable. (2) Verbo, quando misit disci●●los pradicare, & ut cre●itur baptizare, Luc. 10. Guiller Vorrilong. in 4. l. S●nt. dist. 3. art. 3. fol. 123.  with, how ever Guillerm. Vorrilong say it was instituted by Deed, when Christ came into Judea and baptised, Joh. 3. By Word when Christ sent his Disciples to preach, and as it is believed to baptise, Luk. 10. in which latter he is contradicted by Gabriel Biel. And in what Form of words it was instituted is more than I, or, I think, any man living can tell. The Scriptu●e is not, nor was ever meant to be a complete Register of all either the words or actings of Christ: how absurdly soever some will not allow of any thing as said, or done by him, but what is expressly written there, how credibly soever it may be otherwise shown to have ●een said or done by him. And if the Form of words whereby our Saviour did institute Baptism be no moresk own then the Time of its institution, then can there no Argument be drawn from thence, whereby Infants can be excluded from Baptism.  
§. 6. But how then shall we know what the Institution of Christ was, and so judge by that, what Persons are to be baptised? I answer, very well: and by the consideration of two things. The first is, what was in use among the lews before our Saviour's time. The second is, what has been the use among Christians since the time of our Saviour. And if we find the o●e agreeing with the other, and answering to it as face answers to face in water, than there can be no other judged, but that as the one did agree with the other, so our Saviour did ordain it should be; appointing that what was in use before should be still in use as it was, save where he did improve or alter any thing therein. Now whether we look at what was in use among the Jews before our Saviour's time, or what has been in use among Christians since h●s time, we shall find all making for Infant's Baptism.  
§. 7. And by the way you are to understand, that our Saviour, when he put an end to the Mosaical Observances, did not wholly evacuate, and make null, all that was in use and practice among the Jews, and introduce a perfectly new platform of his own, wholly other, in all both the Substance and circumstances of it, from what was before: but did take much of what he found ready to his hand among them, that was useful to him, and did continue it still in his Church, only accommodating and fitting it to his own purpose, and improving and heightening it in the uses and advantages of it to his Disciples. This the Learned show by instances 
Dr. Hammond Quaere of the Baptising of Infants, §. 5.  in sundry particulars. And thus particularly it was in the institution of Baptism. That before the time of our Saviour, even from ancient days, had been in use among the Jews as one Ceremony among others of the initation of Disciples into the Covenant of God; as the most Authentic Records of the Jewish Antiquities do testify. And that our Saviour, leaving off the other two which were in use together with it, namely Circumcision and Sacr●fice, did continue and ordain should be the sole and single Ceremony of Initiation or Admittance of Disciples into his Church. And here by the way I cannot let pass, without a remark, the mercifulness of our Saviour towards mankind, in the continuation of this, and dismission of the other two; in that whereas Sacrifice was chargeable, and Circumcision was painful, he was pleased to lay down them, and continue only Baptism, which was neither charge nor pain.  
§. 8. Now it is most certain that before our Saviour's time those that became Proselytes to the Jewish Church, were admitted into it by three things, Circumcision, Sacrifice, and Baptism; which last was so necessary, that though one were circumcised, yet if he were not also baptised, he was not a true Proselyte, but a Gentile still. Whence, (as the Learned Dr. Light foot informs) it is said, and said as a known Axiom by the Gemara 
Non est quis Proselytus usque dum circumcidatur & baptizetur. Dr. Lightfoot Hor● Habraicae, l. 42.  Babylonica (Jevamoth, fol. 46. 2.) That till a man were both circumcised and baptised he was no Proselyte. I say, a Man, because for a woman baptism was sufficient to ma●e her a Proselyte without circumcision, as the same Gemara shows (Jeva●●h fol. 45. 2.)  
§. 9 Now I being a Statute Law upon record among the Jews (Numb. 15. 15.) that one ●●dma●ce should be both for them, and for t●● manger (the Proselyte) that so journed with them; and that as th●y were, so should the stranger he before the ●ord; and that one ●aw, and one Manner, as for Moral Duties, so for Rites and Ceremonies, should be both for the native Jews and Proselyees that sojourned among them; nothing can be more evident than this, that what is recorded to have been their u●e with the Proselytes, was the●r u●e also with, and among themselves; and that they did to themselves 
Dr. Hamm●n● Defence of Inf. Bapt. p. 10, 11, 24, 25. By three things (say the Hebrew Doctors) did Israel enter into the Covenant, by Circumcision and Baptism and Sacrifice.— And so in all ages when an Ethnic is willing to enter into the Covenant and gather himself under the wings of the Majesty of God, and take upon him the yoke of the Law; he must be circumcised and baptised and bring a Sacrifice. And if it be a woman, she must be baptised and bring a Sacrifice; as it is written [Numb. 15. 15.] as ye are so shall the stranger be. How are ye? by circumcision and baptism, and bringing of a Sacrifice: so likewise the stranger throughout all generations, by Circumcision and Baptism, and bringing of a Sacrifice. Ainsworth on Gen. 17. 12. pag. 68  and theirs, what they did to the Proselytes and their Children: insomuch that their way of arguing to what was necessary to be done to the Proselyte proceeded from what was done among themselves, and that because the Law of God was, that as it was with them, so it should be with the stranger.  
§. 10. Now this is most certain, as being upon record in the Gemara Babylonica, one, besides others, of their most Authentic writings, 
Dr. Hammond Bapt. of Inf. §. 15. and Def. of Inf. Bapt. Sec. 3. Dr. Lightfoot Horae Hebraicae, pag. 42. 43.  that, when any of Heathens became Jews, not only the Proselytes themselves, but also their Infant Children, if they had any, were baptised. They baptise the little or young stranger or Proselyte, saith the Gemana. Again, If together with a Proselyte his sons and daughters be made Proselytes, which none were without being baptised, what their father doth for them, turns to their good. Indeed (as R. Josph said,) when they grew up they might, if they pleased, renounce what was done. Where the Gloss saith, This is to be understood De parvulis, of little ones that were made Proselytes together with their Fathers. And so again Maimonides, They baptise the Infant or little stranger upon the knowledge or understanding of the house of Judgement, or the Congregation. And again (saith he) If an Israelite take or find a Heathen Infant, and baptise him in the name of a Proselyte, Ecce ille est Proselytus, lo, he is become a Proselyte. So R. Hezekiah saith, Behold one finds an Infant cast out, and baptised him in the name of a servant, do thou also circumcise him in the name of a servant: but if he baptise him in the name of a freeman, do thou also circumcise him in the name of a freeman. (Hierosol. Jevamoth, fol. 8. 4.) Infants than were baptised among the Jews before our Saviour's time, admitted into Covenant with God, and into Communion with his Church by Baptism.  
§. 11. And that it was so with Infants ●fter our Saviour's time I have (I hope) sufficiently made it appear by what I have already said in this discourse, showing by abundant authorities and instances that it has been the Practice of the Catholic Church of Christ in all the Ages of it to baptise Infants; and that Practise founded in the Tradition and derived from the Practice of the Apostles, sufficiently, though somewhat obscurely, attested by the holy Scriptures.  
§. 12. Now where we find what was before, and what was after our Saviour's time in this matter answering exactly each to other, save where an alteration is expressly made, what other can any rational man judge than this, that as it was before our Saviour's time, and as it was still continued after his time, so our Saviour in his time did institute and appoint, ordain and decree, that unto all future time it should be. And it is impossible any better account than this should be given of any Institution of our Saviour's that is not particularly recorded in Scripture; as this of Infant's Baptism, neither is, nor was necessary 
* Nam cum Paedobaptismus in Ecclesia Judaicâ in admissione Proselytorum, ita suit notus, us●tatus & frequens, ●● n●hil fere notius, usitatius, & frequentius (1) Non opus erat ut aliqu● pracepto rob●rar●tur [cum Baptismus jam in Sacramentum evaderet ● van elicu●●]. Nam Christus Baptismum in manus suis atque 〈◊〉 Evangelicum suscepit, qualem in 〈…〉 hoc sol●m dito, quod ad digniorem finem atque largiorem usum promoveret. Novit satis gens universa parvulos solitos baptizari: illud praecepto opus non habuit, quod communi usu semper invaluerat. Si prodiret ●am edictum regale in haec verba, Recipiat se unusquisque die Dominico ad publicum conventum in Ecclesia, insaniet certe ille qui●unque olim hinc argueret, non celebrandas esse die Dominico in publicis conventibus preces, conciones, psalmodias, co quod nulla in edicto de iis mentio. Nam cavit edictum de celebratione deel Dominicae in publicis conventibus in genere, de particularibus autem divini cultus speciebus ibidem celebrandis non opus erat, ut esset mentio, cum istae ante datum edictum, & cum daretur, semper & ubique notae essent, & in usu assiduo. Ipsissimo hoc modo res st habuit cum Baptismo; Christus eum instituit in Sacramentum Evangelicum, quo in professionem Evangelii omnes admitterentur, ut olim in Pros●lytismum ad religionem Judaicam. Particularia ●ò spectantia, modus scilicet baptizandi, atas baptizanda, sexus baptizandus, etc. regula & definitione opus non habuerunt: eo quod haec vel lippis & tonsoribus satis nota erant ex communi usu. (2) E contra ergo plana & aperta prohibitione opus erat, ut insantes & parvuli non baptizarentur. si eos baptizandos nollet servator. Nam cum per omnia secula praecedentia usitatissimum esset, ut baptizarentur parvuli, si adoleri istam consuetudinem vellet Christus, aperte prohibuisset. Silentium ergo ejus & Scripturae hac in ●e Paedobaptismum firmat & propagat in omnia secula. Dr. Lightfoot Horae Hebraicae in Matth. 3. 6. pag. 44, 45.  to be, being already so well known by the former practice of it; as the Learned Dr. Lightfoot excellently argues.  
§. 13. And now what can any mortal man, that hath not addicted himself a slave to prejudice, judge any other but this, that in as much as our Saviour made no alteration in this particular in the Jewish Baptism, therefore Infants are by his Institution to be baptised. And, that in all those passages of Scripture, which speak of admitting any to be disciples to Christ, or of any's being admitted by baptism to be his Disciples, there, if Infants be not by some Circumstance necessarily excluded, they are in the design and by the Institution of our Saviour to be included.  
§. 14. As, for instance: when our Saviour enlarging his Disciples former Commission, saith to them, Go and make Disciples of all nations baptising them, who, that remembers but what persons were admitted to be made Disciples before our Saviour's time, namely Infants as well as others; and considers but withal that since his time also Infants as well as others were in the first Ages of the Church, and ever since admitted to Discipleship by Baptism, who I say, that but remembers and considers this, can judge any other, but that our Saviour did in his design extend his words to all those that he did not exclude, even to Infants also as well as to others; and that his Disciples did also accordingly so understand him; and baptise Infants; and deliver Infant's Baptism down as a thing to be for ever retained in the Church even by his Institution: of which their so doing there can no other probable account or reason be given.  
§. 15. Put case, whereas of three things formerly in use for the admitting of Disciples, viz. Circumcision, Sacrifice, and Baptism, our Saviour did lay aside the two former, Circumcision and Sacrifice, and did continue only the later, namely Baptism; (put case I say) he had continued Circumcision to be the only Ceremony to be used in his Church for the admitting of Disciples, and had laid aside Sacrifice and Baptism; and in stead of saying, Go ye therefore, and make Disciples of all nations, baptising them, etc. had said, Go ye therefore, and make Diseiples of all nations, circumcising them, etc. who that remembered that Infants as well as others 
See Dr. Stillingfleets Vindicat. of the A. B. of Cant. p. 107.  had usually in that case been circumcised, would ever have interpreted his words to the excluding of Infants from Circumcision, or ever have once imagined, or fancied any other, but that children should now, and henceforth, as well as formerly, be circumcised. Even so now our Saviour having discontinued Circumcision and Sacrifice, and continued Baptism alone, to be the Sacrament of the Initiation of Disciples into his Church, who, that remembers that it was the use before our Saviour's time to admit Infants into the Church by Baptism, can imagine any other, but that his mind was that they should still be so admitted; or but rationally fancy, that in saying, make disciples of all nations baptising them he meant to exclude Infants from Baptism. If Infants should have come in, had he said Circumcising them, as undoubtedly they would (who would ever once have disputed it, or made any question of it?) than they ought to come in now that he hath said, Baptising them. For the case is equal on both sides, one as well as the other being a Ceremony of admission of Disciples to Proselytism before his saying those words; and there being as much reason for the one as for the other, the very same for both. Which one consideration, if reason might take place, were enough to end the controversy, and carry the Cause for Infant's Baptism.  
§. 16. And thus again, when in the present Text our Saviour saith, Suffer little Children to come unto me, and forbidden them not, in as much as the coming he there speaks of is a coming to be his Proselytes, a becoming his Disciples, (as appears by what he adds as a reason why 
Adduxerunt ergo aliqui è credentibus infantes suos, ut peculiari recognitione Christus eos in discipulatum suum cooptaret, ac pro suis sua consignaret be nedictione. Dr. Lightfoot in Matth. 19 13. Horae Hebraicae, pag. 221.  they should be suffered to come to him, viz. because of such is the kingdom of God, which intimates that their coming to him was for entrance into that kingdom, and to be made members of his Church) and his command to suffer them to come to him was to suffer them to have entrance into God's kingdom, so to come to him as Proselytes of his kingdom, to become members of his Church, it is most evident that he appoints they should have all things permitted to them, and that performed for them, which was necessary to their so coming to him, and was usually done to such as so came, became Proselytes to, and entered into God's kingdom; and that was to baptise them: for he that commands the end, doth even without naming them command the means. His word (M●tth. 28. 19) is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 make them Disciples baptising them, i. e. admit them to Discipleship by the Ceremony of Baptism; let them come to me into my Church by Baptism, that door of their Admission, that Sacrament of their Initiation thereinto.  
§. 17. And in that it is not said that our Saviour did baptise them, but only took them up into his arms, and laid his hands upon them and blessed them, it will not hence follow that he did neither baptise them, nor appoint, nor allow of their baptising. For to argue that he did not do, nor appoint, nor allow of this or that, because it is not said, that he did do, or appoint, or allow of it, is not good: there is no consequence at all in it. For he might allow of, appoint, and do, more than is written: that which is written of his say and do being exceedingly short of comprehending and reporting all he said and did: which were so many, that St. John that modest Disciple, is fain to use an Hyperhole to set out the numerousness of them, saying that, if they should be written every one, he supposed that even the world itself could not contain the Books that should be written, J●ha 21. 25.  
§. 18. Who doubts but 
Jesus primo ad te mpus baptizavit, non quoslibet, sed suos discipulos propria manu, quo facto commisit e is baptizandi officium, & ipse vacabat doctrinae. Dionys. Carchus. in Joh. 4.  that the Tnel●e Disciples of our Saviour were baptised by him? Dionysius Carthusianus affirms it, that he baptised them, and with his own hand. And yet as Tertullian (de Baptismo) saith, tinctos non invenimus, we do not find their baptising in Scripture; it is not where expressed that he did baptise them, or any of them. As therefore it doth not prove that his Disciples were not baptised, because it is not written, that he did baptise them; so it doth not prove, that he did not baptise these Infants, because his baptising of them is not written.  
§. 19 Again, who doubts but that our Saviour himself was circumcised? And yet it is not where expressed in Scripture that he was circumcised. It is said indeed, that when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the Child, his name was called Jesus, Luke 2. 21. But it is not said, that upon the eighth day, when it was come, he was circumcised. As therefore it doth not prove that our Saviour was not circumcised, because his being circumcised is not written: so doth it not prove that these Infants were not baptised, because it is not written that they were baptised by him.  
§. 20. Lastly, who doubts, but that our Saviour did at his last Supper communicate with his Disciples, eat the bread, and drink the cup with them? And yet it is not where written that he did so. It is said indeed, that he blessed the bread, and broke it, and gave it to his Disciples, and said to them, Take, cat. But it is not said that he himself did eat it. I● is said, that he likewise gave the cup to them, and said, Drink ye all of it. But it is not said, that he drunk of it himself. (And his saying, Matth. 26. 29. that he would not thenceforth drink of the fruit of the Vine, does but give reason to suppose it, and is no affirmation of it). As therefore it doth not prove that our Saviour did not communicate with his Disciples, because it is not expressed in Scripture that he did it: so it doth not prove, that he did not baptise these Infants, because it is not written that he did baptise them.  
§. 21. Rather, the very great favours that he is written to have showed these Infants, as to take their part against his own Disciples, even so far as for their sakes to rebuke them; to call the Infants to him; to take them up into his arms; to lay his hands upon them, and bless them, should argue that he did vouchsafe them all the favours that they came to him for more than is expressed. And it is evident, that the baptising of them was one, in as much as Baptism is as it were the door of entrance into that kingdom, into which they came to him for entrance, and into which he commanded they should, when they came or were brought, be admitted, in saying, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbidden them not. And would he deny them that one, that had vouchsafed to them all the rest?  
§. 22. And if he did not baptise them himself, that is no wonder. For he did not constantly baptise himself all that he admitted to be his Disciples. Though from John Baptists saying, I have need to be baptised of thee, I may suppose that he did baptise some; and if no more, yet at least his Twelve disciples, by whose hands, after that he had baptised them, he did baptise others. Whence it is said, (John 4. 2.) that Jesus himself baptised not, but his Disciples. Though he made Disciples, which imports his admitting men to be Disciples, and receiving them to proselytism by the Ceremony thereof, which was Baptism (whence he is as well said to have baptised, as to have made more disciples than John, i. e. to have made by baptising) yet the particular act of baptising them, was a thing, which he did most usually, if if not constantly, transact by the hands of his Disciples. And by their hands he might baptise these Infants, though he did not use his own hands to that work.  
§. 23. And besides what hath been said upon other accounts to show the probability of it, his vouchsafing to them Imposition of hands, that Ceremony, which that renowned Champion of the Church of England Dr. Hammond saith, in the ancient Church was preparatory 
Quaere of the Baptising of Infants, Sect. 22. Explanatâque eidem divinâ vitâ, & ut ita dicam conversatione, ex eo praeterea quaerit, num ita instituat vivere: cum promisit, manum ●jus capiti admovet●t signoque edito Sacerdotibus imperat, ut viri atque sponsoris nomina perseribant, etc. Dionys. Areop. Hierarch. lib. c. 4.  and antecedent to Baptism, is a strong argument for, if not a clear evidence of, his admitting them to Baptism. What can be thought but that he did vouchsafe them that, who did admit them unto all foregoing that, and that was preparatory unto that? What other can be imagined, but that he gave them over to his Disciples to be baptised with their hands, who had vouchsafed them the Imposition of his own hands? For though it be not said he baptised them, yet it is said he did that, that was the next to it, and the utmost that he can be conceived to have done to any, whom he did not baptise himself, but gave over to his Disciples to baptise; he laid his hands upon them, and blessed them; and by those actions did as it were consign them unto baptism, mark them for, and deliver them up to his Disciples to baptise: and that according to the former, and then present manner of receiving even Infants as well as elder persons unto Proselytism by Baptism.  
§. 24. And thus, when we read of a whole City, as Samaria, or a Family, as the Jailers, and Crispuses, and Stephanas', baptised, though none be expressed to be baptised, but those that believed, yet what other can be thought, but that even the children also of those Believers, if they had any in their town or family, were baptised? Since it was agreeable with the Jewish Baptism, (wherein our Saviour's was founded, and from which in that particular it is never said in the least to have differed) to receive to Proselytism by Baptism the Infants of those that were converted, and baptised, as well as the Converts themselves. And if in so many whole Families as are reported in Scripture to have been baptised, there was never a child, which yet cannot be sa●d, and 'tis hard to believe, yet sure in Samaria, a great City, there were some. And why any that were converted and baptised themselves, should not desire baptism for their children as well as for themselves, since their children were by the Institution of Christ as capable of it as themselves were, is not easy to say. And on the contrary, that those that were converted, did desire the baptism of all theirs as well as of themselves, is most evident, because we read of the baptising of whole Houses consequent to the conversion of the single Master, or Mistress of those Houses: for instance, the Jailor, and Lydias, Acts 16.  
§. 25. And touching this latter, the house of Lydia it may not be amiss to make one observation before we pass, namely that, though it be said that the household of Lydia was baptised, yet it is not said, that they or any of them, beside Lydia herself believed, professed, or ever so much as once heard the Gospel preached to them. Now hereupon I would ask our Adversaries, whether we may receive any thing as a Divine Truth, that is not written in the Divine Word, or we may not?  
§. 26. It is their interest to say we may not: that being the main, if not the whole, of all the strength they have against our Plea for Infant's Baptism, that it is not said in the Scriptures that Infants should be baptised, or were baptised, whence they weakly infer that Infant's Baptism is not either in the Doctrine or Practice of it to be received. Now if in pursuance of their Interest they shall say we may not: then I shall infer from the same ground, that it is not to be received as a Divine Truth that the Household of Ly●ia d●d ever believe, profess, or hear the Gospel preached to them before they were baptised, because no such thing is written of them. And so here will be a Scripture Example of Persons baptised, without any either belief, or profession, or knowledge, or so much as hearing of the Gospel; their believing, professing, knowing, or hearing of it, being not to be received as a Divine Truth, because it is not written in the Divine Word. And then a Persons not believing, professing, or knowing the Gospel will be no hindrance to his baptising. And so our Infants cannot be denied baptism upon that account. Why man not our Infants be baptised, though they neither believe, nor profess, nor know the Gospel, upon the undertaking of believers for them, as well as the House of Lydias was: who, for any thing that appears in Scripture to the contrary, nei her believed, nor professed, nor had any the least knowledge of the Gospel before they were baptised, but, as it may be supposed, were admitted to baptism through the Mistress of the family's undertaking for them, and becoming a Godmother as it were unto them.  
§. 27. If, to avoid the source of this Inference, they say we may receive something as a Divine Truth, which is not written in the Divine Word, than I infer on the other side, that it can be no hindrance to our receiving Infants Baptism as a Divine Truth, that it is not written in the Scripture. For if we may receive it as a Divine Truth, that the Family of Lydia had both heard, and did believe, and at least make a profession to believe the Gospel, before they were baptised, (and if they did not, then let the Antipaedobaptists tell us, if they can, upon what account or ground they were baptised) though no one syllable of all this be written of them in the Divine Word, then may we as well receive it as a Divine Truth, either that there were Infants among those baptised one's, or that the Apostles did baptise other Infants, though their baptising be as much passed over in silence, and unmentioned, as the hearing, believing or professing of Lydias Family before they were baptised, here is: especially being there are such other positive grounds, as we have shown, whereupon to receive it.  
§. 28. And here I must profess myself too short sighted to be able to foresee what shift our Adversaries can find out, to evade and avoid the force of this Dilemma; by which their whole way of arguing against us a non scripto, from our having, as they pretend, no Scripture for what we profess and practise in this case, seems to be broken and overthrown.  
§. 29. And by this time hope it is evident to every one, that, not only by the Constitution of this particular Church, but also by Prescription from the Custom and Practice of the Catholic and Primitive Church, and also by the Institution of Christ himself our Infants have a Right to be baptised. And if so, than they cannot, without injury, and injustice to them, not to say also disobedience to the Order of this present and particular Church, Separation from the practice of the Catholic and Primitive Church, disagreement with the institution of Christ, and resistance to the Command of Christ, be denied Baptism. For what else can it be, to hinder those from coming to him, whom he hath commanded to be suffered to come?  
§. 30. And so I have dispatched the Fourth and last Branch of my Argument for Infant's Baptism; and have said all I intended to say by way of Confirmation of the Point. What remains to be said will be matter of Use and Application.   

CHAP. XXXI.  
Infant's Baptism Lawful, though there were neither Command for it, nor Example of it.  
§. 1. BY what I have said in the former part of this Discourse, I hope I have sufficiently evidenced the Lawfulness at least of Infant's Baptism; I will now go on to consider and answer Objections against it; and that will still be a further confirmation of it; and that being but obtained, the Need they have of it, and the Benefit they may have by it, will be sufficient inducements to their baptising, though they had no positive Right unto Baptism.  
§. 2. The Antipaedo baptists main ground, on which they build their Opinion of the Unlawfulness of Infant's Baptism, taken in its full strength lies thus. That which no one Text in all the Scriptures either commands, or gives example of, that it Unlawful. But in all the Scripture there is no one Text, that either commands, or gives an example of Infant's Baptism, Therefore it is Unlawful.  
§. 3. In contradiction to this ground. and to show the falseness of it, I thus argue against the first part of it. If nothing be lawful to be practised, but what some Text of Scripture doth command or give example of, than nothing will be lawful to be believed, but what some Text of Scripture doth affirm. For it is as necessary that we should have a Scripture Affirmation for what we believe, as a Scripture Command or Example for what we practice. And this I think no Antipaedo baptist will deny. And if so, than many things that we now believe and practice, and shall become Heretics and Schismatics, if we do not believe and practise them, shall become unlawful to us, because there is in all the Scriptures not one Text that affirms the one, or commands or gives example of the other: as I shall show in both particulars.  
§. 4. And first in matters of Faith. First, that the Son, as God, is equal to the Father: this we believe, and I hope the Antipaedobaptists do not disbelieve it. And yet there is no one Scripture that doth expressly affirm it. So, that as Man, he was circumcised: this we believe, and our Antipaedobaptists do not deny, and yet (as we have already noted) there is no one Scripture that doth expressly affirm it.  
§. 5. Again, that the Holy Ghost is God: this we believe, and I would hope our Antipaedobaptists did believe it too. And yet there is no one Scripture that doth expressly affirm it. Also that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and the Son: this we believe; and our Antipaedobaptists do not, that I know, deny it. And yet there is no one Text of Scripture that doth expressly affirm it.  
§. 6. Thirdly, that the Three Persons in the Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; D. Basil. de Spir. Sancto, cap. 27. p. 213.  Ghost are but One God; this we believe; and our Antipaedobaptists have not, that I know of, declared themselves to deny it. And yet there is no one Scripture that doth expressly affirm it.  
§. 7. Fourthly, even but this, to add no more, that it is the duty of Children to love their Parents; this we believe, and sure the Anabaptists will not deny it. And yet where is there one Text in all the Scripture that doth expressly affirm it.  
§. 8. Now if we do, and may believe these things, and aught to believe them, having sufficient ground for our belief of them; even good Consequence drawn from some one or more Texts of Scripture compared together, though no one Text of Scripture doth singly, and alone in terms affirm them: then may we as well practise some things, which no one Text of Scripture doth expressly command, or exemplify, so long as we can deduce that practice from any one, or more Texts of Scripture compared together. And the contrary Doctrine, which is the Antipadobaptists ground for the Unlawfulness of Infant's baptism, is erroneous and absurd.  
§. 9 Again, in matters of Practice, That Women as well as Men ought to receive the 
Si quid valerent id genus argumenta mulieres pariter Coena Domini interdicendae essent, quas Apostolorum seculo ad cam fuisse admissas non legimus. Calvin. Instit. l. 4. c. 16. S. 8.  Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord: this we believe, and practice; and the Antipaedobapt●sts too. And yet there is no one Text of Scripture, that any more expressly commands or exemplifies that, than Infant's baptism is commanded or exemplified.  
§. 10. So that the weekly Lords day is to be sanctified, or kept holy; this we believe and practice, and the Antipaedobaptists too. And yet there is no one Text of Scripture that commands it. Nor is there in the Scripture any example of its sanctification, but what may agree to any other besides it. It may indeed be shown, that some where they did meet on that day, and perform holy duties: but it may also be shown that other where they did meet and perform holy duties on other days: and if one conclude for the one, then will the other conclude for the other: and so we shall either have all holy days, or none: and then not that, for any either command that enjoins it, or example that infersit.  
§. 11. So that Men or Women may be baptised either naked or clothed we believe, and the Church hath practised. And the Anabaptists, I suppose, do believe and have practised both ways. And yet there is no one Text of Scripture that commands baptising either way: neither is there an example of any persons being either way baptised extant in Scripture. Of the going of some into the water, of their being baptised therewith, we find mention: but of their going into it, or being baptised with it, naked or clothed, there is nothing mentioned. So that let the Antipaedobaptist say, which way men and women should be baptised, whether naked or clothed, yet still here will be a circumstance at least in practice allowed, and used by them as well as by ourselves, without any Scripture Command for it, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Bas. de Sp. San●to. c. 27.  or Example of it. So that men may be dipped, either once, or thrice, at their baptising, we believe, and it hath in the Church been practised both ways. But what Scripture command or example have we to determine that circumstance either way?  
§. 12. Now if both we, and the Antipaedobaptists, do rightly believe, and lawfully practice, what we believe of, and practice in, these things, without any Scripture command, or example, to enjoin, or direct us; then their assertion of the Unlawfulness of what is neither commanded, nor exemplified in Scripture is erroneous, and full of absurdity. Which yet I shall further make to appear upon other accounts.  
§. 13. I think any rational man will grant, that there is no more necessity of having a Divine Command for every thing we take up into our practice, than there is of having a Divine Countermand for the laying down of any thing practised by a Command Divine. Yea of the two there is more reason we should have an express command from God to leave off what himself had once commanded, than there is to have a command for the beginning of a practice never commanded by him. For that which he never expressed any command for, may yet be agreeable to his secret will, and so not only lawful, but acceptable to him. And this may be shown in sundry cases; and particularly in the Jews ordaining and keeping the Feasts of Dedication, and of Purim. But the leaving off to do what God hath once commanded, cannot but be against his revealed will, and so neither acceptable to him, nor lawful: unless there be good and competent ground for the 
What may be a sufficient ground in this case, See Dr. Stilling fleets Irenic. part. 1. c. 1. S. 3. p. 12, 13.  leaving it off, and a sufficient evidence of the ceasing of that obligation to it, which was once by virtue of a Divine command upon it. If then there may be any thing shown, which was once expressly commanded by God, and practised in obedience to that command, whose practice is now left off; and by the Anabaptists themselves, without any express command to the contrary, and yet lawfully, than it will follow, and convincingly. I hope, that there may be something practised by us, which yet never was in Scripture expressly commanded us: and so Infant's Baptism may be lawful enough, though never expressly in Scripture commanded. Now I instance in the Sanctification of the seventh day, and in the Circumcision of Infants at eight days old: both expressly commanded, both accordingly practised; and both now left off to be observed, and yet without any express command for the disobserving of either. I speak all this while of things sacred, and not merely civil or natural. And say an express command, because I find nothing else will satisfy. Else enough hath long enough, and often enough been offered to show the lawfulness of Infant's Baptism. Which if nothing else had been offered, is sufficiently proved by this Argument following, which they are as far from being ignorant of, as they are from being able to answer.  
§. 14. That which is no sin cannot be unlawful. Infant's Baptism is no sin: Therefore it is not unlawful. That Infant's baptism is no sin either to the Baptizer, or Baptised is plain, because it is no transgression of any Law. For that which is no transgression of a Law is no sin. Infant's Baptism is no trangression of any Law. Therefore it is no sin. That that can be no sin, which is no transgression of any Law is most evident, not only because St. John hath positively defined sin to be the transgression of a law, (1 John 3. 4.) but also because St. Paul hath concluded negatively, that where no Law is, there is no transgression, (Rom. 4. 15.) And these men that conclude Infants baptism unlawful, which must needs signify its being sinful, I wonder how, or whence they come to know it, and conclude it. Sure they do not know more than St. Paul did. And his Rule to know sin by, and so what is lawful, and what unlawful, was the Law. For (saith he) by the Law is the knowledge of sin, (Rom. 3. 20.) And, I had not known sin, but by the Law: for I had not known lust, i. e. had not known it to be a sin, except the Law had said, Thou shalt not covet, (Rom. 7. 7.) So than Infant's Baptism being no transgression of any law; because there is no law against it; for there can be no transgression of a law which is not; it must follow that it can be no sin, and so cannot be unlawful.  
§. 15. The Scripture, I say, being laid down to be the Rule of Lawful and Unlawful in sacred Things; as that which the Scripture commands is not only lawful but necessary, and that which the Scripture forbids, is not only unnecessary, but also sinful: so that which the Scripture neither commands nor forbids, is neither necessary, nor yet sinful: but of a middle nature betwixt both; and that is Lawful. So that though the Scripture had never spoke word, either in particular or in general, of Infant's baptism, yet it must have been granted lawful, and could not have been concluded unlawful: because neither in particular, nor in general hath the Scripture spoke any one word or title against the baptising of Infants.   

CHAP. XXXII.  
Infant's Baptism no Addition to the Word of God. The Scriptures objected on that account considered and cleared.  
§. 1. YEa but, argues the Antipaedobaptist, Nothing is lawful that is not commanded in Scripture. Infant's Baptism is not commanded in Scripture. Therefore it is unlawful. But why is nothing lawful that is not commanded in Scripture? Because the doing of any uncommanded thing is an Adding to the word; & all additions to the word are forbidden by the Word: and so unlawful. Now the Scriptures that forbidden all additions to the word are many, Deut. 4. 2. Deut. 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6. Isa. 1. 12.  
§. 2. But what if not every doing of an uncommanded thing be an adding to the word? Or what if the baptising of an Infant (suppose it never so much uncommanded) be no such addition to the word, as is forbidden? Why then Infants Baptism, for all its supposed uncommandedness, may be no sin. And so the whole force of the Argument falls to the ground. But because the best trial hereof will be a particular view of the Scriptures objected on this account, I will therefore instantly address myself to the consideration of them; and from that view I shall hope to find, as that not all doing of a thing beside the word, is an addition to the word, so that Infant's baptism is none of those culpable additions to the Word, which are forbidden by it.  
§. 3. And the first is that in Deut. 4. 2. Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall you diminish aught from it, that you may k●ep the Commandments of the Lord your God, which I command.  
§. 4. To this I answer first that the Adding here forbidden cannot possibly be so understood, as to make it unlawful to do any thing, even appertaining to the worship of God, which is not expressly commanded. in the word of God. And that will be enough to overthrow their ground, and secure Infant's Baptism from the guilt of unlawfulness. For it is evident that the word here commanded to Israel, to which they were not to add, and from which they were not to diminish, are the Statutes, and the judgements, which Moses taught them to do (ver. 1.) namely, in this Book of Deuteronomy, and the several chapters and verses of it: and however in the whole book of the Mosaical Law. Now it is most certain, that those Statutes and judgements, as they lie dispersed in the whole book of Moses Law, do reach unto all sorts of duties of common life, towards ourselves, and towards our brethren, as well as of worship towards God. If then all doing any uncommanded thing be an adding to the word, and that adding to it which is here forbidden by it, than all other uncommanded actions, as well as uncommanded acts of worship and service towards God, must hereby be forbidden, and so be unlawful: and we must no more do any action of common life, than any act of worship and service towards God, but what is expressly commanded in the word, for fear of incurring the guilt of adding to the word, and doing that which is unlawful. And then there will be Absurdities enough following hereupon, as has upon 
Mr. Hooker Eccl. Polity. Dr. Hammond Will-worship. etc.  several accounts, and occasions, been shown by sundry of our Divines. But if the Prohibition of adding to the word here, be not, for the absurdities consequent thereunto, to be extended unto the actions of common life, than it is not to be extended to the actions of religious service. For the same addition that is not to be made to the one, is not to be made to the other: and the same diminution that is not to be made from the one is not to be made from the other. There being no distinction in this case made betwixt the one and the other, it must be applied to both or to neither. And either there shall no uncommanded actions of common life be lawful, or else some actions of religion may be lawful, though not commanded, and the doing of them no addition to the word. And if so, then Infant's Baptism may be lawful enough, notwithstanding any thing that here is said to the contrary, and not be found any addition to the word.  
§. 5. Secondly, I answer, that, this way of Interpreting this Text, so as to render all uncommanded either civil or sacred actions unlawful being overthrown, there are other commodious renderings of the Text, which may fully speak the sense of it, and yet render Infant's Baptism not unlawful.  
§. 6. One is that of Hugo Grotius, who saith, To diminish is not to do that which is bidden. 
Diminuere est non facere quod jubetur; addere, aliter quam est jussum facere. Grot. in loc.  To add is to do otherwise than 'tis bidden. To do what otherwise? Why that sure which is forbidden. His word is not (aliud) another thing, as if the doing of any other thing, than what was bidden, were in his sense that adding to the word which is forbidden: but it is (aliter) otherwise, clearly showing his sense of the Adding here forbidden to be the doing of what was bidden, otherwise than it was bidden to be done. Now what is this to Infant's Baptism? How can our doing of it be a doing otherwise than is commanded, and so an adding, in his sense to the word, if in the word there be nothing at all commanded that concerns it. And if it be not all commanded, how is it possible we should do it otherwise than 'tis commanded, and so be guilty of adding to the word, in his sense, by the doing of it?  
§. 7. Another is that of Dr. Hammond, who makes the paying of an Uniform Obedience to God by 
Defence of Superstition, pag. 15. 16.  the Jews according to the Law of Moses to be the meaning of the not adding nor diminishing mentioned in this Text. Now what is this, you shall fulfil all my commandments, and not disobey any of them, either by doing what I forbidden, or by leaving undone what I command, or by doing any thing that I have commanded otherwise than I have commanded otherwise than I have commanded it, to the business of Infant's Baptism? What one either Affirmative or Negative Law of God touching his worship and service given to the Jews by Mos●s, is violated and disobeyed thereby? And if none, then for any thing yet here said, it must remain lawful.  
§. 8. A third is that of theirs, with whom I agree, that interpret the not adding here forbidden of not adding any thing to the word of God as the word of God which was never spoken by God. The word Add is explained by the word Diminish. To diminish any thing from the word of God is properly to rob God of any part of it. This is done two ways. First, by wholly destroying it, as if it had never been spoken at all, And this is a thing that they were guilty of, whoever they were, by whom any book, or part of any book of God's word hath been lost, if ever any were, as is to be suspected: some things being spoken of as written, which are not to be found amongst the writings that are extant. Secondly, it is done by diminishing the Authority of it, reckoning that for merely Humane, which is Divine. This is a thing which we are wrongfully charged by the Papists to be guilty of, because we own not the Apocryphal Books as the divinely inspired word of God, but as the writings of uninspired men. But they are justly guilty of it, that look upon the Scripture as a dead letter, and 
Caspar Swenckfeldius docuit vocale verbum tanquam literam ocsidentem rejiaiendum esse: solo spiritu nos contentos esse debere. Alsted. Prolegom. Theolo. Polem. Sensum literalem aiunt [Weigeliani] esse umbram, sonum Antichristianum, sapientiae expertem, spiritu vacuum, fundamentum arenosum, saluti noxium, ambiguum in verbis, imperfectum in doctrinâ, mortuum & inefficacem in literâ, ineptum ad consolationem. Wendelin. Theolog. Christian. Epist. Dedicator.  a useless thing, to be laid by as out of date now in the times of the effusion of greater light. This is the Doctrine of the Swenckfeldians, and Weigelians, and espoused I doubt by too many of our English Enthusiasts.  
§. 9 And accordingly to Add to the word of God is to foist in and obtrude words upon God, pretending them to be delivered and spoken by him, though he never spoke them, nor gave any man order to speak them from him. And this is done two ways. First, by adding words to the word of God. This he should be guilty of that should put any words into the Bible more than Originally were there; or should put into the Translation of the Bible more than is in the words or sense of the Original. And this they are guilty of, that affirm any thing to be spoken by God, which he neve● spoke. And this, Nicholas Stock, and John of Leiden Ringleaders amongst the 
Dr. Fea●ley Dippers dipped, p. 225. etc.  German Anabaptists formerly have been charged with. And I could wish none of our English Enthus●sts were chargeable with it. Secondly, it is done by giving a divine authority to words not spoken by a divine inspiration. This we accuse the Papists to be guilty of in making the Apocryphal Books of equal Authority with the Canonical. Which yet cannot be proved to have been written by a Divine Inspiration; nor to have been given by God as a Law of Faith but only written by Men as a Direction for Life.  
§. 10. If then for the Baptising of Infants we pretend no word of Gods not spoken by him; if into his word we have put no words of our own, or any man's else, nor have given to any thing not written by him an equal Authority with his word, than we are not, we cannot be guilty of that Adding to the word of God which here is prohibited. None sure is so weak as to think the baptising of a child to be the adding of words to the word of God.  
§. 11. And what hath been said of this Text will serve in answer to other Texts of the same import. Such as (Deut. 12. 32.) where it is said, What thing soever I command you, observe to do it, thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. What thing soever, that is, as the Septuagint render it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, every word that I enjoin you, every word of command that I give you, that shall you be careful to observe; to that shall you pay an uniform obedience, forbearing to do the things that I forbidden, and doing the things, whatsoever they be, that I command; and to my words ye shall add no words of your own; ye shall put into my Law no commands that I never gave you, you shall not take from my Law any of the commands that I have given you; ye shall not change the Rule I have set down for you ●o walk by, either in whole or in part, by imposing on yourselves either more severe or more easy performances than I have required from you, instead of those that I have required: but ye shall do fully that which I have commanded, and ye shall do it faithfully as I have commanded it.  
§. 12. And this is agreeable to those Texts, where this uniform observance of the then settled rule is more explicately set down. As (in Deut. 5. 32.) ye shall observe to do therefore as the Lord hath commanded you, you shall not turn aside to the right hand or to the left. And (Deut. 28. 14.) Thou shalt not go aside from any of the words, which I command thee this day to the right hand or to the left, to go after other gods to serve them. And (Joshua 1. 7.) Be th●u strong, and very courageous, that thou mayst observe to do according to all the Law, which Moses my servant commanded thee, turn not from it to the right hand, or to the left.  
§. 13. Now what is this to Infant's Baptism, supposing it utterly uncommanded? How is the baptising of an Infant, a not doing as the Lord hath commanded? or a going aside from any of his words? or a turning from them to the right hand or the left? What one word of our own, or any's else, have we added to his to bring it in? what one word of his have we left out, that else might have given a stop to our doing of it? what one word of his have we changed to make the easier way for its introduction, or continuation? what one thing required by him have we turned from, and let alone unperformed, that we might do that in the stead of it? yea, on the contrary, how doth not our doing of it hold proportion with his word, and so can be no violation of his word? In short, when it can be made appear that the baptising of Infants, is the putting of words into Moses' Law, than we shall, and till than we shall not yield, that it is that adding to the word of God, which God by Moses in this Text for bad.  
§. 14. Such again is that saying of Agur, Prov. 30. 6. Add thou not unto his words lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a lia●. What can this mean other, than that no man ought to add any of his own, or others words to the word of God, as if God had spoken them, whereas he never spoke word of them? This whosoever he be that doth, he must needs be found a liar, when God comes to reprove him. But what reproof can he be liable to for adding to his words, that hath added nothing to them? Or how can he be found a liar upon the account of adding to God's words, who doth not affirm, God ever said one word more than he hath said?  
§. 15. And now what is this Text, or any thing that can be inferred from it, to our pleading for Infant's baptism? Have we for the introducing or defending that practice, inserted into the word of God any words of our own, pretending them to be his words? Let the book be searched, and the words produced, and let the shame of such adding light upon the doers of it. But if we do no such thing, if we have added no one word concerning this to God's Words, then can this Text make nothing at all against us, who have done nothing of that which is forbidden by it?  
§. 16. Indeed from such words of God as are expressed in Scripture, we draw such Consequences as naturally flow from them being rightly interpreted. But this is no adding to the words of God. This is but what we are enabled to by the example of our Saviour and his Apostles: who prove things not expressed in Scripture by Consequences deduced from Scripture: and by such proving justify a rational collection from the word to be no culpable addition to the word, which is the thing that this Text forbids.  
§. 17. Yea but, do we not find the Jews severely reproved again and again for performing uncommanded acts of worship, of which, saith God, I commanded th●m not, neither came it into my heart, or mind, Jer. 7. 31. & 19 5. & 32. 35? Yes verily. And what then? Why then uncommanded acts of worship and service are unlawful. And so Infant's Baptism will upon that account also be unlawful, as being an uncommanded thing.  
§. 18. So the Anabaptists indeed reasons from these Texts: but without any reason, yea against all reason. For the acts spoken of in those Texts as not commanded, are acts of devotion to, and worship of false gods, building high places to Baal, and causing their sons and daughters to pass through the fire to Molech. Now in the name of God, doth this follow? Israel were reproved for performing uncommanded acts of devotion and Idolatrous worship to false gods? therefore it is unlawful for Christians to perform uncommanded acts of devotion, and religious worship to the true God? Or, because it was unlawful for them to cause their sons and daughters to pass through the fire to Molech, therefore it must be unlawful for us to cause our sons and daughters to pass through the water to Jesus Christ? May not we baptise our Infants, and so consecrate them unto God? because they may not burn their Infants, and so sacrifice them to the Devil? What an absurd? What a wild, and irrational consequence is this?  
§. 19 But let us a while consider the expression, which I commanded them not, nor speak it, neither came it into my heart, or mind. What is this but a Meiôsis, intimating in a milder expression a severer interdiction? which I commanded not, that is, which I have most strictly forbidden, as abhorring it, and abominating it in my heart. And were not these things forbidden strictly enough, both in general in the first and second Commandment of the Decalogue, and particularly in Levit. 18. 21. where it is expressly said, Thou shalt not let any of thy s●ed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God. And again, Levit. 20. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. where stoning to death by the people of the land, and that without mercy, is threatened against the offender in this kind. See! these uncommanded things, as they are called here, were things elsewhere most strictly prohibited, most severely interdicted.  
§. 20. Again it is said in the Third Commandment, The Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. Is that all, that the Lord will not look on him that taketh his name in vain as altogether an innocent man? Is it not, that the Lord will most severely punish him? What else is meant in Ezek 17. 18, 19 Jerem. 7. 9, with 12, 14, 15. Zech. 5. 2, 3, 4. Malach. 3. 5. Hosea 4. 2. Jerem 23. 10. So his not commanding here is his forbidding. The not coming into his heart, is his hating such abomination, as it is called, Jerem. 32. 35.  
§. 21. Now what is this to Infant's Baptism? Where hath God any where forbidden it, that the doing of it should be such an abomination to God? From this manner of Gods expressing himself, I commanded not, touching things most severely forbidden, hated, and abhorred by God, how doth any argument arise, how is any reasoning framed to the rendering of that unlawful to man, as abominable unto God, which God is so far from having ever any where forbidden, or expressed any detestation against, that he is supposed never to have said the least word about it?  
§. 22. Yea, what if this be spoken in the way of aggravation of their fault in proceeding to such unnatural cruelties towards their children in the worship of false gods, as were never by the true God required of them? As if God Almighty had said, Your idolatrous wickedness is so much the greater, in that ye do these things to serve your false gods, which, for the cruelty, and unnaturalness of them, I who am the true God, never commanded you to perform to me; it never so much as once came into my heart or mind to require any such thing of you to myself, still this will no way be applicable unto Infant's Baptism, which can in no respect be paralleled unto these most inhuman acts of the most devilish worship.  
§. 23. No more can that of Isa. 1. 12. (a place often enough thrown in our dish about this business) Who hath required this at your hands? For the fault there reproved was not the performing of 
Offerontium nequitla, bene olens thymiams in abominationem convertit. D. Chrys. Hom. 27. in Gen. There are several accounts upon which God in Scripture is said to disregard and not to approve or accept of Sacrifices, which yet were of his own institution. 1. In respect of the Hypocrisy of the offerers: That people being grown formal and corrupt trusted in Sacrifices, and the work wrought in them, and said by them they should be justified. God expressing his indignation against such Sacrificers, rejects the things themselves wherein they trusted, that is in reference to them that used them. This is the intention of the Holy Ghost. Isa. 1. 12, 13. Dr. Owen Confut. of Biddle Catech. ch. 22. p. 472. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 D. Chrysost. 1 Orat. adv. Judaeos.  an uncommanded action: the thing itself, to come and appear before God, and that no less than thrice a year, being most particularly commanded, Exod. 23. 17. and Exod. 34. 23. But it was the performing of a commanded action with such hypocrisy as they did it with; it was their being hypocrites in their hearts even whilst they were before the eyes of God. Their hearts were not with him, even whilst they were performing exterior acts of worship and service to him. Now in such case the most commanded acts of worship are hateful to God; not as acts of worship, but as acts of such worshippers. This may be seen in the Context from 12 to 21. and so again Isa. 66. 3, 4. Prov. 21. 27. & Prov. 28. 9  
§. 24. Now this can no way be applicable to the prejudice of Infant's Baptism: unless our Antipaedobaptists will say, that our coming to appear before God with our Infants to offer and consecrate them unto him in baptism is all Hypocrisy; and that as oft as we tread the courts of God to that end we come but to play the Hypocrites with him. Which yet I hope they will not unjustly, and I am sure they cannot justly charge us with all. What we do in this, we do it simply and sincerely, walking according to our light, and acting according to our conscience, without hypocrisy.  
§. 25. But put case we do allow them their own sense of all those Texts, which they bring to prove the unlawfulness of any thing that is not commanded in the word of God (viz. Deut. 4. 2. & 12. 32. Prov. 30. 6, etc.) yet still it will not follow, that those Texts which were given under, and as a rule for the Legal Dispensation, and reached to all the most minute parts and circumstances of God's worship, which were every one under the penalty of a curse to be punctually observed, are now in force under, and as rules for the Oeconomy of the Gospel. For that will be to bring back again, and make necessary all the former legal administrations; because there must be no Diminutions from God's Word. For by what Texts of Scripture are forbidden all Additions to the word of God, by the same Texts are forbidden all Diminutions from his Word. And if we must do nothing more than has been commanded, because we must not add; then we must do nothing less, because we must not diminish. And so we must fall again to Circumcision, and all the outdated services of the Law, and in plain terms, turn Jews.  
§. 26. If it be said, that the not doing of things now, that were commanded then, is no Diminution, because there has been a disannulling of the Commandment going before (Heb. 7. 18); than I answer that for the same reason the doing of things now, that were not commanded then, is no addition. And those Texts must be in force both ways, or neither way; reaching unto all Diminutions, or else not extending unto all Additions. Besides, if the Commandment be disannulled, than it is no Commandment. And how there should either from, or to, a no Commandment be made any diminution, or addition, is not so very easy to understand. How can any thing be done either more or less than is commanded, when there is no command? And a command disannulled is annihilated as to all existency of being a command: and is now none.  
§. 27. If it be replied that the equity of those Texts remains still. And that therefore as nothing was to be done in the time of the Law, but what was written in the Book of the Law: so nothing is to be done in the time of the Gospel, but what is written in the Book of the Gospel. I answer, No. Thus far the equity of them remains, that what is commanded in the Gospel, be done as it is commanded: and what is forbidden, be forborn. But it doth not reach to the making of every thing unlawful to be done, which is not particularly prescribed in the Gospel. Because there is a great disparity between the Legal and Evangelical Dispensation in this case.  
§. 28. In the Legal Oeconomy particular order was given for all the circumstantial as well as substantial parts of God's service. But in the Oeconomy of the Gospel no such particular Order has been given. And so the case is not equal. And therefore the Argument from the one to the other, from a completely settled administration to an administration not completely settled, is not good.  
§. 29. Find us in the Gospel so complete a Platform not only for all Substantials, but also for all Circumstantials, as was under the Law, and we shall not think fit, upon the account of the equity that is pleaded from those Texts, to add any thing thereto. But till then, we shall neither think it unfit for the Governors of the Church, to whom Christ hath 
* Act. 1. 8. & 15. 28. 1 Cor. 14. 26, 40. 2 Cor. 12. 19 Eph. 4. 11, 12. Tit. 1. 5.  left the power of ordering Church affairs, to order such things as are unordered by the Gospel, nor for those that are under government to be conformable unto their Orders, and consequently to baptise Infants though the●r baptising had not by the Gospel been ordered.  
§. 30. And by this time I hope it appears, that, even their own sense of these Texts supposed, which yet I do not grant, that whole way of reasoning of theirs, from the prohibitions of additions to the commands under the Law, to the not doing of any uncommanded thing under the Gospel, is inconsequent, and of no force against Infant's Baptism.  
§. 31. Yea but, say they still, there is as full and clear a Text against adding to the word of God in the Gospel, as there was any under the Law. Is there so? I pray, where? Why in Revel. 22. 18. If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues, that are written in this Book. Well, what of this? Why then Infants Baptism being not written in the Gospel, is an addition to the Gospel, and so unlawful.  
§. 32. Not so. For the adding here spoken of hath reference only to this one Book of the Revelation, and not to the Gospel, as that is one entire volume, containing all the Books of the New Testament. For they were not put altogether into one Book till some years after the death of the Author of the Revelation: it being long ere sundry of the Books now in the Canon were received into it. Yea, there be that affirm the Gospel of this Evangelist 
Euseb. Hist. l. 6. cap 22. It is certain that he was banished into Patmos where he wrote his Revelation and after his Return to Ephesus his three Epistles and Gospel. which was published by Gaius his host and Deacon. Bp. Prideaux Introduct. to Histor. p. 60. According to Bucholcer in his Chronology (pag. 635.) he was banished Anno Christi 96 to Patmos, where he writ his Revelation: Anno Christi 98 he returned from banishment to Ephesus where in Anno 99 he wrote his Gospel: for which he quotes Hierom-Cum publico edicto edito jussisse● omnes Christianos, & maxim praedicatores Evangelii pelli in exilium, profugere Joannes coactus est in Pathmon insulam ubi dicitur Apocalypsin scripsisse, si modo illius autor est hic Joannes— Tandem trucidato Domitiano permissa est Christianis libertas redeundi, itaque reversus est Joannes ad Ecclesiam suam Ephesinam, & tranquillitatem nactus scripsit contra Ebionitas, Marcionem, & Cherintum [Cerinthum] haereticos Evangelium suum— Herman. Bonnus. Farrag Exemplor. fol. 7. See also Isaacksons Chronology; and Hutcheson upon John, pag. 1. The same may be further confirmed from several other Chronologies, as that of Regino Prumiensis; Hermannus Contractus; Marianus Scotus; the Compilatlo Chronologica published by Joannes Pistorius; the Pantheon of Gotsridus Viterbiensis; and W●rner Role●inks Fasciculus Temporum; also from Spondanus' Epitome of Baronius, Anno Christ. 97, & 99  to have been written after his Revelation. And therefore what is here said could have reference to itself only, and not to the other Books which were written by others, or to be written by himself.  
§. 33. And however that the reference of it is only unto itself, is evident by what goes before, and after, in this, and the following verse. For I testify, saith the Author of this Book, unto every man that hears the words of the Prophecy of this Bo●k, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this Book This Book. What Book? Why that, sure enough, that himself was then a writing; the Book of the Revelation containing those Prophecies, which God was pleased to impart unto him, and appoint him to write in a book, Rev. 1. 11. Which book, even whilst he was a writing of it, he frequently makes reference unto: as where he mentions the Words of this Prophecy, and the things which are written therein, Rev. 1. 3. and the say of the prophecy of this book; & the say of this book; and the words of the prophecy of this book; and the words of the book of this prophecy, Rev. 22. 7, 9, 10, 18, 19 All, expressions intimating the book he spoke of, to be that book which himself was then writing, containing the prophecies and predictions of the things that were to come, and the most of them in a short time, whence the say of the prophecy of this book were not to be sealed, the time being at hand, Rev. 22. 10.  
§ 34. Now let our Antipaedobaptists here have his own sense of Adding; let it import the doing of something not commanded. And what will then follow? Why, that nothing is lawful to be done now in the time of the Gospel, but that which is contained in this Book, the Book of the Revelation But that, he will tell you, cannot be. For so we shall have no Baptism at all: because none is commanded in the Revelation.  
§. 35. What then is the Adding here spoken against? Plainly this, and no more, the putting of some word or words to this Book. This is evident by that which is not to be taken away. For contraries la●d together do illustrate each the other. Now that, the taking away, is meant of any of the words 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Si quis abstulerit de Verbis libri, Versio interlinearis si quis diminuerit de verbis— Verse. Vulg. & Syriac. Si quis detraxerit ex verbis Prophetiae quae continentur in hoc libro. Verse. Arab.  of it. For so it is in ver. 19 If any man shall take away from the words of the book of this Prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, etc. What, I pray, can be taken away from the words of a book, but words or some part of the words? So that in accordance here with the adding here forbidden is the putting of any word or words to the words of this book, more, or other, than were at first set down in it, by the Author of it; whose design is to prevent any 
Hoc propter insalsatores dixit Gor●an. in loc. cx Beda.  man's corrupting of his book by addition or diminution, by putting any word to it, or taking any word from it.  
§. 36. And this was a caution but necessary for those times, when Heretics began to corrupt the Apostolical writings with their 
Innuit futuros in Ecclesia Hareticos qui Scripturas sa●ras adulterarent, atque ad eas cor. rumpendas, & in ●uos errores detorquendas quaedam adjicerent, quaedam ●●iam mutilarent. Id quod de Marcione testatur multis in locis Tertullianus: Et in primis quod plura deleret in sacris literis ad suas haerereses astruendas docet, l. de carne Christi. cap. 2. His opinor consiliis tot originalia instrumenta Christi delere Martion conatus est. Vnde eundem Marcionem Tertullian, lib. adv. eum 1 cap. 1. Murem Ponticum appellat Evangelium corrodentem. Quod verò Martion de suo quaedam Scripturis adjiceret, docet idem lib. de carne Christi, c. 7. Non recipio inquit, quod extra Scripturam, de tuo infers. Quod de Marcione docet Tertull. in multis aliis Hareticis ostendi posset quos uti diximus hoc loco notavit Apostolus. Blas. Vieg. in Apocalyps. cap. 22. Sect ult. p. 893. Adjuro te, qui transcribis librum istum, per Dominum Jesum Christum, & per glo●iosum ejus adventum. etc.  own interpolations. And of Martions so dealing with the Sacred Scriptures, both by taking away from them, and adding to them, Tertullian is a witness, who from his gnawing away of the Gospel calls him the Pontic Mouse. And Blasius Viegas tells us the like may be shown of many other Heretics. In reference to which evil dealing of Corrupters with Authors, Irenaeus imitation of our Author, at the end of one of his own books, adjures the Transcriber of it, by the Lord Jesus Christ, & his glorious coming to judge both quick and dead, to compare his copy with the Original, and most diligently to amend it by the exemplar from whence he had transcribed it.  
§. 37. Now who is so weak as not to see how nothing at all this makes against Infant's baptism? and how remote it is from proving every thing unlawful that is not commanded? A child is able to distinguish betwixt a Font and a Standish; water and ink; an Infant and a Bible; pouring water upon the one, and putting words into the other; and how no connexion there is between the one and the other; so that from the prohibition of the one to the unlawfulness of the other no Argument can be drawn.  
§. 38. And if the want of a Command cannot render Infant's baptism unlawful; then much less can the want of an Example: unless we were under some command not to act without a precedent, nor to proceed further than we have example. But that as we have not, so I do not hear it pretended as yet. And therefore though I think we may in some cases, (I will not say in all) argue positively from an example, and say, this I lawfully may do, because I find it done, yet I do not think we must in all cases argue negatively from a no example, and say, this I may not lawfully do, because I find no example of its doing. So that if there were not the least intimation of any such thing done in the Scripture, nor any thing whereby we might conjecture the doing of any such thing, the contrary whereto has abundantly been shown in this discourse, yet were not that any Argument at all from whence to conclude Infant's Baptism unlawful.  
§. ●9. And now having shown the no unlawfulness of infant's baptism, though there were in all the Scripture no either command to enjoin it, or example to just ●fie it, I might here set up my rest.  
§. 40. Nevertheless, as being willing to give the fullest satisfaction that can be needed, I shall yet ex abundanti further speak touching that often urged, but never proved assertion, that our Saviour gave no precept for the baptising of Infants, and that the Apostles of our ●aviour never baptised any; both which yet might be, though nothing were said of either; and the Scriptures supposed silence in the case is no proof, either that he did not command, or they not practise any such thing. I will speak of both severally.   

CHAP. XXXIII.  
The Scriptures silence no proof of our Saviour's not commanding the baptising of Infants.  
§. 1. ANd first, it doth not follow that our Saviour gave no precept for the baptising of Infants, because no such precept is particularly (as our Adversaries suppose) expressed in the Scripture. For our Saviour spoke many things to his Disciples concerning the kingdom of God, both before his Passion, and also after his Resurrection, which are not written in the Scriptures. And who can say, but that among those many unwritten say of his there might be an express precept for Infant's baptism? And if there were one, it is never the less binding for its not being written. It is Gods speaking, not man's writing that makes his word Authentic, and his command obliging. If no Apostle, nor Eungelist had ever set pen to paper to tell us by writing, what our Saviour did command, sure his commands had been as obliging, though unwritten, as they are now after their writing. And if any command of his did escape writing, as well might be, the Evangelists neither resolving every one severally, nor agreeing all jointly, to set down in writing all his commands, as writing at several times, and in several places, and upon several occasions, and without any command (that appea●s) from God to set down universally all his say, and make one Codex, as it were, of all his Laws; I say, if any of his commands did escape writing, 
See Dr. Hammonds Quaere of Resolving of Controversies.  it does notwithstanding bind those, to whom it is, though by any other way than writing, credibly made known, as much as if it had been written. So that if it may credibly appear, that our Saviour did give any precept for the baptising of Infants, then will Infant's baptism be to be received and practised upon a higher account, than that of the mere lawfulness of it, as being though not commanded, yet not forbidden in the Scriptures.  
§. 2. And truly, to pass by S. Ambrose his affirming that Infant's Baptism was a Constitution 
And they all agree with St. Ambrose l. 10. ep. 84. ad Demetriadem Virginem, who expressly affirms it. Paedobaptismum esse Constitutionem Salvatoris. And it proves it out of St. Joh. 3. 5. A. B. Laud Confer. S. 15. pag. 55. in margin.  of our Saviour's, that such a Precept was given by him, the very practice of the Church to baptise Infants (as we have shown it to be,) doth make it credible. For it is not easily imaginable how such a practice should come up so early, and so universally into the Primitive Church, if the Church had not received it from the Apostles as a command of Christ's to baptise Infants.  
§. 3. Who that understood it to have been our Saviour's command to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever he had commarded them, (Matth. 28. 19, 20.) and observed the Apostles teaching, by word or practice, the baptising of Infants, could judge any other, but that the Baptism of Infants was one of those things, which he had commanded them to teach all nations to observe? Though I have also shown, that even our Saviour's silence in the case, not excluding Infants from that, which it had been the use of the Church before his time to administer to them, when he did institute Baptism to be the Ceremony of admitting into Discipleship to him, is a sufficient indication of his mind, that it was his will they should be admitted; especially when it is remembered and considered, that the same use that was before his Institution, was continued still after it: which makes it evident, that he made no alteration in it.  
§. 4. Not to add, that this very Text of mine was anciently looked upon as a ground, and even as a command of our Saviour's, for Infant's Baptism. And therefore St. Augustine having exhorted the Pelagian to 
Quare contradicis? quare novie disputationibus antiquam fidei regulam frengere conaris? Quid est enim quod dicis? Parvuli non babent omnino vet originale peccatum? Quid est enim quod dicis, nisi ut non accedant ad Jesum? Sed tihi clama● Jesus, Sinite pueros venire ad me. D. Aug, Serm. 8. de Verb. Apost.  baptise his Infant, expostulates with him for contradicting, and going abour with new disputes to break the old Rule of Faith; namely in the point of the baptising of Infants upon the account of Original Sin in them. For whereto, saith he, tends your saying, that children have no, not so much as original sin; but to this, that they might not come to Jesus? that is to be baptised, that being the thing which he before had pressed him to. But (saith he) Jesus crieth to thee (that sure is as much as if he had commanded) Suffer the little children to come unto me, that is to be baptised: as is evident by the design of the Father in that place.  
§. 5. And accordingly Tertullian, who lived within two hundred years of our Saviour's birth, 
De Baptismo, pag. 264. Edit. Rigalt.  thinking this Text to oppose his Opinion, which was for the delaying of the Baptism of Infants for a while, yet not as unlawful, but as more profitable, as he fancied, propounds this Text as an Objection against his. Opinion, and labours to answer it. Which shows however that even so early as his time, this Text was looked upon as a Precept for Infant's Baptism.  
§. 6. And what saith he to it? Why by way of Concession he saith, Our Lord doth indeed say, Do not hinder them from coming to me. And what then? Why then let them come when they are grown up to ripeness of years. Yea, but if they must stay so long before they be baptised, they will not be little ones when they come to baptism; and so will not be concerned in this Text, which speaks of the coming not of Adult persons, but of young children unto Christ. He saith not, Suffer those that are Adult, but Suffer little children to come unto me. And his saying, Suffer little children to come unto me, imports his mind to have them come, and his readiness to receive them at their coming to him, even when, and whilst they are little children. And what man of judgement, would ever have interpreted our Saviour's saying, Suffer the little children to come unto me and forbidden them not, at a time when little children were brought to him, and hindered, for being brought to him so little, as if he had by so saying meant, Suffer these, which now are little children, to come to me hereafter, when they shall be men? that is, as much as to say, Suffer them not to come to me now: which is to command the very same thing which at the very same time he rebuked his Disciples for going about to do; and contrary to his present acting, who even then turned them not away from him, but took them up into his arms, and laid his hands upon them, and blessed them. A gloss this, that contradicts, and corrupts the Text.  
§. 7. Again, saith he, Veniant dum discunt, etc. Let them come when they have learned, and are taught whither to come. But those, whose coming to Christ occasioned this speech, and according to whose then present condition the speech is to be understood, were not such, nor so taught, not such as had learned, or could be taught how to come to Christ: but were Infants brought to him by others by reason of their inability to come to him of 
This passage of Tertullian because it is much stood upon, see further spoken to, und more fully answered by B. Gauden Eccles. Anglic. Suspiria, l. 3. c. 13. p. 299. And by Mr. Wills Infant Baptism Asserted, Par. 2. chap. 7.  themselves: and of them then, and of such as they then were are his words now to be understood, and accordingly have been understood in all the ages of the Church: to be sure as early as Tertullia's time: else why did he dispute against it?  
§. 8. But if there were neither this, nor any other Text, that was, or looked like, a Precept for Infant's Baptism, in the whole Bible, yet there might have been one given, though none were written. And what probability there is of it that one was given, if none of those Texts that are written were by the practice of the Church interpreted to be such, I have now shown.   

CHAP. XXXIV.  
The Scriptures silence no proof of the Apostles baptising no Infa●ts.  
§. 1. SEcondly, as it follows not, that our Saviour gave no express precept for Infant's baptism, because none is written, that is, none is written so expressly as to be acknowledged for such by the Antipaedobaptists, though my Text, as I have shown you, is so express as to have been taken for such in St. Augustine's time, and in Tertullia's time, fourteen hundred, and fifteen hundred years ago, and for aught I know, or any man living can prove to the contrary, from the beginning: so it doth not follow, that the Apostles did baptise no Infants, because it is not expressly written in the Scriptures, that they did baptise any; though I have shown you from the Scripture a very pregnant proof of such practice even by the Apostles themselves in their own times, did not prejudice so blind the eyes of our Adversaries that they will not see it. For they might baptise Infants, though it were not expressed in their extant writings that they did so.  
§. 2. A●e all things written in the Scriptures, that all the Twelve Apostles did in all places, where they came, and preached, gathered, and settled Churches? Yea, how little is there written of what was done by any of them? And how many are there of them, of whom there is nothing written at all; neither what they did, nor whither they went, nor what became of them? Did they nothing of whose do nothing is written? who are at least one half of the whole number of the Apostles. And if they did any thing, as sure enough they would be doing, they might as well do that, baptise Infants, as any thing else, for any thing, that is written, And where we find Infant's Baptism in a Church planted by an Apostle, as in Mus●ovia, Christianized by St. Andrew, or in India by St. Thomas. Why may we not think that planted there by that Apostle, as well as other Christian Customs or Constitutions, though in the Scripture there be a deep silence as to the whole Story. And there is as good proof, that they did not any thing else, of all those things which our Saviour commanded them, as that they did not that: because no more is written of any thing else that they did, than of that, which is just nothing at all.  
§. 3. And they of whose do any thing is written, did they no more, than just what was written? Were they so exact in keeping, and publishing Diaries of all their actions? Not a word said? not a deed done, but what was booked down? How many persons do you read of that were baptised by Paul in all that time that he continued preaching the Gospel, and planting the Church of Christ at Rome? And do ye think none were baptised by him, or at his command all the while? Can there be a Church founded, and form up without baptism? And if any were baptised, where is it written in Scripture, who, what, or how many they were? Again, do ye think the Saints at Rome did never commemorate the death of Christ in the celebration of the Eucharist? If yea, what mention is there of it in Scripture? In what book, chapter, verse is it to be read? No doubt both the one and the other Sacrament was by Paul's instructing and ordering received there: and yet is the Scripture profoundly silent as to any such thing. And who now will be so silly as from the Scriptures silence to draw a negative conclusion, and say no such thing was done there, because the Scripture says nothing of the doing of it. The like may be said of other Apostles, and the Churches planted by them.  
§. 4. Unless therefore that which is written were a perfect register of all that was done by all, and every one of the Apostles, as it is not of the do of either all, or one half, or any one of them, it cannot be proved, that no one of them did any thing, or appointed any thing to be done, (for instance to baptise Infants) because it is not extant in those few scanty memoirs, and intimations rather than relations, of some actions of some few of them, written for the most part occasionally, which are come to our hands, that any one of them d●d it. They might therefore do it, though their doing of it be not expressly written in the Scriptures.  
§. 5. And that they did it, or however so far delivered their mind concerning it, that done it was, and upon the account of their authority is most credible. Because the Practice thereof is, and has been, looked on in all the Ages of the Church, succeeding that, wherein they lived, as a Tradition of theirs. And that Tradition from them is as credibly avouched to us, as their writing those several Fpistles and Gospels, which we receive for their writings, and look upon as the word of God. And we may as well receive the one upon that Tradition as the other, and with as good reason reject the one as the other. We have the Testimony of the Church for the one, and we have but the Testimony of the Church for the other. And if we may believe the Church, when it tells us the Apostles wr● those Books, why may we not as well believe it, when it tells us the Apostles ordered that thing? And if it be of no credit in the latter, let our adversaries consider whether they do not by so saying, derogate from, and destroy all its credit in the former. And so the matter is at last come to this, that either we must have no new Testament Scriptures, or else we must have Infants baptism. The new Testament, and this Sacrament of it, must for aught I see, ever stand and fall together: both standing upon one bottom, Catholic Tradition, which must bear up both, or neither; not being able to support the one, if it cannot support the other also.  
§. 6. I will not say but that some few (one or two, for many hundreds of years) may have thought it not necessary to be administered so soon as in the prime of Infancy, unless in case of death. But their not thinking it necessary then, is a sufficient evidence of their opinion of its lawfulness at other times. For what is not lawful at other times, cannot be necessary even then.  
§. 7. And what ever reason we find any of the Ancients had to think it fit to defer it, I am of opinion we shall never find the unlawfulness of it to have been any of their reasons. Tertullian thought the deferring of it 
Quid enim necesse est Sponsores etiam periculo ingeri? quia & ipsi per mortalitatem destituere promissiones suas possunt, & proventu malae indolis falli. Tert. de Bapt.  was more profitable; but not the doing of it unlawful; to be sure he does not say so. And what's his reason against the necessity of it? That the Godfathers might not be brought into danger of failing in their undertaking, by their own mortality, or the Infant's untowardness. The deferring of it might then be prudential, but that makes not the doing of it unlawful. And if he thought it prudential to defer it, others as judicious as he have thought it no less prudence to hasten it. And so his opinion in that case signifies nothing as to our present concern.  
§. 8. Perhaps some might think it prudence to defer it, to avoid the exposing of so sacred an administration to the jeers of profane scoffers. Dionysius the Areopagite mentions 
Eccl. Hier. c. 12.  some such in his days, as jeered at the Sureties being interrogated and answering in the Infant's name. And no doubt there are now such in our days as think that practice ridiculous enough. But still be it as ridiculous as any has imagined it, that renders it not unlawful. And if every thing must be laid by that any will think ridiculous, we shall have little left, either of our Worship or Doctrine. When some heard of the Resurrection they mocked (Acts 17. 32.) But, as wise and pious persons will not be jeered out of a practice that is solemn and serious and of weighty concern by the raillery of a few aieny-brained phantastics, so it is beside the question in hand; and if any have thought fit to defer it on that account, that is no argument of the unlawfulness of it.  
§. 9 Some perhaps imagining the Contract made by the Persons themselves, though never so young, but three or four years old, so they could but answer themselves to what was to be required of them in order to their baptising, would afterwards be accounted by themselves the more obligatory, and have stronger impressions upon them than if made by others, have thought it fit to defer it for a while. I dispute not the prudentiality of the consideration: but only say that the prudency, be it never so great, of its deferring longer, can infer no unlawfulness on its doing sooner. And it seems to me, that there are more weighty considerations inclining to, and pressing for the hastening of it, than that, or any I have yet met with for the deferring, because the generality have this way showed themselves inclined by baptising their children whilst Infants.  
§. 10. And since we have so many weighty considerations moving to hasten it, being we are assured by a late learned Father of our 
B. Gawden Eccles. Angl. Suspir. p. 299.  Church, that there is not any one of the Ancients that doth deny its lawfulness, I see no reason why any suggestions or pretences of inconveniency, unnecessariness, or novelness in that practice by an inconsiderable number of persons either of elder or later times, should sway us against the vogue of the Catholic Church, to deposit a Constitution in which we see there is so much conveniency, for which we see there is so great necessity, of which we see there is so great antiquity; antiquity reaching up, both unto, and also into, the Apostles Age as being delivered unto the Church by them.   

CHAP. XXXV.  
The Argument from the sixth Article of our Church answered.  
§. 1. YEa, but is it not the express Doctrine of our Church that Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation? Yes. And what then? Is Infant's Baptism therefore unlawful? No such matter. It follows not. I hope there are more things lawful, than what are either necessary to salvation, or are contained in holy Scripture.  
§. 2. But what then follows! Why this. That, supposing Infant's baptism were neither read in Scripture, nor could be proved thereby, it were not to be believed as an Article of the Faith, nor were the belief of it to be thought necessary to salvation. But sure a thing is not therefore unlawful, because it is not to be received as an Article of the Faith; or because its belief is not necessary to salvation. And so this Article, even on that supposition, fights not with the lawfulness of Infant's Baptism.  
§. 3. But we deny the supposition, and say that Infant's Baptism is contained in the Holy 
Nullum dari potest dogma ad salutem obtinendam cognitu necessarium, quod in Scripturâ non contineatur express è vel implicitè, & analogize, ità u● per consequentiam legitimam inde elici possit. Wendelin Theolog. Proleg. c. 3 Thes. 7. Cum dico perspicuè intelligo vel in se, vel per se: vel in suis principiis & per aliud. Hier. Zanch. de Sacrâ Script. q. S. prop. 1. pag. 194. Etsi enim non extet expressum praeceptum hac de re (sc. de baptizan. ●is infantibus fidelium liberis) colligitur tamen perspicuè ex suis principiis, hoc est, ex causis propter quas conferendus sit alicui baptismus, etc. Id. ib. pag. 195.  Scriptures, in that manner as other things are, that are not expressed in it, but yet may be deduced from it, namely eminently though not formally, implicitly though not expressly; so as all Points of Faith are contained in the Creed, that are not expressed in it: or as all Duties are contained in the Decalogue, or all Petitions are contained in the Lord's Prayer, that are not particularly and formally expressed therein.  
§. 4. And that it may be proved thereby, I hope this Discourse hath already given a sufficient evidence. And before I conclude, I will yet add one further proof of it: and that such an one as though some think not conclusive of the Point, yet that acute Divine as well as Heroic prelate, A. B. Laud, thought to be a direct proof, and near an expression in Scripture itself. 'Tis Acts 2. 38, 39 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptised every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, etc. But how doth this prove Infants Baptism? Why, let that learned Man tell you in his own words. For when St. Peter had ended that great Sermon of his, Acts 2. he applies two comforts unto them, ver. 38. Amend your lives, and be baptised, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. And then ver. 39 he infers, For the Promise is made to you, and to your children. The Promise; what Promise? What? why the Promise of Sanctification by the Holy Ghost. By what means? Why, by Baptism. For 'tis expressly, Be baptised, and ye shall receive. And as expressly, This promise is made to you, and to your children. And therefore A. C. may find it, if he will, That the Baptism of Infants may be directly concluded out of Scripture.  
§. 5. But Infants are not named here. True; Yet Children are. But those children might be men. Yes, and they might be Infants also. I conceive the word is exclusive of neither, but inclusive of both. Unless any will say that the Infants were no children; or that the promise that was made to the children as well as persons of the then present hearers, was made only to such of their children as were men and not Infants; which is easilier said, than proved. For the Apostle says to your children; that is all of them; not only some of them; all of them being capable of the thing promised, and none of them being exempted from the benefit of the promise. And where God has enlarged the bounds, why should man enclose the Common? where God has made a restriction? Where God has been kind, why should Man become cruel, and shut out Infants from the benefits of a promise, when God has opened a door wide enough to let them in to it?  
§. 6. It is true, the word Children is not always to be understood of Infants, but sometimes of Men: and as true it is that it is not always to be understood of Men, but sometimes of Infants: and as true again it is that sometimes it includes both. For when the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea upon the dry ground, (Exod. 14. 22.) Were those children all men? Had they no Infants among them? Did they leave them any where behind them? I think it will not be said. In as much then as no distinction is here made, it includes the Infant as well as Men children of Is●ael. And the rather because where God would have it to signify Men exclusively as to children, himself makes a restriction. As in Exod. 12. 37. And the children of Israel journeyed from Ramesis to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot, that were men, beside children. No distinction then being made of the children into Men children, and Infant children, it is by Analogy of Scripture, as well as Judgement of Reason to be understood of both. And if it be to be understood of both, than what right the men had to Baptism by this Text, the Infants had the same, and were to be baptised for the remission of sins, and reception of the Holy Ghost as well as they. And admit, we say, you, and your children, does intent the then present Jews, and their posterity; yet sure none can think the Apostle meant that the promise did belong to their posterity only, and not to their present children also. For why should it belong to those that after should be their children, and not to those that then were? Why should these be skipped over and the other taken in? And would not their after children be once in a state of infancy as well as their present? Would they not be children before they could be men? And at what period of their age must their right to the pomise first commence? When must they begin to be receptive of the Holy Ghost? Here's no restriction or limitation made as to times, any more than as to persons; to show that both then, and afterward, to all that were, or should be their children, as soon as ever, and as long as ever any should be in that relation, the promise did belong.  
§. 7. Again, admit we interpret the children as meaning only such of their children, whether then or after, as were in that capacity that the persons then present with the Apostles, and to whom St. Peter spoke, were: still the business will be done, and effectually. For St. Peter spoke to that whole multitude that was come together upon the noise of what was happened unto the Apostles. And to them he said, be baptised every one of you. So then every one of the then present multitude was capable of baptism. Now is it imaginable that so great, and so confused a multitude coming together on a sudden accident, could consist all of persons qualified for age and understanding in principles of Christianity, according to the Antipaedobaptistical measures of capability to receive baptism? What? were they all Adult persons? no children? no infants, at least of three, four, five, or six years old, among them? We may make an estimate of the matter by what we daily see amongst ourselves on like occasions. Where is it possible to find a Fair, or Market, or other solemn convention of any remark in which some of age under the Antipaedobaptists standard of capacity for baptising shall not be immixed? especially if that convention be sudden, and tumultuary, as this was, when a whole Town flocks together, as when a fire happens, or any sray is fought, or game is played, or show is seen. What running is there on such occasions of mothers, and servants after their children, to secure them from the injuries of the multitude, and save them from being trodden under foot? And we can imagine nothing less than a miracle in it if this assembly were not such. And if such it were, then what would we have more than an exhortation of the Prince of the Apostles with the concurrence of all his Coapostles to such a multitude to be baptised every one of them? What is this less than a Precept for Infant's baptism, And though none of them were sucklings, yet if any of them were Infants (& infancy is a state of some latitude) though able to run about and play, yet unable rationally to profess repentance towards God, and 
Confession of Faith setforth by Anabaptists, Anno 1660. pag. 6.  faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, the case is all one as to the difference between us and the Antipaedobaptists, and Infant's baptism will hence be established.  
§. 8. Yea, but these words are spoken to persons capable of repenting. And they only are bidden to be baptised, who are capable of so doing.  
§. 9 I answer, First it is plain the words were spoken to a confused multitude; and it cannot be proved that there were none in it but such as were so capable; no demonstration can be made of it, that there were no Infants mixed with it. And therefore when the Apostle says to that multitude, be baptised every one of you, it cannot be proved that he had those only of them to be baptised, which were capable of repenting.  
§. 10. Secondly, the words were spoken of Persons capable of receiving the Holy Ghost: but their children were capable of that: and therefore of baptism the means to make them partakers thereof. And sure their inability to repent, could not render them incapable, unless they had been persons that 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Greg. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 658. Edit. Paris.  needed repentance, and of whom it had been required that they should repent. 'Tis hardheartedness sure, and that to a high degree, for want of that duty which they have not need nor ability to perform, to deprive them of that benefit which they have need of, and capability to receive; to deny them the means of being made partakers of the Holy Ghost, who as they do not act repentance, so they need not to repent: and need not to repent because they act no sin.  
§. 11. Thirdly, the Reason inducing the Jews to be baptised, is applied to their children as well as to themselves; which were needless, if their children were not capable of baptising, as well as themselves. Be baptised every one of you. Why? For the promise is made to you and to your children. No need of mentioning the children's right to the Promise, if that did not give them a right to the Means. The Argument as applied to the Parents lies thus. If the promise belong to you, than the means. But the former does belong to you. Therefore the latter. And therefore be baptised, which is the means, that you may receive the Holy Ghost, which is the Promise. And lies it not just so as applied to their Children? If the promise belong to your Children, than the means also belongs to them. But the Promise belongs to them; for it is made to them as well as unto you. Therefore the means also belongs to them. And therefore let your children have the means, that they may not want the grace, let them be baptised that they may receive the Holy Ghost.  
§. 12. Again, that which he would have them baptised for, namely remission of sins, is sufficiently I hope proved to be needful for children as well as parents. And where there is the same need, why should we not think he designed the same help? When he bade the Parents be baptised for the remission of sins, can it be thought his meaning was that the children should rather go without remission, than have baptism? as if he had some compassion indeed for the parents, but none for the children.  
§. 13. But if he meant their children as well as themselves should be baptised, why did he not say, Be baptised both you and your children, but only be baptised yourselves, without any mention of their children. I answer, It was needless so to say, because as one that well understood the Genius of that people, he knew that they would look upon their children as heirs of the promise, as well as themselves, and so to be as capable of, and to have as good right to the means, that would make them partahers of the promise, as themselves; and because he intended particularly to urge that reason for their baptising, which would be as appliable to their children as to themselves, and which they accordingly, observing the custom 
He that would see this Text further opened and urged, may consult Mr. Nathaniel Stephen's Precept for the Baptism of Infants.  of their nation to circumcise, and baptise the children as well as parents, would apply unto them.  
§. 14. And thus I have shown the Practice of this Church to baptise Infants not to be inconsistent with that Article of the Church which is urged against it. And I hope I have sufficiently answered the Antipaedo baptists Arguments against the Lawfulness of Infant's baptism, and defended it against them.   

CHAP. XXXVI.  
A Reply to an Answer made by H. D. to the Objection from the no express Command or Example in Scripture of women's receiving the Lords Supper; referring to Chap. 31. Sect. 9  
Obj. THe Objection (saith H: D:) that is usually brought under this Head, is, That there is no express Command or Example for women's receiving the Lords Supper; yet who doubts of a good ground from consequential Scripture for their so doing.  
Answ. In answer whereto, you'll find there is both Example and Command for the Practice, viz.  
1. From Example, Acts 1. 14. where we read, that Mary and other women were gathered together, and that these women together with the rest of the Disciples, were altogether in one place, and continued steadfastly in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship, and breaking of Bread and Prayers, chap. 2. 42, 44. It being expressly said, That all that believed were together.  
2. It appears from Command, 1 Cor. 11. 28. Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat: The Greek word signifieth a Man or a Woman; the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a word of the Common Gender, as appears, 1 Tim. 2. 4, 5. There is one Mediator betwixt God and Man, and Woman; there is the same word used, Gal. 3. 2. There is neither Male nor Female, but ye are all one in Christ. Let but as good proof appear (from Command and Example) for Infant's Baptism, and it shall suffice. Thus far H. D. Edit. 2. p. 95, 96.  
Having myself with others, made this Objection, and finding nothing replied by Mr. Wills to this Answer made thereto, I think it convenient to take away the force thereof by the ensuing Reply.  
And first I say, that the Allegation that Mary and other Women were gathered together, Acts 1. 14, will not prove that there is express example for women's receiving the Lords Supper. For though the Apostles continuing with one accord in prayer and supplication with the women, and Mary the Mother of Jesus be mentioned there, yet is no mention there made of their continuing, or so much as being with them at the Sacrament of the Supper of the Lord. Nor is it there, or any where, expressly said, that these women together with the rest of the Disciples were altogether in one place, and continued steadfastly in the Apostles Doctrine, and Fellowship, and breaking of Bread, and Prayers.  
It is said indeed, Acts 1. 15. That in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the Disciples. But how does it appear, that any Women were among them at that Assembly? They are not mentioned. And the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Disciples, does not necessarily by the force of its literal import imply them. For that is the proper word for male or he-disciples; there are two other words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for female or she-disciples; and if the she-disciples had been intended, why was not one of the words proper for them used to include them? But further the Apostles address is expressly to men, and not to women. His words are not so much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which might be thought to take in the women, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men (in a word whose literal import excludes women) and brethren. So that unless by Men and Brethren must be meant (and expressly too, or else all is nothing) womans and sisters here will be no room for the women here.  
Again in Acts 2. 1. They that were all-with one accord in one place, are mentioned 〈◊〉 word of the masculine gender, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So in ver. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So in ver. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So in ver. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 again. So in ver. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So in ver. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. So in ver. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 again. So in ver. 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all expressions necessarily implying men, but not necessarily implying women, if not necessarily excluding them.  
And who was it that continued steadfastly in the Apostles Doctrine, and Fellowship, and breaking of Bread, and Prayer, ch. 2. 42. the women? It is not so expressed. But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expressly the Males that gladly received his word, which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 continued steadfastly in the Apostles Doctrine, etc. To whom before their conversion the Apostle addresses his speech as to Men, & not Women; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that's his word, ver. 29. Men and Brethren. And to, and of whom after their conversion he still speaks as to persons of the male sex, as far as we can guests by the gender of his words. Ver. 38. Peter said unto them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 every one of you, i. e. in the literal import, every male of you.  
Nor does it prove it, that it is said, ch. 2. 44. That all that believed wore together. For still they are persons of the male sex, that there expressly are spoken of, if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, words all of the masculine gender denote any such thing: of which gender still are all the words that denote their persons to the end of the Chapter; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ver. 46. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, v. 47.  
I might add that its being said, that all that believed were together, does not prove, that the whole multitude of believers men and women were always all together, never asunder, but all, in all places, and at all times, and in all actions, still together. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will not enforce that.  
I might add also, that it is not demonstrable, that the breaking of bread here is infallibly meant of the Holy Sacrament, for some understand it otherwise, though it is ordinarily so understood. And then where's all the force of the Argument from Example gone? Nothing here said by H. D. has proved it.  
And much of the same rate is the proof for Command, from 1 Cor. 11. 28 Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat. Here, saith H. D. the Greek word signifieth a man or woman, the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a word of the common gender, as appears 1 Tim. 2. 4, 5. There is one Mediator betwixt God and Man and Woman.  
To which I Reply; Admitting the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be, as he saith, of the common gender, and that whilst it continues undetermined to either sex by any distinguishing note, it may be allowed to comprehend both sexes in it (as in 1 Tim. 2. 5. where we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, without any article of either masculine or feminine gender to confine it to either sex, and exclude the other) yet where it is determined by distinguishing notes to either sex, how doth it follow that the excluded sex is necessarily implied under that note that excludes it? The nature of common words being such, that before their determination by any masculine or feminine adjective, they are applicable to either sex, but after their determination to either, they are no longer common to both. Had it been said to be of the doubtful gender, something might have been inferred from that. But as the word is not of that gender, so H. D. expressly saith it is of the common gender. Now look but into 1 Cor. 11. 28, and it is most evidently apparent that the signification of the common word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is determined to the male sex by the very next word that follows it, viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 himself, which is of the masculine gender, and not of the feminine, and in propriety of speaking denotes the male and not the female sex. So that that Text which is only express for men's receiving the Sacrament, can be no express command for women's receiving it also.  
And whereas he saith, there is the same word used in Gal. 3. 28. First it signifies nothing, if it were there, unless it were so used as expressly under a determination of sex by gender to intent a sex excluded by such determination. But secondly, it is not true that it is there: for there is no such word used in that Text: but to take in both the sexes there are two words each distinctly belonging to its several sex, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the first for male, and the second for female. And so that Text is nothing to the purpose.  
And now having showed that there is no proof from either the Example or Command produced by H. D. from Scripture, for women's admission to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, I may conclude, that the proof for Infant's Baptism is as good as for women's Communion, and wish it might (as H. D. saith it shall) suffice.   

CHAP. XXXVII.  
The Conclusion of this Discourse with a Reprehension, Caution, and Exhortation.  
§. 1. THe remaining part of this Discourse, wherein I will not be long, shall be spent in a threefold address by way of Reprehension, Caution, and Exhortation: Reprehension of such as baptise not their Infants; Caution against the seductions of Antipaedobaptists; and Exhortation to the baptising of Infants.  
§. 2. And first, if it be so that little children are to be suffered to come to Christ, and ought not to be hindered from coming to him, then do they deserve a sharp rebuke, that will not suffer them to come, but hinder their coming. Hath Christ's so much tenderness of heart towards your Infants hardened your own hearts against them? What a cruelty is this to them, to debar them from, and deprive them of, that Remedy for their native Infirmity, which the Physician of souls hath provided for them! Do ye love to see them wallowing in the blood of their nativity, unwashed therefrom in the Laver of Regeneration? Is nature's filth so amiable in the eye of any pretending to be Christian? What a presumptuousness is this in you to let them live, and venture their dying, in a damnable estate, And if they be not damned, they have more to thank the mercy of their God, than the care of their Parents; they might have been damned for all you, you resolved to venture both theirs, and your own damnation too, rather than have them baptised, though you knew baptism to be the means, the only ordinary means there is, whereby they might be saved. What shall I call it in you? pride? or perverseness? that you so contumaciously and contumeliously oppose and confront your private novel conceit, to the judgement and practice of Christ's whole Catholic Church. Yea, what is it? cross-grainedness or rebelliousness against the Lord Christ himself, to have no regard to his word, no respect to his reason, but opposing your resolution against his reason, and your will against his word, to hinder little children from coming to him, and forbidden their coming, though he hath said, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbidden them not.  
§. 3. Secondly, are little children to be suffered to come to Christ? and aught they not to be forbidden coming to him? then, my Brethren, beware of giving ear to the contrary Infusions of Antipaedobaptistical Seducers. O let no man whisper into you any doctrine, that contradicts the Command of Christ, disagrees with the Institution of Christ, and crosses the practice of the Universal Church of Christ. O consider not what they say now, but what Christ so long ago hath said, and let his word be of more prevalency with you, than the words of any heretical Seducer. O regard not what they do now, but what the Church of Christ hath ever done, and let her judgement be of more power with you, than the Opinion of any Schismatical Separatist. O think not that an upstart generation of men not heard of in the world till many hundreds of years after Christianity had been planted and settled in the world, are the only men in the world that have the privilege of discerning the truth. But stand ye in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where ●s the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls, Jer. 6. 16.  
§. 4. Lastly, are little Children to be suffered to come to Christ? and ought not their coming to be forbidden? Suffer then, I beseech you, Brethren, a word of Exhortation. Be persuaded to bring, and suffer your little children to come to Christ. Do ye not see Christ calling little children to him? And how can ye then forbear bringing them unto him? Do ye not hear him pronouncing them such as the kingdom of Heaven consisteth of? and how can ye then any longer forbear entering them into his kingdom? Do ye not observe him commanding that little children be suffered to come to him? And how can ye then have the hearts to hinder them from coming to him? O suffer little children to go to their Saviour, who hath his arms wide open to receive them! O forbidden not Infants coming to Jesus, who hath his hands stretched out to bless them! O bring your children, O carry your Infants to Christ, who for their salvation did himself become an Infant, and pass through the state of Childhood. Suffer them to be made partakers of his grace by being baptised with water, who, that they might be made partakers of his glory, was baptised with blood. Consider the Benefit your children may have by Baptism, and let that move you to have them baptised. Consider the Need your Children have of Baptism, and let that excite you to their baptising. Consider your children's Capableness for Baptism, and let that persuade you to baptise them. What shall I say more? Consider your children's Right to Baptism, and let that prevail with you not to suffer them to go unbaptised. Shall the Constitution of this particular Church be of no force to move you? Shall the Practice of the Catholic Church have no power to work with you? Shall the Tradition of the Apostles of Christ be of no moment to induce you? Yea, shall the Institution of Christ himself have no prevalency in it to persuade you? To conclude, if not out of sense of your children's misery, yet out of conscience of your own duty; if not, that you may save your Children, yet that you may not damn 
* Denique terrere nos summopere debet damnatio illa vindicem fore Dcum, siquis foederis symbolo filium insignire conte●●at: quod co contemptu oblata gratia resp●atur & quasi ejuretur. Calvin. Instit. l. 4. c. 16. S. 9  yourselves; if not out of regard to the Authority of the Church, yet out of obedience to the command of Christ; be so just to the fruit of your own bodies, be so charitable to the issue of your own bowels, as to suffer your little Children to come unto Christ, and forbidden them not.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Luc. 2. 14.   

A Postscript.  
TAking notice of some attempts made by H. D. to take away the strength of the Argument from Ecclesiastic Tradition, and Catholic Practice, by decrying the Persons of four or five of the earliest Witnesses we have thereof as erroneous, or their Writings as spurious and supposititious, I think fit here to speak something in vindication of them, which I could not so conveniently insert into and interweave with that part of my Discourse, where their Testimonies were appealed unto.  
And first in general, I cannot but think it very unreasonable, that Persons and Writings generally received for Genuine and Orthodox in those things, wherein they did anciently agree with the Catholic Church, should, for the upholding of any modern Party in their differences from the Catholic Church, be thrown by, as erroneous and Heteredox Persons, and as Fabulous, and Fictitious Writings. For if to say such an Author was Erroneous in his judgement or practice, and held or did some things, which any now, through prejudice and prepossession, rather than any just reason, not knowing the true ground and genuine original thereof, shall call erroneous or superstitious, or that he was a Factor for Antichrist, and that the mystery of iniquity did work strongly in him, though a Confessor of, though a Martyr for Christ, be enough to blow away his Credit, and blast his Reputation, and take away all Authority from his Testimony in any case of Difference, which a private Person or Party hath with the Catholic Church about matters of Doctrine, Worship, or Discipline; if to say any Writing of any Father or Ecclesiastic Author is supposititious or corrupted in any point of present difference, without demonstrable proof that it is so in itself, or was so esteemed and accounted in the Church, before the arising of that difference, be enough to take away the Credit of all testimony given by that writing, What Authors, what Writings shall we have left unquestioned to appeal unto for testimony to the Truth, and support of Religion? For how many must be laid by, or shrewdly purged by the Papists for being in their sense guilty of Heresy? How many by the Protestants for suspicion of Popery? How many by those who are for Episcopacy, as favouring Presbytery and the pretended Discipline? How many by the Presbyterians and Independents as for asserting Episcopacy and the Hierarchy? How many by the Anabaptists for proving Infant's Baptism? How many by the Quakers for vindicating the Scriptures and Tradition? How many by the Socinians for holding the Deity of Christ, and the Holy Ghost, and their Unity with the Father. And how many by the Orthodox Christians for countenancing Socinianism or Enthusiasm? How many by the Calvinists for being Arminian? and how many by the Arminians for being Calvinistical? Where shall we have a Father left? where shall we have a Writing left? wher● shall we have a Council left, that must not upon the differences of some or other of the Parties, be cashired, and laid by as an unfaithful, and an unsufficient witness in the case? and than what shall we have left to vindicate our Religion and Faith against Jews, Turks, and Pagans withal? who will credit that Religion which is professed by such erroneous and superstitious Persons? who will believe that Faith, that is delivered and taught in such forged and corrupted writings? who will receive any writings for the word of God, upon the testimony of such fallacious and deceitful men? Thus shall the whole concerns of Christianity be sacrificed to the interest of a Party. O tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon, lest both the daughters of the circumcised rejoice, and the daughters of the ●ncircumcised too triumph.  
Secondly in particular, if the Author of the Ecclesiastic Hierarchy were pretended by us to be that Dionysius the Areopagite, that lived in the Apostles days, much of what is alleged might perhaps really lie against him. But when his time is laid much lower, even about the third Century, there will be no reason for such hideous outcry of horrid cheat, as is made against him. For it being questioned (as Dr. Hammond informs us 
* Dr. Hammond Quare of the Bapt. of Infants, §. 43. ) about the year 420, whether these were the Genuine Works of that Dionysius, and Theodorus Presbyter alleging the Arguments on both sides, it must needs follow that he must be an Author before that time, and in all probability some considerable time before that. Whence Dr. Hammond not only saith of him himself 
* Dr. Hammond de Confirmatione, c. 2. §. 10. p. 60. , that he is not to be contemned in the opinion of other Doctors, though Dalleus relish him not, as being near upon equal with Damasus, but also tells us 
* Dr. Hammond Quaere of Infan●s Bapt. §. 43.  what Mr. casaubon's opinion was of him, namely that he was Scriptor antiquissimus & elegantissimus, a very ancient and most elegant writer. And it doth not follow that his writing was false and forged because questioned. For then some books of Holy Scripture will come under suspicion, whose Authenticness was for some time doubted of, if yet they pass for current with all.  
For what Hyginus (who died a Martyr about the year 158) saith, Dr. Hammond tells us it is affirmed by Platina out of the ancient 
Dr. Ham. of Inf. Bap. §. 42. 43.  Records. And though the words alleged from the Author of the Constitutions were not written in the Apostles times by Clemens Romanus, yet he saith there is sufficient reason to assure us that they were very ancient; and the Testimony of a Person of his Learning, Judgement, and Integrity is very considerable with unbias'd persons.  
Then for the Responses ascribed to Justin Martyr, if they should not be his, yet being acknowledgedly a very ancient piece they are nevertheless a considerable testimony for the Antiquity of Infant's Baptism. And a suspicion of their Interpolation cannot take away their Authority, unless it could be proved, that they were interpolated in this part, or a suspicion of it had been started before this controversy. And it is observed, that even in Justin Martyrs Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, there is a passage that hath a favourable aspect on Infant's Baptism. Where, saith he 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Just. Mart. Dial. cum Tryph. pag. 261. D. C.  And we, who through him are come unto God, have not received that circumcision which is according to flesh, but that spiritual, which Enoch, and the like kept. But we received it by Baptism through the mercy of God, in as much as we had been born sinners, and it is free for all in like manner to receive it. Here the reason alleged for men's obtaining from God that spiritual Circumcision by Baptism, namely because we had been born in sin, is as truly alledgable on the behalf of Infants. And how can it be thought, but that he that understood, there was the same reason for children's baptising as for men's, should be of opinion that children were to be baptised as well as men. And when he extends the liberty of receiving it unto all, why should he be thought not to extend it unto Infants? Especially when as well the external motive of God's compassion, the misery of man's being born in sin, as the internal Mover of God unto compassion, even his mercy to men so born, is extended unto Infants as well as Men.  
And when he saith, 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justin Martyr Dialog. cum Tryph. pag. 260. B. C.  Moreover the precept of Circumcision commanding to circumcise Infants on the eighth day, was a type of the true circumcision, wherewith we were circumcised from our error and naughtiness, by him that risen from the dead, hath he not a kind aspect on Infant's baptism; Fairly intimating (by expressing the time of Circumcision the eighth day) that our Circumcision, which is baptism, should agree with that which typified it, so far at least as to be susceptible by Infants even of eight days old; younger than which Fidus the Presbyter, because of that law of circumcision, thought they ought not to be baptised, though Cyprian showed him, that himself, and a whole Council 
Cypian, lib. 3. Ep. 8.  were of another mind, even that they might be baptised sooner. And that he had so is the more probable in regard Greg. Naziarzene 
† 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gr. Naz. Orat. 40. p. 658. A. B.  gives the Circumcision of the Jewish Infants on the eighth day for a reason why the Infants of Christians should in case of danger be baptised even so early, as whilst they are insensible of either the want or having of grace, by the want, or having of baptism.  
To proceed to Origen; if he were as perhaps he was not, so very Heretical and desperately Erroneous in his own judgement as is pretended, yet this doth not follow, that he must be also insincere, and mendacious in his report of the Church's Practice. Is it impossible for a man that is erroneous in something, to speak true in any thing? If so, the truth itself will have few witnesses to it, but be well near left to stand and fall by its self. Had Origen been of no Authority in the Church, sure St. Hierome would never have appealed to his judgement, in the case of so high a concern, as whether the Hebrew Books of the Bible had been falsified by the Jews or no, saying 
* Quod si aliquis dixeris. Hebraos libros postea à Judaeis esse falsatos, audiat Originem, quid in octavo volumine explanationum Esaiae huic respondeat quaestiunculae: quod nunquam Dominus & Apostoli, qui caetcra crimina arguunt in Scribis & Pharisais', de hoc crimine, quod erat maximum reticuissent. D. Hier. l. 3. Comment. in Esaiam, cap. 6. Tom. 4. Col. 55.  if any man doubt of that, Audiat Originem, let him hear Origen, etc.—  
But we have not origen's Original of his Commentaries on the Ep. to the Romans, but Ruffinus' Translation. No matter, so the Translation be right. But Ruffinus added, and altered at his pleasure, so that if Erasmus say true, you know not when you read Origen, a●d when Ruffinus. Then it cannot be known, but that what we read in him touching Infant's Baptism is his own. And being taken so to be by all not concerned to oppose it, it ought to pass for his, unless the contrary could be proved. And suppose it were not his, but Ruffinus'; yet still is that a good evidence for the Age he lived in; and that was pretty early up towards the Apostles Times, being confessedly in the Fourth Century. But Ruffinus was a very bad man. Perhaps not all out so bad, as his bitter adversary St. Hierom makes him. And may not a bad men speak truth? Had he spoken untruth in this case, why was not his falsehood detected in the times he lived in? why did not Hierom amongst all the rest of his accusations charge this upon him? that he made Origen say, (l. 5. in Rom. c. 6.) that the Church received from the Apostles a tradition to give baptism even to Infants, when as Origen said no such thing? 'Tis plain he had nothing to say, because he said nothing, who had will enough to incline him, and passion enough to provoke him, to say all he could. Yea, who sometimes quarrels with Ruffinus 
* Cum haec ita se habeant, quae insania est, paucis de Filio & Spiritie Sancto commutatis quae apertam blasphemiam praeferebant; caetera ita ut f●ripta sunt protuliste in medium, & impia voce laudâsse, cum utique & illa & ista de uno impietatis fonte processerint? D. Hieron. ad Avitum. Tom. 2. Col. 218. A. B. Paucisque testimoniis de Filio Dei, & Spiritu Sancto commutatis, quae sciebas di●plicitura Romanis, caetera usque ad finem integra dimisisti: hoc idem faciens in Apologia quasi Pamphili, quod & in Origenis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translatione fecisti. D. Hieron. l. 1. Apolog. adv. Ruffinum. Tom. 2. Col. 296. B.  for his overmuch fidelity in translating some of Eusebius and origen's works, and changing only some few things concerning the Son, and the Holy Ghost, likely to grate upon Roman ears, and letting the rest go entire, and publishing them so as they were written. Besides what should move Ruffinus to falsify Origen in this place? How came he concerned to make any such Interpolation? what advantage to himself, or any party, could he intent herein? But what if, after all this, that piece of Origen on Rom. were translated by St. Hierom himself, and this be owned by him in his Epistle to Heraclius, prefixed before the Commentary? why then all the dust about Ruffinus his corrupting of Origen in this particular vanishes into smoke, and we have St. Hieroms Authority as Dr. 
Dr. Hammond Inf. Bapt. §. 42. † Cum igitur constet Anabaptistas agi sanatico spiritu, non moveat nos corum autoritas, ut discedamus à communi consen●is veteris Ecclesiae de baptizandis infantibus. Nam vetustissimi S●riptores Ecclesiasti●i probant baptismum infantium. Otigenes enim in 6 cap. ad Rom. sic scribit, Itaque Ec clesia ab Apostolis traditionem accepit etiam parvulis dare baptismum. Sciebant enim illi quibus secreta divinorum mysteriorum commissa sunt, quod essent in omnibus genuinae sordes p●ccati quae per aquam & spiritum abolere deberent. Haec sunt Origenis verba, in quibus utrumque testatur, & baptizari infants, & consequi eos per baptismum remissionem peccati originalis, hoc est, reconciliari eos Deo. Melancth. Loc. Com. de Baptismo.  Hammond saith to secure us that these are origen's words. And that origen's words they are † Melancthon doth expressly say. And lastly, why Origen should be so much as suspected to be corrupted in this Place, unless in some other of his writings he had declared himself to the contrary, which I see not pretended, is no easy thing to say; and the suggestion of it is nothing else but a miserable shift of persons enslaved to an Hypothesis, and resolved to say any thing, how irrational and groundless soever, for the maintaining of it. And though this place were laid by, as likewise that of his in Levit. yet whilst his 14 Homil. on Luke of unquestioned Authority shall be extant, there will be a witness of origen's to be produced for Infant's Baptism.  
Lastly for Cyprian; his not urging it as an Apostolical Tradition or Precept doth not prove it was none. However his delivering his Judgement for Infant's baptism is a sure evidence, that he thought neither Scripture precept, nor Apostles practice, nor Church Tradition was against it. And it cannot be thought a private opinion, which was so early concluded in a Council of no fewer than 66 Bishops. And though H. D. meets with no such Council, nor can tell where it was held, yet St. Augustine doubtless was satisfied concerning the truth of it (and St. Hierom too) or else he would never have appealed to its Authority in the case. Nor does St. Cyprians mentioning it to be defined in a Council prove it no Apostolical Tradition, because it was delivered for an Apostolical tradition before that Council Nor was it properly Infant's Baptism that was defined in that Council, but whether Infants might be baptised before the eighth day. Whether the grounds upon which that Councils Conclusion was grounded, wear weak and frivolous, as they are confidently enough said to be, is not now under my consideration (though to wiser persons than I they may, for aught I know, seem strong and weighty), but whether they did so conclude or no, which so good a witness as St. Cyprian is sufficient to prove. Nor do I find it so much contradicted by his great Master Tertullian, whom he so much reverenced, who disputed 
Inf. Bapt. Par. 2. chap. 7.  indeed against the hastening, but not against the lawfulness of Infant's baptism, to which disputation I have given an Answe in part, and Mr. Wills more fully. And therefore I shall rather believe St. Cyprian himself declaring himself to be for Infant's Baptism, than Baronius, if he assert, or suggest, that he was against it.  
And if other things have been fathered on Cyprian, yet till that Epistle of his to Fidus be demonstrated to be spurious, which, H. D. doth not tell us is yet done, no not by Daille himself, I shall presume it is his own. And well may, having it owned for his by two so early and eminent Authors as St. Augustine, and St. Hierom; 
† Beatus quidem Cyprianus non aliquod decrecum condens novum, sed Ecclesiae fidem firmissimam servans, ad corrigendum eos, qui putabant ante o●tavum diem nativitatis non esse parvulum baptizandum, non carnem sed animam dixit esse perdendam, & mox natum rite baptizari posse, cum suis quibusdam cocpiscopis censuit. D. Aug. Ep. 28, ad Hieron. Tom. 2. Col. 108. B.  the former of which in his Epistle to Hierom appeals to it; 
* Ac me putes haeretico sensu hoc intelligere, beatus Martyr Cyprianus, cujus te in Scripturarum testimoniis digerendis amulum gloriaris, in Epistola quam scribit ad Episcopum Fidum de Infantibus haptizandis haec memorat. Porro autem si etiam gravissimis delictoribus, etc. D. Hieron. l. 3. adv. Pelag. Tom. 2. Col. 47. C.  the latter in his third book against the Pelagians, not only doth that, but transcribes a considerable part of it.  
Nor shall I ever the unwillinger receive from him a Catholic Verity, for his having held other, I will not say, (with H. D.) corrupt and Antichristian Tenants, (which I should tremble to say, or think of so pious a person and eminent a Martyr) but private opinions (as Tertullias, and Gr. Nazianzens for the delay of Infant's Baptism are said to have been); which, if no worse than that of the Churches being founded upon Peter, and that sprinkling might serve in stead of baptising (in both which I can assure the Reader he hath good company) may prove not to deserve so heavy a censure, nor he for them to be adjudged a Notable Factor for Antichrist, and one in whom the mystery of iniquity did strongly work, which is a character strangely inconsistent with that estimate that by the Catholic Church has been made of him, both in the times he lived in, and in those that succeeded; as may appear by what Gr. Nazianzen saith in his Oration of him; and what Baronius and others record concerning him, in memory of whose pious life, and glorious death Temples were built, an Altar erected, and a Festival observed.  
And this with men of Reason and Modesty may suffice to have been said in Vindication of those Primitive Witnesses, and their Testimonies. He that is not satisfied herewith may find more for his satisfaction in Mr. Wills of Inf. Bapt: Part. 2. ch. 3. p. 125, etc.  
One thing more I shall beg the favour of saying, and then conclude the Readers trouble; and that is, that I have not urged all the Arguments that are, or might be, insisted on in this dispute: so that if all I have said on these grounds should chance to signify nothing, yet still is the cause neither desperate, nor deplorable; there being behind Reserves of other Auxiliary forces for its succour and support. But why then did I not insist on them? Partly because I thought what I have said to be enough, and was loath to be troublesome with more: and partly because those Arguments have already 
Mr. Baxter, Stephens. Sydenham, Geree, Wills, etc.  been managed by other Writers with great diligence and dexterity: so that it seemed needless for me to concern myself in them. As for those I have used, they are the same mostly that were used by Dr. Taylor, and Dr. Hammond; which because I thought very good, yet as delivered by them, not so well adapted to vulgar capacities, by reason of the too much abstruseness of the language of the one, and too much floridness of the style of the other, as to do that good on ignorant souls, which they intended, therefore I have sent them abroad again, in a vulgar dress, and country habit, accommodated for language and style, as near as I could, and the matter would bear, to mean capacities, so as to be intelligible by the ignoranter sort, (who have most need of instruction, as being most liable to temptation, and whose information, conviction, and satisfaction I have chief, and even almost solely, aimed at in these Papers) yet Adding withal some things of my own, and somewhat Improving what was theirs. And if I have at any time exalted my Pen, it has been merely for the refreshment of some Readers, who would else have been tired with too long a continuation of one strain, and that too but the dull hum of a Country drone: and for that, if it be criminous, I beg, and hope the Readers pardon.  
Et jam defessus lampada trado.  
FINIS.   

A Table of the Contents.  

CHAP. 1. THe Text. The occusion of the words. The doctrine gathered from it, and proved. Pag. 1  
Chap. 2. Of the children that are to be suffered to come to Christ; Infants. 4  
Chap. 3. What children are to be suffered to come unto Christ. 5  
Chap. 4. What coming of little children unto Christ is to be suffered. 12  
Chap. 5. The interpretation of the Text vindicated. 20  
Chap. 6. Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard of their early consecration there by unto God. 26  
Chap. 7. Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard of their being brought thereby into Covenant with God. 32  
Chap. 8. Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard of the Vow they are brought under by it. 37  
Chap. 9 Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard of the care that by others is taken of them upon it. pag. 48  
Chap. 10. Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard of their being thereby united unto Christ. 53  
Chap. 11. Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard of their being made thereby the children of God. 73  
Chap. 12. Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard of their being made thereby Heirs of Heaven. 80  
Chap. 13. Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard of their being thereby made partakers of grace. 90  
Chap. 14. Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard that by it they are consigned unto a resurrection. 103  
Chap. 15. Baptism beneficial unto children, in regard they are saved by it. 108  
Chap. 16. children's need of baptism, in regard of its efficacy to take off the guilt of original sin. 118  
Chap. 17. children's need of baptism, in regard of their being under the guilt of sin. 125  
Chap. 18. children's need of baptism further shown from the consideration of the evil nature, and evil consequents of original sin. 136  
Chap. 19 children's baptism not to be neglected upon presumption that God can or will save them without their being baptised. pag. 144  
Chap. 20. children's need of baptism shown from six other considerations. 151  
Chap. 21. Children not incapable of baptism, in regard of their bodily weakness. 161  
Chap. 22. Children not incapable of baptism, in regard of their having sin in them. 168  
Chap. 23. Children not incapable of baptism, in regard of their not believing. 172  
Chap. 24. Children not incapable of being baptised, in regard of any thing required of them in baptism. 184  
Chap. 25. Children not incapable of baptism by any text of Scripture that forbids it, either directly, or by consequence. 194  
Chap. 26. children's Right to baptism by the constitution of this Church, and custom of the Catholic Church. 219  
Chap. 27. The Catholic Churches custom to baptise Infants. 224  
Chap. 28. Infant's baptism a Tradition Apostolical. 287  
Chap. 29. Infant's baptism an Apostolical Practice. 292  
Chap. 30. children's right to baptism by the Institution of Christ. 303  
Chap. 31. Infant's baptism lawful, though there were neither Command for it, nor Example of it. pag. 331  
Chap. 32. Infant's baptism no addition to the Word of God. The Scriptures objected on that account considered & cleared. 340  
Chap. 33. The Scriptures silence no proof of our Saviour's not commanding the baptising of Infants. 368  
Chap. 34. The Scriptures silence no proof of the Apostles baptising no Infants. 375  
Chap. 35. The Argument from the sixth Article of our Church answered. 384  
Chap. 36. A Reply to an Answer made by H. D. to the Objection from the no express Command or Example in Scripture of women's receiving the Lords Supper; referring to Chap. 31. Sect. 9 396  
Chap. 37. The Conclusion of this Discourse with a Reprehension, Caution, and Exhortation. 403  
A Postscript. 409   
The END.