AS a Foundation to this Chapter, we shall begin with the Institution and Commission of Water-Baptism. Matth. 28.

Go Teach all Nations, Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, verse 19.

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have com­manded you, and lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the World, Amen. ver. 20.

From these two verses, we shall do these two things.

• First, Shew that this is Water-Baptism.
• Secondly, That this Baptism is to continue to the end of the World.

First, That it is Water-Baptism.

It is either the Baptism of Water, or of the Spirit, or of Suffering.

But 'tis neither the Baptism of the Spirit, nor of Suffering:

Therefore the Baptism of Water.

It must be one of these three Baptisms, because there is no other spoken of, in all the New Testament.

1. That it is not the Baptism of Suffering; We suppose none so absurd, as to imagine, that Jesus Christ intended that his Discipies should persecute and afflict one another.

2. That it is not the Baptism of the Spirit, which is the only thing to be cleared, appear;

First, Because this Baptism is commanded, Go Teach &c.

But the Baptism of the Spirit was never commanded, nor was it ever any mans sin not so to be Baptized: Ergo,

Secondly, This Baptism was to be administred by men, Go ye &c. speaking to his Disciples.

But the Baptism of the Spirit was never administred by men; Jesus Christ was the alone Minister of this Baptism.

Thirdly, This Baptism in the Commission was to all Nati­ons, Go Teach all Nations Baptizing them, &c.

But the Baptism of the Spirit, fell only on some few at the beginning.

We might add, if further proof were necessary, that this can­not be the Baptism of the Spirit, because this Baptism was to be administred in the name of the Spirit.

Therefore we conclude, that the Baptism here Instituted, is the Baptism of Water.

Besides, as Mr. Baxter well observes, the Primitive practice of the Apostles, all along the History of the Acts, proves this Baptism in the Commission to be Water-Baptism. As you may see it practised in express terms, in the story of Philip's Baptizing the Eunuch, Acts 8. 36. As they went on their way, they came unto a certain [Water,] and the Eunuch said See, here is [Water,] What doth hinder me to be Baptized? And verse 38. They went down both into the [Water,] & Philip Baptized the Eu­nuch. And ver. 39. And when they were come up out of the [Wa­ter,] Again, Acts 10. 47, 48. Can any man forbid Water,] that these should not be Baptiz'd, and he commanded them to be Baptized [...]n the name of the Lord.

Thus you see, the Apostles, the best Interpreters of our Lord, understood by Baptism, Matth. 28. Baptism of Water; For other Commission they have not, this being the only place that Water-Baptism was instituted and given in Commission to all Nations. Go Teach all Nations. &c.

The Apostles till now were not to go forth into the way of the Gentiles, Matt. 10. 5. Luke 24. 47, 49.

Besides, all the Churches which were after planted, were thus Baptized, as appears both in the Acts and in the Epistles. But more of this hereafter.

If any yet should object, that Water-Baptism was only John's Baptism;

We answer, we have already sufficiently proved that this was Christ's Baptism also. And indeed the diffe­rence between John's Baptism, and Christs, was not in the Element (as if John's Baptism were Water-Baptism, & Christ's Spirit-Baptism) The only difference being this, that John Bap­tiz'd in the Messiah to come, Jesus Christ and his Disciples, in himself already come: as appears Acts 19. beginning.

Thus we have done with the first particular, to wit, that this is Water-Baptism in the Commission. Matt. 28.

The light of this Truth hath shined so clear, that it hath convinc'd the Judgment, and gain'd the Practice of all that have professed Christianity, for above the space of 1600 years, except some few Notionists and Seekers of few years late past.

For the second particular: That this Baptism is to conti­nue to the end of the World;

We thus prove.

First, That which was once commanded by Jesus Christ, the great Prophet of the New Testament, and never repeal'd by him, is still in force and to continue.

But Water-Baptism was commanded by Jesus Christ, and never repeal'd by him;

Therefore it is still in force, and to continue.

That this Baptism was commanded by Christ, hath been al­ready fully prov'd. We further add,

First, and by that Authority, whereby he had all Power in Heaven and Earth given unto him. ver. 18. All Power is given unto me in Heaven and Earth. Go ye therefore &c.

Here you have as it were [...]is Letters Patents, that is, his full Warrant he had from his Father to institute this Ordinance.

Secondly, Commanded to be performed in so solemn a manner, as no Ordinance is in all the New Testament, to wit, In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Which notes the great Honor that Christ hath put up­on this Ordinance.

Therefore without a Repeal from the same hand and pow­er that did institute it, it must still be in force, but no Repeal [Page 4] can be shewn, nor the least shadow of any such thing in all the New Testament.

The Apostle Paul saith, Galat. 3. 15. Though it be a mans Covenant or Testament, yet if it be confirm'd, no man disanulleth or addeth thereto:

How much more dangerous then is it to disanul the last Will & Testament of our Lord, which he hath with such full Autho­rity commanded ver. 18. and so solemnly ratified in the name of Father, Son, and Spirit, and that, the very last thing he did before his Assention into Heaven. Read at large, the peril in so doing, Heb. 2. beginning: & Heb. 12. 25.

A second Argument to prove the continuation of this Or­dinance, is from the Conjunction between Teaching and Baptizing, in the Institution, Go Teach, Baptizing. And again ver. 20. Teaching &c.

Now as long as Teaching is to last, so long ought Baptism to last.

But that Teaching is still in force, and to continue to the end of the World, all men will easily grant: Therefore Baptism.

What therefore Christ hath so solemnly joyn'd together, let no man put a sunder.

Thirdly, The Text saith expresly, it is to continue to the end of the World, ver. 20.

Wherein, as plain as words can speak it, Jesus Christ layes down the continuation of this Ordinance.

Lo, I am with you (to wit, to blesse and assist you in your Work, which he had before said in ver. 19. was to Baptize) alway, even unto the end of the world, Amen.

And that the Apostles in their own persons were to con­tinue to the end of the World, we suppose no man so weak or wilful to imagine, that this was Christs meaning, and therefore must be understood of them, and their Successors to the end of the World.

Object. But to the end of the World, say some, is meant the end of that present age.

Ans. Though 'tis true the word [...] doth sometimes signify an Age, yet this phrase here in the Text, [...], is constantly used by the same Evangelist, to signifie the end of the World.

So Matt. 13. 39. The Harvest is the end of the World, and ver. 40. So shall it be in the end of this World. And again ver. 49. Chap. 24. 3. When shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the World.

In all which places, all men understand the end of the World, in the sense we do here: & therefore there is no other reason, why any other meaning should be put upon this place.

This may suffice for the proof of the second particular, that the Ordinance of Baptism is still in force, and to continue to the end of the World.

Herein also we have the consent of all men in all Ages, ex­cepting some few risen up of late.

Object. Some further object against the present practice of this Ordinance, for want of a due and lawfull Minister or Administrator, qualified by an extraordinary Call as the Apo­stles had, and a power to work Miracles.

Answ. First, that Miracles are not required to the Mini­ster of this Ordinance, because the Text it self saith expresly, that John the Baptist, the first and great Baptizer did no Mira­cle, Iohn 10. 41. yet his Baptism was from Heaven, Matth. 21. 25.

Secondly, That no extraordinary call, is required to con­stitute a lawful Administrator, appears from the Institution it self, Matth. 28.

The Apostles being Commission'd in this Ministration as Teachers, Go Teach and Baptize.

There are two things in this Commission about this mat­ter.

• First, That he must be a Teaching Disciple.
• Secondly, That no more is requir'd but a Teaching Disci­ple.

Both these are contained in those words, Go Teach, and Baptize.

Further John 4. 2. Christs Disciples are said to Baptize as Disciples. Jesus himself Baptized not, but his Disciples.

So also in the History of the Acts, after the Commission given by Christ, which certainly was punctually observ'd by them; yet we read nothing of Philips extraordinary Mission to them at Samaria, when he Baptiz'd them, Act. 8.

So of Anani as that Baptiz'd Paul, all that is reported of his fitness or qualification to this work, is, that he was a Disciple Acts 9. 10. And there was a certain Disciple at Damascus na­med Ananias, &c. And he Baptized him. ver. 18.

Neither is it probable, that Peter Baptiz'd all the 3000. Acts 2.

Thus we see, that if the next immediate Age, after the Ascention of Christ, may be allowed to be the best Interpre­ters of his mind, that a Disciple as a Disciple, is a fit and right Minister of this Ordinance.

This Objection is as much against the practise of all Ordi­nances; and commonly they that begin here, seldom make an end, till they deny all. A just Judgment of God.

Object. Some yet further object, that for a long time we have lost the use of this Ordinance, by that Antichristian dark­ness which has cover'd the face of the whole earth; and there­fore have no power to practise this Ordinance again, till some extraordinary Prophet be rais'd up amongst us.

Answ. We have a Precedent under the Law what to do in this Case; When the people of Israel were carried into cap­tivity, and having there lost, by reason of their Bondage, the practise of some of their Ordinances,; yet after their return, never stayed for an extraordinary Prophet; but did reform according to the Law of Moses, and thereby many lost-Ordi­nances (as the Feast of Booths or Tabernacles) were resto­red according to their first Institution.

This was our Case, who 'tis true for a long time in this Na­tion lost many of the New Testament Ordinances, in their Primitive purity and Practise; yet now our eys are open, what remains, but according to those Reformers under the Law to ask for the old paths and walk therein, and to reform in all things, as 'tis written in the New Testament of our Lord, that great Prophet and Law-giver under the Gospel.

We have the same Law to walk by as the Primitive Disci­ples had; and must therefore walk as they did.

Read Jeremiah. 6. 16. Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old Paths, Where is the good way, and walk therein, and you shall finde rest for your souls; But they said, We will not walk therein.

Object. Lastly, If any shall object, that at first amongst us in this Nation an unbaptiz'd person did Baptize, and so could be no lawful Administrator.

Answ. We conceive the answer is ready and at hand, that the first Baptizer must of necessity be unbaptiz'd, even John the Baptist himself, and yet judged a fit Administrator of so excellent a subject as our Lord himself was. Matt. 3. latter end.

Thus we trust we have sufficiently established this great Ordinance of Baptism, and answered all the Objections to the contrary, of such who have endeavoured to raze it to the ground, and herein have dealt more unkindly with Christ, and his Ordinances, than our Fore-fathers; they indeed have corrupted it for many Generations, yet have kept alive the name of it: But some few in our Generation (which is far worse) have totally laid it aside. They have mistaken the Subject, These have nulled the Ordinance, ma­king the Commands of Christ our great Prophet and Law­giver, no better than an old Almanack out of date.

How justly have we cause to take up the complaint of the Prophet? They have transgressed the Law, and changed the Or­dinance. Isa. 24. 5.

Before we end this Chapter, we desire such to consider by way of Caution, whether they come not under this Charge, that have seen and confess'd the invalidity of In­fants Baptism, as to the subjects, and therefore have deny'd it to their own children; and yet sit down contented with what they have received in their Infancy, and have not been obedient unto Christs Commands themselves since of grown years.

For a Conclusion to this first Chapter, see the danger of such, as obey not Christ in all things whatsoever he hath com­manded, Acts 3. 22, 23. compar'd with this 28. Mat. ver. 20. where you have almost the same words.

Moses truly said unto the Father, a Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you, of your Brethren like unto me, Him shall you hear in all things whatsoever He shall say unto you. ver. 22.

And it shall come to passe, that every soul, which shall not hear that Prophet, shall be destroyed from among the People. verse 23.

Now among others, in this one thing, was Jesus Christ a Prophet, like unto Moses, that as long as Moses his Law continued: so long every part of the Law was to continue. In like manner, as long as the Gospel is to continue: so long every part of it is to continue. As Moses his Law and every part of it was to continue till Christs first coming: Mal. 4. 4. So Christs Gospel and all the Ordinances thereof until his second coming.

We leave this Note with you, That Christ hath provided for the continuance of those Ordinances in especial manner, which he fore-saw the Divel and his Instruments would espe­cially strike at, and root out, to wit, Baptism, his last Sup­per, and his Ministry. His Supper, Luke 22. 19. This do in remembrance of me. Which Paul interprets, till he come again. 1 Cor. 11. 24, 25, 26.

So for Baptism and his Ministry, here in Matt. 28. 19, 20. which hath been the Subject of our present discourse.

And Jesus Christ himself was found living, and dying in the use of Ordinances.

This shall suffice for the first Chapter, to wit, That Water-Baptism is an Ordinance of Jesus Christ still in force, and to continue to the end of the world.

HAving in the former Chapter prov'd that Water-Baptism is an Ordinance of Jesus Christ, still in force; we shall now shew you, that the way and manner to perform this Ordinance, is by Dipping the whole body under Water.

We shall make this good by three Arguments.

• First, From the signification of the Word.
• Secondly, From the constant practice of Christ and his Disciples all along the new Testament.
• Thirdly, From the Ends of Baptism.

First, From the signification of the word [...], which in its proper and native signification, is to Dip.

This the Learned in all Ages, and all Lexicons or Dictio­naries, do acknowledge: Nor can we find by the most diligent search, that 'tis otherwise accepted by any Author whatsoever, excepting some very few of late. I shall instance in some few, chiefly those in English, easily to be had.

Hugo Grotius, as Learned a man as any our latter Age hath afforded, faith, the Word signifies to Dip under Water, in a little piece of his, concerning his Judgment of Infant-Baptism.

Bishop Usher in his Body of Divinity, saith the same.

As also Dr. Ames in his Marrow of Divinity. Book 1. Chap­ter 40.

So Mr. Perkins. All these of good Authority in point of Lear­ning in all Nations.

Ball's Catechism, washed by Dipping.

Mr. Leigh in his Crit. Sacr, on the New Testament, the last and best of this kind, saith, The native and pr [...]er signification of the Verb is, [...] to Dip into Water, or to pl [...]ge under Water; and, of the Substantive, Dipping into water.

So, Wilsons Dictionary.

The Dutch Translation, according to their Language, read, for John the Baptist, John the Dipper, and for, He Baptiz'd them, He Dipp'd them.

The Common-Prayer Book prescribes Dipping, as the best way, for the manner of the performance of this Ordinance: although it does allow of sprinkling, in case of weakness, yet prefers Dipping, and alwaies places it first. The Priest shall Dip &c. so, often.

The last Instance is, of Daniel Rogers, an English Writer of good esteem: He in his Treatise of the two Sacraments of the Gospel, Part. 1. Chap. 5. hath these words; It ought to be the Churches part to cleave to the Institution, which, saith he there, is Dipping, especially, it not being left arbitrary by our Church to the discretion of the Minister, but requir'd to Dip or Dive.

He further saith there, That he betrays the Church, whose Officer he is, to a disorder'd errour, i [...] he cleave not to the In­stitution, which is, to Dip.

And this I so aver, as thinking it exceeding material to the Ordinance, & no sleight thing, yea, which Antiquity constant­ly, and without exception, of Countreys hot or cold, witnesses unto; And especially the constant Word of the Holy-Ghost first and last approveth, as a Learned Critick upon Matthew 3. 11. hath noted, to wit, Casaubon. More to this purpose, there. And further saith, ‘I doubt not but contrary to our Churches intention, this errour having once crept in, is main­tained still by the carnal ease of such, as looking more at them­selves than at God, stretch the liberty of the Church in this Case, deeper and further than either the Church her self would, or the solemness of this Sacrament may well & safely admit. I speak this, as desiring such as it concerns in their pla­ces, to look to their Duty in this behalf;’ Afterwards further saith, I confess my self unconvinc'd by demonstration of Scripture for Infants-sprinkling.

Thus you see we are not singular and alone in this matter, but have given you a Cloud of Witnesses, and 'twere easy to give as many more; but that we think the thing is very plain, and shall in this Chapter again bring in more testimony to this point.

But, because some say, It signifies Sprinkling also, we will consider how 'tis us'd in the New Testament.

First, The Translators themselves never once in all the New Testament, render it by Sprinkling. There is another word for that, which they constantly Translate to Sprinkle, to wit, [...].

Secondly. They render this word in effect thus themselves, to wit, by Washing, Mark 7. 4, 8. Luke 11. 38. Heb. 9. 10. which we know is by Dipping so much as is washed.

Now when 'tis applyed unto men, it must needs take-in the whole Body or Person. In this Tenure it often runs, as, [He] was Baptiz'd, and Baptiz'd [him]; But more of this hereafter.

Thirdly, The Theme or root of this word, to wit, [...], They translate expresly by Dipping, Luke 16. 24. John 13. 26. Revel. 19. 13.

By all this, it manifestly appears, that the word signifies to Dip, and not to Sprinkle.

The Translators themselves seem to us conscious in this matter, because they have constantly retain'd the Greek word Baptism in the Translation.

And thus we have done with the first Argument, viz. the Signification of the Word.

The second Argument to prove, that 'tis Dipping, is, from the practice of Christ, and his Disciples, all along the New Testament.

The first Baptism in the New Testament was in a River. Matt. 3. 6.—were Baptiz'd in Jordan.

The place they were Baptiz'd in, notes that Baptism was by Dipping. Deodate on this place, in his Annotations, saith, they were plung'd in Water. And the late Annotations, put forth by the Assembly, Dipping in Jordan.

The next that was Baptiz'd was Jesus Christ himself, ver. 16. Jesus when he was Baptized, went up out of the Water, which implies it was Dipping, and the parallel place with this, Mark 1. 9. Jesus was Baptiz'd of John in Jordan. The Greek is [...]. into Jordan. Now, what sense would this be Jesus was sprinkled into Jordan.

Cajetan saith, Christ was Baptiz'd, not by sprinkling, but by Dipping into the Water. And Lucas Brugensis on Matth. 3. 16. saith, The party Baptized, went into the Water, as deep as his thighs or Navel, the rest of his Body was Dipp'd, not Sprinkled.

So also concerning Philips Baptizing the Eunuch, Acts 8. 38. 'tis said, They went both down into the Water, and ver. 39. When they were come up out of the Water.

The late Assembly-Annotations on this Text, faith, they were wont to Dip the whole Body. And Piscator on the place saith, The ancient manner of Baptism was, that the whole Bo­dy was dipp'd into the Water.

In John 3. 23. the reason is given, why John was Bapti­zing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much VVater there.

Now if he had not Dipped, but sprinkled, this could be no manner of reason, for a very little Water, will serve to sprin­kle thousands, as Cornelius à Lapide notes.

And Piscator on this place saith, That Baptism was by Dip­ping the whole Body in Water.

Thus you see the Primitive practise of this Ordinance, was by Dipping the whole Body under Water, so plainly from the Text it self, that it hath forc'd the Confession of all our Com­mentators, both ancient and modern.

Many more Testimonies might be brought, if we thought these already urged were not more than enough.

The case is so clear, that Calvin up and down his works, doth often with many others in our daies confess, that the ancient manner of Baptism in the Primitive times was, by Dipping the whole Body under Water.

Now why their practice should not be for our example in the manner of the performance of this great Ordinance, as indeed in all other Ordinances, we see not the least shadow of reason on the contrary to dispence with.

Calvin himself confesses, That the Church hath assum'd this liberty to her self of Sprinkling; but by what power or Au­thority, we know not.

Mr. Mede, a great Antiquary, in his Diatribae, on Titus 3. 5. saith, ‘That there was no such thing as Sprinkling us'd in Bap­tism, in the Apostles time, nor many Ages after them.’

'Tis not yet past the memory of some alive, since Dipping was practis'd in some places in this Nation.

And the Font derives its name from a Fountain, a fit place to Dip in.

Thus we have done with the second Argument, A particular so clear, that we know not how there can be any rising up against it.

Thirdly, That Baptism is by Dipping and not by Sprinkling, appears from the Ends of Baptism, which resembles a Death, Burial, and Resurrection. Rom. 6. 3, 4, 5, 6. Know ye not, that so many of us as were Baptized into Jesus Christ, were Bapti­zed into his Death? Therefore we are Buried with him by Baptism into Death, that like as Christ was rais'd up from the dead by the Glory of the Father: even so we also should walk in newness of Life. For if we have been planted together in the likenesse of his Death, we shall be also in the likenesse of his Resurrection; Know­ing this, that our old man is crucified with Him, that the body of Sin might be destroyed that henceforth we should not serve Sin. So Colos. 2. 12. Buried with him in Baptism, wherein also you are risen with Him.

In these two places, Baptism is manifestly resembled unto a Death, Burial, and Resurrection; Dipping in Water, or plunging under Water, unto a Death and Burial; Our Ri­sing again out of the Water, both to rising from a state of sin to newness of life, and our Resurrection at the last day.

When men are dead we bury them by covering the whole Body under ground, and not by scattering or sprinkling a lit­tle dust or Earth on their faces only.

What little resemblance then is there between Baptism, and a Burial, in Sprinkling? and how fully is it express'd by Dipping?

Daniel Rogers, in his sore mentioned Treatise hath these words, The Essence of Baptism in the very Symbolicalness of it, urgeth no lesse than Dipping; for what resemblance, saith he, of our Burial and Resurrection with Christ, is there in Sprinkling?

Our late Annotations on this place have these very words, The Apostle seems to allude to the Ancient manner of Bap­tism, which was to Dipp the parties Baptized, and as it were to Bury them under the water for a while, and then to draw them out of it, and lift them up, to represent the Burial of our old man, and our Resurrection to newness of life.

And this part of the Annotations was done by Doctor Featly.

'Tis generally agreed on, That as the Supper, so Baptism represents Christs death: And, saith the Apostle, VVe are buri­ed with him by Baptism into death, &c. which must needs be by Dipping: else what Analogy or proportion is there between Baptism and Burial; between the Sign, and the thing signified?

Deodate on this place also saith, Baptism was by Dipping in Water.

And Piscator saith, The Apostle seems to have respect to the whole body Dipped into Water, and presently drawn out again.

Remarkable is the Testimony of Mr. Thomas Goodwin, in his Support of Faith from Christs Resurrection, Chap. 7. quo­ting these two places, Rom. 6. Colos. 2. he hath these very words; ‘The eminent thing signified & represented in Bap­tism is Christs Death, Burial and Resurrection, in the Bapti­zed's, being first buried under water, and then rising out of it.’ More there to this purpose.

Thus we have done with our third Argument, wherewith we conclude this second Chapter. viz. That the manner of performance of this Ordinance is by Dipping the whole Bo­dy under Water.

FOr the proof of this particular, we will enquire into the qualifications, that the New Testament requires, to constitute a person a fit Subject for this Ordi­nance.

First, That they should be, Taught and made Disciples. So in the Institution, Matth. 28. 19. Go Teach all Nations, Baptizing-them, &c.

They should be then, such of all Nations as are first Taught or made Disciples, as the word, [...] is well known and confessed by all to signifie, to wit, to Discipulize, Disci­ple, or make Disciples. They must be first made Disciples, then Baptiz'd, not before; to do otherwise, is to invert and change the Order of the Commission, which runs thus, Teach and Baptize.

A parallel place in sense with this, we have, Joh. 4. 1 Jesus made and Baptized more Disciples &c. First (according to his own Commission afterwards) he made Disciples, then Bapti­zed them.

So then one qualification the Scripture requires before Baptism, is, first to be Taught, or made Disciples.

Secondly, Faith is another Prerequisite unto Baptism. They must be Believers that are the fit Subjects of Baptism; for this, see Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is Baptiz'd, &c.

First, Believing, then Baptizing. This place is Parallel in Time with Matt. 28. and is the Commission or Institution of Baptism; Whereas in Matt. is requir'd Discipling, in Mark Believing; It then appears, They must be Believing Disciples.

Baptism was practis'd upon these Terms all along the History of the Acts. So Chapter 8. 12. VVhen they Be­lieved Philip, preaching the things concerning the Kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were Baptized both men and women, not Children and Infants.

So verse 36. The Eunuch asked Philip, what did hinder him to be Baptiz'd? Philip answers, If thou Believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And the Eunuch answered and said, I be­lieve that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. ver. 37, and ver. 38. They went down both into the VVater, both Philip and the Eunuch: and he Baptiz'd him. So we see that, Philip requires Faith of the Eunuch, before he would Baptize him.

So in the Jaylors case, Acts 16. 31. Paul said to him, Be­lieve on the Lord Jesus Christ. And then verse 33. 34. He was Baptized, Believing in God.

So also Acts 18. 8. Crispus Believed on the Lord, and many of the Corinthians hearing, Believed and were Baptiz'd.

So them, Faith, and the Profession of it, is to precede Bap­tism.

Thirdly, Repentance and Confession of sin is requir'd be­fore Baptism.

The first Baptism that ever was administred was upon these tearms. Matt. 3. 2. John the Baptist preacht Repentance to them. Repent ye, So ver. 8. Bring forth fruits meet for Repen­tance. And verse 6. They were Baptized of him in Jordan, con­fessing their sins. Again, verse 11. I indeed Baptize you with Wa­ter unto Repentance.

So Peter calls for Repentance before Baptism, Acts 2. 38. Repent and be Baptized.

Hence Baptism is often called the Baptism of Repentance, Mark 1. 4. Luke 3. 3. Acts 13. 24. and 19. 4.

So in Heb. 6. 1, 2. Repentance and Faith are plac'd, as An­tecedents unto Baptism. Not laying again the Foundation of Repentance from dead works, and of Faith towards God, of the Doctrines of Baptisms, &c.

Thus we see who are the fit Subjects of Baptism, viz. Disci­ples persons Taught, and converted to the Faith, Believers, and Penitent persons.

Hence then we conclude, That Infants of eight daies old, cannot be the Subjects of this Ordinance; The Scriptures no where in the least countenancing any such thing, being neither capable to Believe, nor Repent, nor to be Taught, and made Disciples; yet all these constantly required unto Bap­tism, throughout the New Testament.

Again, Infants are not capable to hear the Word, and to receive it gladly; this also being requir'd unto Baptism, Act. 2. 41. Then they that gladly received his word, were Baptized. And Chap. 18. ver. 8. Many of the Corinthians [Hearing,] Believed, and were Baptized.

Besides Baptism consists in the answer of a good Conscience to Gods Commands. 1 Pet. 3. 21. which Children are not capable to perform.

All these things being considered, we doubt not but it will appear very clearly, that Children are not the Subjects of this Ordinance, but only grown Persons, Men and Women that come up to the forementioned Qualifications.

Besides the Subjects of this Ordinance, are said, to justifie God in their obedience to it, as on the contrary, they are said to reject the Counsel of God, that were disobedient to it: neither of which, are Children capable of. See Luke 7. 29, 30.

Neither indeed can they come up to, or perform those holy Ends this Ordinance engages to. Rom. 6. Colos. 2.

But we think we have said enough in this matter.

We could heap and produce many testimonies on our side in this particular also, but that we lay not much stresse here, yet a few to satisfie the Reader.

Ludovic. Vives de civit. Dei lib. 1. cap. 27. saith, None of old were wont to be Baptiz'd but in a grown Age, and who desir'd it, and understood what it was.

Erasmus in his Paraphrase on the Romans saith, that Bapti­zing of Children, was not in use in Paul's time.

And Bellarmin lib. 4. cap. 9, De verbo Dei, saith, That Tra­dition is the best Argument to prove Infants Baptism.

Grotius on Mat. 19. 14. says, Ambrose, Gregory, Nazianzen, Chrysostom, Austin, were all Baptized at years. Eusebius says the same of Constantine the great, though Heleua his Mother were a Christian.

We shall conclude this with the Judgement of the Com­mon-Prayer Book, in their Catechism.

Quest. What is required of persons to be Baptized?

Answ. Repentance, whereby they forsake sin, and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the Promises of God.

Quest. Why then are Infants Baptized, when by reason of their tender age, they cannot perform them?

Yea, why indeed? unlesse it be from Tradition, or to in­dulge the flesh, as 'tis reported, Pope Innocentius the third establish'd Infants Sprinkling, for the enlargment of Christen­dom, and the ease of the flesh.

THe first Argument for Infant-Baptism, is drawn from Circumcision. Infants were circumcised: there­fore Infants ought to be Baptiz'd.

Answ. It doth not follow, because Children were Circumcis'd, therefore Infants should be Baptiz'd. The rea­son is, because Circumcision was expresly commanded to Children, both as to Subject, Time, Age and Sex, which was the Male Children at eight daies old, with a severe penalty of the Parents Disobedience, Gen. 17. 10, 12, 14. But there is not one Syllable of Command for Baptizing of Infants in all the New Testament.

The Gospel is as express both for Subject, time, &c. viz. Men and Women of grown age, when they Believe, and this as plain as Circumcising of Infants at eight days old under the Law. Besides, we have the Qualifications of Baptism, clear­ly laid down, as Faith, Repentance, but nothing requir'd [Page 21] before Circumcision; Gospel-Ordinances being administred upon more pure and spiritual terms than the Legal were. And for Jesus Christ not to be as express in all his Instituti­ons, as Moses was in his, is to argue Jesus Christ, the Son, in his House, lesse faithful than Moses, the Servant, in his House; and the Gospel and its administrations, not so clear and plain as the Law, contrary to Heb. 1. begin. and 3. beginning.

That Baptism came in the room of Circumcision, is not prov'd; at least, that Circumcision was a Type of Baptism, cannot be; because they were both outward signs, Rom. 4. 1 [...]. and both in force together, as all the time of our Savi­our's life; and Circumcision by no man held to be abolished till the death of Christ. Now as shadows fly away when the substance comes: so ought Circumcision to have ceas'd when Baptism came in force, had it been a Type of Baptism.

Besides, Baptism in Infancy would be a very insignificant thing to what Circumcision was; for no man now is undoub­tedly assured of his Baptism in his Infancy, but Circumcision left its mark and Character behind.

Thus much shall serve by way of answer to their first and chief Argument for the Baptism of Infants, drawn from Cir­cumcision.

A poor shift to prove a New Testament Ordinance from an Old Testament Rice and Ceremony.

The second Argument for Baptizing of Infants, is drawn from the Baptizing of whole Housholds.

Answ. First in general, Its not certain whether there were any Infants in those houses, yea, or no. Now what a sleight foundation is Probability, May, or May not be, to build so great an Ordinance upon, as Baptism is. And yet, to speak truth, this is the best Argument they have in all the New Testament. But suppose there were Children, 'tis usual in Scripture to call the greater part of the House, the House; This is a known figure, a part for the whole. See that instance 1 Sam. 1. 21, 22, 23. the Text saith expresly ver. 21. That all the House went up to offer unto the Lord the yearly sacrifice, &c. yet ver. 22, 23. 'tis as expresly said, that Hannah and her child Samuel went not up: yet, all the House. So Joshuah 24. 15. [Page 22] As for me and my House, we will serve the Lord. There are none so unreasonable or absurd, to believe that Joshua meant his Infants, if he had any. We might instance in many others: this remains a usual phrase with us to this day, to call the greater part of the house, the house: so its well known, we call the greater part of the Parliament, the House. From this un­certainty it is, that Doctor Hammond grants, That no conclu­ding Argument can be deduc'd from the Baptizing of whole Housholds, to Baptize Children; and therefore in his Judg­ment, Arguments drawn from hence, are better wav'd than made use of, by the Patrons and Defenders of this Cause of Infant-Baptism; And certainly the Doctor judges but rati­onally herein; because a clear word of Institution, ought to be the ground of the practice of all Gospel Ordinances.

Secondly, A more particular Answer to this Argument. The New Testament speaks of four Housholds being Bap­tiz'd. We will consider them all, in Order.

First, The Houshold of Lydia, Acts 16. 14, 15.

Answ. Its uncertain whether there were any Infants in the House, as before. Its far more probable she was a Maid, or a Widdow at this time, than a married Woman, because there is not one word mentioning her Husband; Nay, she is reckon'd the Head of the Family. [Her] Houshold, ver. 15. which would not have been, if at this time she had had a Husband. Grant she were a Widdow, she might have no Children; if any, they might be grown up, and to such Children we deny not Baptism upon Profession of Faith. Besides she was at this time from her own proper dwelling, and that many miles distant; for she was [of] the City of Thyatira, ver. 14. but was now [at] the City of Philippi, ver. 12. where she was merchan­dizing. Grant she had little Children, how unlikely a mat­ter is it, that she should carry them about with her, in her tra­ding, so many miles distant.

So then if you set probability against probability, how little ground is there hence for Baptizing Infants?

But to put the matter out of doubt, the last verse of this Chap. calls them of the House of Lydia, Brethren. They entred into the house of Lydia, and when they had seen the [Brethren] they [Page 23] comforted them and departed. And therefore certainly Chil­dren cannot be here meant, whom the Apostles call Brethren, and returned to comfort with Lydia.

Thus much by way of Answer to the first Houshold.

The second Houshold is that of the Jaylors in the 33. verse of this same Chapter. The Jaylor and all His were Baptiz'd.

Answ. Whether he had any Children, is uncertain, as be­fore. The word His may as well relate to his Wife; Servants, and Domestick friends, and relation, as to his Children. [So Rom. 16. 10, 11. Houshold in the Text, Friends in the Mar­gin.] But whether he had, or had not, its all one in this Case, for in verse 32. 'tis said expresly, that Paul and Silas spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. Now this could not be, to little Children. And in verse 34. 'tis said, that He rejoyced believing in God with all his House. But this, Infants are not capable to do. So then the House that was Baptiz'd, was such as heard the Word of the Lord, and rejoyc'd, believing in God; and there can be no reason given why [His] verse 33. should be larger then [All His House] ver. 32. 34.

These two verses being a Key to the 33. verse, and This Houshold, a Key to all the other three.

The like expression we meet withall John 4. 53. where that certain Noble man himself believed, and all his House. And Acts 10. 2. Cornelius fear'd God withall his House, with many o­ther expressions of like import. Now none understand Chil­dren here, therefore, why in these places before us now in consideration?

A third Houshold, is that of Crispus, Acts 18. 8. which yet is not so plain in the Text, that his Houshold was Baptiz'd; yet if it was, the Text more plainly saith, He believ'd on the Lord with all his House. And that such as believe, are fit Subjects o [...] Baptism, we deny not; But then how Infants could be here meant, we understand not.

The fourth and last Houshold, is that of Stephanas, 1 Cor. 1. 16. I Baptized (saith Paul) the Houshold of Stephanas.

Answ. In the same Epistle Chap. 16. 15. The Apostle saith, That the House of Stephanas was the first fruits of Achaia, and that they had addicted themselves to the Ministry of the Saints. But this, Infants and little Children could not be, nor could not do.

Thus much in answet to the four Housholds; A second Ar­gument brought in the defence of Infant-Baptism.

A third Argument brought for this Cause of Infant-Bap­tism, is, from Mat. 28. 19. The Institution of Baptism. Go Teach all Nations, Baptizing them, &c. Hence some ga­ther, that they are to Baptize all Nations; But Children are of all Nations: therefore Children are the Subjects of Bap­tism.

Answ. First this Argument is no waies good, for then it would follow, that all of all Nations should be Baptiz'd; But this is against the Judgement, and contrary to the practice of these men themselves, That the Children of Heathens, In­fidels, and Pagans, should be Baptiz'd; nay, many of them deny it to the Children of such, as in a general way profess the same Faith with them; and therefore nothing can be drawn from these words all Nations, as a sufficient warrant to Bap­tize Children, unlesse they will Baptize all Children, which they themselves deny.

Secondly, The Institution here, is, to Baptize only such of all Nations, as are first taught, or made Disciples, as the Word signifies. Go Teach all Nations Baptizing them, That is such who by your Preaching among the Nations, are converted to the Faith. And that grown persons are here meant in this Com­mission is clear by the parallel place with this, Mark 16. 16. And our late Annotators upon this place, confesse in Latine, that 'tis spoken, de adultis, which is in plain English, of grown persons.

Thirdly, The word [Them] Baptizing [Them] hath no reference unto all Nations, as is to be seen in the Grammar of the Text, [...] Them, being of the Masculine Gender, but [...], all Nations, of the Nenter. This Them then [Page 25] must have reference to Disciples, to such as are first taught. But of this, before.

Fourthly, Such as are here to be Baptiz'd, are to be taught again, after their Baptism. ver. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, viz. Such as are first Taught and then Baptiz'd, verse, 19. are here verse 20. to be taught again, in the further observance of all Christ's Commands. But this we suppose all men grant Infants are not capable of.

Thus we have done with their third Argument also.

A fourth Argument for this cause, is brought from Acts 2. 39. The Promise is unto you, and to your Children. This Pro­mise, say some, is Baptism, and this is made to Children: therefore Children are to be Baptiz'd.

Answ. In Answer to this Argument, we shall consider what is here meant; first, by Promise; secondly, by Children.

First, What this Promise is? Whatsoever this Promise is, it is not Baptism, but indeed a Promise made unto Baptism. Verse 38. Repent and be Baptiz'd; for the Promise is unto you, ver. 39. So that this Promise, is the Baptism of the Spirit, made unto their Obedience in their Baptism in water, as is plain in the Text. Repent and be Baptiz'd every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the Remission of Sins, and ye shall receive the Gift of the Holy Spirit; For the Promise &c. to wit, this Promise of the Gift of the Holy Spirit, which has reference unto that extraordinary Gift of the Spirit, in the beginning of this Chapter. But of this, more hereafter.

So then the Baptism of Water, is the Duty; the Baptism of the Spirit, the Promise to this Duty.

Secondly, What is meant here by Children?

First, By Children is not meant their Infants, but the Po­sterity of the Jews, as Doctor Hammond grants; and there­fore confesses this place; a very unconcluding Argument for Infants-Baptism. And that the Posterity of the Jews is here meant, is clear by the opposition of the Gentiles to the Jews, in the following words, And to all that are a [far off] By which Phrase is evidently meant the Gentiles; compar'd [Page 26] with Eph. 2. 13. Ye who sometimes were [far off] are made nigh by the blood of Christ. And that the Gentiles are here meant, all do grant.

Secondly, Though by Children here be meant, the Posteri­ty of the Jews, yet not the natural or carnal [...]eed, but the spiritual, as appears by the last words in this verse. The Pro­mise is unto you, and to your Children, (viz. to your Posterity, meaning the Jews) and to all that are a far off (here also the Gentiles are taken in) even as many as the Lord our God shall call, viz. both Jews and Gentiles, as shall appear to be cal­led ones. See Rom. 4. 12. 16. To the end the Promise may be sure to all the seed, not to that only which is of the Law but to that also which is of the Faith of Abraham, who is the Father of us all. And Chap. 9. 6, 7, 8. They are not all Israel, which are of Isra­el: neither because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all [Children] but in Isaac shall thy seed be called; That is, they which are the Children of the flesh, these are not the Children of God, but the Children of the Promise are counted for the seed. So Gal. 3. 7. Know ye therefore, that they which are of Faith, the same are the Children of Abraham.

And, whereas some object, that if we deny Baptism to In­fants, their Priviledges are lesse under the Gospel, then they were under the Law.

We briefly answer, That Birth-Priviledges give no right to Gospel-Dispensations. 'Twas a vain Plea, We have Abra­ham to our Father. Mat. 3. 9.

Thirdly that Children cannot be meant little Infants: be­cause ver. 38. before Baptism they are requir'd to Repent; And ver. 41. they are said gladly to receive the Word: neither of which can Infants do.

Thus we have done with the fourth Argument.

A fifth Argument is from 1 Cor. 7. 14. from the Holiness of Children there spoken of, Else were your Children unclean, but now are they Holy.

Answ. First there is not one word more or lesse, in all this Chapter, spoken of Baptism, but all along of Marriage.

Secondly, for answer to this Argument, we shall consider, 1. What is here meant by Holiness. And 2. what right this Holiness gives Children unto Baptism.

First, By Holiness here cannot be meant regenerative Ho­liness; For the unbelieving Husband, and the unbelieving Wife, have the same Holiness attributed to them as the Chil­dren, and yet unbelievers; therefore it cannot be meant of Holiness to inward sanctification. For 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.

The scope of this place is no other, but to answer a Quaere of the Believers newly converted, Whether or no they ought not to put away their unbelieving Wives, and to depart from their unbelieving Husbands as you may see verse 10. &c. In answer to which Quaere, the Apostle advises them to abide in their married estate; By this Argument among others, in ver. 14. Because the unbelieving Husband is Sanctified by the Wife, &c. That is, that as their Marriage was at first law­ful, so they might lawfully live and cohabit together, and might lawfully make use of one another in that relation: and so were to account their Children legitimately born. Such a Holiness as the Apostle speaks of the Creatures of God, 1 Tim. 4. 5. That they might be lawfully us'd: Or possibly such a Sanctification, as is else-where spoken of in opposition to Fornication, to wit, the Holiness of Chastity, 1 Thessal. 4. 3, 4, 5.

Secondly, But what is all this to Baptism? For whatever Holiness is here spoken of, what right does this give Children unto Baptism? If right to Baptism, why not unto the Lords Supper also? If right to one Ordinance, why not unto another? We find no such parting of the Ordinances in the New Testa­ment; but they that had right unto Baptism, had immediatly thereupon right unto the Supper.

And hence it was that in former times, as Grotius gives the account, with many other Testimonies I cannot now remem­ber, That Infants did as well receive the Lords Supper, as Baptism, and truly I think with as good Authority, one as the other. And we may as well divide the Bread and the Wine as the Papists do; as divide one Ordinance from another.

To conclude, we cannot but wonder, that any knowing man should deduce an Argument from hence, for Infants-Baptism, [Page 28] there being not the least word to conntenance such a thing in the whole Chapter.

A sixth Argument is brought from Matthew 19. Mark. 10. Luke 18. where 'tis said, that Christ took little Children in his arms and blessed them and said Of such is the Kingdom of Hea­ven. From whence they gather, that these little Children were Baptiz'd.

Answ. First, the whole Text speaks not one word of Bap­tism, though as you see, recorded by three Evangelists.

Secondly, Whereas 'tis said, He blessed them. And hence they would infer, He Baptiz'd them; the answer is ready, The Text saith expresly that Jesus Christ never Baptiz'd at all. John 4. 2. Jesus himself Baptiz'd not.

Thirdly, For that passage of such is the Kingdom of Heaven, we answer, First, that the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to lit­tle Children, we do not in the least doubt, because the Text so plainly speaks it. But how it follows hence, that there­fore they are to be Baptiz'd, we know not; no more then that they have right to the Supper of the Lord, as before.

But secondly, whereas the Text says, of Such, that is, of such like, as the Word, [...] signifies, to wit, such as are by the Gospel, made like to little Children, and do resemble them in Innocenty, Humility, Harmlessness, and the like, To them also belongs the Kingdom of Heaven, as the word [...] signifies, it being a note of similitude and resemblance.

Fourthly, For that word [...], it doth not alwaies signi­fie a little Child or Infant as you may see 2 Tim. 3. 15. where the same word is us'd of Timothy, that from a child he knew the Holy Scriptures. Now such Children as they Baptize, are not capable of knowing the Holy Scriptures. And the Text it self seems fairly to admit of such an Interpretation; for as it is said, They were brought to Christ, it speaks also of their com­ming to him.

Dr. Hammond calls this place also an imperfect way of proof for Infants-Baptism.

A seventh Argument is brought from Matt. 18. 6. from whence they gather, that little Children may be believers, [Page 29] and so have right to Baptism. Who so shall offend one of these lit­tli ones that believe in me, &c.

Answ. First, We grant that Believers are fit Subjects for Baptism; 'tis that we plead for all along: neither do we deny that the persons here spoken of, were not fitly qualified for this Ordinance.

But secondly, the little ones here spoken of, are grown per­sons, and are called little ones only by way of similitude (as before) in respect of their Humility, as you may clearly see, ver. 1, 2, 3, 4. Whosoever shall humble himself as this little child, and except you be converted and become as little Children, &c.

Besides, These little ones cannot be meant of natural lit­tle Children, but to be taken in a spiritual sense, because the Text saith, He that offends one of these little ones that believe in me, 'twere better that a Milstone were hanged about his neck &c, A very heavy doom for offending little Children; which they will be; if we take away their play things, or give them but due correction when they deserve it.

Thus much shall serve for answer to this Argument also.

An eighth Argument for the Baptism of Infants, is brought from their Church-membership.

That Children are Church-members under the Gospel, they endeavour thus to prove, They that were once Church-mem­bers, and never repeal'd, are so still: But they were once Church-members, and never repeal'd: Therefore &c.

Answ. Children under the Law, as Children, were not Church-members, but as Circumciz'd, they were not Cir­cumciz'd because Church-members, but became Church-members, because Circumciz'd. In like manner under the Gospel, such as are rightly Baptiz'd are Church-members, and not till then: they are not Baptiz'd, because Church-members, but become Members of the Church by Baptism. 1 Cor. 1. 12. 13. So Act. 2. 41, 42. Then they that gladly received his word, were Baptiz'd, and the same day there were [added unto them] about 3000. souls, viz. to the Church, as you may see, ver. 47. And the Lord added to the Church, &c.

Hence the Common-Prayer-Book saith, That Children are made Members of the Church by Baptism.

The Principle is right, though falsly applyed by them to wrong Subjects; and all agree in this, that I have met with, That Baptism is the initiating Ordinance into the Church. And hence it was, they set their Font at the lower end of the Church, having this Notion right, that Baptism made them Members of the Church.

I shall conclude this particular with an Argument of Mr. Baxter's.

If there be neither Precept, nor Example, of admitting Church members, in all the New Testament, but by Baptism, then all that are now admitted, ought to come in by Baptism; But there is neither Precept, nor example, of admitting Church-members, in all the New Testament but by Baptism: therefore they ought to come in the same way now.

Thus you see, that Baptism is the door of entrance into the visible Church, and that the right of membership comes in, by vertue of their Baptism, and not that persons are to be Bap­tiz'd, because already Church-members.

Besides, grant that Children were Church-members under the Law, yet now the whole Jewish Church-state as National, being abrogated by the comingin of the Gospel, which hath erected a Church upon purer, and more spiritual principles; it follows then that Children lost this Priviledge, with the Jewish state; and when the National Church was abtogated, then were the Children cast out. Thus, if ever they were Church-members, which no Scripture says, yet we have shewn a Repeal.

And so much for this Argument also.

A ninth Argument, that Children ought to be Baptiz'd, is, because Children are Disciples.

Answ. That Disciples are to be Baptiz'd, we grant; but that Children are Disciples, we deny.

That Children are Disciples they endeavour to prove, from Acts 15. 10. in which place, some say, Children are call'd Disciples.

Answ. The Disciples here spoken of, upon whose neck the yoke of Circumcision was laid, were not the Children, but the Fathers, who having now receiv'd the Gospel, did count it [Page 31] a yoke, to have their Children brought under the Bondage of Circumcision again, and other Ceremonies of the Law.

Beside, who are Christs Disciples, the Gospel is plain, Matt. 16. 24. and in many other places might be shewn at large, but that we study brevity.

Lastly, For that Argument, drawn from the practice of our Fore-fathers, successively throughout so many generations, al­most in all Nations, which is indeed the best and strongest proof, not onely of the vulgar, but also of many others, whom we have expected should have been better taught; and otherwise learn'd in these daies of Light, we have only this to say, That it was not so, from the beginning, as we have already prov'd; we had well hoped before this time, this popular Ar­gument of Possession, and Custome in Religion, had been wholly laid aside, considering that even in our daies, we have reform'd many things, that our Fore-fathers did: and why not in this also, if it be found too light for the ballance of the Sanctuary; especially when we remember, the solemn Oath and Covenant this whole Nation hath taken, to reform in all things, according to the Primitive Pattern, and the word of God.

Its not many years, since the Liturgy of this whole Nation, hath bin laid aside, & now almost forgotten, by all sober-min­ded persons in Religion, together with many other abuses crept in, both in Doctrine and Discipline, though for many Ages past establisht and confirm'd.

Besides in this matter, how easy were it to shew you, the Infancy of Infant-Baptism, were it not done sufficiently alrea­dy. (The two first Centuries speak nothing of this matter.)

If we made not the word of God our sole Authority, we could fully make it appear, that Antiquity is on our side in this thing also.

But me thinks I hear some say, if our way be true, What then became of our Fore-fathers that were not Baptized, so, as we plead for?

Answer. The times of this ignorance God winked at. Besides, though we look upon Baptism as a very great Or­dinance of the New Testament, yet we do not hold it so abso­lutely [Page 32] necessary, or essential to salvation, that the neglect thereof is damnable, till the Light of this Truth shining in so clearly to our Consciences and understandings, that then we reject it upon some carnal account or other; notwithstanding our Conviction. We question not, had our Fore-fathers recei­ved the Light of it, as we have, they would have been obedi­ent to it, as we are.

But errors usually follow this practice.

All that we shall say to this, is, This is but the same thing, that hath been all along objected by the Papists against the Protestants,

Some there are from a vain conceit, of late taken up, that they are Baptiz'd with the Spirit, have therefore wholly laid aside, the Baptism of Water, as uselesse and insignificant to them.

To such we answer, First, That none are Baptiz'd with the Spirit at this day, we shall hereafter shew.

But secondly, Grant they were, yet that they ought to be Baptiz'd in Water, is clear, as appears, in that Peter comman­ded such to be Baptiz'd in Water, Acts 10. 44. to the end, While Peter spake, the Holy Spirit fell on all them which heard the Word; on the Gentiles also was powred out the gift of the Holy Spi­rit, for they heard them speak with Tongues, and magnifie God. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid Water that these should not be Baptized, which have received the Holy Spirit as well as we.

To conclude this Chapter, In all Ordinances, Institution is chiefly to be looked at: We must not be wise above what is written, especially in matters of worship, God hath been very jealous of that in all Ages; therefore thou art to consider, how is't written, how readest thou? In this to change, add, or diminish, is to do it with a witness; therefore to the Law, and to the Testimony, if any man speak not according to this, 'tis because there is no Light in him. Take heed of setting thy Posts by Gods Posts.

Christ Jesus will shortly come to take an account, how we have kept his Ordinances, who hath commanded us, to keep them, as he hath commanded, until he come: and hath pro­mised to be with us, in so doing, to the end of the World.

Some are so hard put to it, to find an Institution for Infant-Baptism, who with Luther confess, That Childrens Baptism, was never instituted by Christ, and yet a duty. Would not this fairly countenance all Will-worship? And what were this but to question the Wisdom of our Law-giver? And herein they think to salve the matter, in asking of us, Where we find an Institution for womens receiving of the Lords Supper? We desire such to consider, whether women be not to be reckoned among the number of Disciples? Acts 20. 7. Upon the first day of the week, when the Disciples came together to break bread. And ▪tis well known, that word 1 Cor. 11. 28. Let [a man] examine himself signifies both man & woman. Besides, among those that broke bread Acts 2. 42, 46. were some women, Acts 1. 14.

Thus we have done with the most considerable Argu­ments brought in the defence of Infant-Baptism, together with the Answers to them.

HAving already spoken of the Doctrine of Baptism, we shall now make the Use of it.

• First, to them that are unbaptized.
• Secondly, to them that are Baptiz'd.

First to them that are unbaptiz'd;

Take heed of rejecting this Truth against Light, or of ha­ving low thoughts of Christs waies and Ordinances how con­temptible soever they may appear to the wisdom of this world, or to thy carnal reasonings.

Was it not as strange under the Law, that the Priest must dip the Tip of his right Thumb, and the Tip of his right Ear? [Page 34] What reason canst thou assign for this, but the Will and Plea­sure of the Law-giver? But now Baptism hath many excel­lent, holy, spiritual Designs, and ends in it as, to dy to sin, to be dead to this world, to rise again to newness of Life, and points out our Resurrection at the last, &c.

Were not many of the Ceremonies under the Law, as ridi­culous to flesh and blood, as to Baptize Believers under the Gospel?

Remember Naamans case 2 Kings 5. (beginning,) who when the Prophet bid him, Go wash in Jordan seven times, that his flesh might become who [...]e again, and be clean, went away in a rage and said, Are not Abana and Pharpar, Rivers of Da­mascus, better than all the waters of Israel? I only allude; that thou mayst learn this, That Gods waies and Institutions, are better than mans Traditions and Inventions.

Some Arguments to presse thy duty upon thee.

First, that tis a Principle and a part of the Foundation of Christian Religion, Heb. 6. 1, 2. Therefore leaving the Princi­ples of the Doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto Perfection not lay­ing again the Foundation of Repentance from dead works, and of Faith towards God, of the Doctrine of Baptism, &c.

Secondly, Remember Christ's example, Matt. 3. 16. Jesus when he was Baptized, went up straight way out of the water. And as we would be accounted his Disciples, let us follow him, as we have him for an Example.

Thirdly, Consider his Commission or Institution of this Ordinance. Matt. 28. 19, 20.

And that 1. as the very last thing he did before he went to Heaven.

2. The Authority or Power whereby he gives this forth, who had all power in Heaven and in Earth, verse 18.

3. He joyns nothing but Teaching with it.

4. No Ordinance so solemnly administred as this was, viz. In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spi­rit.

A fourth Argument. No Ordinance in all the New Testa­ment was ever grac'd with such a presence as this was; Father, Son and Spirit, being so wonderfully present at it, Matt. 3. latter end.

Fifthly, Peter commanded such to be Baptiz'd, as had re­ceived the extraordinary Gifts of the Holy Spirit, Acts 10. latter end.

Sixthly, Our Obedience in this Ordinance, holds forth the answer of a good Conscience, 1 Pet. 3. 21.

Seventhly, It is call'd a justifying of God, and our disobedi­ence herein, rejecting the Counsel of God against our selves, Luke 7. 29, 30. And the Publicans justified God, being Baptiz'd with the Baptism of John; But the Pharisees and Lawyers re­jected the Counsel of God against themselves, being not Baptiz'd of Him.

Eighthly, The Water in Baptism represents, and holds forth the bloud of Jesus Christ for the Remission of sin; And if joyned with Faith, our Salvation, Mark 16. 16. He that be­lieveth and is Baptized, shall be saved, 1 Pet. 3. 21. Baptism doth also now save us. Acts 2. 38. Repent, and be Baptized for the Remission of Sin, and 22. 16. Arise and be Baptiz'd, and wash away thy sins. From such expressions, as these are, the Ancients have attributed Regeneration unto Baptism, though unwarily, and that it washes away Original Sin.

Ninthly, It represents our cleansing by the Spirit. So some take these following places to be spoken of Baptism, to wit, John 3. 3. Except a man be born of [Water] and the Spirit. So Titus 3. 5. According to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of Regeneration and Renewing of the Holy Spirit. So Mr. Mede in one of his Diatribae carries this place. See more of him there. So some do sense Eph. 5. 26. That He might sanctify & cleanse it, with the washing of water by the Word. Pemble says, ‘Water in Baptism notes Justification by the blood of Christ, and sanctification by the Spirit.’ So Heb. 10. 22. Our Bodies washed with pure Water.

To conclude: consider, all the Churches in the New Testa­ment were Baptiz'd.

The Church of the Hebrews, Acts 2. Heb. 6. 2.

The Church at Rome, Rom. 6. 3. &c.

The Church at Corinth, Acts 18. 8. 1 Cor. 1, 13: &c. and 12. 13.

The Church at Galatia, Galat. 3. 27.

The Church at Ephesus, Acts 19. beginning, Eph. 4. 6.

The Church at Philippi, Acts 16. 12, 14, 15. 33.

The Church of Colosse, Coloss. [...]2. 12.

I had almost forgot to put you in mind, that Jesus Christ entred not into his publick ministry, till after his Baptism, Mat. 3. compar'd with Mat. 4. And that he avoucheth his Ministerial Authority from his Baptism. Mat. 21. 23 24, 25.

And the Apostles when they were to choose another into the room of Judas, to make up their number; they have a [...]pe­cia [...] care and eye, that he be one under Baptism, Acts 1. 21, 2 [...]. Read the [...]e places at large.

Seriously consider these Arguments, and we doubt not but by the blessing of God, they will be as so many Motives, and spurs to inforce thee to this so much neglected duty.

And now Arise why tarriest thou? and be Baptized▪ as Ana­nias exhorted [...]aul, Acts 22. 16. And though he had eaten no meat for three daies and three nights, yet streightway he was Baptiz'd, before he had eaten any thing, as you may see in this Chapterr.

And of the Jaylor 'tis said, Acts. 16. 33. That he and all his were Baptiz'd [straightway.]

Consider Psal. 119. 60. I made haste and [delay'd not] to keep thy Commondements.

He that hath time to day; may have none to morrow. How sad then will it be to have withstood a Truth, or delay'd the time? How sweet and comfortable on the other side, if thou ha' [...] been found obedient to the Heavenly will in all things, so far as thou hast known. Then shalt thou not be ashamed, if thou hast had respect to all Gods Commandements. Psal. 119, 6.

Use the second, To such as are Baptiz'd. To consider the Holy ends of your Baptism, and to li [...]e up to them. This should make you in love with this Ordinance, because none engages mo [...]e unto Holinesse than this doth, to both parts of Holinesse to wit to mortification of sin; and to vi [...]ification or newnesse o [...] Li [...]e. B [...]ri [...], signifies mortification o [...] the Old M [...]n; Rising again vi [...]ification of the New Man. Rom. 6. 4. Tha [...] we should walk in newnesse of Life, ver. 6. That the Body of sin might be destroyed that henceforth we should not serve sin. You have dec [...]ated hereby to be as persons dead and buried [...]o sin [Page 37] and this world. So Col. 2. 12. and 3. 1, 2, 3. The very Com­mon Prayer-Book tells us, we are engag'd hereby, ‘to for­sake the Devil and all his works, the Pomps and vanities of the wicked word, and all the sinful lusts of the flesh, and to keep [...]o [...]s holy Will and Commandements▪ and walk in the same all the daies o [...] our life.’

'Tis to be fear'd one great Argument, that keeps many from submitting to this Ordinance, is the disorderly walking of many that are under it.

I have read of one being tempted to sin, answered the temptation, I am Baptiz'd. When you are tempted, think of your Baptism, and of your engagement therein.

Secondly, Consider the great Profession you have made in Baptism▪ hereby you have put on Christ, Gal. 3. 27. As ma­ny as have been Baptized into Christ, have put on Christ; have made a publick profession of Christ before God, Angels, and Men; and if thou walk not up to, and in some measure an­swer the ends of thy Baptism, all these will be a witness a­gainst thee. To put on Christ, is a borrowed speech from put­ting on a Livery. As Servants are known by their Livery, and who i [...] their Master, so we in Baptism: 'tis as it were our Li­very, whereby we own Christ for our Lord: therefore live to him, and serve Him. So in the Institution, we are Baptiz'd in, or into, the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, that is into the Profession of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

All Masters have some peculiar mark, badge, or Character, by which their Disciples are known; Moses's Circumcision, Christ's Baptism. And as Christs Disciples are distinguish'd from Moses's by his Institutions: so they are also distinguish'd from the rest of the men of the world, by living up to his In­stitutions.

Especially, take heed of Apostacy after so publick a Professi­on of Christ, as many in these daies have done: let this be your warning, their backsliding.

The Ancients reserv'd the white Garments of such as were Baptiz'd to be a witness against them in the day of Apostacy.

The [...]ad Apostacies in this day, of Baptiz'd persons, is a La­mentation, and shall be for a Lamentation.

HAving already spoken of the Baptism of Water, We now come to treat of the Baptism of the Spirit.

There is a threefold Baptism spoken of in the New Testament. viz.

• The Baptism of
  • Water.
  • Suffering.
  • The Spirit.

Yet, to speak properly, there is but one Baptism, Eph. 4. 5. One Baptism, which is the Baptism of Water; the other two being Figurative and Metaphorical.

The Baptism of Suffering is spoken of by Christ Mat­thew 20. 22, 23. Are ye able to be Baptized with the Baptism that I am Baptized with? Ye shall be Baptized with the Baptism that I am Baptized with, So Mark 10. 38, 39. and Luke 12. 50, I have a Baptism to be Baptized with, and how am I streightned, till it be accomplished. Christ here speaks of his Death and Suffering. Herein also signifying, that his Disci­ples were to be partakers with him, of his Crosse, as well as of his Crown. I shall say no more of this Baptism, but only leave this Note, That every Suffering is not the Baptism of Suffe­ring, but only great and deep Sufferings unto Blood and Death. Hence the Ancients call it, The Baptism of Bloud, in opposition to a lesser Degree or Measure of Suffering, be­ing Dipped & Plung'd unto afflictions. So Wilsons Dictionary. And still, this carries the signification of the Word with it.

Some conceive, this phrase seems to be borrowed from such places in the Old Testament as these Psa. 42. 7. and 69. 1, 2. and 88. 7. Ezek. 26. 19.

The Baptism of the Spirit, is that Baptism which I am now to speak more largely of.

Concerning which, I shall do these three things;

• First, Shew you, That it is a distinct and different Bap­tism, from the Baptism of Water; and herein shew what it is not.
• Secondly, I shall more fully shew what this Baptism of the Spirit is.
• Thirdly, Answer a Question or two, concerning the con­tinuation of this Baptism; and so close all.

First, That it is a different, and distinct Baptism from the Baptism of Water.

For this, see Mat. 3. 11. I indeed Baptize you with Water, (saith John) but He (that is Jesus) that cometh after me, shall Baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. So also Mark 1. 8. Luke 3. 16. Joh. 1. 33. Acts 1. 5. and 11. 16. All these places do clearly distinguish this Baptism of the Spirit from the Baptism of Water. Though I confesse, 'tis generally made to note out, the sanctifying graces of the Spirit, as the inward thing signified, by the outward sign of Water; And therefore Expositors content themselves with opening of that Phrase, [with the Holy Spirit and with fire.] to set forth the operations of the Spirit, as compar'd to, or resembled by, fire, in respect of his purifying Nature, and the like.

But that this Phrase hath a further meaning in it, See Wil­sons Dictionary. Also the learned Cameron, and Dr. Hammond on this place, Who both refer, and that rightly, this, Mat. 3. 11. for the further opening of it, unto Acts 2. 3, 4. There appear'd unto them Cloven Tongues, like as of [Fire,] and it sat upon each of them, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other Tongues, as the Spirit gave them utte­rance. So that this Baptism of Fire hath clearly reference unto, and was fulfill'd in this extraordinary appearance of the Spirit, like as of Fire. That this was the Baptism of the Spirit, promi­sed, Matth. 3. and Luke 3. appears further by Acts 1. 4 5. [Page 40] The Apostles being assembled together, Christ commanded them that they should not depart from Hierusalem, but wait for the Pro­mise of the Father which saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly Baptized with Water, but ye shall be Baptizd with the Holy Spirit, not many daies hence. Which was fulfilled Acts 2. See also Acts 11. 15, 16. As I (viz. Peter) began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them, as on us at the beginning. (viz. in Acts 2. as is quoted in the Margin) Then remembred I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed Baptized with Water, but ye shall be Baptized with the Holy Spirit.

These places diligently compar'd together, evidently shew, that this Baptism of the Spirit, is a distinct Baptism from the Baptism of Water, and hath no reference at all to the inward sanctifying graces of the Spirit, but notes out the most extra­ordinary Gifts of the Spirit, that ever were given to the Sons of men: and therefore is call'd, the Baptism of the Spirit.

I wonder, that so plain a thing as this is, should be let slip, without taking notice of, by almost all Expositors in all Ages.

Thus we have done with the first Particular, That this Bap­tism is a distinct and different Baptism, from the Baptism of Water.

Secondly, Having shewn you what it is not, I shall now shew you what it is; Which I will do in this description.

The Baptism of the Spirit is such a powring forth of the Spirit, in the extraordinary Gifts of it, as to be fill'd with it; the manifesta­tion whereof, was speaking with Tongues, and Prophesying.

Of this Description, in the several parts of it.

First, Its call'd, a powring forth of the Spirit. What the New Testament calls, The Baptism of the Spirit, (as borrowing its phrase from the Baptism of Water, Mat. 3. 11. still carrying the signification of the word with it) that the Old Testament calls, A powring forth of the Spirit, both Terms us'd, viz. Powring and Baptism, in opposition to a Sprinkling or drop­ping of the Spirit, in the ordinary measures thereof. So Joel 2. 28 29. And it shall come to passe, that I will [Powre] out my Spirit upon all flesh and in those daies will I [Powre] out my Spirit. And this very Text Peter quotes Acts 2. where the [Page 41] Baptism of the Spirit was first given out, verse 16, 17, 18. This is that which was spoken by the Prophet Joel, It shall come to passe in the last daies saith God, I will [powre] out my Spirit. And I will [powre] out in those daies of my Spirit.

So Acts 10. 45. On the Gentiles also was [Powred] out the Gift of the Holy Spirit, speaking here of the Baptism of the Spirit.

Thus we have shewn you, that the Baptism of the Spirit, is expressed by the Powrings forth of the Spirit both in the Old and New Testament, as in many other places might be shown.

This powring out of the Spirit, was by Christ from his Fa­ther: therefore call'd his Baptism, and the Promise of the Father, Luke 24. 49. Behold, I send the Promise of my Father upon you. So also Acts 1. 4. 5. Wait for the Promise of the Father, which, saith he, (viz. Christ) you have heard of me, for John tru­ly Baptiz'd with Water; But ye shall be Baptized with the Holy Spirit.

And Acts 2. 33. Having received of the Father the Promise of the Holy Spirit. So verse 39. The Promise viz. the great Pro­mise of the Spirit. So Gal. 3. 14. The Promise of the Spirit, So called, because the Spirit is the great Promise of the Father in the Old Testament; and again promis'd by Christ from his Father in the New, which he [powred] out first at his Ascention.

Secondly, For the further manifesting what this Baptism of the Spirit is; I say, 'tis such a Powring forth of the Spirit, as that they that had it, are said to be [Fill'd] with it, Acts 2. 4. And they were all [Fill'd] with the Holy Spirit. So Acts 4. 31. And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were Assembled, and they were all [Filled] with the Holy Spirit.

Thirdly, It is such a filling with the Spirit, the manifesta­tion whereof, was alwaies by speaking with [Tongues] and Prophesying. So the first Baptism of the Spirit that ever was, is manifested Acts 2. 3, 4. And there appear'd unto them cloven [Tongues] like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them; And they were all fill'd with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other [Tongues] as the Spirit gave them utterance. And verse 6. Every man heard them speak in his own Language. And verse 8. How [Page 42] hear we every man in our own [Tongue,] wherein we were born? and verse 11. We do hear them speak in our own [Tongues]. Not that the Hearers heard that in diverse Languages, which they spake in one; for then the Miracle had been in the hearers, not in the speakers, whereas the Cloven tongues rested on the Apostles, not on the People, as Calvin, well observes.

That this Baptism was manifested by Tongues, see also Acts 10. 44▪ 45, 46. The Holy Spirit fell on all them which heard the Word—On the Gentiles also was powred out the Gift of the Holy Spirit; For they heard them speak with [Tongues,] And Acts 19. 6. When Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spake with [Tongues] and Prophesied. So also Acts 11. 15. As I began to speak (saith Peter) the Holy Spi­rit fell on them, as on us at the beginning, (which was by speaking with Tongues Acts 2.) and verse 17. For as much then, as God gave them the like [Gift] as he did unto us. Which was the Gift of speaking with Tongues. So Acts 15. 8. Giving them the Holy Spirit [even as] he did unto us, viz. Acts 2.

Thus all along the History of the Acts, you see the Baptism of the Spirit was manifested by speaking with Tongues. So that all the extraordinary Gifts before, how great soever, was not properly the Baptism of the Spirit; For from the beginning of the world, there was no speaking with Tongues till Acts 2. That being the first time: and this I conceive to be the reason, why this extraordinary Gift, to speak with Tongues was then given forth; because the Apostles were from that time to go Preach to all Nations and Languages; And hence this Gift of Tongues was given to them to fit them for their work, Luke 24. 47. They were to Preach to all Nations; But they were first to tarry at Hierusalem, till they were indued with Power from on High. verse 49. Which Power was the Gift of spea­king with Tongues, Acts 1. 4, 5. compar'd with Acts 2. be­ginning.

We must lay down this as an undoubted Maxime, that the first time that ever the Baptism of the Spirit was manifested, was Acts 2. immediatly after Christs Ascention and Glorifica­tion, at the right hand of his Father in Heaven. The Foun­dation of this Maxime is laid John 7. 39. The Holy Spirit was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet Glorified, viz, was not [Page 43] yet given in that extraordinary manner, as it was to be, Acts 2. upon his Glorification, and these were part of those Gifts at his Ascention, Eph. 4. 8. When he ascended up on high, and gave Gifts unto men, according as the Prophecy went before of Him, Psal. 68. 18. And therefore when he was ascended, he thus powred out the spirit, Acts 2. beginning. See also verse 32, 33. This Jesus hath God raised up whereof we are all Witnesses; Therefore being by (or at) the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father, the Promise of the Holy Spirit, He hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear.

This is one of those extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit men­tioned, 1 Cor, 12. 10. To another divers Kinds of Tongues.

To conclude this second Head, The Givings forth of the Spirit, as to the Baptism of it, is set forth by such Phrases, as is not applicable to any other Administration of the Spirit whatsoever, as He fell on them, Came on them, Acts 8. 16. and 10. 44. The Holy Spirit [fell] on them. So Acts 11. 15. The Holy Spirit [fell] on them. And 19. 6. The Holy Spirit [Came] on them, and they spake with Tongues and Prophesied.

Thirdly, For that great Question now amongst some in this Age. Whether this Baptism shall be given forth again?

Answ. First for that place, Joel 2. 28, 29. which some bring that it is yet to be fulfilled. I shall only say, The Apo­stle Peter Acts 2. 16, 17, 18. doth expresly quote it, as then fulfilled. This is that which was spoken by the Prophet Joel, And it shall come to pass in the last days (saith God), I will Powre out of my Spirit upon all flesh, viz. Men of all Nations, Gentiles and Jews, And your sons and your daughters shall Prophesy, that is, of both Sexes, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams, that is, men of all Ages, young and old, and on my servants, and on my hand-maidens, I will powre out in those daies of my Spirit, and they shall Prophesy. That is, on all Conditions, Sons or Servants, bond or free. Yet that it was now but in Part fulfill'd, the two next verses seem to hint, viz. 19, 20. And I will shew wonders in Heaven above, &c. which words are also quoted out of Joel.

And that 'tis usual for Prophecies to have a double accom­plishment, that is, to be fulfill'd at two several times, is clear, by comparing John 19. 37. with Revel. 1. 7.

There seems to be the same reason also, why it should be given forth again, as it was at the beginning, because of the Gospel, which is yet to be preach'd to all Nations, Tongues and Languages.

And possibly, As to the Gentiles at their first Conversion, Acts 10, 44. & 11. 15, 19. & 15. 7. 8. So some conceive, 'twill be powr'd out again, upon, or a little before the Calling and Conversion of the Jews.

I determine nothing, only these following Scriptures seem to hint such a thing. Isay 32. 15. & 44. 3. Ezekiel 39. 29. Zach. 12. 10. Joel 2. 28, 29. In all which places read the Context, and Consult them at your leisure.

However there is not the least shew in Scripture that this shall be again till towards the calling of the Jews, much lesse for the continuance of it in all ages, as there is for the Baptism of Water, and the Supper of the Lord, and other Ordinances.

And therefore that place Acts 2. 38., 39. where there is a Promise made of it, unto Repentance and Baptism in water, it must certainly be understood of, and limited to, the Pri­mitive times, else what were this but to Question the truth of Repentance or the faithfulnesse of God, in performing promises, which God forbid? What were this but to open a wide door to question either the truth of the word of God, or the Truth of the work of Gods spirit in the hearts of men and women in all ages since the Apostles, and so to con­demne the generation of the righteous?

And that this cannot be the meaning of these words of Peter, because then it will follow that all the believers in the Primitive times, were thus Baptized with the spirit.

The meaning then of Peter in this place must be this, by encouraging of them to Baptism of Water, he promiseth them the Baptism of the Spirit. That is, that in so doing, possibly they might receive these extraordinary gifts spoken of in the beginning of the Chapter, without which they could not have them.

And that these extraordinary gifts were intended by God, chiefly for the Primitive times, both for the preaching of the Gospell to all Nations, and for the confirmation of it, hath been cleared already. So Mark 16. 17. must be understood. These signes shall follow them that believe Viz. not to all that believe in all ages, nor to all believers in the first age. But to some few extraordinarily, to fit them for the Ministery of the word, else we might all question the truth of our faith. And among other signes in the Text, this is reckoned for one They shall speake with new Tongues, and vers. 20. These signes are expresly said to be given for the confirmation of the Gos­pel. They went forth and preached every where, the Lord work­ing with them, and confirming the word with signes following.

So Heb. 2. 3, 4. How shall we escape if we neglect so great Salva­tion, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was con­firmed unto us by them that heard him, God also bearing witnesse, both which signes and wonders, and with diverse miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit.