An apologetical reply to a book called an answer to the unjust complaint of…An apologeticall reply to a booke called an ansvver to the unjust complaint of…

1. That the things, there spoken of, were not to be numbered amongst those things which are only Sacraments: however they were Sacraments, in a sense, yet they were not Sacraments in that signification of the the word [Sacraments] which is usually amongst Divines, when they call circumcision, and the passover, Baptism, and the Lords supper, Sacraments: for they were not by any solemn promulgation, expressed in the word, instituted & sanctified by God to be seals of the covenant to believers (as circumcision &c.) which is necessary to the constitution of a Sacrament. But as they were miraculous and admirable types of Christ, so they were common, and temporal benefits serving for the bodily refreshing and safety of the people of Israel in general, and therefore that all, even the most unworthy of them, partook of those, it was for a peculiar reason, which hath not place in the Sacraments. For the shadow of the cloud covering the whole army, as a shield, or buckler, received, and kept from them the beams of the sun, which else in, that dry and hot region, might have consumed them ⟨p. 151⟩with burning heat, especially they being wearied, and faint with journeying, therefore it was necessary, that it should be common to them all. The same reason might be given for their passing through the sea, to escape the rage of the tyrant that pursued them. But what is this to Baptism?

1. That the things, there spoken of, were not to be numbred amongst those things which are onely Sacraments: however they were Sacraments, in a sense, yet they were not Sacraments in that signification of the the word [Sacraments] which is usually amongst Divines, when they call circumcision, and the passover, Baptisme, and the Lords supper, Sacraments: for they were not by any solemne promulgation, expressed in the word, instituted & sanctified by God to be seales of the covenant to beleivers (as circumcision &c.) which is necessary to the constitution of a Sacrament. But as they were miraculous and admirable types of Christ, so they were common, and temporall benefites serving for the bodily refreshing and safety of the people of Israel in generall, and therefore that all, even the most unworthy of them, partaked of those, it was for a peculiar reason, which hath not place in the Sacraments. For the shadow of the cloud covering the wholl army, as a sheild, or buckler, received, and kept from them the beames of the sun, which else in, that dry and hot region, might have consumed them ⟨p. 151⟩with burning heate, especially they being wearyed, and faint with journying, therefore it was necessary, that it should be common to them all. The same reason might be given for their passing through the sea, to escape the rage of the tyrant that pursued them. But what is this to Baptisme?

2. That the persons there spoken of were the Church of Israel, whom he calleth our fathers, because from them the Jews sprang which were the visible Church of God, whose children also the Corinthians and all the visible Churches of believers are amongst the Gentiles, who have received from them the privileges of the word, Sacraments, Covenant, and other spiritual good things, as their inheritance. But what are these to those Libertines and others, who cast off all communion with the Churches of Christ? To conclude this Argument in one Syllogism,

2. That the persons there spoken of were the Church of Israel, whom he calleth our fathers, because from them the Jewes sprang which were the visible Church of God, whose children also the Corinthians and all the visible Churches of beleivers are amongst the Gentiles, who have received from them the priviledges of the word, Sacraments, Covenant, and other spirituall good things, as their inheritance. But what are these to those Libertines and others, who cast off all communion whith the Churches of Christ? To conclude this Argument in one Syllogisme,

To build again those errors which the doctrine and profession of these Churches, according to the Scripture, have destroyed, is a sin.

To build againe those errours which the doctrine and profession of these Churches, according to the Scripture, have destroyed, is a sinne.

Therefore to baptise all that are brought promiscuously, as that writing requireth, is a sin.

Therefore to baptise all that are brought promiscuously, as that wrighting requireth, is a sinne.

Reason. 4 The fourth Reason, to prove it to be a sin, is because it is contrary to the good custom and practise of many Churches of Christ. Here J am to show two things.

Reason. 4 The fourth Reason, to prove it to be a sinne, is because it is contrary to the good custom and practise of many Churches of Christ. Here J am to shew two things.

First. That good customs, taken up by Churches upon good grounds should not lightly be broken & laid down. Wherein I do fully agree with the author of that elaborate commentary upon the fourth chapter of John, my reverend Countryman,¹ who now resteth from his labours, who, to prove this, produceth Paul alleging the custom of the Churches, to stop the mouths of contentious men, & commending sundry truths to the people of God, by this Argument, they had received them, and making that a further bond unto their conscience, for which end also he propoundeth that general rule given unto us, walk in the ⟨p. 152⟩ways of good men, ²and keep the ways of the righteous, and a promise which God hath made to them that will learn the ways of his people, ³and conform themselves unto them, then shall they be built in the middest of my people. To make this point more clear, I will add thereunto, from a manuscript,⁴ the judgment of the worthy author of the preface to that commentary concerning the binding force of good examples, who thus expresseth himself.

First. That good customs, taken up by Churches upon good grounds should not lightly be broken & layd downe. Wherein I doe fully agree whith the authour of that elaborate cōmentary upon the fourth chapter of Iohn, my reverend Countryman,¹ who now resteth from his labours, who, to prove this, produceth Paul alleadging the custom of the Churches, to stopp the mouthes of contentious men, & commending sundry truthes to the people of God, by this Argument, they had received them, and making that a further bond unto their conscience, for which end also he propoundeth that general rule given unto us, walke in the ⟨p. 152⟩wayes of good men, ²

Some good actions of holy men in Scripture are examples of Christian liberty, others are patterns of Christian duty: examples of this latter sort be, 1. such as are backed with some Divine precept. So Sarahs obedience to Abraham is set forth as a pattern unto her daughters,¹ 2. such as are held forth in the first institution of an ordinance. Thus our Saviour argueth the sinfulness of Polygamy, as an aberration from the example or pattern of the first institution,² from the beginning it was not so. Hitherto belong sundry precedents set before us, in the Acts of the Apostles, for guiding Church matters &c. Yet here also this caution would be observed, that, in the first institution or celebration of an ordinance, some actions were accidental, and taken up upon special occasions, & such actions are not precedents, unless it be upon the like occasion: other actions are part of the institution (whether essential or circumstantial parts) and belong, either to the completeness, or to the comeliness of it, and these may not be neglected without sin, 3. of the lawful actions of holy men, in Scripture, some were civill, and of those there is more latitude (as not needing an exact rule from Scripture, but admitting the light of civill prudence for a guide) others are sacred as belonging to spiritual things, and serving to spiritual ends. And of these, some of them are varying, not always observed in one constant tenor, in Scripture (as the gestures in prayer, preaching, and the places thereof, any of which are alike imitable) others of them are constant, always the same, and therefore stand as a cloud of witnesses requiring our imitation. The issue of all which is, that those examples which are backed with some divine precept, or which are held ⟨p. 153⟩forth in the first institution of an ordinance, being part of the institution, or which were the constant lawful actions of holy men in Scriptures, not, civill but sacred, so bind us to imitation, as that, not to conform thereunto is a sin.

Some good actions of holy men in Scripture are examples of Christian liberty, others are patternes of Christian duety: examples of this latter sort be, 1. such as are backed with some Divine praecept. So Sarahs obedience to Abraham is set forth as a patterne unto her daughters,

These things being premised, it is evident that promiscuous baptising in that manner as that writing requireth, if it swerve from such good customs of the Church, and examples of holy men in Scripture, will be found to be a sin.

These things being premised, it is evident that promiscuous baptising in that manner as that wrighting requireth, if it swerve from such good customs of the Church, and examples of holy men in Scripture, will be found to be a sinne.

Secondly, that this practise agreeth not with the good customs and practises of the Churches of Christ will appear, if we examine the story of times from the first institution of this ordinance.

Secondly, that this practise agreeth not with the good customes and practises of the Churches of Christ will appeare, if we examine the story of times from the first institution of this ordinance.

First in the Jewish Church, circumcision (whereunto Baptism answereth, being a Sacrament of the same use that it was of) was, by Gods appointment,¹ a token of the covenant made with Abraham and with his seed after him, to be a God unto him, and to his seed after him (which the Apostle calleth a seal of the righteousness which is by faith) and therefore, by Gods ordinance, it was limited to the men children of eight days old of his seed or that were borne in his house, or bought with his money of any stranger, which was not of his seed. So that, to circumcise any others, who were not of that seed to whom this covenant belonged, was a sin. And therefore the holy fathers were careful to follow this rule in keeping this sign joined with the covenant in those whom they circumcised.²

First in the Iewish Church, circumcision (whereunto Baptisme answereth, being a Sacrament of the same use that it was of) was, by Gods appointment,¹ a token of the covenant made with Abraham and with his seed after him, to be a God unto him, and to his seed after him (which the Apostle calleth a seale of the righteousnes which is by fayth) and therefore, by Gods ordinance, it was limited to the men children of eight dayes old of his seed or that were borne in his house, or bought with his money of any stranger, which was not of his seed. So that, to circumcise any others, who were not of that seed to whom this covenant belonged, was a sinne. And therefore the holy fathers were carefull to follow this rule in keeping this signe joyned with the covenant in those whom they circumcised.²

1. 1Gen. 17.7.8.9.10 11.12.13 Acts. 7.8. Rom. 9.11
2. 2Mat. 3.6.7. &c.

Afterwards John Baptist walked in the same steps, and by the same rule, mutatis mutandis, administered Baptism in that Church whereof he was a member, requiring of all that came to his baptism a profession of repentance and amendment of life for remission of sins, whereof Baptism was the seal, & preached Christ unto them.

Afterwards Iohn Baptist walked in the same stepps, and by the same rule, mutatis mutandis, administred Baptisme in that Church whereof he was a member, requiring of all that came to his baptisme a profession of repentance and amendment of life for remission of sinnes, whereof Baptisme was the seale, & preached Christ unto them.

This ordinance our Lord Christ, after his resurrection, established to continue in the Christian Churches, giving a commission to his disciples to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles,¹ & to gather Churches amongst them, and to baptise all such as should believe, throughout the world, as a testimony to them that the righteousness of faith did belong to them also, and not ⟨p. 154⟩to the Church of the Jews only.² Accordingly the Apostles & servants of Christ were careful to observe this rule in their administering baptism. Thus Peter when he saw those 3000 souls pricked in their hearts, preached unto them concerning repentance, remission of sins, Christ, the promise, baptism, faith, and amendment of life, baptised those that gladly received his word, and testified the same by joining together in the profession thereof.

This ordinance our Lord Christ, after his resurrection, established to continue in the Christian Churches, giving a commission to his disciples to preach the Gospell to the Gentiles,¹ & to gather Churches amongst them, and to baptise all such as should beleive, throughout the world, as a testimony to them that the righteousnes of fayth did belong to them also, and not ⟨p. 154⟩to the Church of the Iewes only.² Accordingly the Apostles & servants of Christ were carefull to observe this rule in their administring baptisme. Thus Peter when he saw those 3000 soules pricked in their hearts, preached unto them concerning repentance, remission of sinnes, Christ, the promise, baptisme, fayth, and amendment of life, baptised those that gladly received his word, and testifyed the same by joyning together in the profession thereof.

1. 1

¹The same course Phillip took with the Church that was gathered in Samaria where many were baptised, but none till they professed their belief of the Gospel,² and their receiving the word of God, and therefore it is said expressly, when they believed Phillip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptised, both men, and women. when Ananias was commanded to go and baptise Paul, he objected against it at first, till the Lord assured him that he was one to whom that seal of the covenant belonged,³ and then he went, and did it. When Peter, and those that came with him, saw that the Holy Ghost fell on Cornelius, and those that were assembled at that time in his house, whilst he spake these words, To him give all the Prophets witness, ⁴that thorough the name of Jesus, whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins, Peter demanded, Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptised, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And then they were baptised. To conclude this catalogue, Phillip did not baptise the Eunuch, though he desired it, till he had given him satisfaction by professing his faith in express words, nor Paul the Jailer and his house-hold, till it appeared unto him that they believed on the Lord Jesus. Nor is there any example in the Scripture varying from this course, to warrant such a promiscuous administration of baptism in a place where such heterogeneall mixtures are of people of all sorts & sects, as Amsterdam is,

¹The same course Phillip tooke with the Church that was gathered in Samaria where many were baptised, but none till they professed their beleife of the Gospell,² and their receiving the word of God, and therefore it is said expresly, when they beleived Phillip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Iesus Christ, they were baptised, both men, and woemen. when Ananias was comanded to goe and baptise Paul, he objected against it at first, till the Lord assured him that he was one to whom that seale of the covenant belonged,

In the times after the first Century what care was taken concerning the persons whom they admitted to baptism! The stories are clear concerning those that were adulti, though we find little or nothing concerning infants, only that they were ⟨p. 155⟩baptised, by virtue of that right they had to it, in their believing parents. But that which we find concerning the course which they took with those of years, may serve to show their high esteem of this ordinance, and how far they were from this promiscuous manner of administering it, though we purpose not to examine, whether the first simplicity used by the Apostles was in all things observed by them, nor how exactly they followed the rule in every particular. They divided those that were turned from Gentilism to embrace the Christian Religion into three sorts, whom they distinguished by several names. 1. Whilst they were to be catechised and instructed in the grounds of Christian Religion, they were called [Greek or Hebrew], and Audientes. Catechumenists & hearers. 2. Afterwards, having been completely instructed, and earnestly now desiring to be admitted to the Sacrament, they were called Competentes, petitioners. 3. Being found meet, they were baptised, and then, and not before, they were called fideles, and perfecti, perfect, and believers, viz, in respect of the outward state and order of the Church, with reference to those degrees whereby they must come to be baptised. And when they did baptise them, a public trial was made of their fitness (which aftertimes called Scrutinium, the Scrutiny) and hereof there were two parts, 1. an abrenunciation, 2. a profession of faith. 1. The abrenunciation was expressed by the party desiring Baptism solemnly, in express words, in the Greek Churches. [Greek or Hebrew]. And this part they accounted of so much importance, as that, without it, either in word or deed expressed, they accounted none fit to be baptised. 2. The profession of the faith was openly made, and in the hearing of the people, by him that desired baptism, some times in a continued speech, but more frequently by way of Dialogue, and by certain articles.¹ Credis in Deum patrem omnipotentem? Credo. Credis in Dominum Jesum Christum? Credo. Credis in Spiritum Sanctum? Credo.

In the times after the first Century what care was taken concerning the persons whom they admitted to baptisme! The storyes are cleare concerning those that were adulti, though we find litle or nothing concerning infants, only that they were

This custom at first instituted for, and used only by those of years, who being converted from Gentilism to Christianity desired baptism, was, in aftertimes applied to the baptism of infants, whose sureties answered for ⟨p. 156⟩them.¹ This came in by abuse (saith Beza) and giveth too much advantage to the Anabaptists. For, if baptism may not be administered, without a profession of faith present, in the infant (which if they mean not, why is the infant asked concerning its faith, in the sureties, at that time, saith he) why stay we not with the Anabaptists (which God forbid!) till the child can profess its own faith. And therefore elsewhere saith Beza,² As Chrism and exorcism, although ancient, are well abolished, we would desire also, that not only superfluous, but also unfit questions were omitted also, although Augustine, in a certain epistle, would excuse it, with a certain interpretation, but he calleth it infirmum commentum, and that fitly. And therefore the practise of those Churches, in putting the question to the father of the child is more suitable to the rule; because, in the Covenant which God maketh with the parents the right of the infant to baptism is founded, and the power and care of educating the child in that faith lieth upon them. To let pass this digression. The custom of those times concerning men of years, though it do not, every way, touch the case of infants, yet it showeth the piety of those times, and the judgment of the Ancients concerning the point in question, de suscipientibus baptismum.

This custom at first instituted for, and used only by those of yeares, who being converted from Gentilisme to Christianity desired baptisme, was, in aftertimes applyed to the baptisme of infants, whose suretyes answered for ⟨p. 156⟩them.¹ This came in by abuse (sayth Beza) and giveth too much advantage to the Anabaptists. For, if baptisme may not be administred, without a profession of fayth present, in the infant (which if they meane not, why is the infant asked concerning its fayth, in the suretyes, at that time, sayth he) why stay we not with the Anabaptists (which God forbid!) till the child can professe its owne fayth. And therefore elsewhere sayth Beza,