A63200:190
A trial of the new-church way in New-England and in old ... by that…A tryall of the nevv-church vvay in New-England and in old ... by that…
A trial of the new-church way in New-England and in old ... by that learned and godly minister of Christ, John Ball of Whitmore ; penned a little before his death and sent over to the New England ministers, anno 1637, as a reply to an answer of theirs in justification of the said positions ... ; now published ... by William Rathband and Simeon Ash.A tryall of the nevv-church vvay in New-England and in old ... by that learned and godly minister of Christ, John Ball of Whitmore ; penned a little before his death and sent over to the New England ministers, anno 1637, as a reply to an answer of theirs in justification of the said positions ... ; now published ... by William Rathband and Simeon Ash.
London: printed by T. Paine and M. Simmons for Thomas Underhill, 1644
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Circumcision and Baptism are both Sacraments of divine institution, and so they agree in the substance of the things signified, the persons to whom they are to be administered, and the order of administration, if the right proportion be observed. As circumcision sealed the entrance into the covenant the righteousness of faith, and circumcision of the heart: so doth Baptism much more clearly: As Abraham and his household, and the infants of believing Jews were to be circumcised, so the faithful, their families, and their seed are to be baptized. None must eat the passover who was not circumcised, women excepted, who were circumcised in the males. Nor may a man unbaptized be admitted to the Lords supper. Circumcision was but once applied by Gods appointment and the same holds in baptism according to the will and good pleasure of God: But circumcision and baptism agree not in their special form, and manner of dispensation appointed of God. And in these things a reason cannot be drawn from the one to the other affirmatively. The males only were to be circumcised as only capable of that sign: but males and females both ought to be baptized. The infants males were to be circumcised the eighth day because seven days they were legally unclean.1 But the seed of the faithful are not to be reputed unclean. Ergo, no set time is appointed for baptism. Circumcision as other Ceremonies did distinguish the Jews from the Gentiles; but Christ now of two hath made one.2 Circumcision signified Christ to come, Baptism is the seal of the New covenant made in Christ already come. And so in the degree of grace given, some difference may be put: The other differences alleged in the considerations with the reasons thereof are not so clear and undoubted: for Baptism is not tied to the first day of the week: and the Jews might gather an Assembly on the eighth day as occasion required and it might be appropriated to the Priests and Levites though done in private: But in whatsoever they agree or differ we must look to the institution and neither stretch it wider, nor draw it narrower then the Lord hath made it. For he is the Institutor of the Sacraments according to his ⟨p. 39⟩own good pleasure. And it is our part to learn of him, both to whom, how, and for what end the Sacraments are to be administered, how they agree, and wherein they differ.