There is yet another Argument, viz. That John Baptist and the Apostles did Baptize persons that had no higher qualifications, then are in the Controverted Proposition expressed. As for John, the Scripture assureth us that Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the Region round about Jordan were baptized of him, Math. 3. 5, 6. Mark. 1 5. Now it seemeth much against Reason to Imagine, that those numerous multitudes of (by him) baptized ones, had all of them higher qualifications then those required in the Proposition, (especially Considering that John himself doth intimate that many of them were but chaffy Professors) which if they had not, it must needs follow that persons so qualified ⟨p. 37⟩had right to that Ordinance. For certainly, John would not apply Baptism unto unmeet Subjects, and whereas it is alleged by some, that John told his hearers that they must bring forth fruits meet for Repentance, that only proveth that Repentance is necessary, in order to obtaining the spiritual good held forth in Baptism, and not that John Baptized none but true penitents. Nor is that scruple of any weight, which hath by others been objected, who Question whether the Baptism of John and that instituted by Christ were the same. For besides that the Affirmative is abundantly and irrefragably proved by our Divines against the Papists and some of the Ancients (Fathers so called) this objection falls to the ground, in that it is evident, that the Apostles were for as great a Latitude respective to the Subject of Baptism as John was, for it is said, that they baptized more then John, John. 4 1. Consider the place, with John. 6. 60, 61, 64, 66. How can we think that those many thousands of Jews whom the Apostles baptized before our Saviours Ascension, were so qualified as some with us would now have it to be? It is Confessed that in after Ages as the mystery of iniquity began to work, and men would be stricter and wiser then the Rule, there was in the Church a great Rigidity as to the Administration of Baptism, the Catechumeni were sometimes long deferred, and detained from this Ordinance, and held as Competentes it may be many years together. But did the Baptist or the Apostles ever carry it so? Surely no. Yea, men did [q]Superstitiously omit Baptism, some because they would be baptized in the River, where Christ was baptized.
There is yet another Argument, viz. That John Baptist and the Apostles did Baptize persons that had no higher qualifications, then are in the Controverted Proposition expressed. As for John, the Scripture assureth us that Ierusalem and all Iudea, and all the Region round about Iordan were baptized of him, Math. 3. 5, 6. Mark. 1 5. Now it seemeth much against Reason to Imagine, that those numerous multitudes of (by him) baptized ones, had all of them higher qualifications then those required in the Proposition, (especially Considering that John himself doth intimate that many of them were but chaffy Professors) which if they had not, it must needs follow that persons so qualifyed ⟨p. 37⟩had right to that Ordinance. For certainly, John would not apply Baptisme unto unmeet Subjects, and whereas it is alleadged by some, that John told his hearers that they must bring forth fruits meet for Repentance, that only proveth that Repentance is necessary, in order to obtaining the spiritual good held forth in Baptisme, and not that John Baptized none but true penitents. Nor is that scruple of any weight, which hath by others been objected, who Question whether the Baptisme of John and that instituted by Christ were the same. For besides that the Affirmative is abundantly and irrefragably proved by our Divines against the Papists and some of the Antients (Fathers so called) this objection falls to the ground, in that it is evident, that the Apostles were for as great a Latitude respective to the Subject of Baptisme as John was, for it is said, that they baptized more then Iohn, John. 4 1. Consider the place, with Iohn. 6. 60, 61, 64, 66. How can we think that those many thousands of Jews whom the Apostles baptized before our Saviours Ascension, were so qualified as some with us would now have it to be? It is Confessed that in after Ages as the mystery of iniquity began to work, and men would be stricter and wiser then the Rule, there was in the Church a great Rigidity as to the Administration of Baptisme, the Catechumeni were sometimes long deferred, and detained from this Ordinance, and held as Competentes it may be many years together. But did the Baptist or the Apostles ever carry it so? Surely no. Yea, men did [q]Superstititiously omit Baptisme, some because they would be baptized in the River, where Christ was baptized.
- [q]v. Euseh. i. 4. de vita Constant. Theod. Lib. 1. Hist. Eccles c. 35 Nazianz. […] 40. de Bapt.v. Euseh. i. 4. de vita Constant. Theod. Lib. 1. Hist. Eccles c. 35 Nazianz. 〈…〉 40. de Bapt.
