¶ A moste sure and strong defence of the baptisme of children, against ye pestiferous secte of the Anabaptystes, set furthe by that famouse Clerke, Henry Bullynger: & nowe translated out of Laten into Englysh by Ihon Veron Senonoys.
I wyl be thy god, and the god of thy sede after thee.
Thou shalt reade the contentes of thys boke, in the ii. pagyne after this.
¶The contentes of thys boke.
- i That rebaptizatyon or baptizing agayne is not of god, & that there is but one baptysme.
- ii That ye baptisme of childrē is of god
- iii That the baptysme of children hath continued in ye church of Christ euer sens the tymes of the Apostles.
To the reader.
I haue, good christian reader, alredy proued and set furth these artycles that folow, agaynst these erroneous dyuels the Anabaptistes.
- i The spiryt, which repugneth against the spiryt, which speketh in the holy scriptures, is not of ye father of truth but of the deuyl, the father of liyng.
- ii Of the simplicyte and lernyng, that ought to be in godly preachers.
- iii Of the vocatyon and callynge vnto the ministery & offyce of preachinge against them that thrust them selues vnto it, beyng not called.
- iiii Of the vnitie of the church, agaynste the sectes of heretikes.
- v That Christ dyd not suffer onely for originall synne.
- vi That a synner is receyued to grace as often as he repenteth, and that no [Page] man is without synne.
- vii That saluation & ryghteousnes depēdeth not of our works, but of faith
- viii That the soules, which are departed from the bodye, doo not slepe but lyue in Christ.
- ix That a christian may execute the offyce of a magystrate.
- x That a christiā magistrate is not onely profytable, but also most necessary to a christian commune weale.
- xi That we ought to be obedient vnto magistrates.
- xii That it is not lawful to resist the magistrates. which thinges if thou dost reade dilygently, I trust thou shalte be well enarmed against this pestiferous secte. Beware of them, for they are worse then all other herytyques haue bene, yea, they are renewers of all olde heresyes. So fare ye well.
- And praye to god that all erroneous sectes beyng vanquysshed, his glory may florysh for euer and euer. Amē.
¶ To ye right worshipfull Master Thomas Fletwod, Comptroller of the Kinges Maiesties Minte, in Southwarke, Ihon Heron wyssheth peace of conscyence, and encrease of dyuyne knowledge and vnderstandynge frō god the father, through our Lord Iesus Christ.
IT is not for naughte,Ignoraūce is ye mother of al errours ryght worshipfull Syr, yt of al men, ignoraunce hath bene compted the mother of all errours. Whiche thynge too be most true, we do nowe at this presence, plainely perceyue and se. By godly learning, the erroneous secte of the papistes is in a maner proflygated and ouerthrowen, so that the chief maynteyners of it are cleane ashamed of theyr olde occupatyon, I meane,What godly learning doth. of theyr Idolatry and superstition. But godly learning was neuer soo diligente, in purgynge the fielde of the gospell from the rubbisshes of Antichristes kyngdome,What stubburne ignoraūce doth. as stubburne ignoraunce is now busy in sowynge it ouer, wyth cockle and darnill, wyth tares, and most pestiferous poyson, whych they do [Page] so ouer laye wyth suger and honye, that is to say, wyth paynted and coloured hypocrisie, blandiloquence and flatterye, yt a man at the fyrst syght, would embrace thys errour and heresy, for a most wholsome doctryne, and vnfayned relygyon. But if he, puttynge on the spectacles of goddes worde, wyll loke more narowly vpon it, he shall espye suche a blyndnes and ignoraunce in theyr procedynges & doctryne, that by good ryght, he myght meruayle, that the very infantes do not now, in thys florisshyng tyme of the gospell, perceyue and smell oute thys deuylysshe heresie. For who would not saye that thys commeth of deuilysshe ignoraunce (onles he be blynder then ye blindnes it selfe, that they so shamefully deny the baptisme of yong infantes and chyldren?What is to denye ye baptisme of infants Is not thys too put oure chyldren, from that euerlastyng couenaunte which our lorde god dyd make wyth Abraham, and in hym, with all vs that beleue? I wyll (sayth the lorde) be thy god and the god of thy sede after the.Gene. xvii chapi. Whyche promyse Abraham beleued, and therfore when he came home, he did both circumcise hym selfe, & al the male chyldren [Page] that were in his house. For whye? Cyrcumcision was the seale of the people of god, whych by the commaundement of god was ministred vnto all them yt were comprehended in the Lordes couenaunt In stede wherof baptisme hath bene instituted in the newe Testamente. as the Apostle sayncte Paule. Colloss .ij. Chapter, Doth playnly testifie.Circumcision insted of baptism Syth therfore that chyldren were circumcysed in ye old Testament, and long after instructed in ye knowledge of the lawe: it foloweth, & that by good consequence, ye baptysme oughte to be mynistred vnto our yonge infantes, whom we are bound afterwardes to bryng vp in ye fayth, and true doctryne. This argumente al the rablement of ye Anabaptistes, is not able to dissolue Suffer not therfore, O good christyans, suffer not your selues too be seduced by these smatteryng Anabaptistes, whyche vnderstande not the letter of the scriptures, wherin (I meane, in the bare letter) they do truste moste. And no maruayle thereof: For they are moste shamefullye ignoraunce in all those thynges, yt serue for to expounde and vnderstand the letter. They knowe not the phrases of the [Page] scriptures.The Anabaptistes are ignoraunce in those thinges that serue for to expoūd and vnder stand ye letter. The chyef causes of ye Anabaptistes blyndnes and erroure. Nouatus aucthor of rebaptization. How many wayes this word baptism is taken in ye new Testamente. They do not obserue & mark how many wayes one thing is taken in the scriptures and worde of God. Whiche truely to ye chyef cause of theyr blindnes and errour. For yf they had marked howe many wayes in the scryptures of the newe Testamente, thys worde baptysme is taken, they had neuer renewed the olde condempned heresye of Nouatus, touchyng thys folysh Anabaptisme that is to saye, rebaptyzaty on or baptyzyng agayn. For baptysme is not alwaies taken for that outwarde sygne & seale of the people of God, whyche is an outward wasshyng of water, done and mynystred in the name of the father, of the sonne, and of the holy ghost, wherby we are initiated into a true fayth, and innocencye of lyfe: whych kynd of baptisme Ihon and the Apostles did mynyster, & nowe in the churche of Christe, is by thē administred, yt be appoynted therto: but often tymes it is taken for the doctryne as Mathewe .xxi. Chapter, and Actes, ye xix. Whych place the Anabaptistes do allege to mayntayne their erroure in thys point. Otherwhiles this word baptisme signyfieth death or matyrdome, as Mathew [Page] .xx. Chapter. Where Christ answereth to the sonnes of Zebede, after thys maner: Can ye drinke the cuppe yt I shal drinke? and be baptized with ye baptisme that I shall be baptyzed wyth? there the blynde may se, that he did meane his passion that he should suffer. It betokeneth also the inward illumynatyon of the holy spirite of God, wherby the heartes of the faythfull are illumynated & drawen, as Actes .i. Chapter. Ye shal be baptyzed wyth the holy ghost after these few dayes. Nowe as they are deceyued in thys thyng by ignoraunce and lacke of knowledge, so are they in all the other poyntes. But now that the ignoraunt & symple myght haue an wholsom Antidotus and conterpoyson agaynst this pestilent erroure, especially in thys point of rebaptyzatyon, and baptysme of chyldren: I haue here translated thre most fruyctfull Dialogues vpon thys matter, out of Laten into Englysshe: whyche, yf they be dylygentlye perused, maye enarme and fence the reader, agaynste all the obiectyons that can be made and inuented by these phantastycall and madde braynes. And because that your worshypfull mastershyp [Page] hath bene alwayes earnest in ye defence of the truth, bearyng a singuler affectyon and mynd, towardes all them that are studyous to set furth the glorye of god, which godly affection and mynd ye haue many times (as I haue bene by credible persons enfourmed) declared in your communycatyon, towardes me: I could do no lesse of duty, but to dedicate thys lytle laboure of myne vnto you, in token of gratitude and thankefulnesse, syth that none otherwyse, I am able to deserue or recompence that beneuolente hearte of yours, towardes mee. God of his mercy, vouchsafe with his holy spirit so to rule and guyde your mastership with ye worshipfull gentlewoman youre wyfe, yt whatsoeuer yee shal do, or thinke in al your affayres, maye be to ye glory of god, & saluatiō of of your soule. Amē.
¶ Thre moste frutefull Dialogues, treatynge vpon the baptisme of chyldren, very necessary to be red of all Chrystyans, in these moste paryllouse tymes. ¶ Symon the Anabaptist, Ioiada the true Christyan. ¶ That rebaptizatyon or baptyzyng agayne, is not of god: and that there is but one baptysme.
I Haue taryed here for the, more than an hole houre, Ioiada, I was almost perswaded, I dyd almoste beleue, yt thou durst not come because that thou haddeste lyttle truste and confydence in the other articles.
There is no artycle, yt I am soo sure of: it is so farre, that I should be afrayde to speake of it.
But I wil proue that rebaptyzation is of God.
By what scriptures?Actes. xix. chapi.
By ye .xix chapter of the Actes, where it is expressely set furthe, that the .xii. men, yt had bene baptyzed by Ihon, or in the baptisme of Ihon, were baptyzed agayne by Paule in the name of Christe. If it was lawfull after the baptisme of Ihon, to receyue the baptysme of Christe, why shoulde it [Page] not be more lawfull, that the baptysme of ye Bisshop of Rome, should giue place vnto ye baptisme of Christ? For as those men of Ephesus, had bene ignorauntlye and vnwyttingly baptized with the baptysme of Ihon, and agayne were baptyzed by Paul: In like maner, we were ignorauntly baptized with the baptisme of the Busshop of Rome: Ergo, we maye lawfully be baptyzed agayne, wyth the baptisme of Christe.
As manye wordes as thou hast spoken, so many errours hast thou vomyted and spued out Fyrste, thou sayest that those men of Ephesus wer twise baptized, which thing thou canst not proue,Ac. xix. cha Baptisme is not takē for water, but for the doctryne. for the baptisme of Ihon, ought not here to be takē for water, but for the doctryne.
Thys is the onely refuge that ye flee to, when ye be ouercomen by the truthe. But ye can not proue nor strengthen these your sayinges wt ye scripturs, nor by any truth
But I wil proue vnto ye, yt baptisme is not alwaies takē for ye wasshing yt is done in the water,Ihon. i. & iii. chapter Mat. xxi. chapter. but rather for the doctryne. Ihō .i. & .iii. chap. And of thys thing, there be most sure tokens, signes, notes, as Mat. xxi. chap. where Christ asketh [Page] ye pharises whether the baptisme of Ihon was of god, or of men,Baptisme is takē for ye doctrine for as the water doth wash away ye filthines of ye body, so ye trew doctrine doth clense the soul frō all errours & superstytyon. Act. xii. cha Appollo. & sithens yt it was of god, why dyd they not credite & beleue him, vnderstanding by baptism (as it most manyfestly appeareth) ye doctryne or testimony, which they ought to haue beleued,
Well, go to, put ye case yt in this place it is taken for the doctrine: yet notwithstandinge, it foloweth not, yt in ye Actes of the apostles, it shuld be takē for doctrine.
In ye mean season, ye were to much ouersene in this thing, & ouer blinded, saying most shamefully, yt we did affirme wtout any truthe, ye baptisme is often times taken for ye doctrine. But go to, we wil also proue, ye baptisme is taken in ye Acts, for ye doctryne. In ye .xii. of Actes, Luke saith, yt a certain Iue called Apollo, being an eloquēt mā & taught in ye way of ye lorde, did come to Ephesus, and yt he did teache dilygently those thinges yt were ye lordes, knowing onely the baptisme of Ihon. Here ye very blind may se ye Luke did speake, not of the water, but of ye doctryne. The same Apollos did teache and instruct those. xii men in ye way of the lord. whō afterwardes, Paul doth aske, whether after that [Page] they had beleued & giuen credit vnto the doctrine,What is to receyue ye holy gost they had bene pacified in theyr hertes & consciences, by the holy ghost. (Here it is to be noted, that faithe is not taken for that heauenlye gyft,Faythe is here taken for the doctryne of fayth. that illumynateth the hearte inwardlye, but for the doctryne of faythe, whyche one man dothe receyue of an other by hearynge) But they dyd soo aunswere, that Paule myght easely gather by theyr aunswere that they knew not what the peace of cō sciences, nor what the holye ghost was. He marueylyng therefore,In quid initiati fuissēt This word to initiate, whych we are compelled to vse in thys place, signifieth to instructe, or gyue instructyō in ani kind of relygyon, science or knowlege. what maner of doctryne thys was, that had not set furth vnto them, so necessary and principall poyntes, dyd aske them wheruntoo they were baptyzed, not wherin: For he knewe ryght well that men are baptized in water. But he asketh whervnto they were baptyzed, that is too saye, initiated and taughte, what at lengthe was the marke that they dyd shoote at, fithens yt they knewe not yet the holy gost? They made hym answere that they were baptized, that is to saye, initiated in the doctryne of Ihon. The Apostle dyd vnderstande and perceyue that they were not yet ryght well taught and instructed in [Page] ye doctryne of Ihon. He begynneth therfore, and wyth expresse wordes setteth furth the doctryne of Ihon. Which wordes, if they were well weyghed and pondered, they make altogether against you For thus are the wordes of Paul: Ioannes baptisauit baptismo poenitentiae: yt is to say, Ihō hath baptized wt the baptism of repentaunce. What meane these words,What is to baptyse wt the baptisme of repentaunce he hath baptized with the baptisme of repentaunce, but that Ihon did preache repentaunce? or did teache how we ought to repent, that will be initiated in Christ or receyue the fyrst instructyon in the religyon of Christe? Afterwardes he dyd speake of hym that shuld come after him that they might beleue in hym, that is to say, in Iesus Christe. Out of the whych fayth and beleife, peace doth spryng in ye mynde and conscyence of man. Rom. v.Ro. v chap chap. Whē they had vnderstanded that they dyd receyue the baptisme of water in the name of Iesus. The wordes that folowe of ye imposityon of handes, make me to expound thys last, of the baptisme of water. As I thynke now, I haue suffyciently proued, that this place helpeth nothing the Anabaptistes: for they, whō [Page] mentyon is made of, in the .xix. chap. of Acts, were not baptized againe, but baptyzed once for all, and twyse instructed and taught.Whether ye baptisme of Ihon, & ye baptisme of Christe, be all one.
By thys it shoulde folowe, that the baptysme of Ihon, and the baptysme of Christe is all one, and yt there is noo dyfference betwene them.
Thys can not be, for the doctrine of Ihō dyd differre from the doctryne of Christ
In this thing ye are greatly deceyued, for the doctrine of Ihon, and the doctryne of Christe, are all one, and their baptisme all one (Here I do speake of ye baptisme of water) and by thys we doo gather and conclude truly, that these mē of Ephesus were not baptyzed with the baptysme of Ihon, (I speake of the water) for if they had bene baptized wyth ye baptisme of Ihon, it had not bene necessary and nedefull, that Paule should had baptized them againe in the baptisme of Christe, for bothe theyr doctryne & their baptisme are all one.
If the doctryne of Ihon, & the doctryne of Chrste were all one, why dyd Luke wryte that Apollo was taught onely in the doctrine or baptysme of Ihon, and that therefore Priscilla and Aquilla, dyd take him vnto [Page] them, and did teache him more exactly in the way of the lorde.What is ment by this, that Appollo was taught more exactly. If the doctryne of Ihon, and the doctrine of Christ were al one, what did nede to teach him more exactly? for he that did know the doctryne of Ihon, did also knowe the doctryne of Christe.
Luke sayth, that they did expoūd vnto hym more exactly in ye way of the Lorde. The doctryne was all one: but in Apollo there wanted somewhat, which knew not all thinges exactly and perfectly. For these .xii. do saye also, that they were taught and instructed in ye baptisme of Ihon, whose doctryne for all yt they vnderstode not perfectly, although they were instructed in the doctryne of Ihon, yet notwythstandynge are they taught more exactly by Paul.
But Paul sayth not that the doctrine is all one.
Thou dost euery foote bring darkenes into the manifest lyght. Tel me, I pray the, which is the summe of Christes doctrine, and of the apostles?
And I do aske ye whether Paul in the .xix. chapter of the Actes, did teach that Ihons and Christes doctryne were all one?
To that wyll I answere after that I haue herd of the, whych is ye [Page] summe of Christes doctrine, & of hys Apostles.Note the obstnacye of the Anabaptists
I will not giue the ouer hand, but persyst and abyde in ye wordes of Luke, which are written, Act. xix chap
Thou dost persiste and abide in thy contention and obstinacie. And this are ye wont to do, eyther when ye haue nothyng to answeare, and when ye perceyue that ye are ouercommen with the truthe. Go to, I will declare what is the summe of the doctrine of Christ,The sume of the doctryne of Christ, and of ye Apostles. Marke. i. Chapter. Math. iiii. Chapter. and of ye Apostles. Mark. i. chap. It is written after this maner: Iesus came too Galilee, preachyng the gospell of the kyngdome of god, and saying. The time is fulfilled and the kyngdome of god is at hand, repent ye, and beleue the gospel. Mat. iiii. chap. Iesus departed into Galilee, & did begin to preache and say: Repent ye the kingdom of heauen is at hand. Chryste doth also sende his Apostles, sayinge: As my father hath sende me, soo I do send you,Ihon xx. Chaptre. Ihō. xx. chapter. But the father did sende Christ to preache repentaunce and forgiuenesse of synnes ergo, Christe sendeth his Apostles too preache the same.Luke xxiiii. Chapter. This is manyfest and playn by the .xxiiii of Luke, and laste of Marke. So it behoued [Page] Christ to suffer, and to rise frō death vpon the thyrd day, and that repentaūce and remission of sinnes shoulde be preached emong all nations in his name, beginning at Ierusalem, and ye shal be witnesses of these thinges.Actes .ii. iii. Chap. The boke of the Actes doth testifie, that the Apostles did preache the same .ii. iii. chap. Haste thou any thing against so manifest scripturs?
Nothing:The doctryne of Christ and ye doctrine of Ihon be all one. But now I aske the whether the doctryne of Ihon, and the doctrine of Christe be all one.
I doo proue and conclude by the places afore alledged, that it is all one. It is sayd that the fame of the doctrine of Christ & of the Apostles, is comprehended in this one thing, that men shuld repent, know the kingdome of god to be at hand, and beleue in Iesus Christ. Dost thou graūt these thinges?
What thē?
Ihon did teache yt selfe same thing: ergo, their doctrine was al one, I proue ye first proposityō by ye third of Mathew: Ihon baptist did preache in ye desart of Iury, & did say: Repent ye, ye kingdome of god is at hande. In like maner, Luke .i.Luk. i. cha. Ihō. i. and iij. chapter chapter And thou chylde. &c. It is manifest by ye first and thyrd of Ihon, that Ihon baptyste [Page] did preache the Gospell, Actes .xix. (Whych place we haue treated vpon alredy) he preacheth the same, as we maye gather by the wordes of Paule. For he speaketh there after thys maner: Ihon did preache the baptisme of repentaunce speaking of Iesus Christ, in whom they should beleue. Here I do beseche the to confesse and tell plainely, whether these thinges do not sufficientlye proue that ye doctrine of Ihō, & the doctrine of Christ be all one.
What dost thou gather & conclude therupon.The Anabaptystes do teche ye thynges yt they can not proue by ye scryptures.
That ye Anabaptistes are agayn ouerthrowē and that ye haue taught that thing whiche ye could not proue by the scriptures and yet for all that, ye are so obstacle and stubburne, that ye wyll in no wyse gyue place vnto the truth. Who woulde haue beleued the to be so stiffe necked, that I should be fayne to dryue the to it wyth the scripturs?
What make these thinges to the baptizing agayn?
Very muche. for if the doctryne of Ihō and the doctrine of Christ be al one, their baptisme alsoo is all one.There is no exaumple of baptizinge again in all ye scryptures. Ergo, ye haue no example at all of your rebaptizatyon or baptyzing gayne. Also they, whome [Page] mentyon is made of Actes .xix. Chapter could not haue bene baptyzed wyth the baptisme of Ihon. that is done in ye water and againe be rebaptized by Paule. For so they shoulde had bene twise baptized with one baptism of water, and the one should had abolisshed ye other, which thing can not be done by no mean. For theyr baptisme is all one.
Thou sayest ryghte well, yf there were onelye one baptisme.There is onely one baptysme which ye anabaptystes do deuyde. The doctrine is more excellente then baptisme.
Ye do not onely deuide the churche, but also baptysme. I do bring against the, the wordes of Paul which saith: Chryst hath sent me, not to baptyse, but to preache ye gospel. Now I do aske the whether of these two is more excellent, the doctryne of the Gospell, or the baptysme?
The doctryne is more excellente then baptisme, for baptisme, is annexed and ioyned, to the doctryne.
If Christe and Ihō do agre in the doctryne, it foloweth that they did also consent and agre in the baptysme, ergo, theyr baptysme is all one.
It can not be alone, for the Apostles and Christe dydde baptyse in the name of Iesus, alsoo in the name of the father, of the sonne, and of the holye [Page] ghost, Ihon dyd not so: Ergo, it can not be all one baptysme.
Christ hym selfe dyd not baptyse, but hys Apostles in hys name.Ihon .iiii. Chapter. Ihon .i. Chapter. Marke .i. Chapter. Iuke .iii. Chapter. Ihon and the Apostles dyd baptise in the name of Iesus. Ihō .iiij. Cha. Where as thou sayest yt Ihon dyd not baptyse in the name Iesus, thou doste greatlye erre. For Ihon .i. Chapter. Mar. i. chap also, Iuke the thyrd Chapter, it is most manyfest and playne by his own words that Ihon dydde baptyse in Iesus. For there he doth expound his baptysme, sayinge, I doo baptyse wyth water, but he that shall come after mee, wyll baptyse you wyth the holye ghoste. What other thing is thys, but that I do prepare you to Christe, whyche shall make you perfecte. Is not thys to baptise in the name of Iesus? In what, I praye the, dyd the apostles baptyse, but in the name of Iesus?Actes .ii. Chapter. Actes .ii. Chap. Se nowe what thou hast wonne, truely none other thing, but that with thine own wordes, thou haste confyrmed and proued, that theyr baptisme is all one.
Yet he dyd not baptyse in the name of the father, ye sonne, and the holye ghoste.
Although Ihon did not know Christ to be one god with the father, & the holy gost. [Page] Whereby it shoulde folowe, that when Ihon dyd baptyse, and sende or directe men vntoo Iesus, that he dyd baptyse & directe or sende them vntoo a bare man. Whych thinge how vngodly it is, who doth not see? Ihon Baptist dyd knowe Christe to be the sonne of god, equall wt the father in all thynges, he knew also yt the spirite of god did inhabyte and dwell in hym, whych was geuen vnto hym after no measure,Ihon .i. Chapter. but of whose fulnesse all men did receyue. Ihon .i. Chapter. For this cause he attributeth so muche vntoo Christ, that he did send all men vnto him and prepared the people for hym. Farthermore he dydde baptyse theym in the name of Iesus, because that he knewe hym too be one god with the father and the holy ghost.
These be thy reasons, & not the word of god.
I wyl proue the these thinges by the worde of god. When Ihon did baptise Christe in Iordan, the heauens did open, & he did se ye spirit of god descending and comming doun vpō him. And behold a voice from heauen, saying: Thys is my welbeloued son, In whō I am pleased. Who wil say now yt Ihon knew not ye father & ye holy gost. [Page] Ihon .iij.Ihon .iii. Chapter. Chap. He dothe celebrate and set furth with manye goodly praises, the maiestie of Christe, emong al other thynges, speakyng after this maner: He whō god hath sent, speaketh the word of god. For god doth not geue hym the spiryte after a measure. The father loueth ye son and hath giuen al thynges into his hand These thinges doo testifye and wytnesse that Ihon dyd knowe ryght well the mistery of the trinitie and vnytye in Christe
I graunt that he did know as thou saiest, yet it foloweth not therby that Ihō did baptyse in the name of the father, the sonne, and the holy gost.
It foloweth plainely. For I do aske the whether he that baptizeth in Christ, doth baptyse in man, or in god?
In god truely.
Nowe I aske whether Christ touching his own godheade be seperated from the father & the holye ghost?
No, for there is but one god onely.
Now make thine argument after this maner: Christe Iesus touching his diuine nature, is not dyuyded from ye father and ye holy ghost. And he yt baptizeth in Iesus, baptizeth not in his humain nature, but in his diuine and [Page] godly nature. Ergo, he that baptizeth in Iesus, baptizeth in ye father and ye holye gost. Ihō (as it is proued before) did baptise in Iesus Christ, yt is to say, in hym yt should come after him: Ergo, Ihon dyd baptise in ye father & ye holy gost, for these sentences are of lyke syngnificacion and importaunce: he did baptise in god, he did baptise in Iesus Christ, he dyd baptise in the name of the father, the sonne and the holy gost. For, there is one god onely vnto whom we are brought, and grafted by baptisme.
I neuer vnderstode this thyng afore, for I thought that Ihō had onely begon with hys baptism, but yt the baptisme of Christe had thē at length begonne, when he dyd sende his apostles in the last chapter of Mark, and of Mathew. Whiche thyng if it were true, the baptisme of Ihon, and the baptisme of Christ coulde not be all one.
Of thys dyd come and springe the errour of of the Anabaptistes. Because that they thinke, that baptism was thē ordeyned & instituted after that Christe did ryse from death. And I do merueyle, that they did falle in too thys errour, sithens that with playne testymonyes of the scryptures it [Page] is set forth and expressed, that Christ had by his apostles, baptized before his death and afore that they had receiued the holy ghostes Ihon .iii.Ihon .iii. and .iiii. Chapter. and .iiii. Chapter. After thys Iesus dyd come and his discyples, into the lande of Iuery, and there he did abyde with them, and did baptise. Ihon also dyd baptyse before Christ, wherfore he was called baptyste.
Ergo, baptysme hath hys beginnynge and institutyon of man.
Truly Ihon was a man, whych thing no man can denye, yet notwythstanding, his doctryne and baptysme, were not of man, but of God.Math. xxi. Chapter. Mathewe one and twenty Chapter. But it is called the baptysme of Ihon, and of the apostles, not because it is theyrs, but because it is mynystred by theym. I wyll speake more playnely.Math. xi. Chapter. how thys sayinge. The lawe and the prophetes were tyll Ihō cam. Christ. Mathewe .xi. Chapter, saythe that the law and the prophetes were tyll Ihon came, whereby Christe doth shew that the thynge that the Prophetes dyd afore prophecye, to be or too come, was more fullye set furthe and declared by ye preachyng of Ihon. For the thynges ye afore by the prophetes were prophecied to come, vnder darke fygures of wordes [Page] the selfe same thinges are sette furthe by Ihon, as fulfylled and presente,Ihon begynneth wyth hys baptsme, the gospell and newe testament. and are in a maner shewed with the fygure. The lawe had a misticall lambe: Ihon dydde shewe the true lambe wyth hys fynger. Ihon therfore doth begyn first the gospell and the newe Testamente, and sheweth that the Messias is come. It was necessarye then, that he should abolisshe the olde sygnes, and chaunge them into other, that should be without bloud, worthy of the new testamente.Circumcyon is chaū ged intoo baptisme. For circumcision was chaunged into baptysme. Therfore Ihon beginneth baptisme first, as a signe or seale of the people of God. But let vs heare his owne wytnesses and testimonyes of that thynge.Math. iii. Chapter. Mat. iii chap When he did se manye of the Pharyses and Saduces, cōming too his baptysme (that they also might receiue baptism of him) he said vnto them: Bryng ye furth frutes, worthy of repentaūce. By ye whiche wordes Ihon doth plainlye declare, wherfore, & for what purpose & vse, he did minister baptism, although he shuld saie, It shal not be sufficiēt to haue your body wasshed in the water, but rather this, ye must haue a respect vnto, yt ye be new mē [Page] that ye be sory and repente of your mysdeedes that are passed, and take heede of them, that are to come. There is no cause why ye shuld boste your selues to be the children of Abraham, onlesse ye do folow ye fayth of Abraham. What did Abrahā? he dyd beleue in god, hee was obediente vnto the worde of god, hee dyd approue hym selfe, or shewed hym selfe faythfull in all thinges vnto the same god. For I say vnto you, ye god is able, to rayse vnto Abraham, Chyldren of these stoones (that is to saye of the gentils) Now also ye axe is laid to the roote of the tree,What is to be vnderstanded, by ye vnprofitable bowes wher wyth the vnprofytable braunches that bring forth no fruyte, are cutte of. That is to saye, the bowghes, that dyd growe of the naturall olyue tree, I meane thee vnfaythefull Chyldren, beynge cutte of and cast awaye from the Testamente of god, shal be destroyed and burnt. Vnderstande therfore my wordes a ryght. Prepare your heartes agaynst the comming of the Messias, the newe king, I do baptise you wyth water, and in a maner initiate you, or giue you the first instruction in the religyon of Christ, to the intente yt ye be such, ye wil repente & receiue Christ [Page] When he is receiued, he shal baptise you with the holye ghoste, that is to saye,Too baptism wt thē holi ghost he shal seale and make you perfect, with his holy spirite, he shall pardon and forgeue you your synnes, he shall also endue you wyth fyer, that is to saye, wyth feruente charytye. Study wyth all diligence to receyue hym worthely. &c. By these testymonies we do conclude and gather, that Ihon dydde baptyse fyrste, and that he dyd also baptise in Christe. The apostles after that they had receyued Christ, dyd vse none other baptysme, but the same yt they had learned of Ihon. Yea, Christe hym selfe was alsoo baptyzed in the baptysme of Ihon.The baptisme of Ihon, is the true baptisme, els Christ, was not well baptized. Yf Ihons baptysme is not trewe, it foloweth that Chryste was not truely baptyzed, and that he oughte too be baptyzed agayne. Who is soo madde too say so? Ergo, the baptysme of Ihō, is the true baptisme, whych Chryst dyd confyrme and sanctyfye in him selfe
I doo agre vntoo all these thynges: but what doo they make agaynste rebaptyzatyon?
Thys trewlye, that the men of Ephesus, whome mentyon is made of, Actes. the nynetene Chapter. Were not baptyzed [Page] again, syth that ye baptisme of Christ and the baptisme of Ihon be all one. Yf they were not baptyzed agayne, the anabaptistes haue no example at all, of theyr rebaptyzation. Whereby it foloweth, that theyr rebaptyzatyon is not of God For they deuyde that one onelye baptysme. Paule sayth. One god, one fayth one baptysme, whyche is in the churche of god, wythout the whych, there is noo baptysme. Syth then that the anabaptystes do forsake the church,The anabaptistes haue no baptisme. yea, do deuide the churche, and are felowes of herytykes, they haue noo baptysme. For they are not in the churche of Christe. Ergo. theyr rebaptyzatyon is repugnaunte vntoo GOD, and is nothynge elles, but a newe secte, agaynste the vnytye of the churche.Obiection both foolyshye and chyldyshe.
But thou doest dissē ble this, that they do abhorre ye baptisme of the busshop of Rome, none otherwise then in tymes passed, ye holy fathers dyd abhorre the baptysme of heretykes, or minystred by heritykes. For they yt had bene baptyzed by herytykes and scysmatikes, were baptyzed agayne.
Who dydde euer baptyse men wyth the baptysme of the Busshoppe of Roome? [Page] Dyd the busshop of Roome begyn baptisme?
No, Ihon did begyn baptisme, but the busshops of Rome did adde manye thinges of theyr owne.
The thynges that were added by the busshop of Roome, as salte Oyle, coniurynges, &c. are they baptisme, or parte of baptysme?Thoughe ye byshoppes of Roome haue added many thyngs to baptisme, yet it ought not to be called ye baptisme of ye Byshope of Rome.
Neyther of them, for then, neither Christ nor Ihon, had baptyzed truely, whyche dyd not adde those thinges.
If these new added thinges are not baptysme, nor yet parte thereof, whye do ye call it then the baptysme of the busshop of Roome? Or was euer anye man that dyd baptyse in the name of Clemente, Bonyface, Leo, or Gregorye?
No manne.
In what then were ye baptyzed?
In the name of the father, of the sonne, and of the holye ghoste.
Ergo, ye were not baptyzed in the baptysme of the Busshop of Roome, but in the baptysme of GOD. And they that baptise you nowe, in what, or wyth what wordes doo they baptyse you?
With water, and in the name of the father, of the sonne, and of the holye ghost
Were ye baptized in the same and with the same worde in your youth?
Yes truely.
What neadeth thē thys laste baptisme? doest thou not se ye ye are starke madde?
When we were children we knew nothyng of baptism. We vow now vnto god purenes, & a lyfe without sinnes.
Could ye not do this without baptism? Yf ye could, ye neded no water, yf ye coulde not, the vertue is in ye water. Ergo, our saluatyon is alligated and bounde to the elementtes, agaynste the nature of faythe and of the scriptures. What answere canste thou make here.
It is better, that we thus consecrate our selues vnto god.Anabaptistes are like vnto monkes.
As monkes did heare before tymes bynd themselues vnto god with there vowes. Here poyson is hyddē, yt ye do chalenge nad attribute vnto your selues purenesse of lyfe, ye do detest & abhorre other as vnclean, & as the catharians in times passed ye do gather and assemble vnto your selues a peculiar churche, markyng and sealyng your selues as though ye were the purest of all men.Rebaptyzation is a newe secte againste ye vnytye of the church Wherfore I may well cal your rebaptizatiō a newe secte against the vnitye of the churche, whiche thynge [Page] appeareth more and more by thy words Tell me, I praye the, if youre churche is without sinnes, or is no more in ye flesshe where is then the lost & prodigall chylde the straying shepe, the fyeld sowen with cockle and darnel, the net that draweth all kindes of fisshes, the supper or banket where all they that are bidden, doo sitte also they that haue not the bridegromes liuerie. Yf ye be pure & wholl, then haue ye no nede of Christ, the phisition of the soules. O moste bolde and shameles hipocrytes, O disguysed and masked hery tykes, who hath bidden you, to make dyuision afore tyme? Or if ye be so holye & pure, when wyll ye of charitye, beare wt vs, our heauy burthens, wherewyth we are ouercharged and burdoned, that ye maye fulfyll the lawe of Christe? When wyll ye haue compassyon of our infyrmities? When wyll ye that are strong, take vs that are weake, vntoo you? Whye do ye cut of and contempne the sicke and weak members? What are ye but scismatykes?
Thou hast not yet told why the aunciente fathers dyd baptyse them agayne, that had bene baptized by heritykes.
They were not [Page] baptized againe,It is no baptisme onlesse it be ministred in the name of ye father, the sonne, and of the holy ghoste. but they were baptized as they that had not bene baptized. For herytykes dyd denie the trinitie, the god head of Christe, and the holy ghost. Besides that, they were not of the churche: Ergo, they had no baptisme, nor did baptise in ye name of Iesus, whom they dyd denye. Moreouer, the custome of rebaptizyng, or baptyzing agayn, was not cō monly vsed in the church. For they that had bene baptyzed in the name of the father, of the sonne, and of the holy ghost, were not baptyzed agayne, but were receyued by the imposition of handes, and also were admonisshed to persiste and abide in the sinceritie of fayth. This therefore helpeth you nothynge, but rather doth make against you. Emong the true christians, ye haue no exaumple at all of your rebaptization, but emong these auncyent heritikes, that haue bene alreadye condempned of the churche. For ye doo renew the heresyes of Aupentius.The Anabaptistes do renew olde heresyes. Nouatus & Pelagius.
What maner of men were they.
In the yere of our lorde .CC.lv. there rose in Roome, a ceraine man, called Nauatus, a verye arrogante, proude, obstinate and bold man [Page] He did teache,Nonatus errour. that a man after baptisme was pure and cleane, which purenesse yf he had ones lost through sinne, he coulde neuer be forgyuen. And if anye man for feare and dreade, or necessitie of deathe, had denied Christe, that he ought not any more to be receyued intoo the church (thoughe he lamented neuer so sore for hys fall) but that he oughte to be separated, and as a dampned creature, too be shunned of all men. Thys thynge dydde cause a counsayle of graue and holy men to be gathered at Roome,A counsall agaynst Nouatus. whiche by the scriptures, beynge truelye vnderstanded did condempne this opinion, as vngodly and herytycall. Yet in the meane season, Nouatus dothe not leaue of, nor yet recant his vngodly opinion: but rather did assemble and gather a peculyar churche, condempning the churches, where synners and repentaunt personnes were, he dydde call hys churche pure. Therefore were the Nouatyans,Why the Nouatiās wer called Catharians. called Catharyans. Whome he dydde receyue into his church, them did he bind vnto his errour & consecrate vnto his vnpure clenlynes, by reqaptizatiō or baptizing again. I do not bring these thinges out of mine own head, [Page] but out of those auncyent doctours, Cornelius, Ciprianus, Dionesius, Alexandrinus, and Eusebius. Of whome some did lyue in Nouatus time.The Nouatians & Anabaptistes are lyke in all thynges. Now if thou dost diligently loke vpon these auncyent Nouatians, & the anabaptystes of our tyme yu shalt find very litle difference betwene them, for as Nouatus beinge openly conuinced in that most famous counsayle of learned Bishops, doth not forsake hys errour, but obstinately dothe defende it. so ye Anabaptistes do at this present. For howe often haue they bene ouerthrowen in the open disputations, that haue bene kepte wyth them in Tigure, Sanctogallum, Berne, Basile, Constance, Argentyne, and Auguste? And yet for all that, they wyl rather loose theyr lyfe, then for sake theyr errour: yea, they do gather & assemble peculier churches, they baptise agayne, they condempne oure churches as vncleane, they doo atribute vnto them selues, purenesse of lyfe, to be shorte, they doo all thynges that Nouatus dydde. In the meane season, they are ambitious, arrogante, proude, pufte vp, and verye hipocrytes.
I vnderstande that the Anabaptystes are Nouatyans.
[Page]What sayest thou of the other two?
Aupentius was busshop of Milan,Aupentyus condemneth the baptisme of childrē. afore Ambrosius, of ye sect of Arrius. He did condempne the baptisme of children His errour was condempned in ye counsayle of Miluent.
But it foloweth not thereby, that infantes muste be baptyzed.
Verelye it foloweth, whych thyng we wyll proue by and by.
¶ The second Dialogue. That the baptysme of children, is of God.
Whatsoeuer thou sayest, I wyll proue by most stronge argumentes, that the baptisme of children is not of god.
And I wyll gladly heare howe thou canst do it.The chyef Argumentes of the Anabaptistes agaynste the Baptisme of infantes.
In the last of Marke, Christe sayth to hys apostles go throughout all the wholl worlde, and preach the gospell to euery creature. He that beleueth and is baptyzed, shall be saued: He that beleueth not, shall be condempned. Also in the laste of Mathewe it is wrytten after this maner: Al power is giuen vnto me in heauen, and in earth goyng therfore teache ye al nations, baptizing [Page] in the name of the father, of ye son and of the holy ghost. By these it semeth to folow, and that necessarely, that baptisme ought onely to be ministred vntoo them yt can be taught and instructed. For he sayth first, teache them, and then afterwardes: baptyse them, whereby it foloweth also, that baptisme is a signe of the faith that wente before. For he saithe: he that beleueth and is baptyzed shall be saued, Let vs nowe adde and ioyne vntoo these, and ponder dilygently both the examples and factes of Ihon, and of the apostles, and that whych I say shalbe manifeste and playne. For Ihon dyd baptise them onelye, that dyd confesse theyr sinnes.Actes .ii. Chapter. Actes .ii. Chap. Luke doth wryte after this maner: And they which receyued gladlye the worde, were baptyzed. Philip doth then at lengthe baptyse the stewarde of Quene Candace, after that he had declared vnto him. ye. liii. Chap. of Esay, & had questioned wyth him of his faith.Actes. viii. Chapter. Actes. viii. chapter. All the apostles after that they had preached the Gospell, and that the faith was receyued, did baptise the faithefull. It foloweth then, that baptysme as a signe is due vnto thē [Page] that can both heare and receyue the doctryne. Infantes, because that they want the vse of reason, can neyther heare nor receyue the doctryn, & therfore they haue no faythe. For Paule teacheth that faith commeth by hearynge, and hearyng by the word of god. Rom. x. Chap,Roma .x. Sith then that Children can neyther heare, nor vnderstande the worde of god, they can not beleue. Ergo baptisme is not due vntoo them, which is a signe of the faythe that goeth before. Yf thou canste,A solution to the argumentes of the Anabaptistes. answere me to these: I wil tell and set forth, myne other argumentes hereafter.
Thou hast rehersed the chief and principal foundatyons of the Anabaptystes, that haue anye showe or appearaunce, but thys is noo newe thynge vnto vs, whych haue learned and red in hystories, that aboue three hundreth, xlviii. yeares agone that is to saye, in the yeare of Christe. M.C. lxxxii. there haue bene heretykes,The sum of the Anabaptistes argumēts. that haue taught the same doctrine. But because, yt ye do leane vpon a weake & brickel foundatiō, your fote shal easely be subuerted & ouerthrowen, in al your doctrin ye do most vrgently beat this into mens hedes, ye baptisme is a signe of ye faithfull [Page] or of them that haue faith alredy. Infantes or yonge babes haue no fayth. Ergo baptisme ought not to be ministred vnto infantes. In very dede (if the wordes be wel and truly expounded and vnderstanded) we do gladly graunt this thinge vnto you: That baptysme is a sygne of the faithfull people. But we do not deffyne, cyrcumscribe,This word fidelis, faithfull or fidel ought not to be limited as the Anabaptists wil haue it or limite the faythful, as ye do: for yf no man shoulde be baptised but they that beleue truly, and from a sincere hearte, Iudas, Simon, of Samaria, Demas. and other hipocrites, had neuer ben baptized. Let no man thus take my sayinges, although I would haue baptysme to be ministred vnto theym, whome it is manyfeste and playne to be infydels, but myne intente is to shewe, that by thys word, fidelis, faythfull, some what more is to be vnderstanded, then the Anabaptistes do expresse,
What canst thou make of a faythfull but a faythfull? I can not vnderstand how infantes and yong babes can be faithful, sith that they do wante the vse of reason.
But in thys busynesse, we do soo speake of the faythfull that we do in noo wise exclude [Page] the children from the number of thē, syth that the children and infantes are of god whome god doth alwaies admitte and receyue into his churche emonge the faythfull.
It behoueth the to haue proued the same,Who be ye fideles & faythfull. Gene. xvii Chapter. O comfortable sayinge, both to vs and too oure children. as I haue alredy proued ye contrary,
I wil proue it. Genesis xvii. chapi. Where god doth make a couenaunt with Abraham. the lorde doth peculyarly comprehend the chyldren in the couenaunt, for he sayth. I shall be thy god, and ye god of thy sede after the. And afterwards he commaundeth the infantes to be cyrcumcised vpon the eyght daye, & to receyue ye signe of the Testament. Wherby it foloweth that god is not only the god of thē that be of age, and canne beleue in God, but also of the infante,Children are fideles or faithful and be in ye churche the members of Christe. which for lacke of age can not yet beleue, for they through grace and the promyse, are receyued in to the couenaunt and number of ye faythfull.
I care not for the olde Testamente of the Iewes, these olde thynges are abolished by ye gospel.
By Iesu Christ the ceremonies are abolished and [Page] the figures fulfylled,What parte of ye olde testament is abolyshed by Christ. but the couenaunte made with Abraham, standeth styll. Elles god were not our god, and the God of our sede, and shuld be made by Christ more vnmerciful and more straunge, thē he was to the aunciaunte fathers before Christ. Which to thynke, were a foolysh thyng, that I should not say an vngodly, specially syth that in the newe Testamente,The faythfull are the chyldren of Abrahā. Roma. iiii. Gala. iiii. Mat. viii. Luke .xiii. and .xix. Chapter. Ihon .i. Chapter. alsoo the faythfull are called the chyldren of Abraham. Rom. iiii. Gal. iiii Mat. viii. Luk. xiii. & .xix. Chap. Besides these, Christ wc expresse words, doth say: Suffer yonge children to come vnto me, for to suche doth belong ye kingdō of heauē. Paul speaking of ye children of ye christians, saithe: Youre chyldren are cleane: How should that be, onlesse it were thorow grace, mercy, & the promise of god? It foloweth then, that the children of ye christians, are of god, & ought to be numbred emong the children of god.
These thinges do altogether repugne vnto the scriptures and gospell, as thoughe ye carnall birth should auaile some thyng before god, wheras Ihon saith: Whych were not borne of bloud, nor of ye will of the flesh, or of man, but were born of god [Page] Ye say that the chyld doth belong to the church, because that his parentes are of the churche.
We doo saye thys through the grace & mercy of god, wherof is the promise: The children are of the churche, not for theyr carnall generation & birth, but for the promise of god, whyche he hath promysed, that he wil be the god of the children.
What if the parentes of the childe,Whether ye children of them, ye feygne thē selues to beleue ought to be baptized Act. viii. Chapter shuld feigne their fayth, and not beleue truely: should not these children be borne of vnchristian parentes, and therfore ought not to be baptyzed?
I aske the, Symon, dyd Symon Magus of Samaria, beleue or not?
He dyd not beleue, but he did feygne hym selfe to beleue.
What yf thy sayinges be repugnaunte vnto the scriptures?
I do not thinke it.
I will shewe the therfore. Act. viii. chap. it is writtē after this maner: When they of Samaria had gyuen credyte vnto Philippe, which preached vnto them of ye kingdome of god, & of ye name of Iesu Christ, they were baptized both men & women. Then dyd Simon Magus beleue also and being baptized dyd ioyne hymselfe, too Philippe
He did beleue, that is to say he did confesse the faith with his mouth and sayd that he did beleue.
This yt I say, this word fidele, or faithful is of a larger sygnificatyon, and can not be so narowly taken, which thinge thou thy selfe dost graunte with me, being cō strayned therto, by the aucthoritie of the scriptures. But I aske ye, why did Philyp baptise hym, sith that he dyd not beleue truely? Diddest thou not say before that baptysme oughte too be mynistred vnto no man, except he doth beleue truely? and that baptism is a signe of ye faith that goeth afore?
Because yt he saide wyth ye other, that he did beleue in Christe, Philyp dothe not se the hearte, but being contente wyth the confessyon of the mouth, doth pronounce and baptyse.God only seeth the hearte.
So thou shuldest haue spoken and confessed, that god onelye seeth the heart, and that we oughte to be contente wt the outward confessyon, & vpon this confession to baptise. Sith then that ye father of ye infant, doth confesse ye fayth wt his mouthe, and saith yt he beleueth in Christ Iesus, moreouer doth beleue and confesse yt god is his god, & the god of his [Page] sede, and yt he doth therefore brynge hys chylde vnto baptisme, it is conuenient & mete, yt we beleue his wordes: & thoughe some time we doubt of ye words of the father, yet know we yt the chylde shall not beare the iniquitye of ye father, and yt the carnall generation doth make nothynge to this, but yt they are, and shal be called the children of god, which partayne too the free election and gratuite promyse of god. Do not all men knowe,Ezechias. yt Ezechias being a faithful king, was borne of a wicked parent? But yet this thing did harm or hinder him nothing at all:Esau. euen as Esau got no profit therby, yt he was borne of a godly parent: ergo ye election of god doth remain fre.
What if ye child yt is brought to baptism, were not of ye elect? were it not better yt a man shuld thē at length be baptized, whē we shuld se & perceiue yt he is of ye elect? For they whiche are not elected, are not of god, & they that are not of god, ought not to be baptyzed.
When shuldest thou thē baptyse him that came at the euening in too the vineyarde? when shouldest thou baptise ye thief on ye crosse? By this mean no man should be baptized, and baptism [Page] shoulde be abolyshed, for the electyon of god, is not alwaies knowē vnto vs: yea, we shulde by that meane, take that vpon vs which belongeth to god only:God only knoweth who be elected and who be not. for god onely doth searche the heart & knoweth only, which be elected, & which be not. I do let passe, yt we coulde not thus auoyd the hipocrites. For Simon Magus did feigne his faith wherby ye anabaptistes do iudge & measure ye election, and yet he was not elected.Ismael and Esau were not elected, & they were cyrcumcised. Other that are alredy of age may do the same. But tell me, were Ismael, and Esau elected or not?
They were not elected.
When they were yet babes and infantes, were they numbred emong ye people of god, or not?
I can not tell.
But it behoued yt to know it, syth that thou takesse suche matters in hand. That they wer of ye people of god, I proue it by the circumcision They were circumcised by ye commaundement of god: circumcision was ye signe of the people of god, ergo, in their infancie they were the children of god, and also they weare of the people of god, yea, though they were not elected. It is plain and manifeste by the lyfe that folowed, ye they were not elected and chosen.
I could wel graunt, that they were of ye people of god, but I can not recken them emonge the faythefull.
Are not they, that be of ye people of god, faithful?
They that be of age are faithfull infantes and yonge babes, can not be so for they can not professe theyr faith.
Ye synge alwayes one songe, haste thou not heard a great while agone, that chyldren, though they can not confesse theyr fayth, are rekened emonge the faythfull Or is god onely the god of them that are of age, and not also of the chyldren? Or dyd Christ suffer onely for them that are of age, and not also for the Chyldren?
He dyd suffer for the satysfactyon of all the synnes of the whole world.
Haue the Chyldren anye synne?
They haue the origynall synne.Chyldren are restored by Chryste, and not only they that be of age.
Syth then that Paule sayeth, that whatsoeuer was fallen by Adam, the same was restored by Christe, and not onely they, that be of age, but also Chyldren, be loste in Adam, It foloweth that children are restored agayne by Christ, Yf they be restored by Chryst, they are of God, & ought to be [Page] sealed, with the seale of the people of god Baptisme is the seale of ye people of god Ergo, chyldren ought too be baptyzed.
Proue that baptisme is the signe or seale of the people of god.
I proue that by your owne confessyon. For ye say that baptisme is the sygne of the faythfull.Actes. x. Chapter. What is to receue the holy ghoste. I proue besydes, by ye wordes of Peter, whyche Actes. x. Chapter speaketh after thys maner. Whoo can forbyd them to be baptyzed, that haue receyued the holy gost as well as we?
But children haue not receiued the holye ghoste.
In this place to receyue the holy gost, is too receyue a wytnes that we are of god, whych receiueth vs, and that we are clensed and purged by god.Act. x. xi. xv. Chap. This may be proued by the x. xi. and .xv. Chapter of Actes. Chyldren are clensed & purged by God: ergo, they haue the spiryte of god. If they haue the spiryt of god, they are of God, and baptisme is due vntoo them: as it is suffycyently proued by the olde and new Testamente.
Yf Christ should say The kyngdome of heauen belongeth vnto them, I would easely agre to the, but he sayth not vnto them, but vnto suche.
But thou most thynke and consyder, yt there must be some lykenesse and affinitye betwen the thinges that are compared together. I can not saye, If thou wylt be saued, do as Iudas dyd, for Iudas is not saued: but damned. If the chyldren wer not of god, nor ye kingdom of heauen theirs: the Lorde had not saide. Yf ye wyll enter into the kyngdome of heauē: be ye made as these chyldren are. Therfore when he sayeth: vnto suche, he sheweth that chyldren are such, as he wil haue them to be, that are of god.
It were better, to proue with expresse testimonyes of the scripture, that children haue the spiryte of god.
By what argumentes, wylte thou haue those thynges that are playne and manyfest, to be proued vnto the? But heare thou, a more playne testimonye. Paule. Romaine. viii. faythe: that he that hath not the spirite of god, is not his. Wherby it foloweth that he, which is of god, hath ye spirite of god, the chyldren are of god: Ergo, they haue the spirit of god.Children haue ye spirite of god Yf thei haue ye spirite of god, then ought thei by good ryght to be baptized. For Peter sayeth: who can forbyd them, yt haue receuid the holy ghost, [Page] to be baptyzed.
I wyll not contende. Howe beit I merueyl, that it is so expressely said. Teche ye, baptizyng. Agayn, yt Peter baptized thē which reaceaued gladly ye worde: so lykewise Philip did baptise ye steward of Quene Candace.Howe the places aleged by the Anabaptestes ought to be vnderstanded.
Both ye places and examples, which yu hast brought & aleged, ought to be vnderstanded of them yt are of age, and not of chyldren. Christ did not sende hys disciples to preche ye gospel vnto chyldrē but vnto thē ye were of age & had ye vse of reason. Nor we do not teache, yt children ought to be baptised in those places, wher ye gospel was neuer preched. But wher ye word of god & the holy gospel, hath ben both preched & also receiued by faith, it is no dout, but there it is both taught & beleued, yt the childrē are of god, and yt it is ye wil of god, yt the childrē, which be of god should be sealed wt baptism, & in a maner brought vnto god.The doctrine is greter thē yt baptism Therfore they are not excluded from ye people of god, but are receyued and rekened emonge ye people of god. Or elles tell me Symon, whether of the twoo is greater, baptisme or the doctryne?
The doctryne is greater than Baptysme.
What [Page] is the doctrine?
The holy gospel: For Marke saith: Go thoroughout all the wholle worlde, and preche the gospell vnto euery creature: Mathewe lykewyse: Teache them to kepe what soeuer I haue commaunded you.
Dothe then thys gospell teache that the chyldren are not of God?
No, elles it should be harder & more vnmercifull then the lawe.
Doth Christ cōmande his discyples to preache that chyldren oughte too be reiected and caste awaye?
Noo, But rather he dothe chyde hys dyscyples because that they rebuked theym, that broughte children vnto hym.
Thus I doo conclude then, syth that in these wordes of Chryste. (Teache Baptise) the doctryne is more excellente and greater, and yet chyldren are not forbydden it, but rather broughte vnto it: It foloweth that they are not forbydden baptysme, which is lesse,Infantes that dye without baptisme are notte dampned but rather ought to be brought vnto it. Thus it is manyfest and playne, that thys commaundement of Christ standeth wt vs, and not wt you.
It shuld folow yt the infants which die wout baptism, are not dampned.
That foloweth plainly, & also this dothe folowe, that thou being ouercōmen with the truth, dost seke how to bring me into an other purpose, least I should bind the more straightly.
I confesse that I can say nothinge againste so manyfest truthe. But I haue broughte this of the children, to the intent that thou shuldest teache and instructe me in thys poynte.
Iustifying & saluatyon is much lesse bound to the outward elements thē in tymes passed in the law.Why the infante is baptised. Heb. ix. chap The infante therfore is not baptized for this intent, yt by baptism, yt is to saie: by ye outward wasshyng of water, he shuld be made ye child of god, but he is therfor baptized because he was afore ye child of god throughe grace & promise. Wherefore if they die afore that ye water of baptism be poured vpon thē, they are neuertheles ye children of god, & are saued through the grace and promysse of god, by the force & strength of the couenaunt, by the satisfactiō of Iesus Christ, yt he made on ye crosse, for all mankynde. In the generalitye of mankynd, not only they, that are of age, but also children are included.
By thys meane, we shuld nede no baptisme. For if the chylde is alredye before [Page] the chyld of god, what good doth ye water? wherby this also should folow, that baptisme is bare water.We ought to speake reuerently of ye Sacramentes The outewarde elementes & signes beinge omitted & lefte in necessytie can not dampne one. The baptisme of bloude.
We must speake more reuerently of the sacramentes. None of the faithfull is so alligated and bound to the elementes, and outward thinges, that they may condemne him if they be omitted and left in necessitie: for the bloude of Iesus Christ, hath clensed him. I do call necessitie, as when a chyld departeth before baptism, or whē a man, beyng conuerted to the faith, is afore he can be baptyzed, taken to martyr do [...]n, which thing was often times done in ye primitiue churche, for vnto hym the crosse was in steade of baptisme, wherefore the auncient fathers did call it ye baptisme of bloud. Howbeit no man ought to neglecte or contempne the order that Christ hath instituted, nor to despyse baptisme, if he may haue it. If he contempneth or doth neglect to receiue baptisme when he may haue it, he is noo christian, but ye disciple of Iulianus & Porphirius For if baptism were vnprofitable, Christ would not haue instituted it. All thinges that Christe hath gyuen and lefte vntoo vs, are excellente, holye, and profytable. [Page] Ergo, baptism is not onely profitable vnto vs, but also moste necessarye: Farther more, we do adde thys also, that baptism touchyng ye mattyer, is water, and yet it ought not to be cōtemned and cast awai, or estemed as the comon water of ye well. For the water is onely parte of it, and a certayne signe.The whol action of baptisme conteyneth great mysteryes But the wholle action cō teyneth a greate mysterye, and an honorable sacrament. Wherfore it was called by ye holy fathers, a purging, & remission of synnes, also, regeneracion or renuyng, and other lyke names. Not that ye water hath ye strength to purge or renewe. For then Symon of Samaria, Iudas, Himeneus, Phyletus, and other false brethern and hipocrites had bene clensed and renued, for then were wasshed with the water of Baptism. But it is playne and manyfeste, yt they were not purged inwardely, but defiled with all iniquitye and wyckednesse, that they were not the chyldren of god, but the chyldren of the diuell. Whē therfore these godly & spiritual things are attributed vnto baptisme, they be not attributed vnto ye outward wasshing, but to ye wholl action, which conteyneth the faith of ye minister, of ye church & of him yt is baptized, also ye grace, election & promise [Page] of god. It is then chiefly attributed vnto ye, which is signifyed by ye pouryng on of ye water.
what is signified thē?What is signifyed by the pouryng on of the water.
That he whych is baptized, is of ye people of god, & that he is clensed inwardlye by ye grace of the holy ghost, ye wholsome water, yt he is wasshed by ye bloud of Christ. & initiated vnto a new lyf, euen as water doth wasshe and clense ye outward filthenesse.
verie well, Syth, then that the mysteries of batisme are so hygh excellente, & holy, why,Circumcision was in tymes passed, a great sacrament. I pray yt are they geuen & ministred to infantes, yt are not able to receyue so excellent thinges?
Was not circumcision in tymes passed, a great sacrament, a signe of ye people of god, & an initiation or entraunce into the true fayth and innocency of lyfe. Deu. x. Hier. iiii. Roma ii & iiii Cha. And yet it was geuen & ministred to ye chyldrē, whiche long after wer instructed in the lawe. Deu. vi. Whie shuld we not do ye same? Why shuld we not seale our children beyng newly born wt ye seale of ye people of god? & whē thei be of age, bring thē into knowlege of ye gospel? Of this,Confirmation. did sprīg among aūctant fathers cōfirmaciō or bisshoping, yt is to say, an establyshyng of those thinges, that were begonne in baptisme. [Page] The chyldren were brought forthe, they were asked of their faythe, of the Lordes prayer & other necessary articles, wherin they were instructed & confirmed. Wherfore they that dyd bryng the chyldren to baptism, are witnesses that the child whiche is brought, is borne of chrystian parentes, askyng both in theyr name, and in the parentes name, that the seale of the people of god may be geuen & ministred vnto the childe. Wherfore they be called in oure vulgare tonge godfathers & god motheres, because that they brynge the chylde to god, and wytnesse that he is of god, promysing that they wyl bryng vp the chylde in the true fayth, if nede shuld require. Yf ye aske, by what scripturs we do strenghten these oure sainges, we doo bryng vnto you the Analogye, or cōueniencie of the ceremones of the olde lawe, yt is to say, of circumcision: For euē as in circumcision the chyldren were brought vnto ye Lord, so we do read in ye gospell ye chyldren were brought vnto Christ.
I do lette these thynges passe nowe, & retourne vnto the fyrste. Thou dyddest say yf I remember well, that where Christ is not preached, yt mē must be taught fyrste [Page] and then at length baptized.They ought not to goo aboute to baptise where the gospell is not preached.
So it is, nor it can be done none otherwyse (as thou thy self doest knowe) for yf any man shuld come in to Greekland where ye Turke doth now raygn, & there wold baptise, afore he had taught: should not lose his labour, for men beynge not yet taught what baptisme is, or what it sygnyfieth, wold neyther thē selues receyue baptisme, nor suffer it to be ministred vnto their chyldren.
Did not, I prai yt, the Iues knowe, ye god was their god & the god of their chyldren?
They kenw it ryght wel, & therfore they circūcised their childrē.
what nedeth thē ani preaching emong ye Iues, yt knew god alredy before? Why did they not by & by bryng & intiate ye children by baptisme vnto Christ?
The Apostles did preache baptism against circumcisiō. The Iues wc toth & nail defended circūcision. Therfore ther was nede of long preaching emong the Iues, that they myght vnderstand ye baptisme shuld be in sted of circumcision.
The anabaptistes do say that ye teache these thynges without the scriptures.
Thei shuld easely vnderstand ye baptism is com in ye stede of circumcisiō [Page] if they woulde diligently looke vpon the vse of them both. For in baptisme, as in tymes passed in circumcision, the name is geuē vnto chyldren. So it is wrytten. Luc ii chapter. But these thynges are of lytle weyght emong you. Therfore we do referre all our saynges to the Actes of the Apostles. x. xi. xv. and Collosse .ii. chapte. For there Paul doth comforte the faythfull that were of the gentyles, & byddeth them that they shuld not be sory, because they were not circūcised: for why? Baptisme was the circumcision of ye faythful.
But there he doth playnely and with expresse wordes speake of ye circumcision yt is done without handes, vnderstandyng therby a renewynge of the mynd & of ye inward man.
We speak of none other. But in the meane season Paule dothe meane that Iewysshe circumcysyon, that was done in the priuye membre wyth a flynte stone, and wyth handes. I saye that ye are cyrcumcysed, O ye Collossenses, and haue a cyrcumcysyon, not that cyrcumcysion that is done wyth handes, but in stede of ye bodelye & outwarde circumcision, ye haue Christes circumcisiō, yt is to say, baptisme. For as by circumcision, [Page] ye cuttyng away of affections was signified: so by ye wasshing, done in ye water of baptism, the purging & clensing frō sin, is fygurated & betokened. That thys is the true meaning & sence of this place I wil proue by the very words of Paul In Christ (saith he) ye are complet, whiche is ye head of all rule & power, by whō ye are circumcised wt the circumcysion yt is made wythout handes, when ye dyd put of the sinfull body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, being buried together with him, through baptisme, in the which also ye be risen wt him, by the faith wrought in you of god, which raised him frō the dead. Bring hether to thys place yt .vi. to the Rom. & conferre them together, and yu shalt vnderstand ye baptism is called the circumcision of Christ, & also ye baptisme hath bene placed in the stede of ye circumcision. Vpon these things I do conclude after this maner: Yong childrē were in times passed, circumcised. Baptism occupieth the place & roum of circū cision: ergo, our childrē must be baptized
What, on ye .viii. day?
We are bound neither to time nor too place, but we are fre frō all those thinges by Christ [Page] Al thinges thē being considered,We are free from al outward ceremonies of the lawe by Christ. it is manifest and plaine, that the baptism of children is of god, against ye which, sith that the anabaptistes do repugne, it is wythout doubt. that they do contrary the gospell, the election of God, and the euerlasting couenaunt. They are therfore ouer bold & rash, they are open violatours or breakers of ye couenaunt of god, vnfaith ful against god, sith that they do exclude and debarre them from the couenaunt of God, whome gods grace dothe comprehende in the couenaunte.
Yet ye haue no expresse word of God, ye children ought to be baptized.
Shall not all that we haue hetherto aledged and brought, proue ye same? But go to, put the case that we haue no expresse word therof in the scriptures. Tell thou, where haue ye one expresse word ye chyldren ought not to be baptyzed?
Teache baptyzyng. Agayn: They came and confessed theyr sinnes. Item: They that receiued the word gladly. were baptyzed.Baptisme is in the stead of circumcision. And he that beleueth and is baptized.
I haue answered alredy before to all these: but so ye are wont to repeate euery foote, your bald reasons and [Page] argumentes.The Anabaptistes are prompte & quicke to speake, but not redye to gyue place to ye truthe. For ye are very prompt & quicke to speake, but not so ready to giue place to the truth. I haue not yet hearde in all thine allegations, any suche saying or sentence. Childrē ought not to be baptized.
But that doth folow of ye places afore alledged.
Thys is neither commaunded there, nor yet forbydden. Besydes that, your consequences are false, and wythoute foundatyon. If ye be nothinge ashamed of youre false consequences, we wyll be nothinge ashamed of our true. Therefore when ye crye out saying. Where doth ye scripture teach that children ought to be baptised? we crye agayne: Where doth ye scripture forbid to baptyse them? Ye do answeare in the last of Marke. We bring agaynst you. Gene .xvii. Marke .x. i. Corinth. vii. Acte. x. Colloss. ii Chap. Moreouer, we do submit these our sayinges and writinges, to the iudgement of all godlye persons. Whether that it be more like vnto the truth, that they do exclude & debarre the children whom Christ hath wasshed with his bloud, from ye couenaunt of god (for why do they denye vnto them, the signe of the couenaunte: and of the clensinge?) [Page] or yt we do teche ye children to be of god, redemed by Christ Iesus, whom he biddeth & wylleth to be brought vnto him, & also too be baptized? Iudge thou Symon, and tell me whether of theim is more like to be true.
If the matter be considered by it selfe, all contentiō being laid aside, ye whiche ye say is moste true, and most weightie. But this I doo wonder and maruaile at, that thou doste say, that the baptisme of children hath cō tinued in the church, euer since the tyme of the apostles, which apostles did neuer baptise chyldren. Here I doo moste earnestly desire the to bringe furthe whatsoeuer thou hast yet in store, I wyll gladly receyue all truthe: for manye of vs haue thought hetherto, yt ye baptism of children was brought in by the busshop of Rome
¶ The third Dialogue. That the baptysme of chyldren hath contynued in the church of Christ, euer since ye apostles, vnto this time.
No man can denye, but ye the busshop of Rome & the fathers haue added certaine things to ye baptism of Christ, but no mā [Page] yt is wise, will say yt it had his beginnyng of them, that is to say, that did begin the baptisme of children. Those things then that were added, and were repugnaunte vnto the word of god, were taken away againe, lest any man should make any busines for it. As for that, that ye bringe against vs, that the apostles did neuer baptyse children, no man lyuyng is able too proue it. For I wyll shew no small argumentes, that the apostles did baptise children, wherby yu shalt easely vnderstand yt the baptisme of children hath contynued in the church of Christ, euer since the apostles time, & that it is no new inuentiō of the busshop of Rome.i Certayne argumentes against the Anabaptistes. First, we do make our argument vpon the force & strength of ye precept and cōmaundement of christ & of the doctrine, after this maner: Christ did send his disciples to preche the gospel & to baptise: ergo, he did send thē to baptise childrē.The proue of ye consequence, or argument
I denye ye consequence
But I wil proue it after this maner It is so farre, yt the gospel shuld: reiecte & cast backe the chyldren, yt it dothe rather bring thē vnto Christ. Now the doctrine is greater then baptisme .i. Cor. i. cha. If ye, which is greater, yt is to say, the gospel [Page] is the chyldrens, that then, which is lasse that is to say, baptisme shal be theirs, Ergo, the apostles dyd baptise the chyldren
ij The seconde argument may be made and gathered vpon the nature of him, to whome baptysme is due, and whyche is able too receyue baptisme. As manye as god doth recken emong ye fideles or faithfull, they are fideles, or faithfull. For Peter dyd heare this sayinge of the Lorde. That god hath purifyed or made cleane, call thou it not common or vncleane. Actes. x. chapter. He doth put the chyldren in the number of the faithfull: Ergo, the children are of the number of the fideles or faithfull, and oughte to be compted & reputed of vs emong the fideles, or faithfull, onlesse we will repugne against god and be stronger then he. Now it is most certayne, that the apostles did baptise all them that Chryst commaunded them to baptyse. Christe commaunded them too baptyse the faythfull (as ye youre selues do graunt and confesse) Ergo, the Apostles did baptyse the chyldren. The seconde proposition (which is, that the children are of the number of the faythfull) is knowen well ynough.
[Page]iii. The thyrd argument is gathered vpon ye fact of Peter, which is peculier, but yet in it ye publike administraction of baptism is touched. He coulde not forbyd theym the water of baptisme, yt had receyued the holy ghost, but sealed them as the people of god. Ergo, he could not deny baptisme vnto ye children, syth yt he had learned in the gospel yt the chyldren be of god, & that the kyngdom of heauen is theyrs. Who woulde thynke, yt any man is mete for the kyngdom of heauen, wtout ye holy spiryt?
iiii. We do make & gather the fourth argument vpon the strength & force of circumcision, in stede wherof, baptisme is in the church of Christ. As many as were ye seruātes of god, did afore al thinges, labour & endeuour thēselues, to circumcise theyr childrē. Iosu. v. Exo. iiii. The Apostles were the most faithfull ministers of god: Thē did not thei omit or leaue ye thinge, yt was not brought in, in stede of ye circumcision, Ergo, thei did baptise, not onli thē that were of age, but also children.
v. Fyftely we do thus reason vpō the vse & custome of ye Aposltes. The Apostles of Christ did dyrecte al their doinges to the cōueniencie & example of ye old testamēt.
This we do proue by ye. iiii. Euangelists, [Page] [...] [Page] [...] [Page] the Actes of ye apostles, by the epistles of ye Apostles, Rom. xv. ii. Cor. ii. ii. Tim. iii. ii. Peter .i. chap. Ergo, they dyd order baptisme after the Analogie and figure of the old Testament. The going through ye red sea,The goynge thorough ye read sea, is a figure of baptism was a type & figure of ye baptisme yt was to come .i. Cor. x. cha. Children were in the fygure (for bothe men and women went through with theyr children) Ergo the apostles dyd not denie baptisme vnto the children. The custome & maner of the scripture (whiche custome and maner is vsed almost emong al nations) is not to reherce by name, women & children, and yet neuerthelesse it doth include them, for in ye name of the father of ye famylie, or of the good man of the house, al hys whole famylie is comprehended, as in the chiefe or head. Yf thys were not, women shuld be in no small ieoperdy, yf therfore they were not of god, because yt they be not circumcised. Al these thynges are done, by ye meanes & helpe of a figure yt is called Sinecdoche. The sixte argument shalbe taken out of ye manifest and expresse testimonies of the apostles. The apostles did baptyse al whol housholds and famylies, ergo they did baptyse children also, for the children are in ye number of ye famylie or [Page] housholde. Thys we do proue by ye .xvii of Gene. For Abraham doth circumcise al the male children yt were in his house. For he vnderstode ye promys of god, that saith. I shal be thy god, & the god of thy sede. Likewyse in ye new Testament, whē the goodman of the house, had herd & beleued ye gospell, that is to saie, ye god was his god, & the god of his sede also, he caused all them that were in his house bothe greate and small, to be baptized. Thus ye apostles dyd baptize hole housholds and famylies. That the children do perteyne vnto ye fathers housholde & famylie, it is plaine & manifest by the .xii. of Exodus & ii. of the Actes: this do I inculcat & beate the oftener into mens heades, because yt I se the Anabaptistes to be at this poynt that they do exclude ye children from ye famylie & houshold. for they can not denye but ye hole housholds were baptized by ye Apostles. But who doth not se, that this cometh of mere contention? For though they could proue that there were no children at all in the famylies & housholdes, that ye apostles dyd baptise, yet had they not proued that al families or housholds were, or be wtout childrē: wherfore we do make againe our argument after this maner [Page] The Apostles baptized al wholl housholdes, ergo, thei did baptise children, syth ye childrē are ye princypal & chief part of the familie & houshold. But let vs put ye case, yt there were no children in those families & housholds, yt the Apostles dyd baptise, yet do they perteine & belong to ye houshold, & are rekened in it, and yf there had bene any, they wolde haue baptized thē. For they did baptise ye wholl housholde. The fault then shuld not haue ben in the Apostles nor in ye childrē, yt thei were not baptized: but this had bene the cause that they had bene baptized, because yt there were none: For if they had had children they would haue baptyzed them.
Seuenthlye, we do gather by the hystoryes & chronicles that the baptisme of children hath continued euer sens the apostles time, vnto this time. Origene, which in the yeare of our saluation .c.c. & .xii. did liue in ye church of Alexandria, doth in his v. boke, yt he did wryt vpon ye epistle to the Romaines, testifie and witnesse yt he hath receaued ye baptisme of children, from, or of ye Apostles. After this time, about the yeare of oure Lorde. C.C.lv. ye holy man Cipryan was, he doth proue, & that with no small argumentes, ye baptisme of children, in the .iii. boke of hys Epistles, and [Page] viii. epistle Adfidum, To fidus. In ye yere of our lord .c.c.c.xx. Lactantius did wryte in ye .iiii. boke of his diuyne Insttucion, ye baptism was come in ye stede of circūcisiō whereby all natyons should be gathered vnto the faith, & into the church.Lactantius in hys iiii. boke, & iiii. chapte Hierome which did lyue about the yere of our lord c.c.c. & lxx. doth wt playn & expresse scriptures proue ye baptism of children to Leta and agaynst ye Pelagians. In ye same self tyme and .xl. yeares after. Augustyn, beyng a man endued with great holynesse of lyfe, with exceading great erudition & learnyng, & with a sharpe and exacte iugement did teche in Aphrica. This man writeth many thinges of baptism against ye Donatistes, to Marcellinus & Petilianus, where he doth manifestely saye,Chryste coulde not be baptized afore ye baptism was instituted by Ihō. For the lawe dyd regne tyll them. that the church hath receiued the baptisme of children, from ye apostles. I haue brought these thynges therfore yt thou mayste see & vnderstand, that ye baptisme of children is no new inuention, & that they whyche teche suche thinges do leane to no truth, but to plaine errour. For although christ was not baptized, tyll he was .xxx. yeares old, yet being an infant he was circūcised vpon ye eyght daye, that I shoulde in the meane season let passe, that baptisme was [Page] not yet instituted, which had hys begynnyng of Ihon. But now we wyll stryke vp our sayle clothes, and shewe how vnkunninglye ye gather your argumentes, when ye do reason after this maner. We do not read that the apostles dyd baptise the chyldren of the faythfull: Ergo, they oughte not to be baptised. If we shoulde onelye goo by coniectures and reason, it is more lykelye, that the Apostles dyd baptyse the infauntes then otherwyse in the famylye, and housholde of Stephana, of Lidia, of the keper of the prison, & of other, yf at leste, there were any infantes in those famylyes and housholdes,Do not thynke good reader that we goo about to defende vnwrytten verytes. which examples ye shall neuer be able to cōfute. There be many things done both by Christ and by the apostles, that neuer were written. Nor we can not make our argument after this maner: This thinge was not done. ergo, it may not lawfully be done. That we shuld graunt vnto you ye the apostles did baptise no children, yet haue ye not proued therfore, that children ought not to be baptized. Again we may not to thys affyrmatyue. (The apostles dyd baptyse them that were of age & did beleue) inferre or bringe in, this negatiue (Ergo childrē ought not to be baptized) [Page] for we may neuer, neither in ye prophane nor yet in the holy scriptures, make oure argument, a facto ad ius, To argument or reasone a facto ad ius is whē we go about to proue a thynge to be lawfull because ye it was don afore, or elles to be vnlawfull because it was not don afore but then it is lawfull to bringe the fact and dede for a law, whē it is proued that the dede was done rightfully.
As I do hear the controuersye is of the facte, and of the ryghte or lawfulnes.
Thou saiest truth if anye thinge be lawfull, as soone as thou hast done it, thou hast done well though that none of the apostles did it afore the. Therfore baptisme oughte not to be denyed vnto infantes, because that we do not reade expressely, that the apostles did baptise infantes. Both because yt it may be, yt they did baptise infants (as we haue proued & shewed alreadye, and hereafter, if nede be, wil shew more largely) & yet it was not writtē, & also because yt no mans factes ought to be preiudicial vnto ye law, much lesse ye things yt are left vndone. Therfore, if it were written any where wt plain & expresse words of ye apostles after this maner: The apostles dyd not baptise infauntes, yet it shoulde not folowe that they oughte not too be baptyzed: but we oughte too enquyre and searche, whether that they lefte it vndone, because that it was notte lawfull, [Page] Christ did not baptise.Christ did not baptis & yet we ought to baptise. Ihon. iiii. Ergo, after or according to your saying, we ought not to baptise at al. Who is so mad to say so? For ye Apostles did baptise & that lawfully. Ergo, If ye apostles, did baptise lawfully, though christ him silf did neuer baptise, we shal also lawfully baptise infants, though ye apostles did not baptyse. There is no diuersitie at al, yea, we haue gotten ye better end of ye staffe, syth that we haue Christ ye did not baptise, & yet we ought to baptise, and ye onelye haue the apostles. Bring ye therfore any lawe yt forbiddeth to baptise children. We do not go about by these reasons & examples, as by some strong foundaciō, to proue or strengthē ye baptism of infantes (For we haue many other strong arguments & foundations) But we will shewe, ye ye do both rashely & lyingly say, that the apostles dyd neuer baptise infantes or yong babes. For ye haue no testimonye of that thynge. And though ye had neuer so much, yet it shuld not folow therfore, yt infantes ought not to be baptized: For vpon a thyng that is done, or left vndone, nothing can besureli concluded, but onely vpon that, whyche is sure by goddes worde to be lawful. Agayne, we did bryng so many reasons & [Page] examples to this intente, that we myght proue yt it is more likely, yt they dyd baptyse chyldren than otherwise.
Thou doest bost much of foundations,The chyldrē are as wel of the people of god, by the strength of ye couenaunt as theyr parē tes. but thou bringest forth very lytle. I praie ye, which be these strong foundations.
I haue cast thys foundation, yt the children of ye faithful are as wel wtin the church, and emonge ye Children of god, as the parents & that by the force and strength of ye promys, as wel as they were in ye olde Testament. Besides ye, circumcision (as touching ye sacramental meaning) was ye same thynge vnto them, yt baptisme was vnto vs. Dyd I not alredie both saye & proue these things? Why sayest thou then that I haue brought yet litle or nothing?
Why dost thou take all thinges out of the olde Testament.
I know what the matter is, ye cast away the olde Testament, for ye se that the baptisme of chyldren may be proued & defended by it Dyd not both Christ and his Apostles a alege ye old Testament, whē so euer they wold proue and strengthen their sayings Or tell me now when Christ doth byd ye Iewes to serch ye scriptures, doth he not send them to the old Testament?
I do not denye that.
Why do ye [Page] blame vs then, if we folowyng the example of Christe, do strengthen & confirme our sayings wt the scriptures of the olde Testament?The newe Testamēt & the olde are included one wt in an other The new testament is included in the old, and ye old doth shadowe & proue the new. If thou be sufficyentlye perswaded in this conclusion, let vs passe furth to ye other.
Certain thinges do please me wel, but that thou doest recken & number the children in the familie and houshold, I do not se it proued yet.
Diddest yu neuer se then, yt men are borne of men? & that parents (I meane fathers and mothers) do nourish, kepe, & brynge vp their chyldren? Haste thou so caste of all humayne reason, vnderstandyng and affectyon? But yet in thys moste plaine matter, I wyll bringe and alege the scriptures. Actes .ii. Chapter. We reade after thys maner: And all they that beleued, were together, or in one place, and had al thynges commen emonge theym. Here I doo aske the, whether the faythefull hadde theyr chyldren with them, or not? If they hadde them, whye shoulde they not be then of theyr famylye and houshold. If they had them not, whye do we not reade then, that the faythefull tooke thoughte, because they myghte not haue [Page] theyr children wyth theym? Or was the spiryte that gouerned them so cruel, that it did teache them to put away their children,
We wyll not say, that they had not theim wyth theym, or that they dyd not brynge theym vp, but that they were not in the famylye and housholde of Christe.
Whome do ye comprehend then, vnder the name of famylye or housholde?
Suche as be of that age alreadye, that they may know what the law is, & what synne is. For he that wyll be baptyzed, muste repente: sythe that infauntes can not repente, they can not be comprehended vnder the name of the famylye, or housholde.
Whye doest thou styll make vp a rope of sande, haue we not proued alreadye before that, not onelye they that be of age, oughte too be baptyzed: But yeare soo styffe necked that ye wyll in noo wyse beleue, that anye maye be baptyzed, onlesse he maye repente of hys misdedes. And by and by ye do conclude that, ergo, children ought not to be baptised. But in the meane season, ye haue not yet shewed anye lawe ye orbiddeth to baptyse the chyldren. We (as we haue declared before alreadye) [Page] do knowe,Isaac. Agar. Ismael. yt Isaac being an infaunt was so of the familie & houshold of Abraham that he did cause his father to put awaye ye bond woman, wt her childe. For Paul saith wt Moises: The sonne of the bond woman shal not be heire, wt my sonne Isaac, he was heyre, then wtout doubte he was of ye familie, for they that be not heires, as seruantes & fre men are of ye familie. Exo. xii. We reade after thys maner: If ani stranger wil come to dwel emong you, & kepe the passeouer of the lorde, let al his male children be circumcised, & thē he shal kepe it well. Why is it said, al his male childrē? Doth this pertein onely to them ye be of age? It is your part then to proue, yt they which receiue the seale of ye church of god, according to ye religion of theyr parents, are not of the familye and housholde of their parentes. But I wil bryng an oher testimonye. In the .xxi. of Acts, Luk writeth after this maner: And after certen daies, we departed frō thens & they al brought vs on our way, wt their wiues & children. Were al these children of age? Or if they were not of age, were they not of ye familie & houshold of theyr parents? What myracle, or what affectiō was it if ye men did onely bring forth ye apostle on his way, wt their wiues & yong [Page] men? But this was ye greate affection, yt the fathers with their wiues, did beare & draw their children wt them, as in suche a busines it is wont to be. Now, they dyd not draw wt them, other mens, but their own childrē. Ergo, they were of their familie.
What though they pertain to theyr familie & houshold? Doth it folow therfore yt they wer baptized?
How shuld then Paul say, yt he hath baptized the houshold of Stephana, which he had not baptized, if there were children in it, whō he had not admitted or receued? Again, in ye Acts, it is said. He was baptyzed (yt is to say) (the keper of ye prison) & al his houshold.At the begininge of ye church ye faythfull wer wont to folow ye example of Abraham and of his posteritye. Why wil ye not se yt at ye beginning, ye faithfull wer wont to do as Abraham & his posteritie, which did circumcise al their seruants, & not only their childrē? And in ye .xii. of Exodus (as it is said alredy before) al ye male childrē of the familie, are cōmaunded to be circumcised & yet there no mention of faith, or of the knowlege of god (which thinges ought to be cared for aboue al thinges) is made there.
Thou semest too me alwaies to leaue those things, ye make agaynst ye. For in ye epistle to the Corin. Paule nameth such a familye and houshold, doth [Page] manifestly declare, yt not infants & yong babes, but suche as haue reason & vnderstanding, ought to be vnderstanded. For he saith: ye know ye house of Stephana, yt they are the first frutes of Achaia, & haue giuen thē selues to the seruice of ye saints be ye obedient to thē, and to all ye worke & labour wt them. Why do ye not speake of suche a familie & housholde?
We haue said alredy, & that often, yt thys is a Sinecdochicall phrase, or maner of speaking: such as is .i. Cor. x.. Al our fathers were vnder the cloude, for infantes were also vnder the cloude: but no expresse mē tion is made of them. Al went through ye sea, but the infants could not go through Thei went through then, yt went not thorow, but were born by them yt went thorow. So there were some in the familye of Stephana, yt beleued first of al Achaia, there were also some of the congregatiō yt could not yet beleue in dede, for lack of age, nor giue thē selues to the ministerye & seruice of ye Saints. Al wer baptized in Moses: he speketh al things of ye fathers yt is to lay, of ye aunceters & grandfathers whō notwithstandinge, we do so take, yt thei yt were then children, are now called fathers by Paul. For ye people of Israel was [Page] of thē. Therefore, not onely they yt were of age, were baptized in Moises, but also the infants. For if they yt were then infants, were not baptized in ye going thorough of ye red sea, thē Paul said not wel yt al were baptized in Moises. For they were also (as we haue said afore) the fathers of them yt came after.
This was a figure, what shalt thou then proue by it?
I am wel content. It was a figure yt as ye infants were then of ye family as wel of the earthly father, as of ye heauenly, and were signed or sealed wt theyr sacramentes, yt so now, they that are the children of the christians, syth yt they are the chyldren of god also, ought to vse the sacramente of the children of god. Thou canst finde no starting hole, to escape at. For ye do folyshlye vpon factes and exaumples, brynge in a negatiue: yea, rather vpon neyther factes nor examples, that is to say, ye do vnwisely make your argument, after this maner: Thys thing was done, as we maye proue both by testimonies & examples: Ergo, that thinge oughte not to be done. For what other thing can ye alege for your selfs: but we do not read, that ye apostles did baptise infantes: ergo, they ought not to be baptized. [Page] We do not so: but we might stay our selues vpon facts & examples (if ye woulde stand to) after this maner. The infantes of ye Hebrues were al baptized vnder the cloud, & in the sea [...], as well as ours. For Paul doth altogether proue there in ye foresaid place, yt they were no lesse initiated wt our sacraments, thē we are our selues. First & formeste, then it foloweth, yt in Paules time,The fathers had the same sacramēts yt we haue ye apostles were wont to baptise infants. Secondly, yt whosoeuer denieth yt he doth deprauate & marre the sentence of Paul. For what other thing doth he there, but make al things equal? and yt we are not aboue, or superiours vnto thē, nor they inferyours vnto vs? For he attributeth ye same sacramentes vnto thē, yt we haue, & the same vnto vs, yt thei had, as Colloss. ii. Now al those auncient fathers could not haue bene baptized as wel as we, yf we be not al baptized wt our familie & housholdes. Them al therefore being baptized and made equall vnto vs it is manifest and plain, yt as all their infā tes were baptized in ye red sea in Moises yt so in the apostles time, al ye children of ye christians,This figure Senecdoche is when eyther some whol thynge, is taken for parte of it, or part of it for the wholl, as ye shall herafter haue examples enowghe. were baptized in Christe. It is then Sinecdochically spokē of ye children of Israel: They went al through the sea, [Page] where as, after ye letter or literally, ye going thorough, is applyed onely vnto thē, yt were in health, & of age to go through their selfes. And al thei did eate one spiritual meate, where as thei only did eate, yt were spiritual, & yet neuerthelesse it is spoken of al them yt did eat. In lyke maner, yf paul in this place had added this word (All) & so had sayd: All they of ye house of Stephana haue geuen them selues to the ministerie & seruyce of ye saintes, yet by ye force & strength of this figur Sinecdoche we shuld vnderstand, yt there were infantes in ye familie and houshold, and yt they, which had beleued alredie, had geuen thē selues vnto ye Lord. For this is ye nature of this figure Synecdoche, yt when there is some wholl body, yt hath many partes, which in some thinge are lyke, & in some thinge vnlyke, yf any thing is spokē of ye wholl body, ye same may be vnderstanded of a singular part of it: Again, yf any thinge is spoken of any singular part, ye same may lyke wyse be vnderstand of ye wholl body. Learne ye this yt I say, by familyar examples. All wholl Iurye went forthe vnto hym: Here ye se, that al Iury is put only for them, yt went forth vnto hym, & yt ther be to maner of Synecdoche, ye one [Page] wherby yt which conteyneth any thyng, is taken for yt, which is conteyned, as the contrey of Iurye, for al ye inhabitours: & ye other, wherby, it is sayd yt al the inhabitours went forth, wher as parte only did go forth vnto him. Contrary wyse in Esaye.The daughters of Syon. iii. Because yt the daughteres of Syon, are waxen proude, there the daughters are parte of Syon. and yet they are taken for all the wholl people, and especyally for the prynces and rulers, whiche vngodly did rise agaynst the Lorde. Exo xvi. All the congregatyon dyd murmure against Moses. But how did ye children murmure, whyche knewe not what was done?The anabaptystes are ignoraunt in those thinges yt serue to expoūd the letter which thei stycke to alwayes. If they did not murmur & grudge al ye congregation did not murmur: For ye infants were of ye congregation. Nowe se, I praye yt, what pratinge smatteres ye are, ye thinge, yt ye trust most vpon, ye are most shamefully ignorant in. For ye stick to ye letter, but ye are ignoraūt in ye thing, yt doth most chyefely serue to vnderstand & expound ye letter. Tel I besech yt, Simō to whō is it sayd: Do not take ye name of thy Lorde god in vayne. Thou shalte not steale, & suche like?
To them yt were of age, which are ye people, & congregatiō of god.
Ergo, because yt these thinges can not be said vnto ye children, shall [Page] thei not be of ye church & people of God? God forbid: For Infantes were ye members of ye people of god, & fathers of nacions & peoples. Gene. xxv. It is plaine and manifeste then, yt what soeuer is spoken, to any wholl body or generalitie:Marke ye this. And in ye same generaletye there is some part, to whom yt which is spoken, is not applied, yet notwithstanding it is of ye body, yea, though certain thing do pertain nothing vnto it. Agayne, if any thyng be spoken to part of ye body, or of ye generality, whiche not withstandyng, doth not pertayne vnto ye parte: It perteyneth so to ye wholl body, yt it toucheth and admonisheth only those partes, yt maye be subiect vnto that, which is spoken. Thou art myne enheritaunce, O Israel. To whō is this spokē? Is not this spoken to ye wholl posteritye of Israel? But childrē do not vnderstand it. It foloweth not therfor, yt thei are not of ye enheritaunce or of ye peculier people. But though it is a parte, yt vnderstandeth not what is said, yet neuertheles it perteineth to ye whol body. In like maner, whē Christ saieth: Go ye, teach al nations baptizing them &c. The apostles did teche as many as were able to receaue ye doctrine, & baptized as many, as were able to receaue baptism,
Therfore I do thinke [Page] ye infantes ought not to be baptized, syth yt Christ saith so expressely: Go thorough out al ye wholl world, & prech the gospel, whosoeuer shall beleue & is baptized &c. Going forth, teache ye all nations.
This is the only refuge yt ye alwaies flee to, although Christ, had instituted baptism there, where as Ihon & the apostles did both prech & baptise long afore, when Christ was yet a lyue:The cōtention was emonge ye apostles touchyng ye preching of the gospel to the gentles. There was a contention emong ye apostles, whether ye gospell ought to be preached to ye gentyles, or not. Which contention did rise partlie of a false conclusion & coniecture, & parttely of a likelyhode. The false conclusion or coniectur was this: Christ is promised vnto vs, ergo he doth not perteyne or belonge to yt gentyles. Who is so without vnderstanding, which doth not perceaue, yt this can folow by no mean? The messias is promissed vnto vs yt be Iues, ergo, he doth nothing perteine to gentyles. For it maie be yt he is also promissed to ye gentyles, which thing ye scriptures do testefy in many places. In ye same self maner do ye gather your argumēt, but falsely: The wrytinges of ye apostles do testifye & witnesse, yt they did baptise them, yt had both harde & beleued ye word: ergo, thei did not [Page] baptise infantes. For these .ii. sentences mai both be true. The apostles did baptise them yt beleued: &: ye Apostles did baptise infants. Ye do make an indefinite proposityon, an exclusyue or negatiue proposition, yt is to saye, ye do make of a sentence yt affyrmeth, a sentence ye vtterly deneith. For both these are negatyues: No man ought to be baptized, onlesse he doth beleue, &: Infants ought not to be baptized. Ye were not hetherto able to proue anye of them by ye scriptures. The lykelyhode wherby ye apostles were moued to think, yt the gospel ought not to be preached, vnto ye gentyles, was thys: In their fyrst mission & sending, they were forbiden to go into yt waye of the gentyles: whyche word myght had caused them to contend & stryue, and that stoutely, yt Christe was mynded to kepe him selfe for ye hebrewes onely. Yf ye had now any such word, O lord god, so ye would triumphe agaynste vs. Marke thou therfore. These .ii. commundementes (Go ye & teche all nations baptizing them: &: Go through out all ye wholl world, & preach ye gospel) were a dispensation & an abolisshyng of this interdicte or prohibition (ye shal not go into ye waie of the gentilles.) For they had [Page] alredy before both taught and baptyzed, which thyng eyther ye do not marke, or elles ye do dissemble it craftely. He doth therfore open ye wholl prouynce of al the wholl world vnto thē ye were afore included & in a maner shut vp wt in ye borders of Iury. These places thē are set against ye fyrst,Antithesis is a figure where by one contrary is set agaynste the other. as twoe Anttytheses.
The place ye thou hast aleged before out of the secōd of ye Act, doth make greatli against ye. For it shuld folow, ye infantes had both solde & distributed theyr goods, & many other thinges myght be gathered thervpon.
Whē ye gather your argument after this maner: Yf ye infantes be numbered emong ye faythfull: It foloweth, ye they dyd sel and distribute theyr goodes, ye they dyd praye & breake bread, for they ye beleued, dyd so. Who doth not see, yt ye expounde all thynges after the letter, & yet ye doo not weyghe & ponder it? The infantes are of the familie & houshold of their parentes, which thynge we haue proued sufficienly before, whom sith yt ye had rather to comprehend vnder ye name of houlshold stuffe, then of the faithfull, ye do not only in this thing, most vngodly, but also most cruelly. It is not requieted in this figur Synecdoche, yt whatsoeuer [Page] is spokē or said of some whol body ye same be verified of al partes. For thē it is no Sinecdoche: When yt which is spoken, may be veryfied of al partes, it is no trope nor figur. But thē it is a true sinecdoche, whē eyther some part is takē for ye wholl body, or elles ye wholl bodi for part therof. As in Exo. xxiii. where it is writtē: That al ye male kynde shal apeare before the Lord thrise in ye year, here yu seest thys word (All) Tell me now, were all ye chyldren in ye cradelles caried frō al Palestina thrise in ye yeare to Hierusalem? If yu say est yt it was so, ergo ye infantes (according to thy reason) did .vii. dayes eate unleauened bread, did sowe fyeldes, did offer ye fyrst frutes. Which thyng syth yt they did not: it foloweth yt the male chyldren are not comprehended. If they were nott brought, then this is not true that all the male kind did thrise in ye year apear befor ye lorde: & though at ye first sight, it semeth to haue a shew, yt al ye male children are cō maunded to come to ye thre feastes, yet for al yt, thei are onely bound by ye lawe, that are of ye age, yt may heare & vnderstand ye doctryne, or offer ye fyrst frutes, or beare about branches of trees accordyng to the variety of ye feastes & fashion of ye rightes [Page] As it is writtē Deut .xxxi. of ye cōmyng to ye lecture or reading of ye lawe: it apeareth ye those childrē did come, which did alredi begyn to vnderstand, what was red.
What is this figure Sinecdoche, or from whens doth it come?
Synecdoche, is compounded of Syn,Wherof synecdoch commeth. ek, and Dechome. As yf a man should saye: Whē I do take an wholl bodye, I do vnderstande some thinge a parte, or by it selfe of those thinges, ye are together comprehended in ye same body. It maye in laten be called comprehensio, howbeit it agreeth not all together wt ye Greke word. But what do we stryue for ye word? Tell me now, haue these things yt we haue reasoned vpon he therto, satisfied the?
I haue nothing to say against so manifest scriptures. Nor it is not decent yt a man shuld repugne agaynst ye trueth. I would that thou shuldest take mine obiections although, thei did procede from an ignoraunce person, which yet coueteth to be taught and instructed.
¶Imprynted at Worceter by Ihon Oswen.
ANNO. DO. 1551.
☞ Cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solum.