BAPTISMALL REGENERATION of Elect Infants, Professed by the Church of England, according to the Scriptures, the Primitiue Church, the pre­sent Reformed Churches, and many particular Di­vines apart.

By COR: BVRGES, Dr of Divinity, and one of his Maiesties Chapl [...]ines in Ordinary.

TIT. 3.5. According to his mercy be s [...]ued vs, by the La­ver of regeneration, and renew [...]g of the Holy Ghost.
Aug. vt citatur à P. Lom [...]. 4. Sen. Dist. 4 A. Sacramenta in s [...]is electis efficiunt quod figura [...]t.

AT OXFORD, Printed by I. L. for Henry Curteyn. Ann. Dom. 1629.

TO THE RIGHT HONOVRABLE, FRANCIS, Lord RVSSELL Baron of Thornhaugh, Earle of Bedford, and Lieu-Tenant of Devonshire.


IT is a practise too commo [...] in this scribling age, vn­der pretence of respect, t [...] send worthlesse [...]emp­ty Pamphlets abroad in Gr [...]a [...] Mens Liveries. Which comes to passe, [Page] partly because children of the braine, how deformed soeuer, are held so pre­cious by the Parents, that they thinke themselues not sufficiently graced, vnlesse they procure some Noble person to be the Godfather; & partly because such slimy Comets, although they make a great blaze, cannot moue themselues, without the helpe of the Moone, or of some greater Starre to whirle them about the World, with more ease, and hope. This hath brought much dishonour to many an Honourable Mecaenas; it being like a rich Sumpter Cloath vpon a Colliers sack. Hence, wise men grow afraid and vnwilling to read their Names in Print; and the best deser­ving Authors are forced to the irk­some paines of a nauseous Apology, when they do (with praise) performe a Duty,

For my part, I dare not put my selfe into the rank of best Deseruers; nor, to boast any thing of my present performance. Howbeit, thus much I will take vpon mee to affirme, that mine ayme (next vnto common be­nefit) is Your service; and, that the Subject which I here present, is not vn­worthy of either the best mans la­bour,Est autem ea Quaestio cum difficilis & ple­na controversiae tum digna quae tractetur, & explicetur dili­genter, Whitak de sacram. controv. de Bapt quaest. 4. cap 5. or the Choycest Patrone.

The following Treatise endeavors to lay open and make good the effi­cacy of Sacred baptisme, in respect of Regeneration; in which the greatest ought more to reioice then in the greatest prerogatiues on Earth. This is that which (if they belong to the Covenant) makes them members of Christ, children of God, and heires of that kingdome which is aboue.

The whole, for manner of prose­cution, [Page] is Polemical:De Baptismo & mysterio san­ctae fidei, vnus­quis (que) Archiepis­copus suos suf­fraganeos dili­genter studiose (que) admoneat, qua­tenus per studi­um sacrae lecti­onis imbuti, & de mysterio san­ctae fidei, & de Sacramento baptismatis, v­nu ques (que) illorū, in eropria paro­chia perfectè studiose (que) presbyte­ras, & vniuer­sum populum docere, & in­struere non n [...]g­ligat Concil. Arelat. cap. 3. sub Car. Mag. A [...] 813. tom. 3 Con [...]il. Par. 1. Sect. 2. pag. 188. edit. Bi­niana, 1618. yet vsefull, and such for substance, as the Fathers in the Councell of Orleance, vnder CHARLES THE GREAT, thought fit to commend to the care of all Mi­nisters of every degree, as being neces­sary to bee diligently and fully expli­cated vnto the people. Therefore, I hope, I shal not be censured by judici­ous men to trouble the world with an impertinent discourse, which might, in that regard, disparage your Lord­ships Name, that it humbly craues leaue to beare.

And to say truth, to whom else should it repaire, either to doe its first homage, or to get vnder Covert-Ba­ron, but to your Honour, heretofore the Heyre, now the Master of that Ancient, Noble, and much honoured FAMILY, to which I was, and euer [Page] will be a faithfull & humble seruant; not, in expectation, but only in thank­full acknowledgment of what I haue already receaued, and of what other my fellow-seruants doe, in your Ho­nourable seruice, still enioy.

It cannot be vnknowne to such as knowe Mee, how much I stand obli­ged to your Noble Predecessors, the late Earle & Countesse of Bedford now with God. Nor can any man bee so ignorant as not to see cause why this publique Testimony of my continu­ed gratitude due to that HOVSE, should, by all Rights, bee laid at your Feet, in whom all the perfections and Excellencies of true Nobility doe so eminently meet, to make you highly honoured in the Eyes and Hearts of all that are able to value true Desert, as being one that not onely holds vp [Page] the Honour, but addes to the Glory of all your famous Progenitors, who haue deriued to You that Illustrious Dignity you now possesse.

The Good Lord who hath brought you hitherto, be with You, your Noble Lady, and your nume­rous, amiable, and much promising Progeny, in all things, alwaies. Hee grant you length of daies, increase of all true Honour, the riches of Grace, and the Crowne of Glory. So pray­eth still

Your Lordships most devoted Servant in Christ Iesus COR: BVRGES.

To the Readers

I Will not tediously pre­face touching either the occasion of this Treatise, which wee may finde in the first Chapter; or any par­ticular else that may be passed ouer with­out preiudice to You, or Me. I haue only these things wherof to advertize you, before yee en­ter on the booke it selfe.

1 I am certainly informed that some, hauing intelligence of my purpose of pubishing this worke, (which is tbe summe of sundry Lectures deliuered in mine owneS. Magnus London. Charge) spare not to giue out that this is not the same which I preached. I cannot but won­der at their confidence and vncharitablenesse, forasmuch as I am sure that, at the time of ma­king such their proclamation, they neither saw one line of my booke, nor knew what it containes. [Page] Only in generall, some of them haue heard it by Iudicious and eminent Divines, to be pronoun­ced Orthodox: which it seemes, doth not a little trouble them, because they haue divulged the contrary, of my Sermons. Howeuer they, by this, make it appeare before hand, that they are resolued not to permit this tract to goe without a scratcht face, so soone as their nailes can come at it. I am therfore constrained for defence thereof to avouch, that I can (if need require) make it good by aboue 500 Witnesses, that I haue beene so punctuall in setting downe, in this booke, the maine position which I first deliuered that I haue put it into the very same termes formerly vsed, without the least variation. I willingly confesse, that in the prosecution of the point, I haue here added some things by way of further illustration; and some also, for more am­ple confirmation; and pressed some obiections further then the streights of time would then ad­mit. And if for this I be to blame, let wise men iudge.

2 Whereas most of the obiections pordu­ced and answered in this treatise, haue beene [Page] first vrged vpon me in private conference, or sent me in writing by sundry friends, whose worth I reuerence, & whose loue I much affect, notwithstanding their dissent from me in this particular; I must craue leaue to professe and protest before him that knoweth all things, that my aime is not so much as in my secret thoughts, to despise or disparage any of them hereby: but only to set downe their arguments, that there­by occasion might be taken, more throughly to discusse this subiect. It is true that I haue sometimes made vse of the same phrases first vsed by my friends to me: yet I desire them to take notice that I haue only weighed their ar­guments impartially in the ballance of reason and truth, without the least glaunce vpon any of their persons. And if I could haue beene as­certained that none but they would euer haue lighted on the same obiections, I could as wil­lingly haue suppressed them; as J doe the names of the obiectors. But because what friends doe octiect in loue, others may also presse to the pre­iudice of this truth, I haue made bold to make those arguments thus publique, that their [Page] mouthes may be stopped, who else might happen to vrge the same with violence and passion enough, and thinke them vnanswerable, if there should no answeres be sent out to meet them. For their sakes therfore haue J thus presumed on my friends (whom I earnestly desire still to hold deare vnto me,) hoping they will not bethinke it to the publique good, nor hold themselues dis­paraged hereby, but rather reioice that they haue beene a meanes of a more exquisite debate of this point, wherby the truth may be better knowne.

3 I haue a request to all that shall vouch­safe to make vse of this booke, that they will be at the paines to read ouer the whole, or forbeare to censure it by any peece therof, that they may happen to cast their eye vpon. For, in a point of controversy, wherein method requires only ex­plication in one part, confirmation in another; refutation in another; and often references from one part of the discourse vnto other places there­of, for avoiding of confusion and tedious repeti­tions: it is impossible to receiue full satisfaction by reading any one peece only, how satisfactorie [Page] soeuer it may proue when it is considered alto­gether, and when the rest is pervsed and weigh­ed as well as that branch on which hasty and forward censurers doe sometimes passe a sharpe and heavy sentence. If you pervse the first part of this booke only, without the residue, yee may perhaps obiect divers things, and remaine vn­satisfied because ye goe not on to the latter part wherein all such obiections together with an­swers to them, doe present themselues in their proper rankes. On the contrary, if wee looke only on the latter part to see how the maine obiecti­ons be answered, yee may sometimes haply sticke (through your owne fault) at some of the an­sweres, because I take sundry things for graun­ted which ye may doubt of till ye haue read the former part, wherein the same things are proued at large, and to which, in my answers the rules of Method often compell mee to referre you. Farewell.

A Table of the severall Chap­ters of this Booke.

  • CAP. I. The Introduction declaring the Occasi­on and Necessity of this Treatise. p. 1.
  • CAP. II. The State of the Position. pag. 11
  • CAP. III. The Agreement of this point to the Publike doctrine of our church. p. 22
  • CAP. IV. The point proued by Authority of Scripture. pag. 70
  • CAP. V. The iudgment of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church in this point. pag. 117
  • CAP. VI. The Agreement of it to the confessi­ons of Reformed Churches. pag. 138
  • [Page]CAP. VII. The Iudgement of Forraine Divines in this point. p. 157. particularly of Cal­vine, Chameir, M. Bucer, [...]. Martyr, Musculus, Fran: Iunius, Zanchius, Danaeus, Gerhardus Vossius.
  • CAP. VIII. The Iudgment of some Divines of speciall note in our own Church. p. 185 Bishop Iewel, Doctor Whitaker, Dr Francis White now L. Bishop of Nor­witch. D Davenant now L. Bishop of Salisbury, D. Fulk. and D. Featly.
  • CAP. IX. Six Obiections against the maine Position answered. pag. 231
  • CAP. X. Six other Obiections against the same Position answered. p. 296

The principall Authors quoted in this Treatise as giuing testimony to the maine assertion handled herein.

  • Cyprianus.
  • Gregorius Nazien:
  • Athanasius.
  • Basilius Mag:
  • Chrysostomus.
  • Hieronymus.
  • Ambrosius.
  • Augustinus.
Confessions of Churches.
  • Heluetica.
  • Scoticana.
  • Belgica.
  • Gallicana & Genevensis.
  • Argentinensis.
  • Augustana.
  • Saxonica.
  • Wirtembergica.
  • Palatini.
Forraine Diuines.
  • Ioannes Calvinus.
  • Petrus Martyr.
  • Hieron: Zanchius.
  • Wolfgangus Musculus.
  • Fran. Iunius.
  • Aug: Marloratus.
  • Mart. Bucerus.
  • David Pareus.
  • Lamb. Daneus.
  • Daniel Chameir.
  • Ger. Vossius.
English Divines.
  • Bishop Iewel.
  • Dr Whitaker.
  • Dr Fulke.
  • Dr Dauenant. B. of Sarum.
  • Dr White. B. of Norwitch.
  • Dr Featly.
  • Dr Ames.
  • Mr Richard Hooker.
  • Mr Thomas Rogers.
  • Mr Thomas Taylor, D. of Divinity.
  • Mr. Aynsworth.


CHAP. 1. The introduction, declaring the occasion and necessity of this treatise.

THere is no Ordinance set vp by Christ in his Church, more vsefull and comfortable vnto a Christian, throughout the whole course of his Militant condition, then sacred Baptisme, the Laver of regeneration and of the renewing of the Holy [Page 2] Ghost. Nor is there any fountaine which the Arch-enimy of mankinde,Tit. 3.5. hath more en­deauoured to trouble, and corrupt with multiplicity of poisonous errors, then that which is set open to all the inhabitants of spiri­tuall Hierusalem, for sinne and for vncleannesse. Zach. 13.1.

For proofe hereof, I shall not need to thrust any mans head so much as Within the doore of that Augaean stable of Popish ab­surdities. we haue too many instances else where. Some aduance Baptisme too high: Others depresse it as much too low. There are, that hold it so absolutely necessary, as that none can be saued without it. On the contra­ry, there are, that in scorne call it Elemen­tish water. Others, that thinke it a thing in­different; and deny it to infantes, notwith­standing that to them belongs the kingdome of God: Mar. 10 14. Others that make it a bare signe, and badge to distinguish the members of the vi­sible Church from the rest of the World, some, in tearmes, yeeld it to be somewhat more; yet deny to it all present efficacy in, & vpon infants, ordinarily, in the act of ad­ministration. Some grant an efficacy, but [Page 3] such as is equally communicated to all in­fantes that are outwardly baptized. Some ad­mit the efficacy of it vnto remission of sinne in Infants elect: but, any present worke of the spirit, vnto Regeneration in them, they either flatly deny, or refuse to acknowledge. Against all these errors, and particularly a­gainst the last, the Church of England hath iustly opposed her selfe, in her Publique Doctrine, for the defence whereof haue I ta­ken vpon me this difficult province. The occasion this.

In the course of my ministry, in mine own cure, I was latelyIn Hilary Terme. 1627. cast vpon this point: viz: That all elect infants, doe, ordinarily, in Bap­tisme receiue the spirit of Christ, to seaze vpon them for Christ, and to be in them as the roote and first principle of regeneration, and future newnesse of life Vid. Hooker. lib. 5. Sect. 60. This I speake (as then I expressed my selfe,) with reference only vnto such Infants as dye not in infancy, but l [...]ue to yeares of discretion, and then come to be effectually called, and actually conuerted by the or­dinary meanes of the word applied by the same spirit vnto them, when and how hee [Page 4] pleaseth. As for the rest of the elect who dye infants, I will not deny a further worke, sometimes in, sometimes before baptisme, to fit them for heauen.

For this, am I peremptorily censured and condemned by many, as guilty not only of Arminianisme, but euen of direct Popery, and of teaching a Doctrine of diuells. To make good what they haue done, they lay to my charge sundry passages, as branches of my position, which, not only in stating the question, but also in the prosecution of it, I often and often disclaimed as errors, in ex­presse termes. This they know well enough; & it hath bin made manifest to some of their faces by others also. Howbeit, they owing me a spite for some thing else, (as by the ef­fect appeares) take no notice of their wilfull mistakes. That which they haue once re­ported, they are resolued to maintaine; there­fore they cease not to pursue me with cla­mors, slanders, and revilings without end or measure. No protestations of mine owne, either publique or priuate, no Apologies made by my friends, are able to shelter mee [Page 5] from their virulent dartes which daily fly in my face where euer I become.

This alone were cause sufficient of publi­shing this Treatise, that I may purge my selfe of these odious crimes so vniustly im­puted. He that being a Minister is not care­full to vphold his necessary reputation a­mong the people of God, as well as to keepe a good conscience towards God, is both cruell to himselfe,Nobis enim ne­cessari est vita nostra, aliis fa­ma nostra. Aug. De Bono Vi­duit. Mihi sufficit conscientia mea, vobis ne­cessaria est fa­ma mea Jdem. ad Frat. tu Erem. and iniurious to his Ma­ster. His Ministry must needs bee of lesse esteeme, if not despised out-right, who shall suffer himselfe to bee proclaimed guilty of Error, and Heresie; and sees his Good Name hang'd vp in chaines by the giddy multi­tude, even before his owne doores, and hee not endeauour, in a meet & temperate man­ner, to declare himselfe innocent, when he is well able to plead, not guilty, to the indict­ment.

If any man shall say; Jt is a mans honour to passe by offences, and therefore it had beene farre better to haue endured a while, with patience, the tongues of intemperate men, then thus to haue spred the cause before the [Page 6] whole world: this course being likely more to exasperate, rather then to satisfie or molli­fie such as haue appeared in opposition a­gainst me. To such a person mine answere is this. If the wrong had not trenched so much vpon the credit of my Ministry (which ought to bee as deare vnto me, as any mans is to him;) or if I had beene handled thus in priuate onely, by priuate men, I could wil­lingly haue borne all that reproach and in­famy that is laid vpon me, without complai­ning; but, not without bewailing, with a bleeding heart, the strange pride and inso­lency of such spirits as dare thus wilfully to traduce any Minister of Christ.

That which hath imbarked mee in this publique action is of more importance then the maintaining of mine owne innocency against the murmur of priuate persons: yea there are many weighty causes concurring to put vpon mee a necessity of doing some­thing in this kinde. If any shall take occasion hence to be more exasperated, it shall be on­ly his owne fault: for I hope I shall so man­age this worke, that it shall evidently ap­peare [Page 7] to all Godly, Iudicious, temperate men, that I no where giue any cause of of­fence vnto any peaceable Christian; but en­deauour only, in a modest and humble ma­ner, to cleare and maintaine a Truth, and to giue all satisfaction that I may, vnto such as loue Truth better then Victory.

Breifly, the Causes cheifly enducing mee to send these Papers vnto the Presse, are these Three.

1 The iust Defence of the publique doctrine of our Church, which hath beene by some, vpon this occasion, publiquely op­posed so farre as they durst. For, how freely sundry Ministers doe cry downe this Posi­tion (and that publiquely too) notwithstan­ding that this truth is so clearely consonant to the Leiturgy and Publique Catechisme of the Church in which wee liue, is too well knowne. Through my sides therefore haue they gored and wounded our common Mother, who suffers in the cause, much more then my selfe, or then any Particular either doth, or can.

2 I finde that sundry sober and well [Page 8] affected Christians are often puzled, and at a losse in this particular, for want of infor­mation; yea in danger to bee drawne vna­wares into Schisme;2. Sam. 15.11. not vnlike those 200 men that followed Absolon, in the simplicity of their hearts, not knowing any thing of his conspi­racy. For their sakes therefore it is very re­quisite that this point should be throughly searched into, and made publique. This is not a quarrell about Goats haire; Scomma. nor so poore a businesse as should deserue (in a Pul­pit) to bee compared to the action of a Fa­mous Generall that levies a strong Army, drawes them out into the field, sets them in order or battaile, and raiseth a great expecta­tion of some honourable exploit, which in conclusion proues to bee no other then the breaking of an Egge-shell That Great Athanasius was of another o­pinion, when he placed this very question (how one may knowe whether be receaued the spirit in Baptis­me?) amongst those which he termeth [...] Questions ne­cessary & vse­ful [...] for all Christians to bee ac­quainted with. In titulo Iabri Quaest ad An­tio h. Princ. tom 2.

3 Nor was there euer such need of opening this truth vnto the people, as now: because, neuer, since the heresies of the Sa­cramentarians and Anabaptists were hissed out of the Church of Christ, were men so vio­lent against it, and so impatient of contradi­ction. They cry out, What vse, what vse of such [Page 9] a Doctrine? Whether doth it tend? Mee thinkes they should be able to answere themselues, without help. Is it nothing vnto a Christian, in time of a violent temptation, when hee hath lost all sight of his Saviour, to be assu­red that even in his Baptisme hee receiued the Holy Ghost as an anointing that shall abide with him for ever? Is the consolation of God a small matter vnto a Christian Parent, that in obedience to Christ, and in faith in his pro­mises, hath presented his child to the sacred LaverQuam enim suaue piis ani­mis, non verbo tantum, sed ocu­lari etiam spec­taculo certiores fieri tantum se gratiae apud Pa­trem caelestem obtinere, vt po­steritas sua illi curae sit? Hic enim videre est vt providentis­simi erga nos patris familias personam susci­pit, qui ne post mort [...]m quidem nostram, solici­tudinem nostri deponit quin li­beris nostris con­sulat ac prospi­ciat. Calvin. In­stit. l 4. cap. 16. Sect. vlt., where the Holy Ghost hath seazed vpon him for Christ, so as, whether himselfe liue or die, he may conceiue good hope that Christ hath taken the charge of his child, & will prouide all things needfull for it, and giue it both grace and glory? What a comfort (saith a learned writerM. T. Taylor. vpō Tit. 3.5. making it one Vse of this very Doctrine) is it for a fa­ther to see his child washed with the bloud of Iesus Christ? Clensed from sinne? Set into the visible Church, yea, into the Body of Christ, in the right vse of this Sacrament? Wherein a Parent ought more to reioyce, then if hee could make it heyre of the world.

All these considered, I appeale to any Vnderstanding Man, whether I haue not cause to publish my Labours vpon this sub­iect, out of duty that I owe to the Church of Christ; and whether (considering how lit­tle is done in this kinde) it were not worth the best search, and greatest labour of the most able Diuines in the kingdome,I am sure D. Whitaker was of this minde. Tract. de Sa­cram. controu: de Bapt: quaest. 4. c. 5. in prin­cipio. Where speaking of the efficacy of Baptisme in In­fants: he hath these words. Est autem ea quaestio cum dif­ficilis & plena controversiae, tum digna quae tractetur, & explicetur dili­genter. This is a question that is both difficult & full of controver­sie, and such also as is wor­thy to be hād­led and care­fully opened. to cleare this point to the full, for the edificati­on and comfort of pious and peaceable Christians †.

What I haue performed herein, I humbly offer to bee freely censured by the more Iu­dicious who, truly and indeed, are both able and willing to maintaine the publique Do­ctrine of this Church already established. I will not take vpon me to tie all men, or any man, to my private opinions. I knowe that the Learned may without blame, dissent from each other in many things, so long as they obtrude them not vpon others, nor trouble the peace of the Church thereabout. Howbeit if this, of mine, be a private opini­on, I renounce it, and craue pardon of the whole Church of God for troubling the [Page 11] world with such a toy. But, if it appeare, to impartiall Iudges able to weigh it in the bal­lance of the Sanctuary, to be a truth, & such a truth as the whole Church of England is as much engaged in, as my selfe; I trust that then, it shall finde acceptance with all sober men; and, by Gods blessing, proue profita­ble to all, that in humility and loue, desire & endeavour to imbrace the truth. As for o­thers, I shall passe them by with pitty, and prayer that they may at length come againe to themselues.

CAP. 2. The State of the Position.

NOt to trouble the Reader with any discourse touching the Name, or Definition of Baptisme; nor yet with the efficacy of Baptisme touching Re­mission of sinne, which I willingly admit: let vs now fall vpon the state of the Position tou­ching the efficacy of this Ordinance, vpon the Elect, vnto Regeneration. I shall haue oc­casion to declare my selfe in the other par­ticulars, [Page 12] as I passe along.

There is no terme in our Position need­ing explication vnlesse Two, the Spirit, and Regeneration. By Spirit, I meane not onely grace wrought by the Spirit; but the Holy Ghost dwelling in every true Christian and working Grace. Howbeit I consider this Holy Ghost, not essentially, not personally as the third Person in Trinity; but, operatiuely as the Spirit of Christ communicated from him to all his members, to vnite them vnto himselfe, and to bee in them the first princi­ple, and as it were the soule of spirituall life. It is the Spirit himselfe, and not his Graces that first knits vs to Christ.1. Cor. 12.13 Graces are effects of the vnion, not the bond it selfe. Nor can some of those things which are attribu­ted to the Spirit dwelling in a Christian, possibly be applied to any created Gift or grace infused, but only to the Holy Ghost himselfe: as for example, our Saviours spea­king of that Comforter which he would, after his departure, send to his Disciples to dwell in them, saith that, when hee is come hee will re­proue the world of sinne, of righteousnesse, and of [Page 13] iudgement, Ioh▪ 16.8. which must needs be the act of a person, not of a created inanimate gift, and in ver. 13. whatsoeuer he shall heare, that shall he speake, and hee will shew you things to come, He shall glorify me, for he shall receiue of mine, and shall shew it vnto you, &c. In breife no place of Scripture can be produced, wherein [...]. The HOLY GHOST is put only for grace wrought or bestowed, and not for the Author of it. I am not ignorant that some moderne wri­ters doe holde otherwise: but sauing their iudgements, I cannot but follow the Fa­thers, & soundest schoolemen, who sound­ly maintaine this truth. I will not trouble the reader with heapes of AuthorsOf this see more in Zanth. de Nat. Dei. lib. 2. cap. 6. Quaest. 2. & 3. As also in my learned and much honou­red friend Mr. I. Downham. Christ-warf: part. 4. lib. 1. cap. 3. Choquet Lillan. De Gra. Sanctific. Tom, 1. lib. 1. disp. 1. ca. 4.. I only pray the learned to consider well, whether the admitting of this exposition of such texts of Holy writ as mention the dwelling of the Holy Ghost in a Christian, viz. that by the HOLY GHOST is meant only Grace wrought or working, doth not (vnawares) giue some countenance to the heresy of the Pneumatomachists. Sure I am S. Augustine Cont. Serm. Arrianorum, cap. 20. & cap. 29. Cont. maxim. lib. 1. & lib. 2. cap 11. & lib. 3. cap. 21. & alibi passim. was wont to proue the Godhead of the holy [Page 14] Ghost by this very argument, that wee are said to be his Temples; and he, to dwell in vs.

That other of regeneration, I take to be all one with spirituall life, taken in the largest sense; which life, according to the Scrip­tures, I distinguish into Initiall and Actuall. For as in the naturall, sometimes the soule which is vsually called the forme by which, and sometimes the [...] esse the being it selfe of such or such a creature animated by his soule, is put for life; as that learned Zanchius well obseruethDe Nat. Dei. lib. 2 cap. 5. quest. 1.: so is it in the Spirituall life whereof we are now to treat. And vpon this foundation it is that wee rightly build our present distinction, which hath cleare foot­ting also in the sacred Volumes of Eternall Truth.

1 Initiall (which we may also terme Semi­nall or Potentiall life, I call that which consisteth in participatiō of the spirit of Christ, as the forme of this spirituall life: the spirit being the first principle of Regeneration, by whom the first seede and foundation thereof is laid in a Christian. And this is life as it were [Page 15] in the roote, like vnto the first princi­ples of reason laid vp in the soule rati­onall, before it haue actually enabled the body to moue, and act rationally. And of this, saith acute Iunius De Paedobapt. the [...]: 7., our Sa­viour spake in John. 3. more clearely to our purpose is that of the Apostle, Rom: 8.10. The spirit is life, because of righteousnesse. where the spirit which is the cause of life, is put for life it selfe: and by the spirit is meant; not the rea­sonable soule, but the Holy Ghost; if Caluin, (and before him Chrysostome and Ambrose, and after him Peter Martir) hit right in the exposition of itGal. in loc. Vocabulo spiri­tus ne animam nostram intelli­gas, sed regene­rationis spiri­tum quem vi­tam appellat Paulus., where­of for my part (after serious pensitati­on, of all that any haue said to carry it to another sense) I make no que­stion.

2 Actuall, I call that, which consisteth properly in the very spirituall being it selfe actually produced in a Christian, by the spirit bringing him forth a new man in Christ, in the ordinary course of Regeneration of such as liue [Page 16] to yeares, whereby he is enabled actually to beleeue repent, &c. Rom. 6.11. Likewise ye, reckon your selues to be dead indeed vnto sinne: but aliue vnto God through Iesus Christ our Lord. So Galath. 2.20. and elsewhere.

The severall members of this distin­ction, I further illustrated, thus.

The former of these is as the transplanta­tion of a tree into a new soile; the later, as drawing the fatnesse of the soile into the tree; causing it to shoot vp, spring, blossome, and beare fruit. The former, saith Iunius, ibid. Hac re­generantur in­fantes electi, cum Christo in­seruntur, & huius obsigna­tio sit iis dum baptizantur. is as the transplanting of a man out of the first Adam, into the second; the later, as his draw­ing vertue from him, and liuing thereby. The former is as the stretching of Elisha vpon the dead child, the first time, whereby the flesh of the child waxed warme, but as yet it mo­ved not2. King. 4.34.; the later is as his stretching himselfe vpon it the second time, which caused it to neese seuen times and to open his eyes Ver. 35.. The former of these is like vnto the first incubation or resting of the spirit vpon the face of the waters, while the earth was yet without forme, and voide, Gen: 1.2. [Page 17] the later, as the production of each particu­lar creature, afterwards in his kinde, time, and order, appointed of God, when it plea­sed him to speake the word. The Spirit rested vpon the waters from the beginning; yet the creatures were not presently produced by the spirit: they came forth in their due time, and place, when God gaue his Fiat and not before.

This Distinction laid as a ground, will of it selfe beare vs out in this conclusion.

There may be euen in order of time a communi­cating of the spirit of grace, as a principle of future newnesse of life, before any ordi­nary actuall infusion of actuall or habituall graces, whereby a man, on his part, actual­ly makes declaration thereof, by a thorough change of his heart and life, as a new man in Christ.

This being granted, I adde further, touching the ordinary meanes of manifest conferring on vs and confirming to vs the Spirit of grace, a second Conclusion, which is this.

The first ordinary and certaine meanes where­by [Page 18] we, that descend of Christian Parents, haue any initiall Regeneration begun in vs, and doe ordinarily, receiue and come to be ascertained of the spirit of Christ, for this end, that he may produce in vs future actu­all spirituall life, is the first ordinance of Christ that wee partake of: to wit Bap­tisme.

This is our first certaine and manifest ini­tiation into Christ, (Rom. 6.) and receiuing of the Holy Ghost, in the ordinary way of di­vine dispensation; by meanes (Act: 2.38,) and our ingrafting into the body of Christ. 1. Cor. 12.13. So also saith the 27 Article of our Church. This Article. is vrged and opened in the next cap. This is the Blocke at which so many haue stumbled. This is the Arminianisme, Po­pery, and Doctrine of Deuills, that I am char­ged with▪ This therefore is the Point I am now to Labour in, after I shall haue stated it somewhat more distinctly and fully: for the effecting whereof, I must first more punctually set downe.

  • 1 How farre, all that are not Papists, Lutherans or Arminians doe agree with me herein.
  • [Page 19]2 what be the differences betweene mee and some others, that though they hold neither with Papist, nor Arminian doe yet dissent from me.

The things on all hands agreed vpon are these.

  • 1 That some Infantes may & doe receiue the spirit to vnite them vnto Christ, be­fore Baptisme. The question here is on­ly of the first certaine reception of it, by externall ordinary meanes applied.
  • 2 That by Baptisme is vnderstood the whole Ordinance, consisting of the in­ward grace as well as of the outward signe
  • 3 That there is as much efficacy in Bap­tisme vnto Remission of sinne, as vnto Re­generation; although we are now to treat only of the latter.
  • 4 That the spirit is not giuen to all, but to the Elect only.
  • 5 That the outward element hath not in it any physicall force, either by vertue of the consecration, institution, or administrati­on, to conferre the spirit to any at all: but the spirit is communicated immedi­atly [Page 20] from Christ himselfe, when the Sa­crament is administred, if then it be at all conferred.
  • 6 That God both may and doth euen in Baptisme, bestow the spirit vpon some infants that liue and come to yeares, as well as vpon other some that dye in in­fancy.

The differences then, are only two; which will be most breefely discerned in these 2 Quaere's.

  • 1 whether the communication of the spirit vnto infants, from Christ himselfe, for their first apparent engrafting into his body, and to be in them as the first seede & principle of Regeneration, in the ordinary course of regenerating such, as after Baptisme, doe liue to yeares of discretion, be ordinarily, in the baptisme of the Elect?
  • 2 whether the former, being graunted, it doth also follow, that All the Elect doe ordinarily, receiue the spirit in baptisme; so that such as receiue him before, or af­ter, and not in Baptisme, are to be held [Page 21] to receiue the spirit in an extraordinary, and not in the ordinary course of divine dispensation thereof?

I hold the Affirmatiue in both these Que­stions▪ and determine them thus: viz: ‘It It most agreeable to the Jnstitution of Christ, that All Elect Infants that are baptized,The maine point fully stated. (vnlesse in some extraordinary cases) doe, ordinarily, receiue, from Christ, the Spirit in Baptisme, for their first solemne initiation into Christ, and for their future actuall re­novation, in Gods good time, if they liue to yeares of discretion, and enioy the other or­dinary meanes of Grace appointed of God to this end.’

This Position I am now to make good to be agreeable to the Doctrine.

  • 1 Of the Church of England: by which it appeares to be no priuate fancy.
  • 2 Of the Holy Scriptures, vpon which this Doctrine of our Church is founded.
  • 3 Of the Ancient Fathers of best note in the truly Primitiue church.
  • 4 Of the Reformed churches beyond the Sea; and particularly of Geneva.
  • [Page 22]5 Of the most famous and eminent Di­vines both at home and abroad; & par­ticularly of calvine, and Dr Whitaker, be­side sundry others.

Lastly, I will adde Answers to all the Ob­iections, that euer I could heare of, against this Assertion.

CAP. 3. This agrees to the Publique Doctrine of our Church.

BEfore I goe further, I must aduer­tise the Reader of one thing con­stantly to be obserued throughout this Treatise; and it is this. Wheresoeuer I shall for brevities sake, only say thus much, that the Elect doe receiue the spirit in Baptisme; my purpose is to haue it vnderstood with all those conditions and limitations before expressed, in the stating of the Point. So that it must alwaies bee thus interpreted. viz: That it is most agreeable to the Jnstitution of Christ, that All Elect Jnfants that are baptised (vnlesse in some extraordinary cases) doe, ordinari­ly, [Page 23] receiue, from Christ, the Spirit, in Baptisme, for their first solemne initiation into Christ; and for their future actuall renovation, in Gods good time, if they liue to yeares of discretion, and enioy the other ordinary meanes of Grace appointed of God to this end. This premized, I may more securely goe on with my worke. Nor shall any man that findes oftentimes, in that which followes, a more compendious ex­pression of this Position, haue cause to com­plaine, that I deale ambiguously and sophistically; because my resolution is to be alwaies tryed by this Conclusion so largely deliuered, and so bounded as in the former Chapter you may behold it.

The first part of my taske is, to make it good, that this assertion is agreeable to the pub­lique, and established Doctrine of the Church of England. And this I propound in the first place; not as if I meant to tye any mans faith to beleeue the point, meerely because the Church of England saith it. For She will not as­sume so much Authority ouer any mans faith; hauing declared her selfe expresly in the 21 Article of her Doctrine, that euen Ge­nerall [Page 24] Councells (which represent the whole Church of Christ on earth) in things ordeined by them as necessary to salvation, haue neither strength nor authority, vnlesse it may bee declared that they be taken out of holy Scripture. I vrge not then the Doctrine of our Church to proue the point by it; as some haue giuen out: but only to shew the agreement that it hath with our Publique Doctrine, that no man might proclaime it to bee a peece either of Popery, or Arminianisme; nor yet a priuate conceit of mine owne dissonant from the Churches of Christ: but that it is a branch of that truth to which all the Ministers of our Church either haue subscribed, or ought so to doe; and so, are as deeply enga­ged in the defence of it, as my selfe whom some of them (either ignorant or carelesse of what they subscribed to) doe now so much oppose.

That this accordeth to the Doctrine of our Church, may appeare in one or two plaine Syllogismes; the first whereof shall be this.

Syllogis. 1.
  • Maior. That which the Church in the Publique Leiturgie thereof, exhorteth, & [Page 25] requireth vs to pray for, when any In­fant presumed to be truly and indeed within the couenant of Grace, is brought to baptisme; and, that which it also teacheth vs to pronounce con­cerning that and euery such infant, so soone as he is baptised, must needs bee granted to bee agreeable to the Pub­lique Doctrine of our Church touching all elect Infants that are baptised, or­dinarily.
  • Minor. But the Publique Leiturgie of our Church exhorteth and requireth vs, at the baptizing of euery infant presu­med to haue interest in the Couenant of Grace, as being within Gods Ele­ction
    That our Leiturgy hath an eye to the co­venant of Grace; and presumes of any particular infant, that vnto him the kingdome of Heaven doth in­deed belong; and therevpō pro­nounceth the child, after baptisme is administred, to be regene­rate, may ap­peare most e­vidently by this: viz: That it leadeth vs to that which our Saviour spake in the Gospell touching those infants that were brought vnto him, & blessed by him vpon this ground, that theirs is the kingdome of heaven. Not that all chil­dren haue right to the kingdome; for Esau had none. Rom. 9. Yet because men cannot see Gods secret decree, they are not to make doubt of any particular, but knowing that some infants are elected, and haue right to the Kingdome, vpon this ground they know for certaine that this Child is regenerate by the Spirit, if he be elected, and if to him doe belong the Kingdome of God. And therefore our Church in charity pronounceth so much of every Child considered individually and apart, because in charity shee presu­meth that vnto that very particular belongs the Kingdome of God. For vpon this ground is the following exhortation and assurance built, which vpon this considerati­on, saith Doubt yee not therefore but earnestly beleeue that hee will likewise favourably receiue these present Jnf [...]nts, that he will embrace them with the armes of his mercy, that he will giue vn­to them the blessing of eternall life, and make them partakers of his everlasting kingdome.
    , to pray for the Spirit of Regene­ration [Page 26] to bee giuen vnto him: and, so soone as hee is baptised, to conclude him to be regenerated with the Holy Spi­rit; and accordingly to giue thankes for this, in Prayer, vnto God.
  • Conclus: Therefore it is agreeable to the Publique and established doctrine of the Church of England, that all elect Jnfants doe, ordinarily, receaue the spirit of Christ, in Baptisme, in such man­ner and sense as is before expressed.

The Maior Proposition cannot be doub­ted of▪ vnlesse we shall say that, the Doctrine and Leiturgie of our Church are contrary to one another: which no man, wel in his wits, will affirme, and yet subscribe to both.

The Minor, or, as some tearme it, the As­sumption, is the only Proposition, then, that must be proued. I pray you therefore, with patience, see it done, in the severall branches of it. There are in it these two particulars.

  • 1 The Church, in her Leiturgie requireth vs to pray for the spirit of Christ to be communica­ted to every particular infant brought to bap­tisme, presuming of the particular that he [Page 27] is within the election of Grace.
  • 2 She concludeth him to be regenerate so soone as he is baptised: that is, to haue receiued the Spirit of regeneration, as the first principle thereof.

1. For the former, let the Leiturgie it selfe be produced, wherein the Church enioyneth.

  • 1 The Minister alone thus to bespeake the Congregation, when any children are presented at the Font; I beseech you to call vpon God the Father through our Lord Iesus Christ, that of his bounteous mercy, hee will grant to these children that thing which by nature they cannot haue, that they may be bap­tised with water and the HOLY GHOST. The Church enioyneth further.
  • 2 Both Minister and People, to pray; Wee beseech thee for thine infinite mercies, that thou wilt mercifully looke vpon these chil­dren; sanctifie them and wash them with the HOLY GHOST. Againe, in the se­cond Prayer; We call vpon thee for these in­fants, that they comming to thy Holy Bap­tisme, may receiue remission of their sinnes by SPIRITVALL regeneration: Yet a­gaine, [Page 28] in the Third Prayer; Giue THY HOLY SPIRIT to these infants, that they may bee borne againe, and bee made heyres of everlasting salvation.

The purpose of the Church, then, is to teach vs, that wee should expect the Spirit of Christ to be communicated in Baptisme, to elect infants: or else it must be concluded that the Church meant to mocke vs, by putting vs to pray for that which shee doth not be­leeue we shall receaue.

If any shall say; the Church teacheth vs to pray, indeed, for the Regeneration of a child, when hee is baptised; but not for his present regeneration? I answere: yes, for his present Regeneration; not actuall, ordinarily, such as that he after attaines vnto, in his ef­fectuall calling by the Word; yet Initiall, and Potentiall, (as was before distinguished:) as shall appeare in the proofe of the second branch of the Assumption, which is this: viz:

2 The Church concludeth, in her Leiturgie, that the child is initially regenerate, in his Bap­tisme. For

  • [Page 29]1 It pronounceth him to be regenerate; en­ioyning the Minister thus to speake vn­to the people: seeing now, D. B. that these children be regenerate, and grafted into the Body of Christs congregation, let vs giue thankes vnto God for these benefits, &c. And least any should shift this off by saying they are Sacramentally regenerated, but not spiritually by any actuall reception of the spirit at that time; the Solemne Thanksgiuing following is added to cut the throat of this shiftlesse glosse. Let vs examine it in the next place.
  • 2 It teacheth vs all thus to ioyne in Thanksgiuing vnto God: Wee yeeld thee hearty thankes; most mercifull Father, that it hath pleased thee to regenerate this infant (how? and with what?) with thy HO­LY SPIRIT, to receiue him for thine owne child by Adoption. what words can more fully manifest the Churches in­tention to teach vs that all infants truly belonging to the couenant of grace, doe ordina­rily receiue the spirit in Baptisme: not as a thing which none of them had before [Page 30] but as that of which there was no cer­tainty vnto vs, nor confirmation vnto them before, in the ordinary course of diuine Dispensation of the Spirit, by meanes?

If the matter be not yet cleare enough to such as shut their eyes against it. Let them further attend to what the Church requir­eth vs that are Ministers to pronounce touching a child baptized, rightly, in pri­vate:In the forme of Priuate Baptisme. I certify you that in this case, all is well done, and according to due order, concerning the baptizing of this child, who being borne in Origi­nall sinne, and in the wrath of God, is now, by the Lauer of Regeneration in baptisme, receiued into the number of the CHILDREN OF GOD, AND HEIRES OF EVERLASTING LIFE: for our Lord doth not deny his grace and mercy vnto such infants, but most louingly calls them to him, as the Holy Gospell doth witnesse vnto our comfort, on this wise; At a certaine time they brought Children to Christ, &c. Picke any other sense then I haue done out of the Leiturgy, especially when it shall be further cleared by the Doctrine of the Church; & eris mihi magnus Apollo.

But some will be readdy to stop me here with sundry Obiections, which must be an­swered, 3 Obiections. before my way will be cleare to goe forward.

Obiect: 1 1 Some will be apt to say: The Church perhaps teacheth vs thus to pray, and iudge of infants baptized; but doth not well in so doing; and that if this be the meaning of our Booke of common prayer, we ought not to ioyne in such a prayer?

To this I answere, that it is indeed very true that some haue beene so bold as to put the ly vpon that which the Minister pro­nounceth touching regeneration of the in­fant baptized; saying, in plaine termes, That is a ly. Bvt sauing their fowle mouthes, I trust this shall appeare euen out of the Scrip­tures themselues, in our next chapter, to be the truth; and that Gods owne infallible truth will beare vs out in it. I may not here preuent my selfe. Howbeit, something (to stay the stomacks of such as quarrell our Church for this point; or me, for misinter­preting our Church:) let me alleadge out of a good Author (whom both they and I doe [Page 32] reuerence) and shew his iudgement in the point.Mr Tho. Tailor. The person I meane, is, the learned & industrious author of the English Comen­tarie vpon S. Paules Epistle to Titus. Hee in writing vpon the 3 cap. and ver. 5. of that E­pistle, is so expressely engaged in this point, that all the wit of man cannot fetch him off, without tergiuersation: which is the iudge­ment of all men that euer I yet met with, who haue throughly read and considered both the place and ALL THAT EITHER GOES BEFORE OR FOLLOWES AFTER in that Author, to that purpose. Nor am I a­fraid to referre my selfe to be iudged by the whole World, whether I haue abused him or not: promising that if it appeare to able and impartiall iudges, that in what I haue allea­ged out of him, I haue wronged him, I will aske him forgiuenesse vpon my knees; as publique as euer I made the fault·

That Author hauing treated of the effi­cacy of Baptisme, and proued that in men of yeares, faith is required to receiue the grace offered therein, descends to a Question, which in the margent of Pag. 642. he thus [Page 33] giues the Summe of; How baptisme is effectu­all to infants. His words in explication hereof are these.

Quest. But howsoeuer in men of yeares faith is required vnto Baptisme, yet we are most to respect it as administred vnto children, in whom we cannot expect faith, and therefore vnto them either faith is not requisite, or by the former answere their Baptisme is vn­profitable. Answ. This well is deepe, and we want wherewith to draw certainty of resolution: but will assay in some propositi­ons to deliuer summarily that which may be extracted out of the SCRIPTVRES & EXPOSITORS,
Marke Mr Tailor could find, Scriptures and, Expositors too, for thi [...] Position that he here deli­uers.
as MOST Probable for the vnfolding of this difficulty. To which purpose let vs first DISTINGVISH of INFANTS; of whom some be elected, and some belong not to the electiō of grace. These latter receiue only the outward element, and are not inwardly washed: THE FORMER receiue, in the right vse of the Sacrament, the INWARD GRACE: not that hereby we tythe Maiesty of God to any time or meanes, whose spirit bloweth when & where [Page 34] he listeth; on some before baptisme, who are sanctified from the womb; on some after: but because the LORD DELIGHTETH TO PRESENT HIMSELFE GRATI­OVS IN HIS OWNE ORDINANCE; we may conceiue that in the right vse of this Sacrament, HE ORDINARILY AC­COMPANIETH IT WITH HIS GRACE: HERE, according to his PRO­MISE, we may expect it, and HERE we MAY and OVGHT send out the prayer of FAITH for it.

These are his words. Doe they need any interpreter? Doe they require any labour to draw them home to my present point, viz. that it is most agreeable to the institution of Christ, that all elect infants doe, ORDINARILY, receiue the spirit in baptisme: especially consi­dering that this Author in the end of the 639 page, had laid out this for a Doctrine raised out of Tit. 3 5. that, God in baptisme not only offereth and signifieth, but truly exhibiteth grace, whereby our sinnes are washed and wee re­newed by the HOLY GHOST; and in expli­cation of this Doctrine, hee clearely deliuer­eth [Page 35] his minde (in the words before quoted) how farre forth this Doctrine concerneth INFANTS, and how farre forth it may be granted as true euen of them also. I am a­fraid I shall abuse the Iudicious Readers Pa­tience to stay him so long, as to shew how all that I collect out of this Author (who lately professed vnto me, viva voce, that he will stand to what soeuer he hath written, which makes me the bolder with him;) comes full vp to my purpose. Howbeit be­cause I am published to the world for a cor­rupter of this mans writings in this parti­cular; and, by that, is my sincerity iudged in the allegation of all others that I make vse of in this Treatise, I must intreat the intelli­gent reader, for a little while to Imagine himselfe to be some puny that knowes not how to construe plaine English; and to be contented to learne of me that, which a boy of 14 yeares old would deserue to be whipt for, if he could not vnderstand without teaching.

It is said I haue corrupted my Author. In what? in falsifying his words; or wrest­ing [Page 36] the sense? The sense. How so? He neuer meant that elect infants DOE receiue the in­ward grace, but only that they May doe it? No? doth he not say that God ordinarily accompa­nieth it with his grace? and is not this all one with this specch; GOD DOTH ordinarily ac­company it with his grace? His meaning is mistakē: he doth not say it is done; But, WE MAY CON­CEIVE it is done? Good: But vpon what ground are we to conceive so? Is it not this▪ BECAVSE THE LORD DELIGHTETH TO PRESENT HIMSELFE GRATIOVS IN HIS OWNE ORDINANCE? or is it this BY VIRTVE OF HIS PROMISE We may expect it? or is it this, HERE WEE MAY AND OVGHT SEND OVT THE Prayer of FAITH for it? Or is it because this Au­thor hath searched both SCRIPTVRES & EXPOSITORS, and findes this most a­greeable to them? Now when a man tells me that, because this is MOST agreeable to Scriptures and expositors; because the Lord de­lights to present himselfe gratious in his owne Or­dinance; because this is according to his pro­mise; and because here J may and ought send out [Page 37] the Prayer of FAITH for it; that therefore J may conceiue that God ordinarily accompanies it with his graces: doe I abuse him to say, that hee is of my minde, that it is most agreeable to the institution of Christ, ordinarily, to doe this.

Oh, but he addes; in the right vse of this Sacra­ment, &c: which perhaps in his sense; implies as much as a receiuing by faith? Nay; hee himselfe confesseth in the very place alleaged, that in infants we cannot expect faith. Therefore hee can meane no other by the right vse of this Sa­crament, then a Reverend administration of it according to the Institution of our Lord, both for matter & manne [...], vnto one with­in the Couenant.

But, he saith not this of ALL elect Infants? In common construction his speech must be equivalent to an Vniversall. For, when he distinguisheth of infants, whereof, hee saith, some are elect, and some belong not to the Election of Grace: doth hee not giue vs a generall distri­bution? Be there, in his iudgment, some in­fants that are neither elect, nor not-elect? A­gaine, when hee speaketh of such as are not elect; and saith, these latter receiue only the out­ward [Page 38] element; doth hee not meane, in any mans apprehension, ALL these receiue only the outward element? Then, by the rule of opposition, when he comes to speak to the other member of his Distinction; and to say, the Former (viz: the Elect) receaue, in the right vse of the Sacrament the INWARD GRACE; can any reasonable Creature of the slendrest capacity beyond a child, take him to meane lesse then ALL the Elect?

Yes, you will say, they may, and ought to take him to meane lesse; for himselfe saith expresly, not that hereby wee tie the Maiestie of God to any time or meanes, whose spirit bloweth when and where hee listeth; on SOME, BEFORE; on SOME, AFTER? Well. And what followes hence, but only this; that howeuer God hath set downe this to be the ordinary course which hee ties Vs vnto; yet it is not to be denied, but that hee can, and sometimes doth, extraordinarily, be­stow his spirit, at other times? Now this makes nothing against me: for I neuer said that All ABSOLVTLY; but, All, ORDI­NARILY, doe receiue the Spirit, in Baptisme. And so much this Author must yeeld mee [Page 39] out of his owne words. For hee that saith that the Elect doe receiue the inward Grace; and that God, ordinarily, doth accompany the Sacra­ment with his Grace; although he put a correc­tion of his words, for the explication of him­selfe, that hee speakes not this as laying an absolute tye vpon God; he can bee no other­wise vnderstood then thus: viz. that in some extraordinary and speciall cases, it may bee, and is otherwise. To what end else should he add the word, ORDINARY. It is true that God is not absolutly tied to times, and meanes: and, what euer he doth, he doth it most free­ly: but yet when God hath set vp a standing Ordinance in his Church, and made such a promise of the presence and bestowing of his grace, as may giue his people ground to ex­pect it; and hath bound them to send out the Prayer of FAITH for it; hee that shall say that God hath not tyed and engaged him­selfe ORDINARILY to giue the Grace promised; or, that to beleeue this, is, to tye God, where he hath not tied himselfe; speaks not like a Divine, but makes God a Lier.

But the Author hath expressed himselfe, that [Page 40] it is but sometimes, and in some speciall cases, where­in the Elect receiue the Spirit, in Baptisme? Then he contradicts himselfe, when hee saith, that God, ORDINARILY, accompanies it with his Grace? I tooke not vpon me to quote what he speakes either in private or publique; but what he hath written vpon Tit. 3.5. where he saith, this is done ORDINARILY.

Well, but when all is done, this Author doth not positiuely determine the point, but onely speake what, in charity, may probably be coniectured: for he saith, We want wherewith to drawe certainty of re­solution? It is true, Hee saith so indeed: but what then are those collections out of the SCRIPTVRES, and EXPOSITORS, hee after talkes of? They are but probable conie­ctures, you will say. True: yet he saith, that, what he here deliuereth, is MOST PROBA­BLE. I looke for no more: for what could he say more, that is not divinely inspired with an infallible spirit, which no man takes this Author to be. Yet hee saith enough af­terwards, to make the last words a plaine contradiction to the first, if he would be ta­ken in this sense; viz: that he speakes only con­iecturally; [Page 41] and professes, that, if any should aske him, whether any elect infant doe receiue the spi­rit in Baptisme? hee would answere, that hee cannot tell. For mark, hee that saith, first, that this is not certaine whether elect infants re­ceiue the inward grace, in Baptisme, or not; yet afterwards saith, that they doe receiue it; that, by virtue of HIS PROMISE, wee may expect it; and, here we MAY, and OVGHT send out the PRAYER of FAITH for it; what doth he but contradict himselfe? Will not a PROMISE, (where, the promise is to bee found, lies vpon the Author to shew; if any man doubt thereof;) will not the Prayer of Faith, which wee OVGHT to put vp to God, make this thing certaine? Againe, if the thing be yet vncertaine, why doth hee collect such a certaine vse of comfort from this very discourse of his? For afterwards, making vse of the point, he saith (pag. 647.) What a comfort is it for a Father to see his child washed with the bloud of Iesus Christ? clensed from sinne? Set into the visible Church; YEA, INTO THE BODY OF CHRIST, in the right vse of the Sacrament, wherein a Parent ought more to reioice, then if hee [Page 42] could make it heyre of the world. And doe I yet mistake this Author? Or rather, are not they Incendiaries Who haue bruited it abroad; endeavoring to set him and me at oddes, if it were possible? Yea, doe they not by such re­ports (as daily fly vp & downe) of the con­trariety of his iudgement to this point, doe what in them lies to endamage him more then either he (I hope) will deserue; or then those Boutifeu's will bee able euer to recom­pence againe vnto him; if notice should bee taken thereof, by some, that watch for our hal­ting, and make a man a transgressor for a word?

Thus haue I cleared both my Author, & quitted my selfe of the vniust imputation of doing him wrong. His iudgment, thus ac­cording with mine, will, I hope, somewhat allay their heat and fury, who, for this point, accuse both mee of Arminianisme; and our Church, of Popery.

Obiect: 2 2 It is obiected further: Our Leiturgie is to be vnderstood to speake thus, in the judgment of charity only; and not as binding vs to beleeue infants to be so regenerated indeed?

Ans: It is true, our Church doth indeed teach [Page 43] vs to hope well of every infant that shee ad­mits to baptisme; and, in charity, to beleeue it is indeed regenerated; because, for ought a­ny man knowes touching any particular in­fant, it is elected; yet bindes vs not absolutely to beleeue it, de fide, of all infants collectiuely taken, because it is certaine, that all are not elected. But the judgment of charity must haue a certaine foundation to build vpon; else it is not the iudgment of charity, but foolish and sinfull credulity void of all iudg­ment. For, vnlesse such a thing bee true in­deed of some infants, yea, ordinarily, of all that belong to Gods election, I am not bound to beleeue it of euery one, in the or­dinary course of divine dispensation; nay I am bound, not to beleeue it, no, not so much as in charity. For charity beleeues nothing but things possible, and probable; yea, more probable then the contrary; and things sometimes certainely true of some particu­lars of the same kinde.

No charity could bind mee to beleeue Peter to be a reasonable creature, if it were not certaine to me that some men, that all [Page 44] men were such. I am not tyed to beleeue this Professor to be an honest man, no not by the bonds of charity, if it were certaine to mee that no Professor is an honest man. I were not bound, in the iudgment of charity to beleeue that any of those stragling Atheni­an Hearers that in such multitudes, flockt a­bout me, while I preached this point, more then at other times, did come for any other end then either to beare some new thing, meerly out of curiosity; or to catch & carp, to wrest my words, to run away with wilful mistakes, to censure and iudge, to hope to see me foyled and shamed, because forsooth I deliuered that which they haue hereto­fore rashly and vnsoundly taught, or vnpro­fitably learned; and because I will not con­ceale a truth which might convince them of error, &c. vnlesse it were either certainly knowne vnto me, or vpon certaine ground to be presumed, that some, yea that many are better affected, and more humbly and de­voutly minded.

There must be a certainty in the Thesis; else no iudgment of charity bindes a man to [Page 45] beleeue any thing in the Hypothesis. Nor is it charity, but folly, that I should beleeue Peter receiues the spirit, in Baptisme; if hee that bids me beleeue it of him, will not war­rant me to beleeue it as a thing certaine of a­ny at all. And it were a very vncharitable speech to say, that our Church meant to stretch my charity to beleeue impossibilities or improbabilities, or that which is neuer, yea; not (ordinarily) certainely done. There­fore when the Church (when it teacheth me to beleeue, in charity, that this, and that, and t'other infant receiue the spirit for initi­all regeneration, in Baptisme) teacheth and requireth me, (vpon this ground, that, for ought I know of those particulars they are elected,) to beleeue her meaning to be this, that there are some, yea, that all elect infants, doe ordinarily, receiue the spirit of regenera­tion, in Baptisme, from the hand of Christ, truly and indeed

3 Lastly, it is obiected, The Leiturgy of our Church is not the Publique Doctrine of our Obiect: 3 Church: therefore it followes not that this is the Doctrine of our Church, because found in the Lei­turgy thereof?

Answ. I grant that the Leiturgie is not formally the Doctrine of our Church; no more then the superstructure is formally the foundation. Howbeit the Leiturgy is foun­ded vpon the Doctrine, and the Doctrine vpon the Scriptures, as shall anon appeare. If the Church teach mee such a prayer, it is because it presupposeth the Doctrine to al­low it; else the prayer were without Ground. The prayers of the Church are not intended principally for doctrinall instruction, but yet they take this for graunted that the doctrine is correspondent, and warranteth such prayers; else were they but blind deuo­tions. Notwithstanding to put the matter out of all doubt, and to driue the naile to the head, let me in the next place shew what is the formall Doctrine of our Church in this point. And here, I must giue you the sub­stance and force of my proofe in another Sylogisme.

Syllogis. 2.
  • Maior: That which the Publique Cate­chisme conteyned in our booke of Common prayer, and which the Ar­ticles of Religion concluded in 1562. [Page 47] teach, is to be acknowledged for the Doctrine of our Church.
  • Minor. But both our Catechisme, and those Articles doe teach thus much:
  • Conclus: Therefore this Position is a­greeable to the Doctrine of our Church.

There will be no Question of the Maior, by any vnderstanding man, therefore the Minor only requires proofe. This is proued by the parts, thus.

1 For the Catechisme. The Answere to the Second Question teacheth euery child to professe this: viz. that in Baptisme hee was made a member of Christ, the child of God, and an inheriter of the Kingdome of heauen. But no man can be made such, without the spirit of Christ to initiate him into Christ; for by one spirit are we all baptized into one body. 1. Cor. 12, 13. yea, it cannot be that infants should be truly members of the Church of Christ, vnlesse they were endowed with the Spirit, saith Peter Mar­tir Ecclesiae par­tes verè esse non possunt, nisi spiritu Christi ornati, Loc. Com. clas. 4. cap▪ 8. Sect. 15.. Therefore euery elect infant receiues in his Baptisme, ordinarily, the spirit to initiate him, according to the Doctrine of our Cate­chisme.

[Page 48]2 Touching the Articles of Religion, I al­ledge only the 27 Art▪ which is this. Bap­tisme is not only a signe of profession, and marke of difference, whereby Christian men are distinguish­ed from others that be not Christned; but it is also a signe of regeneration, or new birth, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receiue, baptisme rightly, are grafted into the Church; the promises of the for­giuenesse of sinne; and of our adoption to be the sonnes of God, BY THE HOLY CHOST, &c.

In which words wee are to obserue three things especially.

  • 1 what Baptisme doth, outWardly: It doth visibly signe and seale regeneration, and is not only a bare signe of profession, &c.
  • 2 What inwardly. Tbey that receiue it right­ly are grafted into the Church▪ the promises of the forgiuenesse of sinne, and of adoption to be the sonnnes of God by THE HOLY GHOST.
  • 3 who they are that are partakers of this inward grace, they that receiue it rightly: and this the Article deliuers indefinite­ly, which in common construction of [Page 49] Logick, must be vnderstood as exclud­ing none, in the ordinary course. An indefinit Proposition, in a matter neces­sary is equivalent to an Vniversall.

So then we are now come home to the very head of the point: viz: that All elect in­fants by the Doctrine of our Church, are, ordinarily partakers of the spirit in baptisme; for they that receiue it rightly, all that so receiue it, are partakers of the Spirit.

Obiect. But soft and faire; the article saith not, all elect Infants, but they that receiue it rightly?

Answ. Answ. The Article, in those words, speakes the same thing for substance, that I now contend for, as may appeare by shew­ing what it meanes by receiuing rightly.

To receiue Baptisme rightly imports two things: viz.

  • 1 That Baptisme be for matter, and forme the same that Christ appointed; name­ly, that the Baptized party be dipped in or sprinkled with water, in the name of the Father and of the sonne and Holy Chost, with all due reuerence for the manner also.
  • [Page 50]2 That the Person to be baptized be suffi­ciently qualified to giue him right to baptisme: viz. that he be within the co­venant of Grace; at least so farre forth as the Church can iudge of him. Else he doth but vsurpe the Ordinance: for what hath he to doe with the seale of the Couenant, if he be not comprised in the Couenant? Now then to qualify an infant, it is sufficient that he be with­in the Couenant. If he be borne of Chri­stian parents, hee is so farre forth to be held within the couenant, that the Church ought to admit him to bap­tisme, if he be presented to it. But yet we say not that he is, instantly or at all, par­taker of the inward grace of baptisme, vnlesse he be truly in the couenant of Grace, and vnder election: Howbeit, supposing him to be such an one, we say, that this is enough to make him capa­ble of the Spirit, and to receiue the Sacra­ment of Baptisme rightly. For, more then this is not required at his hands, by the consent of all iudicious Diuines that vn­derstand [Page 51] what they say, or whereof they affirme. And it is a blind conceit of Anabaptists to say, that no infants are capable of the inward Grace of bap­tisme, vnlesse they haue actuall faith and doe actually beleeue.

But least any should take offence, if I bring not proofe of what I say; I will pro­duce a few, of many, Divines that plainely affirme that it is not required of infants that they haue actuall faith to make them capa­ble of the inward grace of Baptisme, & that, notwithstanding they want that faith, they may and doe partake of the inward grace, by the spirit. For this purpose I propound vnto you.

1 Peter Martir, Jn Jnfants, saith he, who by reason of their tender yeares cannot beleeue, the holy Ghost supplies the roome of faith▪ And the effusion of the Holy Ghost is promised in Baptisme, as the Apostle expressely writes to Titus: who sa­ued vs by the Lauer of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed abroad on vs aboun­dantly Infantibus autem qui ad­huc per aetatem credere non pos­sunt, spiritus sanctus in eo­rum cordibus fidei vices ge­rit. Effusio quo (que) spiritus sancti promit­titur in baptis­mo, v [...] in epist: ad Titum di­serte scrìbi­tur, qui saluos nosfecit, &c. Loc. Com. class. 4. [...] 8. sect. 2..

2 Zanchius, vpon those words in Ephes. 5.26. [Page 52] washing it with water through the word, thus writeth, On the behalfe of the receiuer, if he be of yeares▪ faith is required: but this faith is not here expressed, because the Apostle speakes of baptisme wherein infants, although destitute of actuall faith are grafted into the body of the Church Ex parte ac­cipientis, si ad­vltus sit, requi­ritur fides, &c. Sed hec fides hoc in loco non ex­primitur, quia de baptismo quo etiam parvuli, licet actuali fide destituti in cor­pus Ecclesiae in­seruntur, verba facit Apostolus dicendo mu [...] ­dans eam lava­cro aquae. in Ephes. 5. Externa medi­a sunt verbum & aqua per mi­nistrum Christi administrata: medium autem [...]fficax ex parte tu [...]s qui mun­datur est fides, vt in advito, vel saltem spi­ritus fidei vt in pueris, spiritus enim ipse applicat sa [...]guinem Christi infantibus. ibid.. And least any should take him to meane only an out­ward admission, he afterwards addes; The externall meanes are the word, and water admi­nistred by the Minister of Christ; the effectuall meanes on his part that is cleansed, is faith, in one of yeares; at least the spirit of faith, as in infants: for to them the spirit applies, the blood of Christ.

3 That renowned Frenchman Daniel Chameir, wi lingly yeelds that elect infants may be in some sense termed Faithfull: but how? not actuall beleeuers, but only potenti­all: because no man beleeues (actually) but hee that is capable of discourse Quomodo inquam fideles? actu ne an potentia. nam si actu, negatur: quia nemo credit nisi compos rationis, &c. lib. 5. cap. 10. parag. 28..

4 Doctor Ames, being to proue against the Anabaptists the lawfulnesse of baptizing Infants, of 5 Arguments, he reserues this to the last place, as if he set most by it: In the ve­ry [Page 53] beginning of regeneration, whereof Baptisme is the seale, a man is meerely passiue: and hence it is that of a man that is to be either circumcised or baptised, no external act is required, as in other Sa­craments there is; but only a capacity passiue to receiue. Infants therefore are as capable of this Sacrament, in respect even of the CHEIFE VSE thereof, as men of yeares themselues. Quia in ipso initio regenera­tionis cuius si­gillum est bap­tismus, homo se habet merè pos­siue vnde etiam hominis vel cir­cumcidendi vel baptiz [...]ndi nul­la actio externa requiritur, vt in aliis sacra­mentis; sed tan­tum receptio passiu [...]. Infantes igitur sunt aequè capaces huius sacramenti, re­spectu praecipui eius vsus at (que) a­dulti. Medull. Theol. lib. 1. cap. 40. Thes. 13. And indeede it is absurd to say that the grace of that Sacrament cannot be attai­ned by infants vvithout faith actuall in them, when as it is cleare that one part of the inward Grace thereof is the Spirit, the wor­ker of Faith. Now, no man well in his wits will say that no person can first receaue the spirit but by the hand of actuall faith: for how should he haue faith, without the spi­rit to worke it in himSpiritus autem communicari dicitur fidelibus, non quia fides antecèdit omnem spiritus opera­tionem, vt quidam imperiti colligunt; nam ipsamet prima regeneratio, & conversio aperte tri­buitur spiritui sancto a Christo. Ioh. genitus ex spiritu. Sed quia soli credentes, postquam iam crediderunt, operationem illam accipiunt spiritus sancti, qua obsignantur tanquam arrha hae­reditatis futurae. Ephes. 1.13.14. & 4.30 Gal. 3.14. The spirit is said to be communica­ted to the faithful, not because faith goes before all operation of the spirit, as some igno­rant men doe collect: for the very first regeneration and conversion is plainely attribu­ted, by Christ, vnto the Holy Ghost. Iohn Except a man be begotten of the spi­rit &c. but therefore the spirit is said to be communicated to them, because onely be­leeuers after they haue beleeved doe receaue that worke of the spirit whereby they are sealed, as with the earnest of the inheritance to come. D. Ames. Medull. Theol. lib. 1. cap. 28. de adopt. Thes. 23.? Hee must therefore [Page 54] first be partaker of the Spirit of faith to be­get faith in him: which spirit, then, hee may receaue in Baptisme, without actuall faith to take him in. These new lingles in Divinity, against the current of all judicious Divines, are most intollerable, and good for nothing, that I knowe, but to breed quarrells, to worke distractions, to increase doubts, to make all things vncertaine, and to bring in Atheisme I neuer yet saw that Divine of note in the Church, that ever durst to say & stand to it, that any infants, though dying in infancy, were of necessity actually to be­leeue, or else they could not be vnited vnto Christ so as to be saued: nor yet, that no man can, ordinarily, haue the spirit of Christ in baptisme or at any other time, till by faith he lay hold vpon him and so receaue him into his heart. But this by the way.

5 That Reverend Bishop, Dr Davenant, in his elaborate and solid Lectures vpon St Pauls Epist. to the Collossians, answering that Obiection so much bawled by the Anabap­tists (one of the most ignorant Sects in Am­sterdame) viz: that Baptisme hath mortifi­cation [Page 55] &c. annexed to it, whereof infants are not capable because destitute of knowledge, and faith to apprehend it; and therefore not to be baptised? Thus saith, If they speake of actuall faith, and of the actuall study and profession of mortification and vivification, thos [...] Scriptures which require these in persons to be baptized, are to be restrained to those of yeares. Touching In­fants, because they are sinners, not actuall, by any proper act of their owne, but by an hereditary ha­bit; it sufficeth them to haue faith, not actually ex­ercising it selfe, but included in the habituall prin­ciple of Grace: and, that the Spirit of Christ can worke this habituall principle of grace in them, and vseth so to doe, none but a crackt braine will deny Si l [...]quantur de fide actuali, de actuali studio & professione mortificationis & vivificatio­nis, illa scriptu­rae loca quae [...]aec requirunt ni baptizatis, ad adultos esse re­stringenda dici­mus. Ad infan­tes autem quod attinet, quia peccatores sunt non proprio a­ctu, sed haeredi­tario habitu, suf­ficit quod pecca­ [...]i mortificatio­nem & fidem habeant non proprio actu [...]ese exerentem, sed in habituali principio gratiae i [...]clusám: spiri­tum autem Christi principi­um hoc habitua­le gratiae in illis efficere posse & solere nemo sa­nus negaverit..

6 The Author of the Comment: on Tit: answering an objection which some might make against that resolution of the Questi­on touching the ordinary reception of the in­ward Grace in baptisme; viz: that infants want faith? He saith; that they want indeed ac­tuall faith which presupposeth hearing, vnderstan­ding, &c. He further saith with Musculus that children may bee called faithfull, although they haue no faith, and with Zanchius, that it is pro­bable [Page 56] that elect infants haue the spirit of faith▪ &, in such as liue to yeares, he adds that the spi­rit worketh in thē the seeds or inclinations of faith, which in due time shall fructifie vnto eternall life.

Now, we haue witnesses enow, and suf­ficient, to proue, that to receiue baptisme right­ly so as to partake of the spirit in it, faith is not re­quired. And I think every man will acknow­ledg that all these Authors were far enough off from Popery & Arminianisme, that thus witnesse for mee. And will men yet lay both these to my charge?

If this bee Arminianisme, or Popery, to say that, all right receavers doe, ordinarily, receaue the spirit, in Baptisme: so long as I restraine it only to right receauers, and declare, that by right receauers I meane onely those that be­long truely and indeed to the election of Grace: I must be content to beare this brand; as many doe the name of Puritane, without desert.

Obiect. But they will say. Both the Leiturgie, Cate­chisme, and Article speake generally, excluding none: therefore, if you be, in sober sadnesse, resolued to sticke so close to the Doctrine of the Church of [Page 57] England, you must hold this, not of the Elect only, but of all infants whatsoever?

Answ: It is very true that our Church excludes none from participation of the in­ward Grace in the Sacrament; but, knowing for certaine that all the Elect doe partake of it, and not knowing at all that this or that particular infant is not elected, suffers not a­ny of her children to speake or iudge of any particular infant that hee doth not receaue the inward grace; no more then she permits him to say that such a particular is not elec­ted. For, who hath knowne the mind of the Lord Rom. 12.34.? And who art thou that iudgest another mans servant Rom. 14.4.? Howbeit our Church knowes ve­ry well, and presumes that all her children knowe also, that, in respect of Election, knowne only to God, They are not all Israel that are of Israel Rom. 9.6.: and that of those many that be called but a few be chosen Math. 20.16. But who those few bee, shee will not determine, yet thus much shee doth determine, that any par­ticular infant rightly baptized is to be taken and held, in the iudgment of charity, for a member of the true invisible elected san­ctified Church of Christ, and that hee is re­generated [Page 58] indeed▪ in the sense aforesaid. And so doe I. Notwithstanding, mistake not Her, or me. It is one thing to speake of all infants distributiuely, singling them out individually one by one, and passing iudgment of each particular apart; and another thing to speak of them collectiuely, and in the lump, with­out restraining our speech to any particular. To say, that wee cannot iudge of any parti­cular sonne of Adam, not discouered by God himselfe to be reiected, that he is reie­cted of God; doth not proue that no sonne of Adam is reiected; when we speake of all mankind in the general Masse or Lump: for then, what need of a Hell, for cast awaies? Thus, that learned Bishop; By the iudgment of charity, the Faithful iudge every professed mem­ber of the visible Church, when they speake of the particular persons, to be a member of the invisible, elected, called, iustified, sanctified; howbeit they knowe in generall, that many are in the church, which be not of it, and that many be called, but few are chosen Dr Iohn Downham on Psal. 15. ver. 1. pag. 19.. The like phrase wee haue in the forme of Burial, wherein when wee bury any particular person whatsoeuer, wee are [Page 59] taught to say, and pray, that wee with this our Brother, &c. may haue our perfect consummation and blisse, &c. and yet no man will say that all men that dye doe goe to heauen: for euen in that very prayer we are taught to restrain this only to the elect: Almighty God, with whom doe liue the Spirits of them that depart hence in the Lord, and in whom the Soules of them that bee elected, after they be delivered from the burden of the flesh be in ioy and felicity.

So then, neither our Leiturgie (in the Pub­lique Forme of Baptisme) nor Catechisme, nor Article doe intend to bind me or any man else to beleeue that every man without ex­ception doth indeed partake of the inward Grace of Baptisme, although it bind me and every man to conclude no other, when wee pitch our speech vpon any particular. Nor is this my Glosse alone; but that Iudicious Hooker saith also, that all receaue not the grace of the Sacrament that receaue the Sacrament of his Grace Lib. 5. Sect. 57.. So Mr Tho: Rogers in his so often printed Commentary on the Articles of Re­ligion. For in Article 25, hee makes this one of the Propositions coutched in that Arti­cle; [Page 60] All which receaue the Sacraments, receaue not there with all the things signified by the Sacra­ments Propos. 11. Hee that shall hold other­wise doth in effect bring in opus operatum againe For al­though he will say that grace is giuen by virtue of the institution: yet hee also saith that, by virtue of the institution every infant outwardly baptized, is partaker of the inward grace? why so because bapti­zed, forsooth. Now no Pp. will say that baptisme could confer grace, if it were not by virtue of di­vine instituti­on: for there are none of thē so absurd as to say that the outward signes of themselues naturally, without respect to the institution, doe conferre grace. This opinion therefore, for substance, is the ve­ry same with that of the Papists; only they haue put on other cloaths vpon it. It is as much [...]lv [...]sh as the other, onely it hath gotten on a Lambs skinne. Therefore Dr Whita [...]r disclaimes it, in his Treatise de Sacram. in genere, quaest: 4, cap 1. Non enim ex ope­re operato, ne parvulis quidem gratiam conferri à Sacramentis affirmamus, vt necesse sit habere gratiam omnes qui Sacramenta percipiunt.. And before, in explication of the third Proposition, he saith; In some the Sacra­ments doe effectually worke in processe of time by the helpe of Gods word read or preached which in­gendreth faith. Such is the estate principally of in­fants elected vnto life and salvation, and encrea­sing in yeares. And vpon Art: 28. Prop. 4. The life spirituall is PECVLIAR to Gods elect. Mr Hooker deliuers as much, for hauing said that infants receiue the divine virtue of the Holy Ghost, in baptisme, which giueth to the powers of the soule their first disposition towards future newnesse of life; afterwards addes, Predestina­tion bringeth not to life, without the grace of ex­ternall vocation, wherein our Baptisme is implied. For as we are not naturally men without birth, so neither are wee Christian men in the eye of the Church of God, but by new birth, nor according to [Page 61] the ordinary manifest course of divine dispensation new borne, but by that Baptisme which both decla­reth and maketh vs Christians. In which respect we iustly hold it to be the doore of our actuall en­trance into Gods house, the first apparent begin­ning of life, a seale perhaps to the Grace of ELE­CTION before receaued, but to our sanctificati­on here a step that hath not any before it Lib. 5. Sect. 60 pag 316.. Some it may bee, will cavill at the word, PER­HAPS: and say, that hee makes it but a Per­haps, that men receaue baptisme as a seale of Election. But before they doe so, let them du­ly weigh the place, and they shall finde that he makes no PERHAPS of this, that such as partake of the Grace of Baptisme are ele­cted: but only of this, that they doe, perhaps, receaue Baptisme as a seale of grace of ele­ction before bestowed on them. For hee is dealing with T.C. about Baptisme. T.C. af­firmes, that Baptisme is only the seale of Grace before receaued. Mr Hooker answeres by di­stinguishing of Grace, into Grace of Electi­on and grace of Sanctification; admitting his words (with a perhaps) to bee true, in the former sense; but not in the latter, ordinari­lyDeus in Bap­tismo vt signifi­cat remissionem peccatorum & salutem, ita re operatur: & veritas cum sig­no coniuncta est in electis. Whi­tak: de Sacram. in gen: quaest. 4. cap. 2. respons▪ a [...] 7. tessim.. [Page 62] And doth not that Reverend Prelate, D. Francis White Now L. Bi­shop of Car­lile., in answere to the calumny of the Iesuite Fisher say as much? For, first, he makes good the efficacy of Baptisme, out of Scriptures, Fathers, our owne Church, & Forraine Divines, and particularly out of Calvine: Then, he addes, not without appro­bation of it▪ (why else should hee speake it? And what vse would it be of, against Fisher?) The same Author, with others of his part, main­taine the former Doctrine concerning the efficacy of the Sacrament of Baptisme, and they differ onely from Lutherans and Pontificians: first, in that they restraine the grace of sanctification only to the E­lect. Secondly, in that they deny externall baptisme to be alwaies effectuall at the very instant time when it is administred Answ. to Fi­sher, Pag 176. If any shall p [...]esse mee with the Ru­brick, before Confi [...]mation: my answere is, That Rubrick hath reference to Confirmati­on; giving vs to vnderstand that if an in­fant dy with­out Confirma­tion it is cer­taine by scrip­ture that he is as vndoubted­ly saued, as if he had beene Confirmed. 2 That Rubrick speakes of the state of infants dying before they come to yeares, as the old Rubrick of the first book saith expresly, which doth not concerne our present Position which hath reference onely to such infants, as liue to yeares of discretion, shewing what, ordinarily, is conferred on them in Baptisme; and not, what they receaue, that liue not so long, bur dy in infancy. In these I doubt not but that the spirit of God doth work more effectually..

To make an end, our owne Catechisme teacheth as much in expresse termes. What need we further witnesse? That, teacheth me to beleeue in God the Holy Ghost, who hath [Page 63] sanctified me and all the elect people of God. The elect; all the elect; only the elect if my learned friend Doctor Iacksons word may bee taken for the exposition: for hee would haue the Reader to obserue a difference between the extent of the sufficiency (for so I take him) of christs death, and the efficacy of Christs Spirit. Although, saith he, in that place we are taught to beleeue in the Holy Ghost; yet this we are taught with this caveat, that he doth sanctifie all the elect people of God, not all mankind Treat. of Gods Essence and Attrib. Sect. 2. cap. 15. pag. 171.. Now, compare our Leiturgie, Article, and Catechisme all toge­ther. The Leiturgie teacheth mee to beleeue of this and every particular infant conside­red single and apart that he is indeed regene­rate with the Holy Spirit. The Article saith, that they (that all they) that receaue baptisme rightly are grafted &c? by the Holy Ghost. The Cate­chisme shewes how this is to be limited, and extended, saying; that the Holy Ghost sancti­fies me and all the elect people of God, Therefore by the doctrine of our Church, all the elect and only the electThis re­straint is clear in the Scrip­ture (see Gal. 4.6.) And wee must expound the doctrine of our chur [...]h by that Rule. See the next Chapter. doe certainly & indeed, ordinarily receaue the Spirit, in Baptisme. Yea our very Leiturgie is cleare in this point, [Page 64] as I haue before shewed, in that it presumeth the child to be one to whom belongs the king­dome of God; vpon which ground wee are taught not to doubt but stedfastly to beleeue that he will favorably receaue the present infant; that he will imbrace him with the armes of his mercy, that hee will giue vnto him the blessing of eternall life, and make him partaker of his everlasting king­dome. Againe in the end of the praier which is appointed to be vsed immediatly before the act of baptisme in the name of the Father & of the Sonne, and of the Holy Ghost, wee pray that the children may receaue the fulnes of Gods Grace and ever remaine in the number of his faithfull and ELECT children: which shewes plainly that the Church supposeth that all such as doe indeed receaue the Spirit in their baptisme, bee of the number of Gods Elect. And so Bucer expounded it of old, as shall hereafter appeare in due placeSee Cap. 6., when we come to shew the judgment of forraigne Divines in this point.

Nor is this to bee put off with that new coyned distinction of election to Grace and not to Glory. For the Leiturgie speaks onely [Page 65] of Election to glory, inasmuch as it had assu­red vs before, that God will giue vnto the infant baptized, the blessing of eternall life, and make him partaker of his euerlasting kingdome & so concluds this prayer, that the infants may be inheritors of his euerlasting kingdome through Christ our lord. And why should any presume to obtrude vpon the Church such a distinction which hath not the least shew of any footing in the word of God? For how euer I deny not but that the scripture some­time speaketh of a temporary election of some persons vnto some particular offices & seruices in the Church of God; yet it neuer speakes of election vnto the grace of sancti­fication, but as it is a beginning of glory which certainly followes sanctification and is vndoubtedly conferred on all that are sanctified: so as no man is elected to the one but he is elected vnto the other also. For such grace is but glory begun, 2. Co [...]: 3.18. And when S. Paul, Act: 20.32. commends the Ephesians to God, that is able to giue them an inheritance among all that are sanctified he most euidently shewes that, as none par­take [Page 66] take of the inheritance but such as are sancti­fied; so none that are sanctified can misse of the inheritance. The like might be demon­strated out of Rom: 8.29▪ 30. where the A­postle shewes that all predestination to ef­fectuall calling and iustification ends in glo­rification, as S. Augustine doth most soundly & vnanswerable collect from this very text.

Yea this is so cleare a truth that Bellar­mine himselfe could not but confesse & main­taine it against all opposers,De praedest. Sanct. cap. 17. vide locum. although hee could not but know it to be contray to the doctrine of many of his owne side, who were the first authors of the distinction of election, into election to grace, and election to glory, which is still maintained by the later Iesuites, Cornelius a Lapide, Com in Ephes. 1.4.5. and others, from whom the Arminians haue made bold to borrow it, as they doe sundry other wares of that society. But Bellarmine is peremptory that whosoeuer is vnder the decree of Gods election, how peruerse and crosse soeuer he be to the meanes of his conuersion, and per­seuerance in graceRespondeo potest ille libere gratiam repudi­are, sed certum est non repudia turum, quia de­us vocabit il­lum, sic vt vi­det congruum illi esse vt vo­cantem non respuat. Hoc e­nim modo gra­tia dei vera a nullo duro cor­de respuitur, quoniam ad hoc datur vt cor e­molliat. Haec Bel. de Gra. & lib. Arb. lib. 2. cap. 15. resp. ad 2. obiect., and in respect of the li­berty of his will may be yeelded to be such [Page 67] an one as may possibly refuse grace, yet it is certaine that he will not refuse it, because God will call him, in such manner as may best agree to his disposition to the end that he might not reiect God calling him. For by this meanes it comes to passe that the true grace of God is refused of no hard heart, be­cause grace is giuen to this very purpose that it might mollify the heart. And all this hee speaketh to shew that Gods decree cannot faile; but that all who are elected freely to true grace are as freely elected to glory, and doe as certainely obtaine the one, as they doe the other.

But yet some may here obiect one thing more, and that is this. The Church teacheth to beleeue all the elect to be regenerate actually, and not only, initially, as you say? Why may not any man expound it in that sense, as well as in yours; the termes are generall, Seeing this child is regene­rate, &c.

Answ. If by Actuall regeneration be meant an actuall change of the heart by the infusi­on and operation of particular habits of grace, the best expositors of the Doctrine of [Page 68] our Church run otherwise, and the very doctrine of the Church doth it selfe declare the contrary, in the ordinary course of such as liu [...] t [...] yeares. For expositors; take M. Ro­gers, in the place before cited, where, he is al­lowed to deliuer this to be the sense of the Church In some the sacraments doe effectually worke in processe of time by the helpe of Gods word read or preached which engendereth faith, such is the estate principally of infants elected vnto life & saluation, and encreasing in yeares. in Art. 25. prop. 3. And this booke hath beene printed with publique allowance many timesYea this booke came abroad w [...]th iniunction from the Arch-B shop that th [...]n w [...]s that th [...]e should be one of them b [...]ught for e­very Par [...]sh in the Pr [...]uin [...]e of C [...] [...]b [...]ry. And [...] it now be on [...]e worth no­thing.. If the Church will not be tryed by him, then marke what Mr Hooker hath to this purpose. Baptisme is a sa­crament which God hath instituted in his Church to the end that they which receiue the same might thereby [...]e incorporated into Christ, & so through his most pretious merit obteyne as well that sauing grace of imputation which taketh away all former guiltinesse, as also that infused Diuine virtue of the Holy Ghost whi [...]h giueth to the powers of the soule their first disposition toward FVTVRE NEW­NESSE OF LIFEibid. [...]op. sect. 60..

But you will say, the [...], the words of our [Page 69] booke are plaine? True: so is HOC EST COR­PVS MEVM, for you know what: yet you and I know these words must be expounded according to the true sense of them explai­ned by other Scriptures which make plainly against both Trans-substantiation, and Con­substantiation. So then, the words of our booke in the Leiturgy must admit of what sense our Doctrine elsewhere doth set vpon it. Now, our Doctrine is it selfe cleare against certaine actuall regeneration in Baptisme of infants liuing to yeares. For, in Act. 17. touch­ing Predestination, it is said; they which be in­dued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to Gods purpose by his spirit, working in DVE SEASON they through grace obey the calling, they be iustified freely, they be made the sonnes of God by Adoption, &c. So much of what Our Church holdeth herein.

CAP. 4. The point proued by authority of Scripture.

MY next worke is to make good the point in hand, by Diuine and infalli­ble Testimony of Holy Writt. And this is that foundation only, which I build vpon, for proofe of the Position. If any shall con­vince me to haue failed in this, I will for euer abandon this opinion, (although it should be with perill of life,) what euer all the men and Churches in the world should professe, and bind me to beleeue to the contraryNemo mihi dicat, O Quid dixit Donatus, aut quid dixit Parmenianus, aut Pontius, aut quilibet illorum. Quia nec ca­t [...]olicis Episco­pis consentien­dum est, sicubi forte falluntur, vt contra cano­nica Dei scrip­turas aliquid sentiant Aug. de Vnit. Eccl, cap. 10. Si enim ratio contra diuina­rum scriptura­rum authorita­tem redditur, quamlibet acuta sit, fallit ve­risimilitudine, nam vera esse non potest. Idem. epist. 7. ad Marcellin..

That I may more methodically proceed, and dispatch more speedily that which I haue to alledg out of the Scriptures, I must necessarily bind my selfe to the lawes of Argumentation, wrapping vp the force of my Arguments in some plaine Syllogismes (as as I haue done in the former chapter,) and confirming the seuerall propositions that need proofe, by expresse scriptures, expoun­ded by such learned expositors, as mine ad­versaries pretend most respect vnto. By this [Page 71] course I shall be sure not to abuse my Rea­ders, if they be able to iudge of reason When they see it.

My first argument shall be drawne from Arg. 1 the Nature of Baptisme in respect of the se­uerall Parts of it which the scripture conti­nually ioynes together, when it speakes of that Sacrament; and I frame it thus.

Maior. That which the Scriptures attri­bute to Baptisme, as the cheife part and as it were the soule of that ordinance, is ordinarily communicated to all the e­lect, when they partake of Baptisme.

Minor But the Scriptures doe attribute the confirming of the Holy Ghost, to that ordinance, as a principall part of it.

Conclus. Therefore it is consonant to the Scriptures that all elect infants bapti­zed, doe, ordinarily receiue the spirit in Baptisme.

The Maior Proposition, me thinkes should not be doubted of by any; vnlesse by Sacramentarians: for, will any man of vn­derstanding deny vnto the elect that wich the scriptures doe euery where attribute as [Page 72] the cheife part, and as it were the soule and life of that ordinance of baptisme? If any man shall doe so, he must grant that elect in­fants doe receiue but a peece of baptisme; the shell, without the Kernell; the body, with­out the soule. And if this be true, to what end are they baptized? If they be not, euen in in­fancy, capable of the principall part of bap­tisme, why are they admitted to it? How shall wee answere the Anabaptists who pleade from hence, against the baptizing of in­fants, that they are not capable of the in­ward grace? If that be true Which Dr Ames affirmeth, that they be as capable of baptisme, in respect of the cheife vse thereof, as persons of yeares; who shall deny them the inward grace? Doe we not know that in Gods account, the sacra­ment of circumcision was not accounted circumcision, when it was only outward in-the flesh, and not inward also in the heart? For, he is not a Iew which is one outwardly; nei­ther is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Iew which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit, and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men but of [Page 73] God. Rom. 2. Circumcision We know, was a seale of the righteousnesse which is by faith 6. Rom 4.11.. Now I demand, whether any sound diuine did e­uer affirme that only the outward ceremo­ny of circumcision of the flesh, was vnto the elect the proper and only seale of the righteousnesse which is by faith? Sure I am, the Scripture euery where teacheth that the spirit is the seale of God set vpon the saith­full2. Cor. 1 22. Ephes. If then Circumcision were accounted vncircumcision, where it was not accompa­nied with the inward grace; what shall we say other of baptisme, where the spirit is not communicated? Therefore also in baptisme of the elect (for whose sakes only, this and all other ordinances of Christ were set vp in th [...] Church) there must be, ordinar [...]ly, not only the outward element of water sprink­led on the child, but the inward grace also: else it must necessarily follow [...]hat either in the baptizing of elect infants, but hal [...]e bap­tisme is ordinarily conferred, which in Gods account is no better then no baptisme; or, Baptisme is not to infants what the scrip­tures affirme it to be to men of yeares. And [Page 74] if this last be true, in the ordinary course of diuine dispensation; I will maintaine, that infants are not to be baptised. If those infants which may bee saued without baptisme re­ceaue no more then the outward signe when they are baptized, why are they bap­tized? Can the outward signe saue them; or make them more certaine or more capable of salvation then they were before, so long as they remaine void of faith? Were it not as good to deferre their baptisme till they be of yeares; as to offer them to bap­tisme in infancy which doth them no more good, then it doth to a reprobate, till their actuall conversion? To say that Baptisme admits them to the outward meanes, is to say iust nothing to the purpose. For, aske these men, what is it that makes a person capable of the inward grace of baptisme. They will answer; faith. But, how is this faith wrought? By preaching of the word; say they. Well; admit this: may not an in­fant vnbaptised come to heare the word read or preached: Anabaptists doe not shut their children out of the Church when the [Page 75] word is preached, but onely exclude them from the Sacraments. And wee also permit excommunicate persons to heare Sermons, howeuer we debarre them from other ordi­nances. Therefore infants need not bap­tisme meerly for their admission vnto the outward meanes of faith and conuersion, for as much as they may participate of the word without baptisme, and the word be­ing, by these mens telling, the onely outward ordinary meanes of begetting faith. If Ana­baptists might as freely shew themselues here among vs, as they doe in other coun­tries, this doctrine of Baptismal grace would bee better entertained by such as now op­pugne it without consideration of this se­quele. This therefore to mee is without all controuersie, that, What the Scriptures doe at­tribute to Baptisme as the principall part and as it were the soule of Baptisme, is, ordinarily, communi­cated from Christ vnto the Elect, although infants (because in them actuall faith is not requi­red) in their baptisme. Where the Scripture makes no difference, why should we?

What else doth the Author of the Com­mentary [Page 76] on the Epistle to Titus meane, where he saithPag. 63 9., We must conceaue that in eve­ry Sacrament there bee three essentiall parts, the absence of any of which destroy the whole; 1. The Signe, 2 the thing signified; 3. the analogy be­tweene them, which is the vnion of them both. The first is some outward and sensible thing; the second inward and spirituall; the third, mixt of them both? To this agree all learned Divines, and confessions of Reformed Churches so farre forth at least, that they vnanimously con­clude Sacraments to be not naked signes, but cert [...]ine sure witnesses and effectuall signes of grace and Gods good will towards vs, by which he doth worke invisibly in vs Articl [...]s of Relig. art. 25. and convey some in­ward grace, ordinarily, from Christ vnto all that haue true interest in the couenant of Grace, whereof Sacraments are the Scales. And so my Maior stands good against all Sacramentarians, and their vnwitting Pro­ctors whatsoever. I come therefore to the Minor.

The Minor Proposition now to be pro­ved is this. But the Scriptures doe attribute the conferring of the Holy Ghost to that ordinance, as [Page 77] the principall part of it, This I make good by all such Scriptures as mention the conferring of, and washing with the Holy Ghost, as well as with the outward element; without difference of yeares, and without mention of actuall faith to apply the same.

I might begin with that place in Ioh. 3.5. Except a man bee borne of WATER and of the SPIRIT, &c. where Water and the Spirit are ioined, as going together into all heyres of the Kingdome. Which place, (how ever some make a doubt whether it be meant of the Sacrament of Baptisme, yet) not onely the Ancients, but Beza Sed de Baptis­mo [...]cag [...], siue simpliciter, sive al [...]quà ad lega­l [...]s ablutiones al­lusione, omnino existimo. Beza in l [...]cum, also without all doubt, doe interpret of Baptisme, so also, the learned Bucer Nec enim au­diendos puto eos, qui hic per a­quam, non a­quam sed Spi­ri [...]um Sanctum volunt intelligi; q [...]asi vero Do­minus voluerit spiritum San­ctum bis ponere: eo [...] dicere, vel, qui n [...]n fuerit gent [...]us ex [...]piri­tu sa [...]cto & spiri [...]u sa [...]cto; vel, qu [...] non fue­rit ge [...]itu [...] ex aqua, quae est spiritus sanctus. Bucer de vi & effic: Baptis. in­te [...] scrip [...]: An­glic. pag. 596.. But because I did not vse it in my Lectures, and some may wrangle at the exposition, therefore resolue to waue it: and quote only three other Texts.

The first is that in Math: 3.11. I indeed baptize you with water vnto repentance: but hee that commeth after me is mightier then I, whose shooes I am not worthy to beare, he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire. In which place Iohn makes the Baptisme of Christ to [Page 78] consist non onely of Water, but of the Holy Ghost, and of the powerful operation of the Ho­ly Ghost metaphorically described vnder the terme of Fire. Nor can it be vnderstood, either of baptisme administred by Christ in his owne person, (for Iesus himselfe baptized not; but, his Disciples Ioh. 4.2.) or only of extraordi­nary gifts of the spirit conferred on the Apo­stles to worke miracles, and to speake with tonguesAct. vid. Luk. 24 49 Act. 1.4.5.: but it is meant also of that which all the elect may expect in the right vse of that ordinance, by virtue of Christs Institu­tion, ordinarily, when his Ministers doe rightly dispense the outward element. For marke, Iohn speakes not this to Christs A­postles afterwards assembled at Hierusalem; but to the promiscuous multitude, that came vnto his Baptisme. Therefore it cannot bee meant only of those extraordinary gifts be­stowed on the Apostles in the day of Pente­cost; but of the ordinary course of Divine dispensation vnto all the elect.

The better to iustifie this exposition, con­sider the Apostle Peter speakes vnto such as vpon hearing of him, were pricked in their [Page 79] hearts; and demanded what they should doe? For he answers thus; Repent, and bee baptized every one of you, in the name of Iesus Christ, for the the remission of sinnes, and yee shall receaue the gift of the Holy Ghost Act. 2.38.. Hee requires them to re­pent, indeed, before Baptisme, because they were of yeares: but, vpon their baptisme, hee assures them of the Holy Ghost to bee be­stowed on every one of them. True, you will say; but that was, because they repen­ted? I deny that; for howeuer, if they had not repented, being such growne persons as they were, they had not receaued the Holy Ghost: yet their repentance was not the cause of their receauing the spirit in Bap­tisme; but, Christs owne institution & pro­mise to accompany his owne ordinance with the inward grace. Else, what needed they to bee baptized? For if repentance would certainely fetch the spirit; baptisme in that respect, should be superfluous. It can­not honestly be denied that those very per­sons had receaued the spirit, in some mea­sure, before baptisme: how else could they haue repented? If then they receaued not [Page 80] the spirit first, vpon their repentance; but be­fore it: shall this seeme a truth impregnable, that infants who cannot actually repent, doe not, ordinarily, receaue the spirit in bap­tisme, for want of repentance? Or can it bee inferred from any of the places before quo­ted, that they speake of the efficacy of Bap­tisme in persons of yeares only? Some per­haps will bee ready yet to presse me, that both the place in Mathew, and those alleaged out of the Acts also, doe clearely intend an extraordinary manifestation of the spirit vi­sibly vpon the men there spoken of; and of extraordinary gifts bestowed on them; and so cannot be drawne to proue what is ordi­narily conferred in Baptisme now. But let such consider that how euer the places doe indeed comprehend an extraordinary man­ner and measure of conferring the spirit to those that were then baptized; yet baptisme was the ordinance wherein those extraor­dinary gifts were giuen. And what can this teach vs but that in baptisme the spirit is stil bestowed, although not in like manner or measure as at the first? That miraculous way [Page 81] of conferring the spirit was then necessary to gaine honour to the Gospell from vnbe­leeuers. This necessity being remoued, wee haue no reason to expect the like extraordi­nary manner of dispensation. But because we haue as much need of the spirit to rege­rate and sanctifie vs, as ever they had, there­fore haue we even from thence as good war­rant as they to expect the donation of the spirit in our baptisme, so farre as the spirit is vsefull and necessary for vs in these times to fit vs for Christs worke, and kingdome.

But some will yet obiect, that place in Mathew is so farre from prouing the actuall conferring of the spirit, in baptisme; that it rather proues the cleane contrary: for Iohn speaking vnto such as he had baptized; saith, of Christ, HE SHALL baptize; not, HE HATH baptised you, with the holy Ghost, they therefore did not receaue the spirit in baptisme, but were to expect it as a thing then to come. How then can it follow hence that Water and the Spirit doe ordinarily goe together in Baptisme of the Elect?

To this I answere, 1. That it cannot bee [Page 82] proued that this speech was directed vnto such as were baptised; although it were vt­tered at that time it was spoken to such as came to his Baptisme, to be rather specta­tors, then to be baptized of him. For the 7th verse makes it manifest that this was spo­ken to the Pharisees & Saducees; who if wee beleeue S. Luke, Luk. 7.30. reiected the councell of God a­gainst themselues, and were not baptized of him i. If this answere will not passe, then I adde. 2. The Bapist meant not to shew a difference of time betweene the outward washing, and cōferring of the Holy Ghost: but only to note a difference betweene him the ministeriall Agent, and Christ the Author of that Sacra­ment; thereby to raise their thoughts higher and to teach them to depend vpon Christ for the conferring of his spirit, which Iohn, his Minister, could not conferre, although he baptized them outwardly with water. He distinguisheth, not de Baptismis, as if his baptisme differed from that of Christ: but de baptizantibus of the persons baptizing, shewing what was proper to himselfe; name­ly to baptize outwardly with water; & what [Page 83] to Christ; namely to conferre the Holy Ghost, saith the Learned Chamier De Sacram. lib. 5. cap. 13. par. 21. who makes good his exposition, out of Augustine, Chry­stome, and Hierome; The speech therefore notes, not a distance of time, but a diffe­rence of Agents; it shewes, not what they that were then baptized, did not receiue at the present; but from whom that gift is receiued, and to whom the conferring of it is to be ascribedSo Caluin. lib. 4. instit. cap. 15. sect. 8.. He speakes no other­waies of Christ baptizing them, in the fu­ture tense, then he doth of his coming, in the same tense also He that cometh after me, saith our Translation, shall baptize you, &c. But in the originall it is, [...]; which, word for word, is to be rendred thus, qui venturus, he that is comming, or about to come af­ter me; as if he were not presently come: and yet we know that he was come, euen at that time, therefore both Beza and our transla­tors render the text in the present tense, Qui venit, hee that cometh: and in the same sense must wee vnderstand that which followes of Christs baptizing with the Holy Ghost: he shall baptize; that is, saith Beza Qua etiam ra­tione dixit [...] futu­ro tempore, potius quam [...]. Beza in Math. 3., he doth [Page 84] Baptize you with the Holy Ghost. To this I may adde that which learned Bucer saith of so many of them as were truely baptized vnto repentance; that, to the intent they might escape the wrath to come, it must of necessity follow that they receiued the Holy Ghost as the spirit of sauing repentance, and faith in Christ, euen in that Baptisme of Iohn Bucer. in script. Anglic. De vi & effica­cia Baptis. pag. 595. So also Dr Whitaker: de Sacram in Genere quest. 4. cap. 2. Nec sequitur, Bapti­zabit; ergo non baptizat: nam illud baptiza­bit, continuum actum, siue con­tinuam actio­nem significat.. The reason of this ex­position is that which was giuen before: viz that the scope of the Baptist is not to point at the time when, but at the Person who baptizeth with the Holy Ghost: nor, to restraine his speech only to such as were then baptized; but to assure all other the elect of God of like benefit of baptisme, when thy should, by Gods prouidence, be partakers of it. Which being so, I conclude hence that the Baptist, in that passage, declares what in bap­tisme is ordinarily communicated to all the elect, infants themselues being not excluded. For as Dr Ames saith wellibid vt supra., it is not in bap­tisme as in other ordinances of God, that a man must necessarily lay hold on the thing signified, by an act of his owne, or else he should not receiue it, here receptio tantum pas­siua [Page 85] only a passiue capacity to receiue grace offered is sufficientThe same author an­swering to that of Bellar. Baptismus ali­quid sacramen­tale confert, eti­amsi detur & non percipiatur fide. Takes vp­on him to giue this an­swere in be­halfe of the Protestants, Nihil omnino in ternae qualitatis consert: adultis abs (que) fide. Colleg. Anti-Bellarm. tom. 3. Disp. 9. th [...]s. 7. And who will not thence in­ferre a con­cession of that I contend for, in infants? Why else doth he not abso­lutely deny Bellarmines proposition, but only limit it?, which vnto elect infants is neuer wanting, because theirs is the kingdome of God.

A Second place is that in 1 Cor. 12.13 For by one spirit are we all baptized into one bo­dy, &c. Here the Apostle makes baptisme to consist chiefely in the spirituall insition of a man into the body of Christ by the Holy Ghost: as if he would giue vs to vnderstand that, that deserues not the name of baptisme wherein the spirit doth not ingraft vs into Christ. Nor doth he note this, as some spe­ciall priuiledge in extraordinary, conferred only vpon a few; but hee manifestly declar­eth it to be the common benefit of all that by election belong to Christ, when he sayeth; by one spirit are we ALL baptized into one body.

This is true, saith Caluin vpon the place, of all the faithfull for howeuer vnto many, bap­tisme is but a symbole without any further effect: yet the faithfull doe, together with the outward Sacrament, receiue the thing represented thereby. And therefore in respect of God it is alwaies true that baptisme is an insition into Christ: because [Page 86] God doth not represent any thing but what he is ready to fulfill, if we be capable thereof. Now that infants are capable hereof, he proues in his Comentary vpon the 7th chap: of this same Epistle; where he shewes, that the children of faithfull parents are holy, ex beneficio faede­ris; by virtue of the couenant: and, if holy; then faithfull, although not yet endowed with actuall faith saith Musculus Omnes Chri­stianorum in­fantes ad Chri­stum pertinen­tes, de (que) nume­ro fidelium ex­istentes, recte dicuntur esse in fide Christi, fide­les & creden­tes, licet non­dum sint imbu­ti fide Muscul. in Math: 18..

Another place to proue that the Scrip­tures doe attribute the conferring of, and washing by the Holy Ghost, vnto baptisme as a principall part of that ordinance, is that in Tit. 3.5. where the Apostle speaking of Baptisme, describes it to be the Lauer of Re­generation, and of the renewing of the Holy Ghost: in which words it is as cleare as the sunne at noone day, that baptisme is not the Lauer of Regeneration alone, but of the renewing of the Holy Ghost also: so as he that is partaker only of the former, is but halfe baptized: that is, he is partaker but of the body of the sacra­ment, without that which giues life, forme & being vnto that ordinance. And, to make the baptisme of the elect to be no more or­dinarily, [Page 87] then a participation of the carkase of Christs institution, would, I thinke, be an harsh doctrine euen in their owne eares, that deny the spirit to elect infants. More soundly Caluin in locum.. The Apostles, saith hee, are wont euen from sacraments to draw arguments to confirme vs in assurance of our participation of the things therein signed and sealed to vs. For this ought to be an vndenyable principle maintained by all the Godly, that God vseth not to abuse his peo­ple with empty signes, but by his power doth in­wardly make good, what by externall signes he re­presenteth to vs. Wherefore, fitly and truly is Bap­tisme stiled the Lauer of Regeneration. Now, if Baptisme be fitly and truly invested with this title, because God, doth vndoubtedly make good vnto his owne, inwardly, that which is externally signified; who will call that baptisme, in the language of scriptures, that is destitute of inward grace?

I know the shift which is laid hold on, Obiect. to beat off all these plaine & pregnant proofes: viz. that none of these places speake of baptisme with reference vnto any, but such as bring with them actuall faith to lay hold vpon the grace of [Page 88] Baptisme: and that therefore these texts proue no­thing touching the communicating of the spirit to Jnfants.

Answere. Answ. Although I haue said enough before to keepe off any intelligent Reader from this euasion: yet, for their sakes, who thinke no obiection sufficiently answered that is not fully remoued euery time it is vr­ged, I will be content to take the paines of giuing a fowrefold answere herevnto.

1 1 I answere by denying the proposition obiected: viz. that all the places before cited speake only of persons growne and endow­ed with actuall faith. This were answere e­nough till the thing obiected be proued, as well as said. For that which is but only affir­med without proofe, may be denyed with­out wrong to any. I willingly admit that some places of scripture speake of faith; some, of repentance, when the speach is of actuall sensible apprehension and applicati­on of the inward grace of baptisme, by an act of the person himselfe making vse of, & receiuing comfort sensibly from his bap­tismeCol: 2.12. Act: 2.3 [...] 1 Pet 3.21., But this proues not that the inward [Page 89] grace is neuer at all conferred vpon the elect where there is not actuall faith to apply the same: no more then those places which re­quire actuall faith in all persons of yeares, vp­on paine of damnation if they be capable of the ordinary meanes of grace, & admitted to them, doth proue that not so much as an in­fant can be saued, without actuall faith. An opinion so harsh and rash, as no learned man would willingly be guilty of.

2 I answere that of infants actuall faith 2 is not required: for that cannot be iustly re­quired, whereof, in the ordinary course, their very infancy makes them altogether vncapable. This I haue so largely proued in the former Chapter, as I should right­ly bee condemned of tautologizing, if I should stand to repeat all the testimonies before alleaged out of Zanchius, Martyr, Cha­meir, D. Ames, D. Davenant, and the Author of the Com. vpon Tit. who all confesse that in in­fants it is enough to make them capable of the inward grace in Baptisme, that they haue the Holy Ghost in them insteed of faith to apply the same.

[Page 90]3 I answere that (if these men will yet 3 so farre gratifie the Anabaptists as to contend further that elect infants cannot be capable of the inward grace in baptisme, without faith;) infants may, in some sense, bee admit­ted to haue faith; and so, not vncapable of the inward grace of that Sacrament. Hee that said, whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that beleeue in me Mat. 18., would giue vs to vn­derstand that it is no extraordinary thing for infants elected to haue in them some degree of faith: not actuall, but potentiall, initiall, & seminall, which is no other then the spirit of faith communicated, as Zanchius, and Peter Martyr, well.

If my words bee worth nothing with these men, if none of the worthies before al­leadged may prevaile; let them yet giue some credit to Mr Aynsworth, a man farre enough off from from Popery, and also from confor­mity to our present Church. He, in his Cen­sure of a Dialogue of the Anabaptists, when hee comes to that objection of theirs against the Baptizing of Infants: viz: that if it cannot be proued that infants haue their hearts sprink­led [Page 91] from an evill conscience, haue faith, re­pentance, &c. they ought not to be baptised; giues a double answere; 1. That this makes as much against circumcision of old, as a­gainst baptizing of infants now. 2. That Christian infants haue the graces they speake of, repentance, faith, regeneration, &c. though not ac­tually, or by way of declaration to others: yet they haue through the worke of the SPIRIT the seed and beginning of faith, vertually, and by way of inclination; so that they are not wholy destitute of faith and regeneration, though it bee a thing hid and vnknowne vnto vs, after what manner the Lord worketh these in them. This hee proueth solidly and fully: and among other his ar­guments this is one: They to whom God giueth the signe and seale of righteousnesse by faith, and of regeneration, they haue faith and regeneration; for God giueth no lying signe; hee sealeth no vaine or false covenants: But God gaue to infants circum­cision, which was the signe and seale of the righte­ousnesse of faith and regeneration. Gen. 17.12. Rom Col. 2.11. Therefore infants had (and consequently now haue) faith and regene­ration, though not in the crop or harvest by decla­ration, [Page 92] yet in the bud and beginning of all Christi­an graces. Then marke his censure of such as deny this. They, saith hee, that d ny this reason, must either make God the Author of a lying signe & seale of the covenant to Abraham & his infants, or they must hold that infants had those graces then, but not now: both which are wicked and ab­surd to affirme. Or they must say that circumcision was not the signe and seale of the righteousnesse which is by faith; and then they openly contradict the Scripture, Rom. 4.11. And after more full proofe, hee makes this sharpe conclusion; Wherefore they are but a faithlesse and crooked ge­neration, that notwithstanding all that God hath spoken and done in this kind, doe deny this grace of Christ to the infants of his people, and the seale or confirmation of this grace by baptisme now, as it was by circumcision of old. Thus Hee, pressed hereto by the Anabaptists,Read the Au­thor himselfe pag. 42. 43. 44. 45. whom it is not possible otherwise to shake off.

4 4 Lastly I answere by retorting the ar­gument vpon them that make it. The same necessity which lies vpon an infant to haue actuall faith, ere hee can partake of the spirit of Regeneration by his baptisme, will also [Page 93] be as strong to exclude him from participa­tion of the outward signe. For, baptismall washing is (at least) significant and obsig­nant too, sealing to the party baptized the inward grace signified and exhibited, by their owne confession that so much quarrel me for this Position of Baptismall Regenera­tion. And if so, what should an infant doe with this honourable mystery and sacred Ordinance, he being not able to put any dif­ference between baptismall washing by the Minister, and ordinary washing of his face at home by his Nurse? Now then, if his pre­sent incapacity hinder not his partaking of the outward element, which yet, in the or­dinary course of dispensation, requires faith to discerne the vse and mystery of this Di­vine Institution, as well as to apply the in­ward grace thereby signified; what should hinder but that an infant belonging to the election of grace, should partake initially of the grace of the Sacrament, by the Spirit which is in him insteed of actuall faith? De­ny him this, and deny him the Scacrament it selfe.

By all this I hope it is now evident out of the Scripture it selfe, that either elect infants doe ordinarily partake of the spirit, in Bap­tisme; or else, they receaue not whole Bap­tisme, but only a peece if wee consider this Ordinance, as the Scripture doth: viz: not only as an outward signe, but as that which euer is accompanied with the inward grace to all that are elected.

My other Arguments drawne from Di­vine Testimony, are two: and both taken from two distinct vses of Baptisme, which now follow in order.

Arg. 2 2. Argument.

Major. That which was ordained to bee the Laver of spirituall regeneration & renovation vnto all that are saued by it, must needs containe in it the dona­tion of the spirit, by which this worke may be done.

Minor. But Baptisme was ordained vnto this end that it should bee the Laver of re­generation and of the renewing of the Holy Ghost vnto all that partake of it and are saued, ordinarily.

Therefore Baptisme (taken as the Scripture takes it, for all that which, in baptisme, is vsually giuen to the e­lect) containes in it, ordinarily, the conferring of the spirit to all the elect that partake of it.

The Maior is vndeniable; vnlesse we will maintaine, that the effect may bee produced without it's proper cause: for how can Bap­tisme wash and renew a man spiritually, without conferring of the Spirit? This is as if I should grant a man to speake, yet deny him to haue a tongue; or, to admit him to act and moue rationally, and yet not yeeld him to haue a reasonable soule. This Propo­sition therefore I take for granted.This place was alleadged in the former ar­gument, but to another purpose: there to proue the spirit of Rege­neration to be one maine branch of whole bap­tisme; here to declare the end of bap­tisme, in re­spect of rege­neration.

The Minor is expresse Scripture, Tit. 3.5. Of his mercy he saued vs, by the Laver of regenera­tion and of the renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on vs abundantly through Iesus Christ our Saviour. Therefore the Conclusion is sound.

But you will perhaps except, and say, that the Apostle speakes here of Actuall Re­generation, which, by my former distincti­on [Page 96] and foundation, cannot agree to infants?

Answ: That he speakes of Regeneration, the Text it selfe will cleare it: but that hee speaks only of actual Regeneration wrought by the Word, is not apparent; yea no circum­stance of the Text will warrant any man so to restraine it. The Text tells vs that Baptis­me is the Laver of Regeneration; but that it is only to actuall beleeuers such, what words will beare such an exposition? But to make all sure, let vs heare what Iudicious Calvine, and other of the Learned speake of the true meaning of this place: that so in the mouths of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

1 Mr Caluine, in his answere to the Ana­baptists who deny baptisme to infants vpon pretence of their incapacity of the end of Baptisme, to witt, Regeneration, till they be able to make vse of the Word brings them in thus obiecting: But how, say they, are infants? regenerated in baptisme, they being not capable of so much as any knowledge either of good or euill? To this, saith he, wee answere, that this is the se­cret worke of God, which, although to vs it be not [Page 97] euident, yet we may not say, that therefore it is none at all At quomodo inquiunt, rege­nerantur insan­tes, nec boni nec mali cog­ni [...]ione praediti, nos autem re­spondemus, opus Dei etiamsi cap­tui nostro non subiaceat, non tamen esse nul­lum Instit: lib: 4 cap. 16. Sect. 17.. Now, if he meant not this of what God ordnarily workes in and at bap­tisme, it were no answere to their obiection which lies only against all present efficacy of Baptisme, in the ordinary course, in and vpon Infants.

The same Author, prosecuting the same businesse, to that obiection which they fur­ther make▪ viz. that Circumcision, and therefore Baptisme, is the sacrament of repentance and faith? Saith thus; Although infants, in the moment of their circumcision, were not able to comprehend what that signe meant, they were yet, truly, cir­cumcised for the mortification of their corrupt and defiled nature, which, after they came to yeares, they meditated on. In a word, this obiection is ea­sily answered: they are baptized vnto future repen­tance and faith, which graces although they be not formed (actually) yet by the secret operation of the spirit the seedes of both doe lye hid in them. By this answere, is at once ouerthrowne whateuer these men obiect against vs from the signification of Bap­tisme: such as that, for example, where Paul calls baptisme the Lauer of regeneration and renewing [Page 98] by the Holy Ghost, from whence they would con­clude that this sacrament is to be administred vn­to none, but to such as are capable of these graces Etsi infantes, quo circumcide bantur mom [...]n­to, quid sibi vel­let lignum illud intelligentia non comprehende­bant; vere ta­men circumci­debantur in na­turae suae cor­ruptae, as co [...]ta­minatae, mortifi­cationem, quam adulti postea m [...]ditarentur. Deni (que) nullo ne­gotio solui potest obiectio haec, baptizari in futuram paeni­tentiam & fi­dem: quae etsi nondum in illis formatae sunt, ar [...]ana tamen spiritus operatione vtrius (que) semen in illis late [...]. Hac responsione semel euertitur quicquid aduersum nos torquent a baptismi significatione petitum: Quale estielogium quoa Paulo insignitur, vbi vocat laua [...]rum regenerationis & renovationis, vnde ratiocinantur nemini nisi earum rerum capaci conferendum. Idem, ibid: Sect. 20.. So then Caluine you see, avoucheth infants to be partakers of Regeneration, in Baptisme, although not actuall, yet seminall and ini­tiall; and that from this very place of the A­postle.

2 Zanchius, in his Confessions, affirmeth that not only those of yeares, but infants al­so, if they doe truly and indeed belong to the coue­nant; are, in baptisme so sealed, as they that euen now are incorporated by the Holy Ghost into Christ; and that therefore among other titles giuen vnto baptisme, in scripture, it is called the Lauer of regeneration Baptismus primum Novi Faederis sacramentum est quo cum omnes, qui vel paenitentiam peccatorum professi, fidem etiam in Christum, adeoque in deum patrem, Filium & spiritum sanctum profitentur, vel altem propter parentum pietatem ad faedus pertinere creduntur. 1 Cor. 7.14. tum maxime illi qui vere ad faedus pertinent, Christo tanquam ei iam per spiritum sanctum incorporati obsignantur: vt non sint amplius sui turis, sed illius, per quem in faederis societatem, e [...] (que) in vnum corpus cum eo sanctisque omnibus, & in omnium spiritualium caelestiuin (que) bonorum participationem, asciti esse dicuntur. Act. 19.5, 1 Cor. 6.19. Per hunc baptismum, tanquam lauacrum regenerationis, a peccatis vi sanguinis Christi, mundati, & cum Christo consepulit in mortem. vt quemadmodum ille resurrexit a mortuis per gloriam patris, sic & nos in novitate vitae ambulemus, vnde & sacramentum paenitentiae in remissionem peccatorum, sacramentum fidei, [...]ymbolum faederis, Lauacrum regenerationis, &c. appellari consueuit lib. confess. cap. de Cap. de Bap. sect. 1..

[Page 99]3 Peter Martyr expounds this place not only of that which is conferred on persons of yeares endued with actuall faith, but e­uen vpon elect infants also, by virtue of the Holy Ghost supplying in them the roome of faith. I alleadged the place before: yet be­cause hee speakes so fully to this purpose, I will repeat the same againe. This Author hauing declared himselfe for the efficacy of baptisme, doth with al giue vs to vnderstand that in persons of yeares faith is so requi­site that without faith they neither receiue the seale of iustification, nor yet of sancti­fication, in their baptisme? For as Austin well, the efficacy of baptisme is from the word of institutiō indeed; yet not as it is pronounced by the minister, but as it is beleeued by the receiuer. But what benefit then can baptisme (may some say) bring to Infants who can­not actually beleeue? This,Loc. Com. clas: 4. cap. 8. sect. 2. See our for­mer Chap. where the Authors own words are quoted in the Margent pag. 51. our Author wise­ly and roundly preuents, by adding, that in Jnfants who by reason of their tender yeares can­not beleeue, the Holy Ghost supplies the roome of faith. And, to assure vs that such infants haue the spirit, he alleadgeth this very place of our [Page 100] Apostle to Titus, saying; The effusion of the holy Ghost also is promised in Baptisme, as the Apostle expressely writes to Titus, (where he saith) who saued vs by the Lauer of regeneration, Vide etiam, Iucer de vi & effic. Bapt. i [...]ter opera Anglic. pag 597. and of the renewing of the Holy Gost, which he shed on vs abundantly by Jesus Christ our sauiour. Lastly, the Author of the Commentary vpon Titus, as hath bin already declared at large in our former chapter, is expresse for this, that not only persons actually beleeuing, but euen elect infants also doe, ordinarily, receiue, in the right vse of Baptisme, the inward grace. And this he speakes as grounded on this very text, vnlesse we will say that he forgate his text, when he spake it; which to impute vn­to him, were, in my apprehension, a wrong­ing of him.

wherefore I conclude this argument thus. If the iudgment of Caluine, Zanchius; Peter Martyr, And the Author of our English commentary on Titus, be sound in exposition of this scripture, it doth proue the ordinary communication of the spirit of Regenerati­on as well to infants elect; as to persons of yeares that actually beleeue; which is the [Page 101] substance of our maine Position.

My third and last argument is drawne Arg. 3 from another vse of baptisme; to wit our insiti­on and incorporation into Christ. I frame it thus.

Maior. That which baptizeth elect in­fants into the death of Christ, & initi­ally incorporateth them into the true mysticall body of Christ, in their baptisme; must needs be, ordina­rily, communicated to them, in that ordinance.

Minor. But it is the spirit of Christ that thus doth.

Conclus: Therefore the spirit of Christ, according to the scripture, is ordina­rily giuen to the elect in Baptisme

The Maior is confirmed thus. The elect are baptized into Christs death, when they are baptized outwardly and sacramentally; therefore they must needs then receiue that by which this is done. The Antecedent is ex­presse scripture. Rom. 6:3.4. Know ye not that so many of vs as were baptized into Christ, were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by Baptisme into death, &c. What is [Page 102] this to infants? May some man say, Yes, saith S. Augustine, Ac per hoc e­tiam ad ipsos (nempe parvu­los) pertinet quod sequitur, dicens conse­pul [...]i illi sumus per baptismum in mortem, Aug. Enchirid: cap. 52. it doth pertaine euen to infants also, when it is said wee are buried with him by bap­tisme into death. And Learned Danaeus, com­menting on that passage of Austin, defends him in it, if it be restrained to the elect, and vnderstood only of initiall regeneration Ergo & si­ [...]em & regene­rationem ha­bent parvuli electi Dei, et si nondum illius opera nobis ap­parent: & ea dona habent pro ratione aeta­tis, (i.) pro ca­pacitate vasis. I amb. Dan. in Augustin Euch. ibid..

And doth Calvine set narrower bounds vnto this Text? Calvine doth not say, as some doe, that the Apostle wrot thus, because they were actuall beleeuers to whom he writeth: but, he affirmes it to be, from the very insti­tution it selfe, the common benefit of all vs that are now baptized; although hee could not but know and remember that we were not baptised at mans estate, but in our infan­cy. His words are these. It is a thing, saith he, out of all controversie true, that we put on Christ in Baptisme, & were baptised vpon this very ground, that we should be one with Him Extra con­trouersiam in­duere nos Christ­um IN B [...]p­tismo & hac lege nos baptiza ri, vt vnum cum ipso simus. Caluin. in Rom. 6.. Was Calvine thinke we, asleep, when hee wrote this; or, they, not in a dreame rather, that doe deny it? Let no man tell mee that, hee, and all the Authors I haue named or can name, doe more often speake against this very Positi­on, [Page 103] then for it; and that it is easie to produce them, in more then an hundred places, avou­ching this expressely, that the sacraments doe profit no man but him that hath faith to apply the grace offered in them: and so Caluine himselfe speakes plainly, in that very place, besides sundry other passages that he hath elsewhere to this very purpose touch­ing the efficacy of Baptisme.

I am not either so ignorant, as these men would make me, in the Authors I quote; nor yet so impious as to corrupt mine Authors in such manner, as some insinuate. It is ve­ry true that Caluine Instit. lib. 4. cap. 14. & cap. 15. nec non in Commentarijs eius super Sanct. script. passim. and other reuerend Di­uines doe often require faith as the hand of the soule; to apply vnto the beleeuer the grace offered in the Sacraments. But is it not also as true, that both Caluine and the rest haue also written all that which I haue al­leadged out of them? If not, then let mee beare the blame for euer: If so: why doe men complaine that I wrong mine Authors? If I alleadge a passage out of Bellarmine against the Popish Tenet in any particular, will any man conclude that I haue wronged him be­cause [Page 104] they are able to shew that Bellarmine himselfe writes the quite contrary in some other parts of his workes? If I finde an Au­thor speaking for me, I cannot be iustly tax­ed of falsifying him, although he speake ne­uer so directly against me in another place; vnlesse it appeare that he retracted the first, and professeth an alteration of his iudg­ment. So then these Quick and Great-Read men, are too hastie in their sentence that, J haue wronged mine Authors, although I had no other Plea in Barre, but only this.

Howbeit that I may giue them a little further satisfaction then they deserue, know all men by these presents, that for asmuch as Caluine and the rest doe acknowledge a pre­sent efficacy of Baptisme in infants elected, although they doe not actually beleeue; and for asmuch also as these Authors haue neuer recanted such their iudgement of those in­fants; those other speeches of theirs, which require actuall faith, must of necessity be vnderstood with limitation and reference only to such as are of yearsSo Caluin in Mat. 19.14. talium est reg­num Dei, thus writeth a­gainst the A­nabaptists cauill Quod autem non ali­ter reconciliari ros Deo & a­doptionis haere­des fieri conten­ducit quam fide hoc de adultis fatemur: sed quod ad i [...]fan­tes attinet fal­sum esse convin­cit hic locus. whereas they contend that wee are only by faith re­con [...]iled to God, and made heires of adoption: we acknow­ledge it to be true of per­sons of years, but that it is false in the case of infants this very place of our Saui­our conuinc­eth, because it saith that euē of such is the kingd [...]me of God.; for asmuch as none of these can haue any actuall comfort [Page 105] and sensible evidence of the inward grace conferred vpon him in his Baptisme, nor bee actually a partaker thereof, on his own part without actuall faith to apprehend and ap­ply the same. Thus that Acurate Chameir ex­presseth himselfe, in treating of this very Ar­gument; sometimes hee affirmes Iustificati­on & Regeneration to be conferred in bap­tismeLib. 5. de Sa­cram. cap. 4. par. 8 9. 10.; yet in some places seemes to deny either Iustification or Sanctification to be giuen to any, till they come to age and beleeueLib. 2. de Sa­cram. cap. 7. par. 24. 25.. Howbeit the cleare expression of his mea­ning purgeth him from the guilt of contra­dictiō, & preserueth his Reader from stum­bling and mistaking. For, in one place for all, he shewes what hee meanes by that san­ctification and Iustification proper vnto such as are of yeares, that, in the moment of baptisme of infants is not conferred: viz: 1. Not any iustification or sanctification at all, by any physicall efficacy in the externall Sa­crament, either in; or after the administratiō of it. 2. Neither the sense of iustification, nor yet sanctification, as it imports an actuall change. By the former he meanes that by which actu­ally [Page 106] a man applies that iustification vnto himselfe which is properly not in vs, but in God: which sense can bee in none but such as are of yeares: by sanctification hee vnder­stands an actuall change both of the vnderstan­ding and will from falsehood to truth, from evill to good Apello autem iustificationis sensum, cum per quem actu nobis applicatur iu­stificatio illa, quae propriè est extra nos, & in Deo: qui sensus non est nisi in adul­tis, & iudicio vtentibus. San­ctificationem verò notum est significare actu­alem immutati­onem tum intel­lectus tum vo­luntatis, à falso in verum, à malo in bonum. Cham. ibid. lib. 2. cap. 7. par. 12.. This is that which he denies to bee ordinarily communicated to Infants, So did Calvine, and so doe IFatemur ergo baptismum pro cotempore (id est, ante fidem) non profuisse nobis hilum, quando in eo nobis oblata promissio, siue qua baptismus nihil est, neglecta iacebat Instit. lib. 4 cap. 15. sect. 17. And in Sect. 15. of the same Chapter. Ex hoc Sacramento, quemadmodum ex aliis omnibus, nihil assequimur nisi quantum fide accipi­mus. All this he speakes of actuall application and sensible evidence on the part of the receaver, or else he must needs be held a contradictor of himselfe in all the sixteene Chapters..

But least any should imagine that I cun­ningly play the Lapwing in carrying away my Reader from the Obiection made a­gainst me out of Calvine, with telling him a faire tale out of Chameir; I will returne to Calvine againe, and make good what expo­sition I formerly gaue of such passages as may be vrged against me out of Calvine, or others; and that by Calvine himselfe.

This learned man hauing largely confu­ted the blind error of the Anabaptists that furiously deny the baptisme of Infants, [Page 107] shewes also that, how ever he admit of some present efficacy of Baptisme even in and vp­on them; his meaning is not that they doe ordinarily partake of actuall Regeneration in that Ordinance, vnlesse they bee such as die in their infancy. For thus hee explicates himselfe in this particular. Whom God vouch­safeth to elect, if after they haue receaued the Sa­crament of Baptisme they dye before they come to yeares, them he doth renew by the power of his spi­rit, by vs incomprehensible, as it seemeth best vnto himselfe. But if they liue to yeares of discretion, whereby they may be instructed touching the truth of their Baptisme, they are then thereby the more provoked to the study of newnesse of life, the impres­sion whereof they then come to learne that they were endowed with from their very infancy, where­by they ought more seriously to meditate vpon the same all the daies of their life. And hither is to be referred that which Paul teacheth touching our burial with Christ by baptisme, in those two places, (Rom 6.4. Col. 2.12.) For there the Apostle meant not to shew that it is necessary for him that is to bee baptized, to be thus buried with Christ before hand; but what simply baptisme doth effect in and [Page 108] vpon them that are now baptized Quos electione sua dignatus est dominus, si ac­cepto regenera­tionis signo, p [...]ae­senti vita ante demigrent quam adoleverint, eos virtute sui spiri­tus nobis incom­prehensa reno­vat, quomodo expedire solus ipse providet. Si grandescere in aetatem contin­gat, quâ baptis­mi veritatem edoceri queant, hinc magis ad renova ion is studium accen­dentur, cuius tessera se a pri­ma statim in­fantia donatos esse discent, quo eam toto vitae decursis meditarentur. Eodem referatur quod duobis locis Paulus docet, nos Christo per baptismum consepeliri (Rom 6 4. Col, 2.12) nam eo non intelligit consepul­tum Christo iam prius eam esse oportere qui baptismo sit initiandus: sed quae baptismo subest do­ctrina simpliciter declarat; id (que) iam baptizatis. Instit. lib. 4 cap. 16. sect. 21. If any shall quarrell the translation of the word tessera (which is rendred properly enough) let them knowe that Calvine meant more by it then only an outward badge or signe, as appeares by what he had spoken in the very next Secti [...]n before: viz. Baptizari in futuram paenitentiam & fidem (infantes dicit) quae etsi nondum formatae sunt, arcana tamen spiritus operatione vtrius (que) semen in illis latet In English thus. They (viz: Infants) bee baptized vnto future repen­tance and faith, which graces although they be not yet formed, yet by the secret opera­tion of the spirit the seed of them both lies hid within them. So in cap. 15.1 Proinde qui­bus visum est baptismum non aliud esse quam tesseram ac notam qua religionem nostram apud ho­mines profitemur, quo modo Imperatoris sui insignia praeferunt milites, in suae professionis notam; ij quod primum erat in baptismo non perpenderunt.. By this all men may perceiue that howeuer he affirmes that the vigor & life of this Sacrament can­not bee sensibly applied on the part of the Re­ceauer, by any but by persons of yeares that haue actuall faith, yet hee admits of some initiall work of the spirit euen vpon in­fants, if they belong to the election of grace. The like may bee said of all other moderne Divines that require actuall faith for the ap­plication of the inward grace of baptisme, on the part of the Receauer. Thus much be spoken to this so often iterated obiection, by which so many doe thinke to strip mee at once of all those Testimonies of Calvine, or others whom I haue produced. And so [Page 109] much also of the Maior Proposition of my present syllogisme.

The Minor Proposition was this: Jt is the spirit that thus incorporateth vs into Christ. This is evident in the expresse words of St Paul. For by one spirit are we all baptised into one body, 1. Cor. 12.13. Vpon which words the learned Morton thus writes. Why doth not the Apostle say simply that, by one spirit wee are made one spirituall body: but rather thus, we are bapti­sed into one body? certainely that hee might shew that a man is then incorporated into the Church in the beginning of his conversion and regeneration; at what time Christ communicating his spirit vnto him, makes him a member of the invisible Church, as the Minister in the administration of baptisme doth admit and ingraffe him into the body of the Church visible Quare non simp iciter dicit per vnum spiri­tum simus vnū spirituale cor­pus; sed potius, baptizamur in vnum corpus? Certè vt osten­deret hominem in Ecclesiam in­corporari in ini­tio conversionis & regeneratio­nis suae: quo tem­pore Christus spiritum suum communicans, eum invisibilis Ecclesiae mem­brum facit, vt Minister bap­tismi admini­stratione eum in visibilis Ecclesiae corpus admittit & inserit. Mor­ton in locum..

If it bee answered, that all this may bee granted, and yet the maine point still denied: because the spirit may be giuen to the elect, not at the moment of baptisme, but at their effectuall calling by the Word: I reply; then, betweene the time of Baptisme and effectu­all calling outwardly by the word, baptisme [Page 110] is but a bare signe, to such as liue to yeares. But this is confessed by all sound Divines to be a meere fancy derogatory to Christs In­stitution; and is condemned in the Sacra­mentarians This Marlorat vpon Ephes 5.26 well saw, and therefore saith, that therefore the Apostle teacheth that in Baptisme we are wa­shed, because there God doth both testifie our abla­tion, and also effect what hee represents. For vn­lesse the truth of the thing were ioined with the outward signe, it were improper to call Baptisme the Laver of the soule Quod baptis­mo nos ablui do­cet Apostolus, ideo [...]st quod il­lic ablutionem nostram testa­tur Deum & si­mul efficit quod figurat. Nisi e­nim coniuncta esset rei veritas & exhibitio, im­propria haec esse▪ locutio, Baptis­mus est Lava­crum animae. Marlor. in Eph. 5.. And in that very place, saith Calvine, Paul comprehends the whole church of Christ, no lesse then where hee saith in another place 1. Cor. 12.13 that by baptisme wee are ingraffed into the body of Christ: so as from both wee collect that infants, whom Christ reckons among the rest of his members, are to be baptized, least they should bee torne from his body Vniversam e­nim Ecclesiam complectitur Paulus, vbi di­cit mundatam lavacro aquae. Nihilo secius & ex eo quod alibi dicit, nos in Christi corpus per Baptismum esse insertos, colligimus, in­fantes, quos mē ­bris suis annu­merat, bapti­zandos esse, ne à suo corpore divedantur. In­s t. lib. 4. cap. 16 Sect. 22..

If yet they answere; that this followes not by their doctrine: viz: that baptisme is a bare signe; because they grant it to bee also a seale of after Grace: I reioyne: this helpes not (vnlesse they grant, as Calvine freely doth some principle and seed of grace bestowed, [Page 111] ordinarily, in Baptisme:) because by their o­pinion it is a seale of some thing absent that is to be expected in reversion only. They de­ny all present exhibition and collation of a­ny grace in the moment of Baptisme, by vir­tue of Christs institution; and so they doe not make it a signe signifying but rather prog­nosticating only some future effect: which is a new kind of Divinity, that, so farre as I am able to iudge, destroyes the nature of a Sa­crament, by denying to it both the cheefe part of it, viz: the inward grace thereby sig­nified and together with the signe exhibi­ted and conferred on those that truly and in­deed be within the couenant; as also the vi­gor and efficacy of the word of institution which makes the vnion betweene the signe and the thing signified; & lastly this spoiles elect infants of the inward seale; to wit, the spirit of Christ which incorporates them in­to Christ as members of his body. Were not such possessed with too much prejudice they would not so easily leap ouer all these materiall arguments, but bee more sober in their censures, and wary in their doctrines. [Page 112] I deny not future efficacy of baptisme after the act of administration; but I onely plead for some efficacy of it when it is admini­stred. In a word, I will conclude this mat­ter in the very termes of Calvine before allea­ged: Infants are baptized vnto future repentance and faith; which graces although they bee not yet formed in them; yet, by the secret operation of the spirit the seeds of them both ly hid within them Ibid vt supra Inst. lib. 4. cap. 16. Sect. 20..

I see, me thinkes, some ready to wrangle further, and to obiect Obiect. to me after this man­ner: Some places haue beene alleadged in­deed to proue, that in baptisme the spirit is giuen to the faithfull: but yet wee heare not of one text that saith directly and expreslly that elect infants, doe, then, receiue the spirit?

To this I answere That when any of you will shew me any expresse text of scripture that in direct termes mentions the baptizing of infants, I will also shew you an expresse Text to proue their reception of the spirit in Baptisme. But if you cannot doe the one (nor is it much materiall, so long as there is such solid ground in the scriptures, and such vn­doubted arguments may be thence drawne [Page 113] to proue the lawfulnesse and necessary vse of Paedobaptisme;) what equity is it to require of me the other? How is it possible to shew an expresse text prouing that infants doe re­ceaue the spirit in Baptisme, when no text is found that mentions their baptisme. If in the iudgement of all the Churches of Christ, it be sufficient (as indeed it is) to confute all the Anabaptists in the world, that infants are within the couenant, & therefore ought not to be debarred of the seale of it, no more then infants of old were debarred of Cir­cumcision by reason of their inability and incapacity to vnderstand that mistery; that to them belongs the kingdome of heauen, and therefore the admittance into it must be yeelded them; that they are a part of Christs Church, yea of his body; lastly, that, al­though they haue not actuall faith, yet, they haue the spirit of faith to apply vnto them the grace of baptisme, if God so please: and therefore in all these respects they may be baptized, notwithstanding that no Text of scripture enioyne it in so many words: Then this also ought to satisfie all ingenuous and [Page 114] moderate men, that by like sound and ne­cessary consequences I haue from the scrip­tures made good this point in hand. The places alleadged I haue seriously weighed, and found them all cleare for the proofe of my conclusion. Nor haue I beene mine owne iudge, or expounded them out of mine own head, but taken such expositions as the most Learned Iudicious, Reuerend, and eminent Diuines of this last age, as well as others of lesse note had set vpon them, long before I medled with them: least any man should say, that I take vpon me to coine expositions of mine owne, that might looke fauourably vpon that which is taken to be mine owne cause.

One thing more remaines that in a word must be dispatched. There are some I know, will like well enough the allegations of Scripture brought to proue that the Elect, that all the elect doe receiue the spirit in Bap­tisme: but with all they finde fault at the re­straining of those scriptures to the Elect only: for they will haue it thus, that the scriptures are cleare to proue, that all that are baptized, [Page 115] doe receiue the spirit in Baptisme, as well as the Elect.

To this I breefly say thus much: The scriptures doe not warrant any such extent of baptismall grace; but plainly teach the contrary. For What doe these men make of that place, in Rom. 8.30. Whom be did predesti­nate them he also called, and whom he called, them he also iustified, and whom he iustified, them he al­so glorified? The Apostle restraines iustifica­tion and effectuall calling to those that are predestinated, to what? to Grace only? No; to glory, saith the Text expresly.

The ground of these mens mistake is this, that they thinke the efficacy of bap­tisme depends so certainly and vniuersally vpon the Jnstitution, that where there is no wilfull actuall opposition in the party bapti­zed he cannot misse of the effect; to wit, the spirit of grace. But they must know that howeuer by vertue of the institution we may assure our selues that the elect partake of the inward grace yet it is not the institution alone, but GodsSee after­wards in cap. 6. & 7, the iudgments of Caluine, Iunius Dr Iewel, and, Dr Whitaker. preordinatiō of them vnto grace and glory, that makes the sacrament [Page 116] effectuall vpon them, and not vpon others. Wee admit the word, in its kinde, to haue ef­ficacy to beget faith as an instrument in the hand of the spirit: yet it begetts not faith in all? Why? Because they doe resist? That may be true, but why doth it worke faith in o­thers? Cheifly, because they are elected vnto eternall life: so saith the scripture, as many as were ordained to eternall life beleeued Act. 13.48.. Doth S. Luke in that place, thinke wee, meane other then this; that they, and only they that were elected, did beleeue. Lastly, doe but consi­der one plaine place more, it is in Gal. 4.6. Because ye are sonnes, God hath sent forth the spirit of his sonne into your hearts, crying Abba Father. He doth not say, because they had receiued the sacrament of Baptisme, which yet they had done; nor yet, because they did beleeue, which no doubt many of them did; but, because ye are sonnes: now this sonship de­pended not vpon the sacrament, or any or­dinance of Christ; no nor yet vpon their faith & inward grace; but vpon the eternall decree of Gods free Election. Ephes. 1.4.5. So much of [...]e Proofe of this point by the Holy Scriptu [...]

CAP. 5. The iudgment of the Fathers in this point.

I Am now come to the third part of my taske, which is, to proue that this hath beene the iudgement and Doct­rine of the cheife and best approued Fathers of the Primitiue Church. In this, I will enforce my selfe to all possible breuity, contenting my selfe with a few instances, least the worke grow too large and tedious to the reader. And that I may be as good as my word, I will mention only such as liued within the first 500 yeares after Christ: because they that came after may be liable to chalenge.

1 Then,Cyprian. to begin with Cyprian that emi­nent Doctor, and famous Martyr, who is stiled by Gregory Nazianzen, the cheife and most approued Pastor of his time, and the prin­cipall light: so as not only the Churches of Carthage, and Affrick; but throughout the whole Christian world, his fame and admi­ration did spread it selfeGreg. Naz. in laudem Cyprian. [...], &c. Pastorum optimus & pro­batissimus, &c.. Hee in his e­pistle ad Pompaeium De Haeret: baptizandis, [Page 118] giues this for a reason why such as were bap­tized by Hereticks cast out of the Church, were to be rebaptized; viz because there is noe presence of the spirit among such as are not of the Church of Christ; and therefore their baptisme is not sufficient. His words are these. Wherefore, saith he, let them grant that, either the spirit is present where they say true baptisme is; or, that it is no true baptisme, where the spirit is not: because baptisme cannot be with­out the spirit Quare aut & spiritum esse conced [...]m illic, vbi baptisma esse dicunt: aut nec baptisma esse, vbi spir tus non est; quia baptisma esse sine spiritu non potest.. It is true that out of his zeale against Hereticks of that time, who grosly erred in maine Fundamentalls, he was ouer vehement against baptisme administred by such as the Church had then eiected out of her society; because he thence inferred a ne­cessity of rebaptization of all such as were so baptized by such Hereticks: yet the alle­gation reacheth home to our present pur­pose, in that this shewes his iudgment to be clearely for this truth, that the spirit is ordi­narily communicated in Baptisme. Hence he afterwards inferrs, in the same Epistle; The natiuity of Christians is in their baptisme Natiuitas Christi: no [...]um in baptismo est.. And to make it euident that hee vnderstood [Page 119] this to be the ordinary effect of baptisme, euen vpon Infants, he elsewhere declares himselfe expressely. For, in his epistle ad Fi­dum de Infant. Baptiz. he vseth this as an Ar­gument prouing the lawfulnesse of baptiz­ing of infants; that, the spirit refuseth not to communicate himselfe euen to them. The Holy scripture, saith he, declares, that diuine grace is dispenced vnto all, as well infants as others: which was shadowed out in Eli­sha's stretching of himselfe vpon an infant insensible of the Good which the Prophet did vnto himEsse deni (que) a­pud omnes▪ siue infantes, siue maiores natu vnam diuini muneris aequa­litatem decla­rat nobis scrip­turae diuinae fi­des, cum Heli­saeus super in­fantem viduae filium qui mor­tuus iacebat, ita se Deum de­precans super­strauit, vt capi­ti caput, & fa­ciei facies adpli­caretur, & su­persusi Helisaei membra singu­lis parvuli membris, & pedes pedibus iungerentur.. By which it is manifest that, had not Cyprian beleeued that the spirit com­municats himselfe to infants in their bap­tisme, he would scarce haue allowed them to be baptized; for asmuch as this is the cheife ground that he builds vpon, to iustifie their admittance vnto the same. If any shall except against what is vrged out of this last epistle, as being no other then an Heterodox opinion; Goulartius will defend it, if it be restrained to the Elect; and Chameir iustifies Goulartius in that assertionEt verè Gou­lartius, in hunc ipsum notauit locum, Quae­cun (que) profere sâc epistola Cyprianus noster de S. Baptismi in electis Chri­sti varijs effectis vt orthadoxè & ad fidei analogiam scriptum amplectimur. Cham. de sacram. lib. 2. c. 6. parag. 38..

[Page 120]2 Gregory Nazianzen calls Baptisme That Good thing which giues vs initiation into Christ; Gregory Nazianzē which common benifit, and foundation of new life we all receiue from God [...]. Imitationis di­uina bonum, quod commune beneficium, & secundae vitae fundamentū a Deo omnes ha­bemnus. Greg. in Laud. Gorgo.. In his Oration or Ho­mily touching baptisme, after a large and elo­quent narration of the efficacy of baptisme, he saith, that it hath force euen vpon Infants also, and therefore would haue them bapti­zed vpon this ground, that he takes it for granted, that they also are, in some degree, sanctified euen in baptisme. Witnesse that speech of his, It is better that they be sanctified without any apprehension of the thing done, then that they should depart this life without baptisme and initiation And of this thing circumcision may afford vs president: for; that, being the fore-run­ner of baptisme, was administred vnto such as could n thy the vse of reason discerne what it meant [...]. Edit. Graecolat. Billii. Pa is. 1609. Praestatu: abs (que) sensu sanctificari, quam sine sigillo & initiati­one abscedere: At (que) huius rei ratio nobis est circumcisio, die octauo pagi solita quae Baptismi figur [...]m quodammodo g r [...]bat a [...] (que) tis qui rationis adhuc expertes erant offerebatur.. which place I vrge not, to proue the necessi­ty of Baptisme, as if without reception thereof it were impossible for infants to be saued: for I make no doubt that in the time of the Law many infants were saued that [Page 121] dyed before the eighth day wherein they were to be circumcised. But I make vse here­of, only to shew what that Gregory beleeued and taught touching that which is ordina­rily communicated in Baptisme, even vnto Infants as well as others; supposing them to be admitted therevnto.

3 That Great Athanasius, who,Athanasius in his time, was the chiefe, and, in a manner, the on­ly professed Champion the Truth had left her, when (as Hierome complaines) the whole world seemed to be turned Arrian: A man that was, by the sentence of all Divines, the most approued Doctor, as Vigilius Omnium Ec­clesiasticorum virorum iudicio probatissimus. Vigil. cont. Eu­tich. l. 2. c. 4. the Mar­tyr titles him: Hee, in his Booke of Questions dedicated to Antiochus, Quaest: 2. propounds this Question, Whence may a man knowe plaine­ly that he hath beene baptized and receaued the Spirit in baptisme, seeing hee was but an infant when he was baptized? The answere hee giues vnto it is this: As a woman with child by the springing of the babe in her wombe, knowes for cer­taine that she hath conceaved fruit: so the soule of a TRVE CHRISTIAN knowes, not by the reports of his parents, but by the springings of his [Page 122] heart, (especially vpon those solemne dayes wherein Baptisme, and the Lords Supper are administred) and by the inward ioyes that then hee conceaues, that he receaued the Holy Ghost when he was bap­tized [...].. This testimony is so cleare and full, that I knowe not what can be said to evade it He speakes indefinitly, therefore he exclu­deth none that are Christians indeed: but vnto them he doth restraine it in expresse termes; & so, he speaks directly to our present point.

4 Chrysostome, one of the best and clea­rest Expositors of the New Testament, a­mong all the Fathers; calls Baptisme our ini­tiation into Christ Hō. 1. in Act.. And to let vs see that hee meanes it not of an outward admission only into the visible Church, hee afterwards de­clares himselfe, when he makes the spirit to be the cheife part of baptisme, as if there were no baptisme worth that name, which is not accompanied with the presence of the spirit to make it efficacious. Jn Baptisme the cheife part is the spirit, by which the water becomes effectuall [...]. Hom. 1. in Act. [...]. Hom. 40. in Act.. If any shall say, that this proues not that the spirit doth alwaies accompany [Page 123] the outward washing; but rather the contra­ry, because Chrysostome speakes this of the A­postles that had beene baptized, and yet were commanded by Christ after his resurrection to stay at Hierusalem in expectation of the Holy Ghost; saying, Yee shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many daies hence Act. 1.5. I answer, that Chrysostome admits, that in them, the case was such indeed: but, saith he, in vs, both are performed together [...]. Aom. 1. in Act.. I stand not to iustifie his Exposition of the place in respect of what he saith touching the bestowing of the Holy Ghost vpon the Apostles, as if they had not receaued of the spirit in some measure be­fore that time. Let that opinion shift for it selfe as it can. I only vrge the words to shew his iudgment of this thing: viz: that now, we Christians receaue the spirit in bapt [...]sme as well as the outward signeThat this was his iudg­ment even of infants also, appeares in his Homil. on Ps. 14. (i) 15. iuxta Heb. Adducit quispi­am infantem adhuc vbera su­gentem, vt bap­tizetur, & sta­tim Sac [...]rdos exigit ab infir­ma aetate pacta conventa & assensiones, & m [...]noris aetate fi [...]uss [...]r [...] accipit susceptorem & interrogat. Renunciat Satanae, & non dicit, In finem: vel cum Christo [...]mungitur in sinē: sed sta­tim in principio vitae petit renunciationes & coniunctiones.. And yet least any should imagine him to be so grosse as to thinke that all that partake of the outward washing doe receaue the inward grace heare him afterwards in the same Homily, expres­sing [Page 124] his griefe for the contrary. What anguish of heart, saith hee, doe J sustaine so often as I see some, even when they are ready to breath their last, runne vnto Baptisme, and yet are never a whit the more purged by it [...]. Eduio Savil. Ibid. Quos aestus pe­ctoris sentio, quoties alios vi­deo subextre­mum balitum festinantes ad initiatio [...]em, nec hinc fieri puriores. ibid. prope sin. edit. Lat.. This Father therefore did not hold, that all that are baptized doe par­take of the Spirit in Baptisme; how euer his iudgment were cleare for it, in the Ordinary course of Divine dispensation. Nor let any Arminian thinke to take me tardy, as if I abu­sed the Reader by alleaging that which mine Author speakes of Persons of yeares (who doe oftentimes ponere obicem, actually oppose the spirit of grace even while they be present at the meanes of grace;) to proue the like in the case of Infants. For howeuer it be too true that Persons of yeares doe oft times resist the spirit by a wicked heart and corrupt life; yet this Father speakes of men of another disposition: for he speaks of men euen at the point of death, apprehending a necessity of remission of sinne by Christ, and hastening to Initiation Festinantes ad initiationem. Ibid., which argues an ear­nest desire after the grace of Baptisme; and yet they goe away without it. Therefore [Page 125] they of whom he speaketh, are not such as doe resist the spirit when they are baptized: and so, the words are pertinent vnto my purpose.

5 Basil, to that Question, How Christians are saued? Giues this answere; By being regene­rated by the grace receaued in Baptisme [...]. De Spir. Sanct. c. 10. And a little after, Baptisme is vnto mee the beginning of life and the day of regeneration is the beginning of daies, in that respect [...]. ibid.. In another place, spea­king of Baptisme, hee saith that it is the death of sinne, the new birth of the soule [...]. Conc: exhort. ad sanct. Bapt. &c. I will not adde more out of him. This may suffice.

6 Hierome, in his third booke of Dia­logues against the Pelagians, brings in the Pelagian thus cavelling with the Orthodox; I pray thee tell me, why are Infants baptized? To which he shapes this answere; that in bap­tisme their sinnes might be remitted Dic quaeso, & me omni ibera quaestione, quare insantult bapti­zentur? Orthod. vt iis pectata in baptismate di­matantur. And so much the Author of the Perpetuity of the regenerate mans estate, ac­knowledgeth, and professeth pag. 456. edit. 2. And in the conclusion of that booke, that hee might at once hisse that absurd distinction of the Pe­lagians (that, children are baptized not for re­mission of sinne, but to make them partakers of the kingdome of heauen) out of the Church, hee thus speakes in the person of the Orthodox, [Page 126] vnto the PelagiansHoc vnum dicam, vt tan­dem finiatur o­ratio; aut no­vum vos (Pela­giani nempe) le­bere symbolum tradere vt post Patrem, Filium & Spiritum Sanctum, bapti­z [...]tis infantes in regnum cael [...] aut si vnum & in pa [...]vul [...]s & in magnis habe­tis baptisma, e­tiam infantes in remissionem peccatorum baptizandos in si­militudinem prevaricationis Adam credatis.. That I may at length put an end to this discourse, I will say but this one thing: either you must forge a new Creed, and, after that forme of baptisme, I Baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost, adde this, that thou maist partake of the kingdome of heauen; or, if yee doe beleeue that there is but one baptisme of persons of yeares and of infants, yee must hold that infants also are baptized for remission of sinne, as well as others. But this cannot be without the spirit in an infant (then, at least, if not be­fore) communicated to apply the blood of Christ vnto him, as the same Father, against the Luciferians Hi [...]rom [...]uer. Lucifer: Nulli hominum sine spiritu sancto peccata [...]imit­tuntur. Quomodo ant [...] ­quis sordib [...] a­nima purgat [...], quae [...] habet spiritum? ibid. Ne (que) enim [...] lavat anima [...], sed prius ipsa la­vatur à [...]p ritu, &c. vide locum., expresly teacheth. Sinnes are remitted to none, without the Holy Ghost. And a little before, thus: How can that soule be purged from old sinnes that hath not the holy spirit? And againe, in the same Tract; It is not water that washeth the soule, but the water it selfe is first san­ctified by the spirit; not vnlike to that speech of Moses in another case, The spirit of God mo­ved vpon the waters: whence it is evident that bap­tisme cannot be without the spirit. To conclude, Christ, saith he, was baptized, and receaued the spirit in Baptisme; not that hee had it not before, [Page 127] for he never was without it; but that it might be manifest to vs, that true baptisme is that wherein the Holy Ghost is present. And to this also Cal­vine giues testimony, in his Institutions Lib. 4. cap. 16. Sect. 18..

7 Ambrose, speaking of the parts of bap­tismeDe iis qui ini­tiantur mysteri­is, cap. 4. Ires sunt in baptis­mate, aqua, san­guis, spiritus; si vnum horum detrahas, non stat baptismatis sacramentum. Quid enim est aqua sinc cruce Christi? elemen­tum commune sine vllo sacra­menti effectu?, There are, saith hee, in Baptisme, three things, Water, Bloud, and the Spirit. Take away but one of these, and yee destroy the Sacrament. For what is water without the bloud of Christ; or a common element, without any effect of the Sacra­ment? If any shall say, that this is not cleare for the efficacy of Baptisme at the time of administration; hee shall therein shew so much ignorance in that Fathers Writings, as that the Learned would iustly blame me, if I should take vp more time to demonstrate this vnto him, and gnash their teeth at such an Ignoramus.

8 Lastly, Augustine that great & famous Doctor of the Church is knowne to all to be very frequent in this very Argument. It shall suffice to quote a place or two. There is not, saith heSerm ad in­fantes. Nulli est aliquantenus am­bigendum, tunc vnumquem (que) fi­delium corporis sanguinis (que) Do­mini participem fieri, quando in baptismate effi­citur membrum Christi., the least doubt to bee made by any man, that then every one of the faithful is made par­taker of the body and bloud of our Lord, when in [Page 128] Baptisme he is made a member of Christ. If any thinke that by the faithfull, he meanes onely persons of yeares actually beleeuing, let them consult his EpistleEpist. 23. tom. 2. to Boniface a de­vout Earle touching the baptizing of Infants; wherein they shall finde that Father to com­prehend infants in the number of the faith­full, and that by reason of the Sacrament of faith. AgaineEpist. 57. ad Dardanum, Dicimus in bapti­zatis parvulis, quamvis id ne­sciant, habitare spiritum sanctū. Sic enim cum nesciunt quam­vis sit in eis, quemadmodum nesciunt & mé­tem, cuius in iis ratio quâ vti [...]dum possant veluti quaedam scintilla sopita est, excitanda aetatis accessis., We say that in infants baptized, although they be not aware of it, the Holy Ghost doth dwell. For so are they without knowledge of his being in them, although he bee in them; as they are, of the reasonable soule; reason being in them who yet cannot make vse of it) like a little sparke raked vp vnder ashes, and is not stirred vp but by accesse of yeares. And in the same Epistle, with which I will make an endHabitare au­tem ideo & in talibus dicitur, quia occultè in eis agit, vt suit templum eius, id (que) in proficien­tibus & profici­endo perseve­rantibus profi­cit. ibid., The Holy Ghost is said therefore to dwell in them, because he secretly workes in them, that they may bee his tem­ple; which hee afterwards perfecteth in those that profit and make further proceedings, & persevere in the same. Then which speech what can be said more plaine and full to my present pur­pose touching the Holy Ghosts ceazing vp­on infants, even in baptisme, to prepare them [Page 129] in his owne time to be Temples for him­selfe?

Such as would extend the efficacy of bap­tisme indifferently to all infants, will be per­haps ready to wrest all these testimonies out of my hand & make vse of them against mee? for asmuch as all these allegations doe seeme to make for the vniuersall extent of grace to all that are baptized, without restraining it to the Elect as I doe.

It is true the Fathers except none, yet this proues not that therefore they held that none are exempted by God: nay they often declare the contrary. They, considering the charge which Christ hath laid vpon his ministers to deny baptisme to none to whom belongs the kingdome of God, and not taking vpon them to pry into Gods se­crets to know who they be that belong to his election; and who, not: as they baptize all, so they pronounce of each one, that his sinnes are remitted, and the spirit is giuen him in baptisme: yet withall, confining the donation of these gifts only to such as haue indeed interest in the kingdome; although [Page 130] they take not vpon them to declare who they be in particular that haue no share therein. Now, that notwithstanding their indefinite and illimited speeches, touching the efficacy of Baptisme they did holde and declare that all are not indeed partakers of the grace of baptisme, shall appeare by one or two of them, which I thinke is enough to declare the iudgement of the rest that were sound among them.

Not to repeat what I formerly vrged out of Chrysostome, to shew that he was not of opinion that all, without exception, did cer­tainely receiue grace in baptisme, although they did not actually resist it when they were baptized: I will mention only one pas­sage out of Hierome, and another out of Au­gustine concerning this point.

St Hierome, if it be not falsely fathered on him, writing on Galath. 3.In Gal. 3. si igitur qui in Christo baptiza­ti sunt Christum induerunt; manifestum est eos qui non sunt induti Christum, non fuisse baptizatos in Christo. Ad eos enim qui fi­deles & baptis­ma Christi con­secuti putaban­tur dictum est: Induite ves Do­minum Iesum Christum (Rom. 13.) Si quis hoc corporeum & quod oculis car­nis aspicitur, a­quae tantum ac­cepit lavacrum, non est iudutus deminum Iesum Christum Nam & Simon ille de actibus Apost: acceperat Lava­crum aquae: verum quia sanctum spiritum non habebat, indutus non erat Christum. Et Haeretici, vel Hypocritae, & si qui sordide victitant, videntur quidem accipere baptismum, sed nescio an Chri­stum habeant indumentum. Ita (que) consideremus ne sorte & in nobis aliquis deprebendatur, qui ex eo quod Christi non habet indumentum, arguatur non baptizatus in Christo.. As many of you as haue beene baptized into Christ haue put on Christ, hath these words; If they who haue bin [Page 131] baptized into Christ, haue put on Christ, it is ma­nifest that they who haue not put on Christ were not baptized into Christ. For vnto such as were thought to be faithfull, and to haue attained the baptisme of Christ, it is elsewhere said, put ye on the Lord Iesus Christ. Jf any hath receiued only that which is corporall and visible, viz: the Lauer of water, he hath not put on Iesus Christ. For euen Simon magus receiued the externall washing, yet because he had not the Holy Ghost, therefore he did not put on Christ. And so Hereticks Hypocrites, & wicked liuers seeme indeed to receiue baptisme, but I know not that they haue put on Christ as a gar­ment. Therefore let vs lay this to heart, least any man be found among vs that being not cloathed with Christ, should proue not to haue beene bapti­zed into Christ.

Some perhaps may snatch at this testimo­ny and say that St Hierome speakes here of such as are of yeares that doe obicem ponere, make resistance to grace; and not of infants of which the question is: & if he did speake of infants, yet here is not a word of election, as the reason why some doe receiue that which others goe without. To these two [Page 132] cauills I must make answere in order. First I deny that he speakes only of persons of yeares, for from the generall obseruation, th [...]t, there be some who were not indeed baptized into Christ, he makes application in particu­lar to himselfe and others, most of which were baptized in infancy, (though some of yeares were daily added) and euen them would he haue to consider seriously whe­ther it were not thus with themselues, al­though baptized in infancy. Nor doth he make reluctation in Simon Magus to be the reason why he was not baptized into Christ; but his not hauing of the spirit: and this is as much in effect, as if he had said, he was not baptized into Christ, because he was not in the number of Gods sonnes by election: for the scripture assignes this as the reason why some doe partake of the spirit; because they are sonnes Gal. 4.6,. The rule of opposition therefore, must needs make the contrary true: no son no spirit: no spirit, none of Christs Rom. 8 9.. Wherefore, secondly, I say, that in effect he restraines the grace of baptisme only to the elect; and for this reason, that they be elected. For if Simon [Page 133] could not be baptized into Christ, for want of the spirit: it is true that he could not be baptized into Christ, because not elected: for if he had beene a sonne by election, hee could not haue missed of the spirit, as is clear both in Galath. 4.6. and in Rom 8.14. Now, forasmuch as the Holy scriptures doe so clearly teach that none partake of the spirit vnto sanctification and saluation, but only the elect, (as by and by we shall, by occasi­on, see confessed also by Lombard himselfe;) it were too great a wrong to so worthy a Fa­ther as St Hierome was, to interpret his speech vttered according to scripture, as hauing in it a meaning contrary to the Scripture, to bolster vp a tottering error of some that drew it immediatly from Bellarmine and the rest of that crew.

What need many words. If Hierome be not thought cleare enough, then see my other witnesse, St Augustine; who, if Lombard abuse him not, I am sure, will put all out of doubt. The Sacramenta in solis electis efficiunt quod figurant, ita Lombard: 4. sent. dist. 4. in A. sacraments, saith he, doe effect or worke that which they signify, only in the elect. I willingly admit that Lombard seekes to giue an answere [Page 134] to him; but such, as rather stablisheth then opposeth our present position. See what hee writes.

Peter Lombard takes vpon him through­out his fourth distinction of his fourth booke In princ. Sa­cramentum & rem simul sus­cipiunt omnes parvuli, qui in baptismo ab originali mun­dantur peccato: quamvis qui­dam diffitean­tur illis qui pe­rituri sunt par­vulis in baptis­mo dimitti pec­cata; inniten­tes illi verbo Augustini (Sa­cramenta in so­lis electis effici­unt quod figu­rant.) non intel­ligentes illud ita esse acc pien­dum, quia cum in alijs effici­unt sacramenta remissi [...]nem, non hoc iis fa­ciunt ad salu­tem, sed solis e­lectis., to shew the efficacy of baptisme. He begins with infants, & as his owne opinion, affirmes first, that they all obtaine remission of sinne in bap­tisme. Then he alleadgeth the opinion of o­thers that seemed to thwart his, Some, saith he, thinke that some infants notwithstanding bap­tisme may perish, grounding themselues vpon that of Augustine, the sacraments doe effect that which they represent, only in the elect. But to euade this, he saith, that they want vnderstanding in S. Austin who doe not so interpret him, as that the Sacraments doe not procure remission of sinne vnto saluation, but only vnto the elect. In which an­swere of Lombard to the allegation of the ad­uerse parties out of Augustine, wee may be­hold these three particulars. 1 A distinction betweene that remission of sinne which is indifferently sealed vnto all in baptisme, and that grace which is necessary for them to obtaine in it, that are vndoubtedly saued by [Page 135] it. 2 A confession that this last to witt, grace vnto salvation, is peculiar only vnto the elect Gab. Biel in 4 Sen. dist. 4. 42 concl. 7. assigning some causes why some re­ceiue more grace in bap­tisme then o­thers doe, a­mong the rest he puts down this for one. Cum Christus communiter ponitur nosse omnia quae De­us scientia visi­onis, per conse­quens novit e­lectos omnes, & ad quem gra­dum gloriae sint electi. Potuit ergo pro praesti­nato ad maiorem gloriam offerre plenius passionem suam & praecipue eum se obtulit pro genere humano ad hoc vt impleretur praedestinatio divina: And this be saith is a meritorious cause of the inequality of grace giuen in baptisme. And a little before ibid., he assigned e­lection to greater glory, to be the cause why some receiue greater grace; so he vrgeth it out of Scotus, which shewes clearely that the sounder Schoolemen did euer take it for granted that the efficacy of baptisme was extended only to the elect.. 3 A concession that all they doe receiue in baptisme what is represented thereby in the outward signe. I willingly acknowledge that his owne opinion is, that in some sense, all infants doe receiue remission of sinne in baptisme; but yet, in such a sense, as doth not suffice for their saluation, if they be not of the number of the Elect, as his owne words doe expressely manifest in the place alleadged, which restraint of his is full the same with that I holdSt Aug. de Pec. Mer. & remis. ad Marcellinum lib. 2. cap. 27. Sicut generatio carnis peccati per vnum A­dam in condemnationem trahit omnes qui eo modo generantur, sic generatio spiritus gratiae per vnum Iesum Christum ad iustificationem vitae aeternae ducit omnes qui eo modo praedestinati rege­nerantur. Sacramentum autem baptismi prosecto sacramentum regenerationis est. And the same S. Augustine De bono perseuerantiae. cap. 11. Proinde sicut Apostolus ait, non volentis ne (que) currentis; sed miserentis est Dei: qui & parvulis quibus vult, etiam non volentibus ne (que) currenti­bus subvenit, quos ante constitutionem mundi elegit in Christo, daturus etiam iis gratiam gratis, &c..

And thus out of the first Father of the Po­pish schoolemen that euer reduced the body of Diuinity into a method out of the Fathers, you haue a confession that S Augustine was [Page 136] clearely of this iudgement, that only the elect doe receiue the spirit, & grace in baptisme; which therefore we haue reason to beleeue to be also the iudgment of all the Fathers that liued in his age or before him; vnlesse we will make him a priuate opinionist that dissenteth from the rest, which were a mise­rable shift, with palpable iniury offered to so eminent a Lamp in Gods Church, who hath on his side Chrysostome & Hierome, that for substance speake as much as he doth; which is enough to acquit him of the staine of a priuate opinion, and sufficient to stop the mouthes of all gainsayers, that would faine shake out this arrow shott out of his bow into the sides of that error touching the equall efficacy of baptisme vpon all that are partakers of the outward Element; an absur­dity not hatcht in the Church by the spirit of error, till after Peter Lombard was dead & rotten.

It may not be denyed that the Fathers in many passages speak not so distinctly & cau­tiously, as the grosse mistakes of after ages would haue required; yet their excessiue [Page 137] speeches and flowres of Rhetorique must not be so farre vrged, as to weaken their au­thority in what they tooke vpon them to speake positiuely, properly, and determina­tiuely, according to the Scriptures. When no Aduersary as yet appeared to abuse their speeches to a wrong sense; they spake more securely and freely, not giuing such exact bounds to their words, as otherwise they would haue done. If they found any that would presume vpon saluation, because they had beene outwardly baptized; whe­ther they were Hereticks, Hypocrites, or lewd liuers, Chrysostome and Hierome (as we haue seene) begin then to restraine the sauing grace of Baptisme only to such as be­leeue and liue as they ought. And if any thinke that Election makes no difference be­tweene man and man, but that such as are not elected, as well as the elect, may bee par­takers of Baptismal grace equally; S. Austin will take off that opinion with protestation, that the Sacraments doe not effect what they signifie, but only vpon the elect: and this, Lombard him­selfe will confesse to bee true, of the efficacy [Page 138] of baptisme vnto saluation. When therefore we meet with any of the Ancients that doe not thus limit their assertions, we must yet conceaue them to be of the same mind with S. Hierome, & S. Augustine in this point; espe­cially considering that the Scriptures them­selues (as in the former Chapter hath beene declared) doe so bound the same, from which we ought not to conceaue that those sounder Fathers would dissent, forasmuch as those three Worthies before alleaged (who are better Expositors of the mindes of the rest of their Brethren that liued with them or before them, then any peruerse Pa­pist or Arminian either is, or can be,) haue so fully and perspicuously declared themselues agreeable therevnto. And thus much con­cerning the iudgment of the Fathers.

CAP. 6. The Confessions of Reformed Churches.

I Doubt not but that I shall meet with some spirits that will deride and scorne all these testimonies of [Page 139] the Fathers, as the dreames of erring menNec tamen Patres aliud di­cunt, quā quod nos dicimus, fie­ri nos in baptis­mo novos homi­nes, & peccata nobis remitti, et spiritum sanctū esse efficacem: omnia haec nos damus; sed non ideo sequitur, sa­cramenta con­ferre gratiam ex opere operato quasi quia sunt efficacia organa spiritus sancti, ideo ex via sua & ex opere ope­rato efficacia sunt. Whitak. de sacram. in genere quest. 4. cap. 2. Et paulo post: ibid. Tribuunt illi (Patres nem­pe) multum bap­tismo, & meri­to quidem, remissionem pec­catorum, grati­am, vivificatio­nem, regenerati­onem, & alia huiusmodi: & forsan aliqui nimium tribuunt: quanquam re vera nihil dicunt. quod non satis commode exponi potest. Non enim dicunt illam gratiam esse inclusam in aqua, aut ex opere operato couferri: sed spiritum sanctum esse in aqua & per aquam efficacem, quod ex eo Basilij lo­co constare potest, quem affert bellarminus, [...], &c. vide ibi plura, in pag. 73. 74.; and so will bee ready to say; it is not much matter what the Fathers speake, forasmuch as they spake and wrote a great deale more than any sound Diuine will take vpon him the iustification of, or is able to defend. Therefore it is requisite that I now shew what the Churches of Christ, since the last happy Reformation, haue all conspired to acknowledge and professe in their severall Publique confessions, printed at Geneva, concer­ning this point: by which it will appeare, that herein they doe, in substance, concurre with those Fathers that some shallow braines please to set so light by. The iudgment of our owne Church, as it is expressed in the Forme of Baptisme, the Catechisme, and Articles of Religion, wee haue already seene at large We are therefore now to produce the Con­fessions of forraine Churches only, which here follow in order.

[Page 140]1 The Helvetian confession, cap. 20 runs thus:Baptizari in nomine Christi, est inscribi, ini­tiari, & re [...]ipi in faedus, at (que) fa­miliam, adeo (que) haereditatem fi­liorum Dei, im­mo iam nuncu­pari nomine Dei id est, appell [...]ri filium Dei pur­gari item à sor­dibus peccato­rum, & donari varia Dei gra­tià, ad vitam novam & inno­centem. To be baptized in the name of Christ, is to be inroled, initiated, and receaued into the couenant and family, and so into the inheritance of the sonnes of God: yea to be euen now called by the name of God, that is, to be called a sonne of God; to bee pur­ged from the filth of sinne, and to bee endowed with the manifold grace of God, vnto a new and inno­cent life. And a little after:Nam intus re­generamur, pu­rificamur & renovamur à Deo per spiri ū sanctum &c. for we are inwardly regenerated, purified, and renewed by God through the Holy Ghost. And for a close of that Chap­ter, they adde;Damnamus Anabaptist [...] qui negant bap­tizandos esse in­fantulos recens natos à fideli­bus. Nam iux­ta doctrinam evang li [...]am, horum est reg­num Dei, & sunt in foedere Dei [...] itaq, non daretur eis signum foederis Dei? Cur non per sanctum baptisma initiarentur, qui sunt pec [...]um & in Ecclesia Dei? Wee condemne the Anabaptists, who deny young infants borne of faithfull parents to be admitted vnto baptisme. For according to the doctrine of the Gospell, theirs is the kingdome of God, and they are within the covenant of God: why therefore should not the signe of the couenant of God be giuen vnto them? Why should they not bee initiated by holy baptisme, that are Gods pecu­liar, and within his Church?

2 The confession of Scotland. Certò credimus per baptismum nos in Christo Iesu niseri, [...] quam omnia nostra peccata teguntur & remittuntur participes fieri. We doe cer­tainely beleeue that by baptisme wee are ingraffed into Jesus Christ, and made partakers of his righ­teousnesse [Page 141] whereby all our sinnes are done away.

3 The Belgicke confession. art. 34. thus speakes.SVOS igitur OMNES ius­sit Dominus in nomine Pa [...]ris filii, & spiritus sancti pura aqua baptizari, vt sig­n [...]ficaret san­guinem Christi per spiritum sanctum id [...]m praestare & effi­cere internè in animâ, quod a­qua externè o­peratur in cor­poribus. Therefore did the Lord command all of his to be baptized with pure water, in the name of the Father, the Sonne, and the Holy Ghost; that he might signifie that the bloud of Christ by the Holy Ghost doth performe inwardly in the soule, that which the water doth effect outwardly vpon our bodies. And that they vnderstand this of In­fants also, they afterward expresse thēselues, by declaring against the Anabaptists, that even infants partake of Christ in baptisme, pro modulo suo, according to their capacity, as well as others: saying,Re vera Chri­stus non minus sanguinem suum effudit vt fide­lium infantes, quam vt adultos ablueret: ideo (que) signum seu sa­cramentum rei, quam Christus eorum causa est operatus, illos re­cipere concenit. certainely Christ shed his bloud that hee might no lesse wash infants of faithfull parents, then those of yeares; and therefore it is requisite they should also receaue the signe or Sacrament of that thing which Christ for their sakes accomplished.

4 The confession of France, which is also the confession of Geneva, professeth this,Agnoscimus duo tantum sa­cramenta toti Ecclesiae com­munia, quorum prius est baptis­mus, nobis testi­ficandae nostrae adoptionis da­tus quoniam in eo inserimur Christi corpori, vt eius sanguine abluti, simul etiam ipsius spiritu ad vi­tae sanctimoniam renovamur. Art. 35. We ac­knowledge only two Sacraments common to the whole Church, the former whereof is Baptisme, gi­ven [Page 142] vnto vs to witnesse our adoption, because in it we are ingraffed into the body of Christ, that being washed with his bloud wee might also be renewed by his spirit vnto holinesse of life. Againe in the 37. Art: Credimus, si­cut antea dictū est, tam in coena quam in baptis­mo. Deum nobis re ipsa (i) verè & efficaciter donare, quic quid ibi sacramenta­liter figurat; ac proinde cum sig­nis conin [...]gimus veram possessio­nem ac finitio­nem eius rei quae ibi nobis offer­tur. We beleeue, as is aforesaid, that as well in the Lords supper, as in baptisme, God doth be­stow vpon vs in very deed; that is to say, truly, and effectually whatsoeuer hee therein sacramentally doth represent vnto vs: and therefore with the signes we ioyne the true possession and fruition of that thing which is therein offered to vs. And in Art. 38 thus Dicimus itaq, elementum a­quae, quantum­vis eaducum; nobis nihilomi­nus vtrè testifi­cari interiorem animi nostri ab­lutionem in san­guine Iesu Chri­sti per sancti spi­ritus efficaciam. Rom. 6.3 Ephes. 5.26..

5 The Argentine confession, cap. 17. thus determineth;De Baptisma­te ita (que) confite­mur, id quod passim scriptura de illo praedicat, eo sepeliri nos in mertem Christi, coagmentari in vnum corpus, Christum induere, lavacrum rege­nerationis, peccata abluere, nos salvare, Rom 6 3. 1. Cor 12. Gal 3. Tit. 3. Act. 22. 1. Pet. 3. Touching Baptisme we confesse that which the scripture every where affirmeth of it: that, thereby wee are buried into the death of Christ, knit together in one body, we put on Christ; it is the laver of Regeneration to wash away our sins, and to saue vs, Rom. 6 3. 1. Cor. 12. Gal. 3. Tit. 3. Act. 22. 1. Pet. 3.

6 The Augustane confession. art. 9.Docet quod infantes per baptismum Deo commendati, recipiantur in gratiam Dei, & fiant filij Dei, sicut Christus testatur, Mat. 18. non est voluntas patris vestri qui est in coelis, vt pereat vnus ex parvulis istis. teach­eth [Page 143] that infants being by baptisme commended vn­to God, are receaued into the fauour of God, and made his sonnes as Christ testifieth: Math. 18. say­ing; it is not the will of your father which is in hea­ven that one of these little ones should perish.

7 The Saxon confession cap. 14 thus.Retinemus et infantium bap­tismum, quia certissimum est promissionem gratiae etiam ad infantes pertine­re &c. nec iudi­camus hunc mo­rem tantum o­tiosam ceremo­niam esse, sed vere tunc à deo recipi & san­ctificari infan­tes. We retaine the baptisme of infants also, because it is most certaine that the promise of grace belongs even to infants &c. nor doe we iudge this a meere idle ceremony, but that then they are truly receaued by God, and sanctified.

8 The confession of Wirtemberg, cap. de Bapt. to the same effect:Docemus eum qui baptizatur in nomine Pa­tris, filii, & spi­ritus sancti, vn­gi spirituali Chrysmate; hoc est fieri memb [...]ū Christi, & dona­ri spiritu sancto &c. We teach, that he that is baptized in the name of the Father, of the Sonne, and of the Holy Ghost is anointed with a spiritu­all chrysme: that is, he is made a member of Christ, and endowed with the Holy Ghost.

9 To all these we may adde the pious and orthodox confession of the Palatine, extant in the same Harmony of confessions; De virtute & efficacia sa­cri baptismi cre­do & confiteor, liberos nostros, quia in hoc foedere, vt iam dictum, etiam ipsi vna includuntur, cum in articulos antiquae nostrae & catholicae fidei baptizantur, sicut in iis ipsis educari & institui debent, etiam cruentis mortis domi­ni nostri Iesu Christi, omnium (que) eius bonorum quae illic morte sua acquisivit, vnà participes fieri: id (que) hoc modo, quod quemadmodum externum sigillum, sacrosanctum sacramentum, nempe elementa­rem aquam à ministro ve [...]bidivini, extrinsecus in corpore recipiunt, ita quoq, simul à Christo ipso, effuso illius sanguine, in animabus suis, hoc est interne baptizantur, & per spiritum sanctum de inte­gro, seu in novas creaturas regenerantur. Touching [Page 144] the force and efficacy of holy baptisme, I beleeue & confesse that our children (forasmuch as they also are included together with vs in the covenant be­fore spoken of) when they are baptized into the Articles of the ancient and catholike faith (as in them also they ought to bee trained vp and instru­cted) are made partakers as well as we of the blou­dy death of our Lord Iesus Christ, and of all other good things which in that his death he hath procu­red: and that in this manner; viz: that as they re­ceaue the outward seale, to wit the holy Sacra­ment, the elementary water from the Minister of the word externally in the body; so also together & at once by Christ they are washed with his bloud in their soules; that is to say, they are internally baptized, and are regenerated a new as new crea­tures by the Holy Ghost.

But some may obiect that, this last is not the Confession of the Church of the Palati­nate, but only of Frederick the third, the Pals­graue of Rhene? To which I answere, 1. By confessing it to bee true that it was indeed the Confession of that religious Prince; yet such as was approued of by that whole Church, as appeares by the inserting of it a­mong [Page 145] the publique Confessions of the Churches, nor is there any other confession of that Church to be found in the Harmony of Confessions, but only this; by which it is e­uident that the whole Church of the Palati­nate, considering how full this confession was, & how exactly according with their publique catechisme, thought it needlesse to draw any other publique body of con­fession, but rather to rest in this so well per­formed to their hands. 2 I say that it doth fully agree to the established doctrine of that Church set forth in their publique cate­chisme. For in the 69 Quest of that Catech: this is demanded;Qua ratione in baptismo ad­moneris & con­firmaris, te v­nici illius, sacri­ficii Christi par­ticipem esse? By what ground art thou admonished and confirmed that in thy baptisme thou art made a partaker of that one and only sa­crifice ef Christ? Quod Chri­stus externum aquae lauacrum mandavit, addi­ta hac promissi­one, me non minus certo ipsius sanguine & spiritu a sor­dibus animae: hoc est, ab omni­bus peccatis me­is lauari, quam aqua extrinse­cus ablutus sum, qua sordes cor­poris expurgari solent. The answere to it is this. Be­cause Christ enioyned that outward lauer of water, with this promise annexed to it, that J should be no lesse certaine that J am washed by his bloud and spirit frō all the filth of my soule; that is from all sins, thē that I am externally washed with water, wherby the staines of the body are wont to be purged away.

To which I may further adde, that lear­ned [Page 146] Pareus, in his larger explication of that catechisme, how euer he require faith in the receiuer that will haue sensible possession & benefit of the graces of that Sacrament; yet in his commentary vpon the 74 Question of the same, vndertaking to proue against the Anabaptists the lawfulnesse of baptizing of infants, the second argument which hee there vseth is this;Ad infantes ecclesiae perti­net beneficium remissionis peccatorum & re­generationis (h. e.) infantibus aeque ac adultis remissio pecca­torum per sanguinem Christi, & spiritus sanctus fidei ef­fector promit­titur; ergo in­fantes Christianorum debent baptizari. that remission of sinnes by the bloud of Christ, and the Holy Ghost the worker of faith, is promised to infants; as well as to those of yeares, and that therefore infants ought to be baptized Againe, in his answere to the second obiection of the Anabaptists by which they would proue that infants ought not to be admitted vnto baptisme; namely, because they beleeue not. he thus saith;Infantes enim credunt suo modo, pro modo aetatis quia ha­bent inclinatio­nem ad creden­dum. Fides inest inf [...]ntibus potentia & inclinatione, licet non actu, vt in adultis. And a little after. Habent etiam infantes spiritum sanctum, & ab eo regenerantur pro modo aeta­tis suae, sicut Ioannes baptista impletus fuit spiritu sancto cum adhuc esset in vtero matris: & Ie­rimiae, cum nond [...]m produsses ex vtero, sanctificani te. Si infantes habent spiritum sanctum, certè operatur in eis regenerationem, bonas inclinationes, novos motus, & alia quae ad salutem eis sunt necessaria: vel certe haec omnia ipse quasi supplet, & ad baptismum eis sufficit, iuxta d [...]ctum Petri, quis potest arcere ab aqua eos, qui spiritum sanctum acceperunt, sicut & nos, Act. 10. they haue faith, although not actuall; yet, potentiall, and by incli­nation; or at least the holy Ghost himselfe suppli­eth the roome of it, and so sufficeth for their bap­tisme: For he that hath receiued the holy Ghost [Page 147] ought not to be excluded from baptisme; accord­ing to that of the Apostle in Act. 10.47. which that Author applies to this very purpose.

Thus haue we the Confessions of nine seue­rall Churches of cheefest note beyond the seas, professing and publishing as much as those eight Fathers of old, and as our owne Church at home, touching the efficacy of Baptisme of elect infants; or, if you will, in­definitely of all infants supposed to be true­ly and indeed within the election and co­uenant of grace.

Some, haply, will be medling here againe, and say that all these confessions doe not set such a restraint vpon the efficacy of bap­tisme, as our present position doth, but ex­tend it indifferently vnto all. But to such I must giue the same answere that I did be­fore, because the obiection is the same and because also it is set vpon the same san­dy foundation: viz. that the Confessions are indefinite, so as none are excluded from the grace of the sacrament, that are partakers of the outward washing. The forme of ex­pression which the churches vse is indefinite, and it is necessary it should be so, because [Page 148] they speake of baptisme considered in the nature of it when it is applied to those with­in the couenant, to all which the grace of baptisme is ordinarily giuen: yet well know­ing that all are not indeed within the coue­nant, although borne of parents that are members of the visible Church; they doe not say vniuersally that all infants are partakers of the grace of baptisme; but indefinitely, that in­fants are partakers of it. Now, although oft times an indefinite proposition in materia necessaria, be equiualent to an vniuersall: yet it is not alwaies so, (as, hath beene former­ly sh wed) when some circumstance doth occurre that may varie the condition of the partie to whom it is applied As for example, to say that persons so & so educated in their youth doe proue wise and able men for such or such an imployment, makes the proposi­tion to be taken as generally true, by reason of the sufficiency of the meanes of their edu­cation: yet because there may be, and oft is, some inward impediment or incapacity in some particulars, that proposition is by no wise men beleeued to be meant as, vniuer­sally [Page 149] true of all that are vnder the same helpes and meanes. Yea some propositions that are vniuersally propounded, haue yet their limi­tations implied which are discerned by all rationall men that either heare or read them: as for instance; yee are all the children of God by faith in Christ Iesus saith the Apostle, Gal. 3.26. yet who can be so charitable as to thinke that there was not so much as one Hypo­crite in all the Church of Galatia? doth not the same Apostle say elsewhere, that2 Thes. 3.2. all men haue not faith? and againe,Rom. 9.6. they are not all Isra­el which are of Israel? What then? Why, this. The Apostle looking vpon the powerfull meanes of begetting the Galathians vnto God, viz the word and Sacraments; and con­sidering their outward submission and con­formity thereunto, he professeth of them in the Lump, ye are all the Children of God, &c. Howbeit no man will take him otherwise then this; yee are all his children if yee hee indeed inwardly, what yee seeme outwardly to mee, that am willing thus to hope and speake of you.

In like manner then, must the Churches be vnderstood, if they should deliuer them­selues [Page 150] in vniversall termes; for asmuch as all are not partakers of the spirit and bloud of Christ, that are partakers of the outward La­ver of regeneration, as some of the Fathers haue soundly taught vs, in the former chap­ter. Because in the sacrament, by virtue of Christs institution, ordinarily, grace is giuen to all that are by election capable of it; and it being knowne to none who they be that are not elected, it is more apt and proper to speake indefinitly, rather then restrictiuely, in publique Confessions of Churches, that so all may with more care and reuerence at­tend the Ordinance of Christ, and expect that in it, which how euer it be not of a cer­tainty vniuersally communicated to all in­differently, yet is not denied to this, or that, or any particular, presented vnto baptisme, for ought any mortall man can iudge, or may take liberty to presume of any one in particular, howeuer in the generall he may set it downe for a conclusion of truth, that there are some which goe without it.

If yet I should be further pressed, that at least all the Lutherans doe expresly and stifly [Page 151] declare themselues to beleeue that all infants doe certainely receiue the inward grace of baptisme, so as to be indeed regenerated in the very instant of the administration? To this I answere, that it is perhaps true of some particular men among them, that, as all men who professe themselues stiffe followers of such or such a master, doe vsually in tract of time and through heat of disputation, goe further then their master, or then those more moderate men that in former times did adde here vnto him, as they now doe; so these (who therefore, for some errors which they vniustly father vpon that Worthy, are termed pseudo Lutherans) going further then euer L [...]ther did, may take vpon them the de­fence of this error, which yet may iustly passe as a priuate fancy of their owne, and no true issue of his that they seeme so much to glory in; at least no publique definition of any of those Churches, which are at this day (through the violence of some particu­lar men in them) nicknamed Lutherans Sure I am, and so also may all others be that will take the paines to pervse their confessions, [Page 152] that no such thing can be necessarily proued thence: but that the contrary thereunto may as probably be defended, as that which some would deduct from those publique Instruments and declarations of their faith generally agreed vpon amongst them all. And how the rest; to wit, the French, Gene­vean, Heluetian, Netherland, and Palatinate ChurchesD. Fran. White makes it the con­stant tenent of all those whom the quarrells of the world terme Calui­nists, to re­straine the ef­ficacy of b [...]p­tisme only to the elect. In his answere to [...]sh [...] pag. 176 touching the efficacy of bap [...]. of which more after­wards. are to be vnderstood in their Confessions, let the most learned and iudi­cious among them declare vnto vs in their publique writings, which is the next thing that I am to shew.

CAP. 7. The iudgment of Forraine Diuines.

I Shall not need to be long in this, because I haue in great part shewed the iudgment of Caluin, Peter Mar­tir, Zanchius, Junius, Bucer, Beza, Marlorat, Daneus, and Chameir; so farre as they haue o­pened or cleared any of those places of scrip­ture before alledged in my fourth chapter, for the proofe of my position by Diuine [Page 153] testimonies of holy Writ. Notwithstanding, for my words sake, I must doe something, & set downe here also a breefe of their opini­ons concerning this matter, who are of most eminent note in the Church, that it may bee yet more manifest that I haue not set a­broach any new doctrine of mine own. My purpose is not to be curious in marshalling the seuerall Authors which now I am to produce; but rather to ranke them so as I may soonest haue done.

I haue euery wherein my Treatise made vse of Calvine, so as I haue not much more to alleage out of him then that which I haue alleaged before. Howbeit, because he is one of the principall moderne Writers that I build vpon, as being very cleare for this opi­nion, and of best reckoning with those that oppose me herein, I will here also produce him againe, and lay nearer together all such passages of his, as are more scatteringly dis­persed, in my former chapters, vpon the oc­casions there offered vnto me. And because I may bee thought to mistake his meaning, I will together and at once shew you how [Page 154] that renowned and inuincible Chameir doth also vnderstand Calvines writings touching this point: and so I shall dispatch both Calvin and Chameir with one and the same labour.Daniel Chameir tom. 4.

Chameir, dealing against the Pontificians, especially against Bellarmine, touching the efficacy of the Sacraments of the New Testament, doth disclaime that position that, Sacraments are without all efficacy; and complaines of it as a wrong done to all sound Protestants, (whō every where hee calls by the name of Catho­liques, which title the Papists vniustly attri­bute, and appropriate vnto themselues) that they are charged with such an error: For, saith hee,Docent ergo Catholici in Sa­cramentorum perceptione effi­ci gratiam in fi­delibus: at (que) ha­cte [...]us sacrame­ta dicenda effi­cacia. Ne (que) invi­ti audiunt à Greg. de Valen. Dubitari non deber, quin per aliquem tandem mo­dum, quicun­ (que) ille sit, Sa­cramenta om­nino sint cau­sae conferen­tes gratiam. Et sane Calvini verba haec sunt; praestat igitur verè Deus quicquid sig­nis promittit, ac figurat: nec effectu suo ca­rent signa, vt verus & fidelis probetur co­rum Author. So Calvin lib 4. Instit. cap, 14. Sect 17. The Catholiques teach that in recea­ving of the Sacraments, grace is wrought in the faithfull, and that the Sacraments are to bee held efficacious to the ends for which they were ordai­ned. Nor doe they vnwillingly heare that from, Greg: de Valentia, viz: it ought not to be doubted but that in some manner, what ever that be, the Sa­craments are causes conferrring grace. For in very deed the words of Calvin are these; God doth truly performe what euer he promiseth and repre­senteth in the outward signes; nor doe the outward [Page 155] signes want their effect, that Hee who is their Au­thor might proue himselfe true and faithfull of his word. Then Chameir, goes on to explicate how and in what manner they worke grace, not as the principall cause, but only instrumentall; and that not physical, but morall. The same in effect he speakes againe in the same Booke,Calvine. cap. 3. par. 10.Sane tum Calvinus tum omnes Catholici baptismi effica­ciam agnoscunt. Verily both Calvine, and all Ca­tholiques acknowledge an efficacy of Baptisme.

But here some will bee ready to obiect: What need all this? Who denies this? All the Question is, what efficacy doth he, & Calvine meane? Answ: Let Chameir himselfe expli­cate their meaning in his owne words. They are these.Lib. 5. de Sa­cram. cap. 4 par. 8. Nostra senten­tia minus est verbis ampulla­ta, sed longè sim­plicior & solidi­or. Restauratio­nis humanae du­as esse partes in­terim dum ex­pectatur salus plena; Iustifica­tionem & san­ctificationem, &c. The doctrine of vs Catholiques is lesse g [...]rgeously set out (then that of the Papists) but more solid: There be two parts of mans restaurati­on vnto salvation, Iustification and Sanctification: both of which hee briefly explicateth, then, concludeth,Ibid. par. 9. Vtri (que) huic par­ti adhibitum es­se sacramentum baptismum, Scil. significandae & efficiendae. Vnto both these parts the Sacra­ment of Baptisme is applied, to wit to represent, and to effect them. This he makes good out of Cal­vines catechisme, which is the publiquely au­thorized Chatechisme of Geneva and the Church of France. Thus runnes the Cate­chisme. [Page 156] Qu [...]e est bap­tismi significa­tio? Ea duas partes habet: mi ibi remissio pec­catorum, deinde spiritualis rege­neratio figura­tur. What is the meaning of Baptisme? Ans. Jt hath in it two parts: for therein both remission of sinnes, and also spirituall regeneration is repre­sented. And a little after thus the Catechisme explaines the former word representation, Sic figuram esse sentio vt si­mul annexa fit veritas. Ne (que) e­nim sua nobis dona pollicendo nos Deus fru­stratur, proinde & peccatorum veniam, & vitae novitatem of­ferri in baptis­mo, & recipi à nobis certum est I iudge it to be so a figure, that the truth of the thing figured is also annexed to it. For God doth not frustrate our expectation when hee promiseth vs his gifts; and therefore it is certaine that both re­mission of sinnes, and regeneration is both offered to vs, and also receaued by vs in Baptisme. Thus far the Catechisme of Calvine, which doth fully agree to all those passages of his formerly cited; if not only I, but that Reuerend Cha­meir bee not mistaken in construing of his words. Obiect.

There is no question, say some, but that you are both out, if you say Calvine meant this, of the efficacy of Baptisme before faith. For Calvine even in that very Chapter so of­ten before quoted, saith expresly;Instit. lib 4 c. 16. sect. 21. Quare nihil plus in p [...]do­baptismo prae­sentis efficaciae requirendum est qu [...]m vt faed is cum illis à Do­mino percussum ob fi [...]met & san­ci [...]t. Reliqua e­ius sacramenti significatio, quo tempore Deus [...]p e providerit, postea conseque­tur. There is no more to be required in the baptisme of infants in re­spect of present efficacy, than this, that the covenant of God made with them should be ratified & con­firmed: the rest that is signified in that Sacrament, [Page 157] shall follow after, in Gods good time. To which I answere, that this is as much as I contend for; viz: so much efficacy as may for the pre­sent confirme an elect infant in Gods coue­nant. But this confirmation is not, in Cal­vines iudgement, the bare reception of the outward signe, but a conferring of the in­ward earnest of the spirit to assure thē there­by of after grace and glory. For so himselfe speaketh in the 15. chap. and 12. Section of the same booke. The Apostle, saith hee, hauing shewed that we are accepted of God through Christ, hee subioynes,— Subiungit, eos omnes qui iustitia Christi induuntur, si­mul spiritu re­generari, & hu­ius regeneratio­nis nos ar [...]ham habere in bap­tismo. That they all who are cloathed with the righteousnesse of Christ, are also regenerated by his spirit, and the earnest hereof we haue in our baptisme. There is then a confir­mation by an earnest, and this earnest is part of the whole benefit promised, and by him assigned in expresse termes to bee the Spirit [...] Baptizemur in mortificationem carnis nostrae, quae à baptismo in nobis inchoa­tur, quam quo­tidie prosequi­mur; perficietur autem quum ex hac vita migra­dimus ad Domi­num. Sect. 11. yea look but into the very last words of the next Section immediatly preceding the Se­ction now quoted, and you shall finde him there affirming; i That we are baptized vnto the mortification of our flesh, which mortification is be­gun in vs from our very baptisme, we daily goe for­ward [Page 158] in it, and it shall be perfected in vs when wee depart hence vnto the Lord. Loe here, what Cal­vine meanes by confirming and ratifying the covenant vnto an elect infant; and what it is that is to bee expected to follow after in Gods good time, even the breaking out, grouth and perfection of that grace, which was begun euen from his baptisme wherein he receaues the spirit as the earnest penny & Author of the same.

But Calvine directly affirmeth, that,Fatemur ergo baptismum pro eo tempore non profuisse nobis h [...]lum, quando in eo nobis obla­ta promissio, sine qua baptismus nihil est, negle­cta iacebat. In­stit. lib 4. ca. 15. Sect. 17. Till by faith we lay hold vpon the promise sealed in bap­tisme, our baptisme is not worth a rush vnto vs? To this I haue sufficiently answered more then once before; and particularly, in chap. 4. in confirmation of the major Proposition of my third argument: the summe whereof is briefly this; The Sacrament profits no man of yeares, without faith to apprehend the promise: nor can the elect themselues sensi­bly perceaue the fruit and comfort of their baptisme, in the ordinary course, vntill after they haue obtained actuall faith at their actuall conuersion. Nor doth it follow that they had not the spirit in baptisme, because [Page 159] they were not capable of so much as know­ing the same at that time; much lesse, of be­leeuing; for so saith the same Author:Etsi infantes quo circumcide­bantur momen­to, quid sibi vel­let signum illud, intelligentia non comprehende­bant: vere tamē circumcideban­tur in naturae suae corruptae ac contaminatae mortificationem quam adulti po­stea meditaren­tur. Deni (que) nul­lo negotio solvi potest obiectio haec, baptizari in futuram paeni­tentiam & fi­dem; quae etsi nondum in illis formatae sunt, arcanâ tamen spiritus operatio­ne vtrius (que) semē in illis latet. lib. 4. c. 16. sect. 20. Al­though infants in the instant of circumcision were not able to comprehend what that signe meant they were yet truly circumcised vnto the mortifi­cation of their corrupt and defiled nature, which af­ter they came to yeares they meditated on. And a little after; infants are baptized vnto future re­pentance and faith, which graces although they bee not (actually) formed in them, yet by the secret ope­ration of the spirit the seeds of both doe lye hid in them. Now these two places laid together doe make it evident that, when this Author said that Baptisme profits nothing till the pro­mise be apprehended, his meaning was not that the Spirit of God doth nothing at all at the time of baptisme in an elect Infant; but only this, that the party cannot haue any actuall sensible benefit till actuall faith be begotten in him, and the same actually imployed in the application of those good things which were exhibited and sealed vnto him in his baptisme.

But it will be yet further objected, that, [Page 160] admit Calvine were of opinion that some in­fants are endowed with the spirit in their infancy, yet he meant not to ascribe the communication of it to Baptisme; but rather de­clares himselfe to meane it of grace receaued before Baptisme; as appeares by the instan­ces he giues of John Baptist, Documentum praebuit in Iohā ­ne Baptista quē in matris vtero sanct ficauit, quid in reliquis possit. ibid: cap. 16. sect. 17. which he con­tendeth to haue beene sanctified in the wombe by God, who therein gaue vs an experiment of his power to sanctifie others in like manner: now, what is this to the reception of the spirit in Bap­tisme? To this I answere, first, that his maine scope is to confute the Anabaptists touching their supposed impossibility of the capacity of regeneration in an infant, for which rea­son they would not haue him admitted to sacred baptisme, as appeares in the begin­ning of the same Section.Ibid. Rationē quo (que) firmissima obtendere sibi videntur, cur arcendi sint à baptismo pueri, dum causantur non esse per aeta­tem adhuc ido­neos q [...]i signa tum illi [...] myste­rium assequan­tur. Id autem est spiritualis re­generatio, quae cadere in pri­mam i [...]fantiam non potest. Therefore hence I collect that his purpose was to ouerthrow this imaginary bulwarke, by making evi­dent not only a possibility, but (in that parti­cular of Iohn) a certainty of regeneration e­ven in the womb, which was sooner then baptisme; so as their argument could not hold against Baptisme: for, if an infant bee [Page 161] capable of the spirit in the womb, much more then in baptisme, and therefore he ought to be baptized. Secondly, if his pur­pose were not thence to inferre that an infant not only may, but doth receiue the spirit in baptisme, it were no sufficient answere to their obiection: for they might iustly reply thus; if you intend only a possibility of re­generation of some, before baptisme, and not of what is ordinarily conferred in bap­tisme, then it cannot follow hence, that, be­cause in some extraordinary cases some few may be sanctified before baptisme, therefore it ought to be drawne into an or­dinary practise that infants should be bap­tized because by your owne confession, that sanctification which some infants partake of, is not by virtue of the efficacy of bap­tisme, but by and from the speciall pleasure of God manifested vpon some few, here & there without this ordinance Thirdly, I adde that, Caluine doth certainly and expres­ly intend that the first principle of regene­ration, to wit the spirit of Christ is ordina­rily giuen in baptisme: for in the 21 Section [Page 162] of the very same chapter he thus speaketh,Quos electi­one sua digna­tus est Dominus, si accepto rege­nerationis sig­no, prae ent [...] vita [...] e demi­grenr q [...] in ido leuert [...] vir­tute sui spiritus nobis incomp e­hensa re [...] uat quo modo expe­dire solus ipse providet, si grā ­des [...]cre in aeta­tem contingat, qua baptismi veritatem edo­ceri qutant, hinc magis ad ren ua [...]io as studium a cen­dentur, cuius tessera [...]e a pri­ma statim in­fantia donatos esse discent qui cam toto vitae ùccursu meditarcutur. Eodem refe [...]atur quod duobus locis P [...]u­lus decet, nos Christo per bapt [...]smum c [...]nsepchri. Nam eo non intelligit, consepultum Christo iam prius cum esse oportere qui bapt smo sit ini [...]iandus: sed quae b [...]ptismo subest doctrina, simplicitur de­clarat; id (que) iam baptiz [...]tis, vt ne infani quidem baptismo, praeire ex hoc loco pugnaturi sint. In hunc modum & Moses & Prophetae populum admonebant quid sibi vellet Circumcisio qua tamen infante [...]b [...]nati fuerant. Tantundem valet quod & Galatis scribit, eos dum baptizati fuerant, Christum induisse. Q [...]n [...]um id? Nempe vt Christo in posterum viuerent: quia non anio vixissent. Et quanquam in natu grandioribus mysterii intelligentiam signi susceptio consequi debet: parvulos t [...]men alio loco ac numero babendos, mox exponetur, &c. Whom God vouchsafeth to elect, if after they haue receiued the signe of regeneration, they dye before they come to yeares, them he doth renew by the power of his spirit, by vs incomprehensible, as it seemeth best vnto himselfe. But if it so fall out that they liue to yeares of discretion, whereby they may be instructed concerning the truth of their baptisme, they are then thereby the more prouoked to the study of newnesse of life, the pledge and badg whereof they then come to learne that they were en­dowed with from their very infancy, whereby they ought more seriously to meditate vpon the same all the daies of their life. And hither is to be referred that which Paul teacheth in those two distinct pla­ces touching our buriall with Christ by Baptisme, (Rom 6 4. Col. [...].12.) For thereby the Apostle meant not to shew that it is necessary for him that is to be baptized, to be thus buried with Christ, [Page 163] beforehand; but, what simply baptisme doth effect in and vpon them that are now baptized, that so no crackt braines should contend that this doth goe before baptisme. After the same manner Moses & the Prophets admonished the people what was the meaning of circumcision; with which notwithstand­ing their very infants were also signed. This is e­quiualent to that which also the Apostle writeth to the Galathians, that when they were baptized, they put on Christ. Why speakes he so? Namely, that they might now liue vnto Christ, which before that time, they had not done. And although in persons of ripe age the receiuing of the sacrament ought to follow the vnderstanding of the mystery; yet infants are to be accounted of another ranck and number, as shall be presently declared, &c. By all this then it is manifest that Caluines iudgment was for the reception of the spirit in Bap­tisme, in the ordinary course thereof, not­withstanding the instance he giues of the Baptist who receiued his first sanctification in his mothers womb. His meaning was not to shew when an infant receiues the spi­rit, as if he vsually receiued it in the womb, or out of baptisme; but only to proue a pos­sibility [Page 164] that an infant may receiue the spirit in baptisme notwithstanding his infancy, because hee may partake of it in the very womb.

Well; yet when you haue all done, Cal­uine speakes this in some speciall cases only; as namely in the case of elect infants dying in infancy, as the place last cited may declare? Answer. It is very true that Caluine speakes not of all that are outwardly baptized; no more doe I. I restraine it to the elect; and so doth heSpiritus sanctus (quem non omnibus promiscue Sacramenta aduchunt, sed quem d [...]minus peculiariter suis confe [...]t [...]is est qui Dei gra ias secum affert, qui dat sacra­mentis in nobis locum, qui ef­ficit vt fructifi­cent. Instit. lib. 4 cap. 14 Sect. 17.; as is euident in the last passage, quoted out of him. But yet he is not so to be taken, as if he held that, only elect infants who dye in infancy, doe receiue the spirit in baptisme: but that all the elect, whether they liue or dye, doe, ordinarily partake of the spirit in that ordinance. Touching elect chil­dren that dye in infancy, I am of opinion that, by a secret and incomprehensible worke of the spirit, they are actually rege­nerated so as to be made meete to enter into that Holy citty into which no vncleane thing shall euer enter; and this Caluine also professedly maintainethPorro infan­tes qui seruan­di sunt, (vt certe ex ea aeta­te omnino ali­qui seruantur) ante a domino regenerari mi nime obscurum est. Nam si ingenitam si [...]i cor [...]uptionem e matris vtero secum afferunt: ea repurgatos esse opo [...]tet, an­tequam in reg­num Dei ad­mittantur, quo nihil ingredi [...]ur pollutum aut inquinatum In­stit. lib. 4. cap. 16. sect. 17.. They therefore [Page 165] haue a further worke wrought in them, then, ordinarily others haue: howbeit it was neuer the meaning of that iudicious man to restraine all communication of the spirit to such as dye in infancy, but only, to extend it to all the elect, and to the elect only. Why else should he say, that euen.Instit. lib 4. cap. 15. Sect. 12. of which but a little before. WEE are bapti­zed vnto mortification of our flesh, which morti­fication is begun in vs from our very baptisme, and WEE daily goe forward in it, &c.? Why doth he else auouch that,Et sane ideo a prima infantia sanctificatus fu­it Christus, vt ex aetate quali­bet sine discri­mine electos suos in scipso sancti­ficaret. Nam quemadmodum ad delendam in­obedientiae cul­pam, quae in carne nostra pe petrata fue­rat, eam ipsam carnem sibi in­duit, in qua per­fectam causa vi­ce (que) n [...]stra obe­dientiam prae­staret ita ex spi­ritu sancto con­ceptus fuit vt eius sanctitute in assumpta car­ne ad plenum p [...]rfusus, ipsam ad nos trans­funderet. Instit. lib. 4 c. 16. sect. 18. Christ was sanctified from his first incarnation, that he might sanctify his e­lect of euery age, without any difference. For as he tooke to him our flesh, in which he perfectly per­formed perfect & compleat obedience for our sakes, and in our roomes, for the abolishing of the sinne of disobedience committed by vs in the flesh; so he was conceiued of the holy Ghost, that being fully en­dowed with the spirit, vpon the assumption of our flesh, he might transfuse the same holinesse vnto vs? All which he speakes, not of such as dye in infancy, but of such as liue to ripe yeares al­so. And if he meant not to affirme this to be the ordinary course of diuine dispensation, in the baptisme of such as liue to yeares, [Page 166] he could not possibly repell the argument of the Anabaptists who therefore disclaime the baptisme of infants, because they receiue no part of the inward grace signified by the outward signe. For if He should make such an imperfect answere as this; viz: that al­though elect infants who liue to yeares are not then in any degree partakers of the in­ward grace, yet such as dye in infancy, doe partake thereof; and therefore, for their sakes atleast infants should be baptized, if, I say, he should thus answere, they would hisse at so poore a shift, and reply thus; if you would haue all infants baptized, because some of them may dye and in that regard may need baptisme, for as much as they are to be rege­nerated in baptisme, to make them fit for heauen: this is a beggerly kind of reasoning: for, by your owne confession,At periculum est, ne is qui ae­grotat, si abs (que) baptismo deces­serit, regenera­tionis gratia priuetur, mini­me vero Jn­fantes nostros, antequam nas­cantur, se adop­tare in suos pronunciat De­us, quum le, nobis in deum sore promittit, semini (que) nostro post nos. Hoc verbo contine­tur eo [...]um sa­lus Instit, lib 4. c. 15. sect. 20. elect infants, dying before baptisme, cannot perish, so as there is no necessity for baptizing of all infants for the regenerating of a few thereby, that may happen to dye in infancy; in as much as they would be sanctified, although they should neuer be baptized, and the rest, although [Page 167] baptized, would not by your owne doctrine, be then sanctified at all. Thus haue I largly declared the iudgment of that iudicious & iustly honoured Caluine, touching this point: and haue beene more tedious herein, then a iudicious reader will (perhaps) beare with patience: but if any finde fault, my apology is this; they who should haue had more wit and honesty, haue filled the heads of the mul­titude with this conceit, that, howeuer I made a great flourish with the name of Caluine, for giuing countenance to my opinion; yet the truth is, Caluine deliuered no such thing; but is rather against me, then for me, as they are able to shew, at pleasure, to any man that shall require it. Now to cleare my selfe of this foule aspertion vniustly cast vpon me, I held my selfe bound by a kinde of necessity thus copiously to set downe Cal­vines opinion; and to meet with all obiecti­ons that could possibly be put vp against me, to weaken the seuerall testimonies I take out of Caluine for my defence; to the in­tent that after all that can be said on both sides, the impartiall reader, how meanly soe­ver gifted, may be able to iudge, whether [Page 168] Caluine speake with or against me.

What was the conceit of Chameir touch­ing the iudgment of all sound Diuines, and particularly of Caluine, you haue seene in part already. And because Chameir is of such eminent note in the Church, and so expres­ly deliuereth the iudgment of all Protest­ants; and therein, his owne, concerning the efficacy of baptisme vpon elect infants,Constat vtrin­ (que) consentiri in prius caput de Iustificatione, nempe quo ad culpam paenam­ (que) omnium peccatorum, quam in baptismo sig­nificari id est effici neutri negant. In alte­ro itidem capi­te, hoc saltem vtrin (que) poni, sanctificationē (i.) novitatem vitae conferri. Quid igitur controuerti? N [...]mirum h [...]ius sanctificatio [...]is modulum & mensuram, &c. De sacram: lib. 5. cap. 4. par. 10. I will produce a place or two more out of him. He writing of this very point, and stating the controuersy betweene the Papists and vs therein, saith thus; The question betweene them and vs is not. 1 Whether iustification from all our sinnes be offered and conferred in baptisme; for this, neither part denies: nor, 2 whether any sanctification at all be then conferred: for that, both allow: but the punctuall difference is only con­cerning the quantity and measure of sanctification. The Papists contend that sanctification compleat is then giuen; and this we deny, saying that it is only then begun, and is daily perfected by degrees. Here least any man should dreame of an am­bi [...]uity in his speeches, take notice that [Page 169] Chameir in that very chapter had before shewed his meaning to be of that which is ordinarily communicated in the very in­stant of the administration of Baptisme.Duo dissenti­onis capita sunt; primum, de ef­fectu praesenti, alterum de fu­turo. Praesen­tem effectum dico, qui assig­nandus sit huic sacramento in ipso celebratio­nis legittimae momento: futu­rum vero qui post eam cele­brationem. ibid. par. 6. For thus, He; The present difference betweene vs and Papists touching the efficacy of baptisme, may be reduced to two heads; the first touching the present effect of it; the other, touching that which is fu­ture. By the present effect, J meane, saith hee, that which is assigned to be wrought in the very in­stant of the right administration of baptisme: by the other, that which followes after the celebration ended. Then he goes on with his discourse that was but now propounded, to shew that euen in the moment of Baptisme all Ortho­dox diuines doe allow of some present effica­cy of baptisme vpon infants, vnto sanctification, as more at larg appeares in the Author himselfe. Yea so resolute is he for the efficacy of baptisme vpon infants, that he feares not to affirme, that either thē or neuer it takes ef­fect vpon thē See his own words.Etenim tan­tum abest, vt d [...]ceamus nihil agere baptis­mum, nisi cum adoleuerint in­fantes: vt con­tra effectum baptismi, quem D [...]us ipse per se praestet, scia­m [...]s praecedere ipsam celebrati­onem baptismi: Ita (que) aut nun­quam vllum futurum, aut tum esse reapse quum celebra­tur: vere inquā remitti peccata; vere adoptione, sed fieri morali­ter. de sacr. l. 2. c. 6. par. 4. So farre is it frō vs that we should teach that Baptisme effecteth nothing vpon infants vntill they come to age; that on the contrary, we knowe that the effect of Baptisme, [Page 170] which is performed immediatly by God himselfe, (sometimes) goes before the very celebration of baptisme: therefore wee say that, either then, there is some effect, in truth and indeed, when the Sacrament is administred; or else there will never follow after any at all, that is, then our sinnes are truly remitted, and our adoption made sure to vs: but all this, morally, and not by vertue of any inherent force in the outward signes to con­vey those graces naturally to the receiuer by vertue of the outward act performed in such manner as the vertue that is in a potion conveies it selfe necessarily to the expelling of corrupt humors out of that body into which it is receiued. This Physicall efficacy, as they terme it, is a thing which both hee and all sound diuines doe professedly disclaime. To make an end with this Author, He al­lowes an efficacy, we see, expounds himself to mean only a morall efficacy, & this morall effi­cacy he affirmes to be found, not in all; yet in all the elect, as he also presently after declar­eth himselfeQuid ergo; nimirum benè diximus, effecta sacramentorum non aliter ex­pectanda, quam ex institutione: extra quam ex­terna signorum administratio vim nullam ha­bet. Hoc modo sacramenta ipsa valent per se plurimum: id est etiamsi nulla adsit actu pre­sens fides, vt in infantibus, sal­tem electis. De sacram lib. 2. c. 6. par. 40. Wee rightly say, saith he, that the effects, of the sacraments are to be expected only from their institution; without which the externall [Page 171] administration of the outward signes hath in it no force at all. But in this respect (viz. of the institution) the sacraments, of themselues, availe very much; that is, although no actuall faith be present to the receiuer; as for example, in infants, at least in those that are elect. Thus much of the iudgment of Caluine and Chameir, the glory of France, and indeed of all Christen­dome. I will be very breefe, in the rest.

Our next witnesse shall be that great and profund diuine, whom Caluine stiles a most potent man in the Scriptures, Martin Bucer, who treating of the efficacy of baptisme, plainely a­voucheth that,Nec emim ser­uat Baptisma adultos nisi cre­dentes: salus quidem baptis­mate offertur omnibus: reci­piunt autem il­lam adulti non nisi per fidem; infantes per ar­canam spiritus sancti operatio­nem, qua ad vi­tam aeternam sanctificantur. Ex bis iam omnibus locis clare perspicimus, baptisma commendari nobis, vt instrumentum divinae misericordiae, quo deus non sua, sed nostra causa dignatur vti, vt quo electis suis, quibus ipse haec sua destinauit dona, conferat vsus suorum ad id ministerio, quod eis praescripsit, peccatorum salutarem paenitentiam, certam (que) ablutionem & remissionem, mortem, sepul [...]uram purgationem, spem certam resurrectionis, in Chri­stum incorporationem, eius induitionem, (i) sal [...]ificam communionem, regenerationem, innovatio­nem (que) spiritus. Nec minus efficax est horum omnium donorum Dei instrumentum baptisma electis Dei quos eo statuit Dominus regignere, quam est vllum remedium quantumvis efficax ex natura vt dicitur ad conferendam sanitatem corpori, ad suscipiendum hunc effectum maxime parato & ac­commodato. Ex dei enim verbo pendet effectus vtrius (que) rei. Imo multo certius, p [...]rcipiunt electi Dei enumerata Dei beneficia per baptisma, quam corpora humana sanitatem suam per illa, quae vo­cantur romedia naturalia. Bucer. De vi & effic: Bapt. in clas. inter scripta anglica. Baptisme saues none of yeares, but beleeuers. Saluation indeed is offered in bap­tisme vnto all; but those of yeares receiue it not, but by faith, and infants, by the secret operation of the holy Ghost, by which they are also sanctified [Page 172] vnto externall life. Then, for a Conclusion of all that he had said & collected from many scriptures cited to this purpose, he thus shuts vp the whole matter. From all these places we now clearely perceiue baptisme to be commended vnto vs as an instrument of diuine mercy, which God vouchsafeth meerely for our sakes to vse, whereby he might conferre vpon his elect, by the ministry of his seruants, all these gifts, sauing re­pentance, certaine ablution and purgation of our soules, vndoubted hope of the resurrection, incor­poration vnto Christ, putting on of Christ; that is the sauing communion, regeneration, and renew­ing of the Holy Ghost. Nor is this instrument of baptisme lesse effectuall vnto all these vses in the elect, whom God hath resolued to regenerate, than is any remedy, how effectuall soeuer, by a naturall energy, to giue health to a body that is most capa­ble of such remedy, when it is applied thereunto. For on Gods word the effect of each thing depends. Yea much more certainely doe the elect of God par­take of all the forementioned benefits by baptisme, than humane bodies doe receiue health by naturall meanes applied. Thus wee see Bucer to averre the efficacy of Baptisme, not only [Page 173] to persons of yeares beleeuing, but to infants also: and this, to be ordinarily in the baptisme of the Elect, of all the eelct, and only of the elect.

Peter Martir, writing of the very same subiect, and endeauouring to make good the solid doctrine of the Church touching the baptizing of infants, affirmes; that, they are not vncapable of baptisme for want of actuall faith, because the spirit, in them sup­plies the roome of faith; nor are they exclu­ded from present efficacy of that ordinance, because that vnto them, as well as to the rest of the faithfull, the holy Ghost is promised, at that time. His owne words are plaine and full enough: therefore take the paines to read and marke them.Infantibus au­tem qui adhuc per aetatem cre­dere non pos­sunt, spiritus sanctus in eo­rum cordibus fidei vices gerit. Effusio quo (que) spiritus sancti premittitur in baptismo, vt in Epist. ad Tit. diserte scribi­tur; qui salvos nos fecit, &c. Loc. Com clas. 4. cap. 8. sect. 2. Jn infants, saith he, who by reason of their tender yeares cannot beleeue the Holy Ghost supplies the roome of faith. Also the effusion of the Holy Ghost is promised in bap­tisme, as the Apostle expresly writes to Titus saying, who saued vs by the lauer of regeneration and renew­ing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed abroad on vs aboun­dantly. Afterwards, in the same chapter, he, taking occasion to debate what efficacy, in particular, infants are partakers of, in their [Page 174] baptisme, modestly refuseth to determine it punctually: and thus waueth the point;Iudico satis est, vt statuan­tur quod se [...]uan di sunt, eo quod per electionem & praedestina­tionem ad pe­cultum Dei per­tineant; spiritu sancto profundi, qui radix est fidei, spei chari­tatis, & omnium virtutum, quas postea exerit & declarat, cum per aetatem li­cet. ibid. sect. 14. I hold that it is sufficient that wee acknowledge they shall be saued, for as much as they, by election and praedestination, belong to Gods peculiar flock, that they are endowed with the spirit, who is the roote of faith, hope, loue, and all other graces, which spi­rit afterwards doth manifest and declare himselfe in the sonnes of God, when they come to years.

Musculus of Baptisme giues this descripti­on:Defi [...]iemus baptismum esse sacramentum regenerationis, purgationis, ini­tiationis, sancti­ficationis, ob­signationis, & incorporationis in Christum seruatorem. Haec enim omni no per spiritum Christi fiunt in electu & fidelibus, quorum sacramentum est baptismus; vt rectè in illo profici dica­tur, quod per spiritum Christi reipsa & spiritualiter perficitur Muscul de Bapt quest. 1. Sect. 8 Loc. Com. Wee define baptisme to be the sacrament of regeneration, purgation, initiation, sanctification, obsignation, and incorporation into Christ our Sa­viour: For all these are effected in the elect and faithfull by the spirit of Christ, of all which graces baptisme is the sacrament; so as in it this may rightly be said to be done, because truly and spi­ritually it is effected by the spirit of Christ. If a­ny thinke to obiect against me that Musculus speakes this of the faithfull, and so, vnder­stands it not of infants? I answere out of Mus­culus himselfe;Omnes Christianorum infantes ad Christum pertinentes, de (que) numero fidelium existentes, recte dicuntur esse in fide Christi, fideles & credentes, licet nondum sint imbuti fide. Musc: in Mat. 18 All infants belonging to Christ, [Page 175] borne of Christian parents, and being of the num­ber of the faithfull, are rightly said to be in the faith of Christ, to be faithfull, and beleeuers, al­though as yet, they be not endewed with actuall faith. Besides he that saith, Christians being elect are, by the Holy Ghost, ingraffed into Christ, in baptisme, must not exclude elect infants; for as much as none but infants are now vsually baptized in the Church. There­fore hee must be vnderstood of what bap­tisme doth ordinarily effect vpon infants; or else his definition is very improper; yea, false, being applied to children, beside whom there are none (vnlesse in some rare cases of proselites) baptized in these latter times.

Francis Iunius, in his Theses of Paedobapt. speakes as fully to this point, as any of the rest.Si enim in Christi corpus baptizandi omnes electi, si omnes christum induere debent, infantes non se­cus ac adulti, eos a christi cor­pore separare, & Christo non in­serere nefan­dum esset. Thes. 4. If, saith he; all the elect are to be baptized into the body of Christ, if moreouer all of them, as well infants as persons of yeares ought to put on Christ, then, to separate thē from the body of Christ, and not to engraffe them into Christ, were a most wicked thing. And againe a little after,Cum bapti­zantur infantes deus offert & confert omnia bona faederis & stipulatur. ibid. Thes. 10. When infants (What infants he meanes, he had suf­ficiently [Page 176] expressed before: viz. elect infants) are baptized; God doth both offer, and conferre all the good things of the Couenant, and engageth himselfe vnto it. In another place, thus:Baptismus est actio sacra Dei lauantis suos, intus, lotione spiritus, foris, lotione aquae, Mat. 3. Ioh. 1. & passim. Haec igitur relata sunt, aqua & spiritus. lotio aquae & lotio spiritu Relatio vt [...] est i [...]s illa, siue appli­catio vntus ad alteram secun­dum naturam rel [...]torum, for­mam constitu­exs sacramenti. Quemadmo­dum igitur ho­mo in actionibus humanis, ani­ma & corpore actionem inter­nam & exter­nam agit vnica operatione, in qua, sicut ani­ma est forma corporis, ita actio interna formalis quodam modo, externa vero materialis est: in cundum modum Deus spiritu suo & aqua, agit actionem internam & externam vnica operatione, in qua, lotio interna a spiritu formalis est; & in [...]terialis, externa: pr [...] vt dicebat Ioannes, ego baptizo vos aqua, &c. Iun. in Exam. Gratian. Prosp. Par. 3. Bap­tisme is a sacred action of God washing those that be he his owne, inwardly, with the washing of the spirit; outwardly with the washing of water. Mat 3. Iohn. 1. and elsewhere. These two therefore, the water, and the spirit, the washing of water, and the washing of the spirit, are relatiues, And the relation it selfe is that application or vni­on of these one to another according to the nature of relatiues, which constitutes the forme of the sacra­ment. Wherefore as a man in humane actions doth, with his soule and body produce both an inward and an outward action in one and the same opera­tion, in which as the soule is said to be the forme of the body, so is the inward action, after a sort; the formall; and the externall, the materiall part of the action: euen so after the same manner God, by his spirit and by water, doth performe both an in­ternall and an externall action, in one and the [Page 177] same operation; in which, the inward washing by the spirit is the formall part; and the externall washing with water, is the materiall part of that his action; according to that of Iohn the Baptist, I indeed baptize you with water, &c. but he that cometh after me shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, &c. This passage passing from that learned man in a scholasticall confutation of a subtile aduersary, is perhaps more abstruse then it can be fully vnderstood of an ordina­ry reader; yet all that are iudicious cannot see lesse in it than this: viz that in the iudg­ment of Iunius, that is not held for Baptisme of the elect, wherein God doth not ordina­rily accompany the outward administrati­on of that sacrament with some inward worke of the spirit inwardly washing the soule, as well as the water outwardly wash­eth the body, in the Lauer of Regeneration.

But what manner of worke that is, which is ordinarily performed by the spirit, in the matter of Regeneration, the same Au­thor also describeth in the place first cited, where he thus distinguisheth of regenerati­on, and then explaines himselfe in what [Page 178] sense he affirmeth infants elect to be regene­rated in baptisme.De regenera­tio [...]e aliter con­sideratur in f [...] l [...]ne to, id est, in Christo, habitu, aliter in nobis, actu. P [...]i­m [...] regeneratio (q [...]e dici potest transplantatio a vetere. Id mo in novum) tan­q [...]am causa e [...], a [...]tera tanquam fructus sequi­tu [...]. De prima inquitur Chri­stus. Iohn. 3. Apostolus v­tram (que) coniun­git, Rom. 6. Hac regeneran­tur infantes e­lecti cum Chri­sto inferuntu, & huius obsignatio sit i [...]s du [...] baptizantu [...]. De Paed. bap. ch [...]. 7 Touching regeneration, it is one way to be considered in the foundation, that is to say, in Christ the habit thereof; and another way, in vs, in the act thereof. The first regenerati­on (which may be termed a transplantation out of the old Adam into the new,) is as a cause; and the other followeth as an effect thereof. Of the former Christ speaketh in the 3d of Iohn. The Apostle ioynes both together in Rom. 6. With this (to wit the first) elect infants are regenerated when they are set in­to Christ, the obsignation whereof is made ouer vn­to them in the time wherein they are baptized. Thus we see the point receiuing cleare testi­mony from this witnesse also, as full as can be desired, if all the passages of the Author be laid together, and considered with im­partiall eyes.

In the next place let vs enquire of Zanchi­us what he thinketh of this point. Wee are in part informed already what his iudg­ment is: but this being the place which is proper for him to giue vp his verdict in, let vs heare him more at large in his owne words. He, in the Confession of his faith, thus [Page 179] speakes of baptisme.Baptismus primum Noui faederis sacra­mentum est; quo cum omnes, qui vel paeni­tentiam pecca­torum professi, fidem etiam in Christum adeo (que) in Deum Patre, filium, & spi­ritum sanctum profitentur, vel saltem propter parentum pieta­tem ad faedus pertinere cre­duntur. 1. Cor. 7.14. tum maxime illi qui verè ad faedus pertinent, Chri­sto tanquam ei iam per spi­ritum sanctum incorporati, obsignantur: vt non sint am­plius sui iuris, sed illius, per quem in faederis societatem, ce (que) in vnum corpus cum eo sanctis (que) omnibus, & in omnium spiritualium caelestium (que) bonorum parti­cip [...]tion [...]m, asciti esse dicuntur Act. 19.5. 1. Cor. 6.19. Per hunc baptismum tanquam per l [...]c [...]um regenerationis, a peccatis vi sanguinis Christi, mundati, & cum Christo consepulti in mortem: vt quemadmodum ille resurrexit a mortuis per gloriam patris, sic & nos in novitate vi­tae ambulemus. Vnde & sacramentum paenitentiae in remissionem peccatorum, sacramentum fi­dei, symbolum federis, lauacrum regenerationis, &c. appellari consueuit. Zanch. lib. Confess. cap. de baptismo Sect. 1. Baptisme is the first sa­crament of the new couenant wherin all that ei­ther by repentance and profession of faith in Christ, and so, in God the Father, the Sonne, and Holy Ghost, or by reason of their parents piety are belee­ved to pertaine to the couenant, 1. Cor. 7.4. but especially they that doe truly belong to the Coue­nant, are sealed vp for Christ, as being euen then incorporated into him by the Holy Ghost: that they might no longer be their owne, but his, through whom they are said to be receiued into the society of the couenant, and so into one body with him and with all the saints, and into the participation of all spirituall and celestiall blessings. Act. 19.5. 1. Cor. 6.19 By this baptisme, as by the Lauer of regene­ration, they are clensed from their sinnes by the ver­tue of Christs bloud, and are buried with Christ into death: that as he rose againe from the dead by the glory of the Father; even so wee also should walke in newnesse of life. Whence also it is called the sacrament of repentance for remission of sinne, [Page 180] the sacrament of faith, the badg of the couenant, the Lauer of Regeneration, &c. Lo here an effi­cacy of baptisme, and an efficacy vnto rege­neration, euen in infants also belonging tru­ly and indeed to the couenant of grace, as well as to persons of yeares attaining vnto actuall faith and repentance.

And least any man should stumble at the ambiguity of some words here vsed, wee may finde Zanchius expressing himselfe al­most in the same termes which I vsed at the beginning of this treatise in the explicatiō of my distinction of initiall, and actuall regene­ration; for which they who terme me a Dreamer, must also take him; and the Fathers into the same number: for, thus Hee:Non incongrue Patres decent effectum illum spiritus domini, quem describit Moses. in G [...]n. 1. typum fuisse illius quem prae­stat spiritus sanctus in aqua baptismi. Vt enim ibi incu­babat aquis il­lis, & eas foue­bat, animabat, praeparabat (que) ad [...], rerum (que) omni­um generatio­nem: sic sp [...]ritus sanctus praesidet aquis baptismi, & eis quasi in­cubat, illis (que) be­nedicit, & in­de electos fovet, regenerat, ani­mat, faecundos (que) reddit ad bona opera. Zanch. de Trib. Eloh. lib. 7. cap. 1. Not vnfitly doe the Fathers teach, that effect of the ho­ly Ghost mouing vpon the Waters, which Moses describeth in Gen. 1. to be a resemblance of that which the Holy Ghost performeth in the water of Baptisme. For as there he rested vpon those wa­ters, that he might cherish and prepare them for the producing of liuing creatures, and for the gene­ration of all things: so the Holy Ghost sits vpon the waters of baptisme, and sits as it were abroad vp­on [Page 181] them, and blesseth them, and thence doth che­rish, regenerate and animate the elect, and makes them fruitfull vnto all good workes. The Holy Ghost then, doth rest vpon the waters (not in the shape of a doue as some absurdly picture him; but yet truly in a spirituall man­ner, as best becomes him) and doth com­municate himselfe therewith vnto elect in­fants, for producing of future actuall newnesse of life, not presently, but in due time and or­der, in them. It were easy to adde to this great cloud of witnesses, many moreOecolompa­dius. Pareus. Marlorat. Melanchton.: but I must of necessity contract my selfe; I will therefore mention only two more of this sort; and then draw nearer home to our owne Diuines.

One of the two I meane to cite, is Lam­bertus Daneus, an Author of great learning and note in the Church, He, in his learned & fruitfull commentary vpon St Augustines Enchiridion, cap. 52. (Where that Father quot­ing that of the Apostle in Rom. 6. wee are bu­ried with him by baptisme into death, and a­vouching that this belongs even to infants as well as to others;) allowes that saying of [Page 182] Augustine, being restrained to the elect, and vnderstood only of initiall regeneration, as I had occasion to note before. His owne words are these.Ergo & fide & regeneratio­nem habent parvuli electi dei, etsi nondum illius opera no­bis apparent: & ea dona habent pro ratio­ne aetatis, id est, pro capacitate vasis. See more touch­ing the iudg­ment of this Author, in my answere to the 4th main obiection a­gainst this position of baptismall grace Therefore little infants that are the elect of God, haue faith and regeneration; although the workes thereof doe not yet appeare to vs: and those gifts they haue, according to the con­dition of their age; that is to say, according to the capacity of the subiect receiuing the same.

The other is that famous Vossius now so much bought vp of all learned men, He, in defence of the baptisme of infants, after ar­guments to confirme the truth, addes an­sweres to the principall obiections of the Anabaptists pleading against it. And to that so often iterated cauill, that infants ought not to be baptized because they want faith, shapes this answere.Nec vlii i [...] est momenti, quod aiunt, inc [...]edulos non esse baptizandos. N [...]m bifariam aliquis inc [...]edu [...]us dicitur: negatiue, qui salutari fid [...]i quidem habitu destituitur, non tamen contrario ba­bi i [...] e [...] pollutus: positiue autem, qui & habitu fideicaret, & contrario [...] malo laborat. Intan [...]es duntaxat negatiue sunt infideles, hoc est nondum babentes fidem, cuius ne quidem capa­ce [...] sunt per naturam Tamencapaces sunt spiritus fidei: per quem anima accipit esse spiri uale ac supernaturale, c [...]i (que) principium operationum spiritualium, suo (que) tempore est efficax, ac cessantibus etiam actionibus in homine manet. Abs (que) hoc spiritu si essent parvuli non vnire itur Christo, nec mystici eius co [...]poris membra forent: eo (que) nec participes ess nt [...]rivilegiorum ecclesiae, quae in sym­bolo commemorantur. Etu igitur infantes non credant actu, tamen non magis hoc eos a baptismo a [...]ere debet, quam cibus iis debet den [...]gari, etsi ab Apostolo dictum sit, qui non vult laborare, non manducet. Gera [...]d. Vossius: Thes. Theol. de Paedobapt. par. 1. th. s. 15. nuper editis. Jt is of no validity which they vrge, namely that vnbeleeuers ought [Page 183] not to be baptized. For one may be said to be an vnbeleeuer two waies. viz. negatiuely, so he that is indeed destitute of the habit of faith, yet is not polluted with the contrary habit of infidelity: or positiuely, as he that both wants the habit of faith and also labours vnder the contrary of vnbeleefe. Infants are vnbeleeuers only negatiuely; that is they haue not yet the habit of faith, of which they are not for the present capable. Notwith­standing, they are capable of the spirit of faith, by which the soule receiues a spirituall and superna­turall being, and that is the principle or beginning of all spirituall operations, and is effectuall in his due time, and remaines in a man euen when there is a cessation of the actions of it. If they were with­out this spirit, infants could not be vnited vnto Christ, nor be made members of his mysticall body, and so neither should they be partakers of the pri­viledges of the Church which are contained in the Creed. Although therefore infants haue not actu­all faith, yet this ought no more to keepe them off from baptisme, than meat ought to be denyed them, because the Apostle saith; he that will not worke let him not eat 2 Thes. 3.10.. Here we see an initiall rege­neration taken for granted, and so described, [Page 184] and so described also as there is no need of labour to draw it home to my present purpose:Let the reader here be aduertised, that the Ar­minians are censured by the fowre publique pro­fessors of Leiden for ioyn­ing with that blasphemous wretch Socinus, and his Disciples, in that they in their publique Confessions of their faith, doe make baptisme to be only an externall rite whereby men are ingraffed into the Church, and admitted to Gods ordinances, without any obsignation, and reall collation of grace in and vpon the parties baptized: & although the Remonstrants doe vse some words that may seeme to infinuate a purgation, a de­liuerance from sinne, and a donation of grace: yet those professors censure them be­cause they speake of those things, as that which is to be expected in time to come, and not begun at the time of baptisme. See the confessions of the Remonst▪ at larg: cap. 23. Sect. 3 And the censure of it pag. 304. where speaking of the former part of the Remonstrants description of baptisme, they vse these words: Siquidem prior plane Socinianizat, quatenus baptismum hoc vsu tantum definiunt, Quod hoc publico & sacro ritu saederati per solennem aquae ablutionem Ecclesiae inseruntur, & cultui diuino initiantur. Simi­lia habent Sociniani in catetch: Racoviensi, quod fit ritus exterior quo homnes è Iudaismo vel Gentilismo ad Religionem Christianam accedentes, manifeste profitebantur se Christum pro suo do­mino agnoscere. Presse eos insequitur Episcopius Disputatione de Baptis. Quod sit cere­monia & ritus N T qui, quo ii ad religionem chirstianam accedunt, & Ecclesia Iesu Christi publice accenseri cupiunt, aqua abluuntur, ad testandum vitae male anteactae derelictionem, & vitae melioris inchoationem. Ita vt ex parte Dei, nullam illi gratiae Dei in baptizatis obsigna­tionem agnoscant. Vnde & Socinus lib: de Offic: hom. Christ. cont. Evangelicos as­serit, baptismi finem non esse, gratia Dei de remissione peccatorum per sanguinem Christi ob­signationem, sed tantum significationem: nec fidei nostrae & gratiae Dei confirmationem, sed tantum professionem. Paria è Socino suo Episcopius, Thes 9. Effectus siue finis baptismi, non est rea­lis aliqua gratia collatio, sed sola tantum diuinae gratie & professionis nostrae significatio. Ptior ita (que) illa Remonstrantium definitio plane Socinum exprimit. And in page 306 thus the Professors to the latter part of their definition, wherein they mention an inward pur­gation, and donation of grace and glory, they thus censure the Remonstrants. Quum vero vsus illos futuro tempore enunciant, nempe purgandi, liberandi, donandi vocibus, si futura de continua actione accipiant, recte sane, &c. Thus haue I made good what I vndertooke in producing the iudgment of ma­ny forraine Diuines of best note in the Church. If any complaine of length and tediousnesse in citing so many, let them consider that they are [Page 185] not a few that bandy themselues against this truth, and sticke not to giue out in all places; that there is not one of all those Authors which I haue alledged, but rather makes against me than for me: of which now let the equall and able reader iudge.

CAP. 8. The iudgment of some Diuines of speciall note in our Owne Church.

WHat iudicious Hooker, Mr Thomas Rogers; Dr Ames, Mr Aynsworth, & the Author of the English com­mentary vpon St Paules Epistle to Titus, haue written touching this point, I haue al­ready shewed in the third and fourth chapters of this Treatise: by which it is euident that I am not the firstNam multi protestantes etsi non fidem actualem infan­tibus tribuunt: tamen inclina­tiones quasdam bonas, novos (que) motus in pueris esse dicunt cum baptizantur. Whitak. de Sacram. cont. de Bapt. quaest 4. cap. 5. in princ. that haue set abroach this doctrine in the Church of England, nor the first English man that hath published this point to the world; although it be my hard hap to be first chalenged for it. I will not in this place repeat what hath beene formerly produced out of any of these, nor [Page 186] yet stay you with a large view of all those that, vpon further search, might be added vnto these, to witnesse the same truth with them. It shall suffice that I alledg only these 6. viz. Bishop Iewel, Doctor Whitaker, Doctor Francis White now Lord Bishop of Norwich, Doctor Davenant, now Lord Bishop of Sa­lisbury, Doctor Fulk, and the learned Author of the second Parallells.

B. Iewel.1 I begin with that rare and much ho­noured and admired Iewel, the first champi­on of our English Church, since the last happy reformation, that, (both by publique Apology for our refusing to communicate a­ny longer with the present Romish syna­gogue, and also, by open chalenge made to that side, for prouing their principall tenets now in difference betweene vs, to haue bin so much as knowne to the Ancient Fathers for the doctrine of truth, within the first six hundred yeares after Christ;) entred the lists with that great Goliah, in the name of the Church of England, and came off so hap­pily, that all that wish well to the truth, doe, to this day, (and for euer, shall) call him bles­sed. [Page 187] What testimony & approbatiō this wor­thie mans workes frequently receiued from our late learned K. Iames, they, who last pub­lished B. Iewels Workes, in their Epistle Dedi­catory, to giue publique witnesse: viz. that they haue long and frequently vpon all occasions had a most singular testimony & approbation of his Maiestie for the most rare and admirable workes that haue beene written in this last age of the World. And what generall acceptance they finde in the whole Church of England, is euident by this, that euery parish in Eng­land is enioyned to buy them, and to haue them opē in the parish Churches, for all that desire instruction in the truth, to read and pervse. And lastly, what extraordinary ap­probation he receiued from the most iudici­ous and eminent diuines beyond the seas, their frequent epistles, and dedication of bookes vnto him (of which wee may read in the history of his life) doe amply declare. Therefore I thinke that what I alledg out of him, may iustly be receiued (if not as the doctrine it selfe of the Church of England, yet) as that which no iudicious sonne of [Page 188] this Church will refuse as dissonant from, much lesse repugnant to the publique doctrine of our Church, but as most agreea­ble both vnto it, and vnto the truth of God maintained therein.

This Chariot of Jsrael and Father of our Church, in his Apology of the Church of Eng­land (which was first written in latine and translated almost into all languages, for the great esteeme it receiued in all the Churches of God,) speaking of the sacraments, and denying transubstantiation in the Lords sup­per, thus saith:Nec tamen cum ista dici­mus, extenua­mus coe [...]m Domini, aut eam frigidam tantum cere­moniam esse dicim [...]s, vt in ea nihil fieri, quod multi nos docere calumni­antur. Christum enim asserimus verè sese praesen­tem exhibere in sacramentis suis in baptis­mo, vt eum in­dumus; in Coena, vt eum fide & spiritu comedamus, & de eius cru­ce ac sangume habeamus vi­tam aeternam: id (que) dicimus non perfunctorie & frigide, sed re ipsa & vere sie­ri. In B. Iewels workes last set forth, you shall finde this in english in the defence of the Apology cap. 14. divil. 1. pag. 269. And in speaking thus wee meane not to abase the Lords supper, or to teach, that it is but a cold ceremony only, & nothing to be wrought therein: (as many falsly slander vs that wee teach.) For wee affirme that CHRIST DOTH TRVLY AND PRESENTLY giue himselfe in his Sacraments. In baptisme that wee may put him on: and in his supper that wee may eate him by faith and spirit, and may haue euer­lasting life by his Crosse and blood. And we say not, this is done slightly or coldly, but effectually and truly. Now, in this passage this renowned Prelate makes no difference betweene the [Page 189] efficacy of the sacraments; he allowes a pre­sence of Christ in the one, as well as in the o­ther: he professeth, that in Baptisme Christ is as truly put on, as he is fed vpon in the Supper: and when he saith that, in the Supper he is fed vpon by faith and the spirit, saying no such thing of the necessity of faith for putting on of Christ in Baptisme, when an infant is baptized: he plainly yeeldeth that, in bap­tisme of infants that truely and indeed be­long to God, Christ is truly and indeed put on, although they be not endewed with actuall faith, which is required of persons growne to yeares of discretion. And when M. Hard­ing quarrelled him for this, and charged him of error, in making the presence of Christ in bap­tisme, like to his presence in the supper. He thus answeres;Defence of Apology: pag. 264. Chrysost. in Epist. ad Ephes. hom. 20. Bernard, super missus est. hom. 3. Leo in serm. de 4. feria. c. 1. Here is one error more then any of the learned Catholique Fathers euer noted. Saint Chry­sostome saith; In the sacrament of Baptisme wee are made flesh of Christs flesh, and bone of his bones. Saint Bernard. saith Lavemur in sanguine eius: Let vs be washed in his blood. Leo saith: Christi sangui­ne rigaris quando in mortem ipsius baptizaris: Thou art washt in the blood of Christ, when thou art bap­tized [Page 190] into his death. By these few it may appeare, that Christ is present at the sacrament of baptisme, as he is present at the holy supper: vnlesse ye will say, we may be made flesh of Christs flesh, and be washt in his blood, and be partakers of him, and haue him present without his presence. Therefore Chrysostome, when he had spoken vehemently of the sacrament of the supper, hee concludeth thus; Sic & in baptismo, euen so it is also in the sacrament of baptisme. The body of Christ is likewise present in them both. Beda in 1. Cor. 10. And for that cause Beda saith (and he saith it out of Saint Augustine,) nulli est ali­quatenus ambigendum, tunc vnumquem (que) fidelium Corporis sanguinis (que) Dominici participem fieri, quando in Baptismate membrum Christi efficitur. No man may doubt, but euery faithfull man is THEN made partaker of the body and blood of Christ, when in Baptisme he is made the member of Christ. All this B. Iewel vrgeth out of the Fathers, and by ap­prouing their doctrine, confoundeth his Aduersary. If any question be made of the word faithfull, I haue sufficiently shewed how that is to be taken. And if Saint Augustine be not mistaken, he tells vs that euenVbi ponis par­vulos non bapti­zatos, profecto in numero cre­dentium. De verb. Apost. Serm. 1. Infants were reckoned among the faithfull; nor was there [Page 191] euer any question among the Fathers in any Age of the Church, but that elect infants did receiue remission of sinne, in baptisme; and by consequent, regeneration, for as much as these two are inseparable. All this, that reuerend Iewel, very well knew; yet is not afaid to subscribe to their doctrine. Yea, in the same Apology, he thus particularly de­liuereth his iudgment concerning infants:Defence chap. 11. divis. 3. pag: 216. Wee say that Baptisme is a sacrament of there-mission of sinnes, and of that washing which wee haue in the blood of Christ: and that no person that will professe Christs name, ought to be restrained or kept back there from: no not the very babes of Chri­stians; for as much as they be borne in sinne, and doe pertaine vnto the people of God. I thinke his words are plaine enough to proue that in­fants partake of remission of sinne, in Bap­tsme: because, saith he, baptisme is a sacrament of remission, and because infants are to be bap­tized vpon this ground, viz: (not only be­cause they are part of Gods heritage; but) vpon this ground, that they be borne in sinne. Now, if they ought to be baptized vnto re­mission of sinne, because borne in sinne, will any [Page 192] man, well in his wits, conclude other then thus; therefore they doe partake of remissi­on of sinne in Baptisme.

I doe imagine some will be ready to pull me by the sleeue, and say; I pray, Sir, looke againe, B. Iewel, calls baptisme the Sacra­ment of Remission, not remission it selfe: and this he may doe, yet neuer hold remission of sinnes to bee conferred in baptisme of infants; but only that it is a seale of that grace hereafter to be conferred, when by faith they apply the same?

Indeed so M. Harding the PapistSee in B. Iew. ibid. pag. 217. would needs vnderstand him, charging him and the rest of the Protestants, with speaking too slenderly of baptisme, in that they call it a sacra­ment of Remission; whereby (if yee will be­leeue him,) they meane that it is only a signe or token, or at the best but a seale of our new birth; and not beleeuing with the Catholique Church, accord [...]ng to the Scriptures, that in and by baptisme sinnes be fully and truly remitted, and put away. All this M. Harding would fa­ther vpon our Church, but pray marke the note that Jewel puts in the margent (pag: 217) ouer against that calumny of Harding [Page 193] viz. vntruth. For wee say not so.

And whereas M. Harding is pleased to goe on in his railing veine, professing that the Church beleeues that remission of sinnes is giuen in baptisme;Ibid. and that, not through the faith only of the giuer or receiuer, or of any o­ther, (though herevnto it be necessary in those that be come to age of discretion;) but through the power and virtue of the sacrament, and Gods promise. B. Jewel, to that word faith, giues this note in the margent; This tale is needlesse, and out of season. As if he should say, in the baptisme of infants, we require not faith, but rely only on Gods promise. For so, more at large, in his answere to Harding, Hee explicates him­selfe. First, he granteth it as a truth, that the sacrament dependeth, neither of the minister, nor of the receiuer, nor of any other: for though they be all the children of sinne, yet is baptisme the sa­crament of remission of sinne. The place he al­ledgeth out of Saint Augustine, speakes his minde plainly, that, he depends vpon Christ himselfe for the efficacy of baptisme, and not vpon the faith of the receiuer, if he be an infant, of which only the question betwene [Page 194] Him and Harding was (by Harding himselfe) put vp, who chargeth the Protestants with denying the present efficacy of baptisme vn­to Remission of sinnes vpon infants, for want of actuall faith.

Notwithstanding, because the Aduersary is so brag and confident that the Fathers stood not vpon faith in the baptizing of in­fants, the Bishop is pleased a little to take downe his pride, and to discouer his igno­rance in the Fathers, and shewes out of S. Augustine and S. Hierome, that to the intent Baptisme might be effectuall vnto infants, they thought it requisite that the faith of their parents should then be imployed on their behalfe, and be imputed to them. But yet for his owne part he professeth his dis­sent from that opinion, although, it might be further backed out of Iustine Martyr; S. Cyprian, and Saint Hierome. For thus they write, saith he: How truly, I will not say. But their words be plaine. The Prophet Habbacuck saith, Iustus ex fide suâ vivet, the iust man shall liue (not by the faith of his parents but) by his owne faith. Then he approueth a speech of Augustine more [Page 195] consonant to the truth, affirming thatHabent fidem propter fidei sa­cramentum. Epist. 23. ad Bonif. Infants haue faith of their owne, because they haue baptisme which is the sacrament of faith: for he saith; quemadmodum sacramentum corporis Christi, secun­dum quendam modum, corpus Christi est, ita sacra­mentum fidei fides est. As the sacrament of Christs body (not verily and indeed, but) after a certaine manner of speech, is Christs body: so baptisme is faith, because it is the sacrament of faith. Therefore saith Iewel Cardinall Caietane is worthily blamed by Catharinus, in that he saith, An infant for that hee wanteth instruction in faith, therefore hath not perfect baptisme. Out of all which I can picke no o­ther English but this: There is no necessity that we should holde a necessity of faith in infants: yet, if they haue any, it is but impro­perly so called, it is that, not which they brought with them to the sacrament; but that which they are reputed to receiue in the sacrament it selfe. And this, in effect, is the very doctrine ofInstit. lib: 4. cap. 16. sect. 21. compared with other passages in the same chapter. Caluine, set forth at large in the former chapter: viz. that it is not re­quisite alwaies that a Christian should bring grace vnto baptisme, to make him capable of the grace of baptisme; but he must come to baptisme that there he may receiue it, if [Page 196] he be not of yeares; as he that is of yeares, receiues a confirmation of that which was wrought in him before. And so much this same Bishop in his Reply to M. Hardings Answer. Art. 1. Div. 13. (of which place wee shall perhaps haue fitter occasion afterwards to speake) in effect declareth also.

For the present, you see, that what euer becomes of the faith of infants, he ioynes with Catharinus in condemning of Caietane denying infants to be perfectly baptized for want of instruction in faith. Then, he expresseth that, as the Antient Fathers did, so doth he hold baptisme to be efficacious; yet not the out­ward element, but the spirit of Christ doth the deed when it is effected. In breefe, he denyes not the thing to be conferred even on infants, but only the manner which the Romanists contend for. They say that the blood and spirit of Christ is in the very out­ward clement, by the consecration of the Preist, as the virtue of healing is naturall in a medicine, and that ex opere operato by ver­tue of the bare outward administration of that sacrament every one partakes certainly [Page 197] and indeed of the inward grace. This, The founder Fathers disclaimed, as wee haue proued at large, & this B. Iewel makes good out of them, against his aduersary, that the inward grace comes from God immediatly, and not from the water, or outward act of the minister In summe, he thus shuts vp the whole matter,Defence of A­pol pag. 219. As for that M. Harding here toucheth as an error defended by certain, I know not by whome, that haptisme giueth not full remission of sinnes, he may command it home againe to Lovaine amongst his fellowes, and ioyne it with other of his and their vanities. For it is no part nor portion of our doctrine. Wee confesse and haue euermore taught that in the sacrament of Baptisme, by the death and blood of Christ is giuen remission of all manner sinnes: and that not in halfe, or in part, or by way of imagination, or by fancy, but full, whole, & perfect of all together: so that now, as Saint Paul saith, there is no condemnation to them that be in Christ Iesus.

I hope no man duly considering the con­trouersy betweene him and Harding, will haue the face to say that the Bishop speakes not this of the present efficacy of [Page 198] baptisme, but of that which at actuall cōuer­sion is to be expected. For the thing where­of Harding complaines is this that, wee deny the present efficacy of baptisme, and make it only a signe, or at best but a seale to confirme future grace, vntill wee haue attained actuall faith. And the answere what it is, you now see: viz. that wee allow and teach that in baptisme is giuen full remission of all sinnes; which if the Bishop should not meane of the present effect of baptisme, his aduersary might iustly complaine for want of answer to his vniust complaint.

Thus much then we haue gained out of this Iudicious Father, that, at least, remission of sinnes is ordinarily communicated to in­fants, in their baptisme, when it is administ­red. And, if remission of sinnes be then gi­uen, it must needs be yeelded further, that he held that, the spirit of God is communi­cated, then also, vnto infants, for the apply­ing of that benefit vnto them. Therefore in the very same place,Defence Apol. pag 218. he voucheth a passage of Cyprian De baptismo Christi. to this purpose; Remissio peccato­rum, &c. The remission of sinnes, whether it be [Page 199] giuen by baptisme or by any other sacraments, is in­deed of the Holy Ghost: and to the same Holy Ghost only the priuiledge of this worke doth ap­pertaine. The solemnity of the words, and the in­vocation of Gods holy name, and the outward signes appointed to the ministry of the Preists by the Apostolicall institutions, worke the visible out­ward sacrament, but touching the substance there­of (which is the remission of sinnes) it is the holy Ghost that worketh it. Likewise, saith Saint Hie­rome, In Esaiam. cap. 4. Homo aquam tantum tribuit, The Minister being a man giueth only the water, but God giu­eth the Holy Ghost, whereby the sinnes be washt away.

If any passionate opposite should be so farre transported, as to obiect; that all that haue beene hitherto spoken out of Bishop Iewel, tends only to proue that Remission of sinne is giuen to infants in Baptisme, which is another thing from the present point of Regeneration: therefore all this is as much as nothing to the purpose?

I answere, first, that this obiection is so silly that it deserues no answere; for what Author euer taught plenary Remission of all [Page 200] sinnes to be giuen to him, that doth not in some measure partake of the spirit vnto sanctification? was it euer knowne that these two were separated? Why then is it required that our author should in expresse termes af­firme both; or else, be denyed to allow of both, although he expresly avouch it of the one of them He had no occasion to speake directly touching Regeneration, nor could he well doe it, without digression. For the Question betweene him and his Antagonist was only touching the present efficacy of Baptisme vnto Remission of sinne: if therefore he should haue fallen vpon the other, hee should idly haue runne out of his way, and fallen vpon another controuersy not so much as named by the Aduerse party.

Notwithstanding, that I may not leaue the least shaddow of an argument vnanswe­red, secondly, I adde that, the same author, in hisYou shall find this Trea­tise at the end of B. Iewels workes of the last edition frō Page 261 to the end. Treatise of the sacrament, affirmes the efficacy of baptisme vnto Regeneration also. For of Baptisme in particular, he thus speak­eth.265 Page. Baptisme is our regeneration or new birth, whereby wee are borne anew in Christ, and are [Page 201] made the sonnes of God, and heyres of the king­dome of heauen, it is the sacrament of the remission of sinnes, and of that washing which we haue in the blood of Christ. And a little after, among other places of holy scripture by him alleaged, for proofe hereof, he brings that of our Sauiour in John 3. Except a man be borne of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdome of God; and then addeth; for this cause are infants baptized, because they are borne in sinne, and can­not become spirituall, but by this new birth of the water and the spirit. They are the heyres of the promise; the couenant of Gods fauour is made vn­to them, &c.

It is very true that in the very next page, he speakes of the necessity of faith in some that are baptized: for thus he saith;Pag. 266. It is the Couenant and promise, and mercy of God, which cloatheth vs with immortality; assureth our resur­rection, by which wee receiue regeneration, for­giuenesse of sinnes, life, and saluation. His word declareth his loue towards vs: and that word is sealed and made good by baptisme. Our faith which are baptized, and our continuance in the profession which we haue made, establisheth in vs this grace [Page 202] which wee receiue, as it is said, De consecrat. dist. 4. Verus. Verus baptismus constat non tam, &c. True baptisme standeth not so much in washing of the body, as in faith of the heart. As the doctrine of the Apostles hath taught vs say­ing; Art. 15.9. 1 Pet. 2. by faith purifying their hearts. And in another place; baptisme saueth vs, not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the examining of a good conscience before God, by the resurrection of Iesus Christ. There­fore Hierome saith; In Ezek. c. 16. they that receiue not baptisme with perfect faith, receiue the water, but the Holy Ghost they receiue not.

But this no way makes against our posi­tion touching the efficacy of baptisme vpon infants For marke, first, of whom he speaks those words; not vniversally of all that are baptized; but only, of persons of yeares. For hauing in page 265. shewed the efficacy of baptisme vpon infants, at the foote of that page he makes a transition of his speech from infants, and comes on to declare the efficacy it hath vpon others also. His words are these: And as the children of the faithfull by right ought to be baptized: so such others also as were borne of vnbeleeuing parents, and were ali­ens from the common wealth of Israel, and were strangers from the couenant of promise, and had no [Page 203] hope, if they acknowledge the error in which they liued, and seeke the forgiuenesse of their former sins, may well receiue this sacrament of their regenera­tion. So, when they which heard Peter, were prick­ed in their hearts, and said to Peter and the other Apostles: Men and brethren what shall we doe, Peter said vnto them. Amend your liues, and be baptized euery one of you in the name of Iesus Christ for the re­mission of sins. They were buried with Christ by bap­tisme into his death, & made partakers of his blood, and continued in the Apostles Doctrine and fellow­ship. Then he goes on with his discourse of these, in the words before cited out of the 266 page. Now in all this there is not one word of infants, of whom he had spoken be­fore; and so that passage cannot be taken as a deny all of the efficacy of Baptisme in any without faith, saue only in persons of years. And if this were not thus to be vnderstood, he should directly contradict all that he had before spoken of the regeneration of infants, in whom there is no actuall faith, by his owne confession, in his defence against Hard­ing, as I haue shewed before: And to make this yet more cleare that, he did certainly [Page 204] beleeue that infants in baptisme receiued some principle of regeneration, although not actuall renovation of the whole man, see what he saith afterwards in the same Treatise of the sacraments, touching the state of infants baptized, and of the care of parents in their education.Page. 282. God saith, your children are my children. They are the sonnes of God. They are borne anew, and well shapen in beautifull proporti­on: make them not monsters. He is a monster who­soeuer knoweth not God. By you they are borne into the world, be carefull also that by your means they may be begotten vnto God, you are carfull to traine them vp in nature and comely behauiour of the body, seeke also to fashion their mindes vnto Godlinesse. You haue brought them to the foun­taine of baptisme to receiue the marke of Christ: bring them vp in knowledge, and watch ouer them that they be not lost. So shall they be confirmed and will keepe the promise they haue made, & will grow vp vnto perfect age in Christ. He saith, they are borne anew; and yet bids parents be carefull that they may be begotten vnto God: Therefore he well discerned the distinction of initiall and actuall regeneration. This is our first an­swere, [Page 205] and this is abundantly sufficient. Howbeit, secondly, I pray marke, in those words of his that are found in page 266: that euen they that haue faith, if they be such as were baptized in infancy, are not then said to receiue the grace of baptisme, when they haue faith, as if that were the first time of their reception of grace: but only then they come to be assured and confirmed sensibly and euidently in that which before, in their baptisme, they did receiue, for so he speaketh in expresse termes, OVR FAITH which are baptized, and our continuance in the profession which we haue made, ESTABLISHETH in vs this grace which we RECEIVE. And so, in his Reply to Harding, Artic. 1. Divis. 13. pag. 27. to like effect he speaks of persons of yeares that their coniunction and incorporation into Christ is first begun and wrought by faith: and then, the same incorporation is assured vnto them and increased in baptisme. But yet well know­ing that it is otherwise with vs that were baptized in our infancy, hee presently re­membreth a place of Saint Augustine touch­ing the baptisme of infants,August: de bap­tismo parvul. Ad hoc baptisma [Page 206] valet, &c. To this availeth baptisme, that men being baptised, may be incorporated into Christ and made his members. Now this must needs be meant of such as are baptized in infancy, or else it were directly contrary to his owne assertion im­mediatly preceding, wherein he saith that, some are incorporated by faith, and that incor­poration is assured them afterwards in baptisme: and then produceth this of Austin, which affirmes vs by baptisme, to be incorporated into Iesus Christ. Therefore he goes on to shew of what vse the other holy mysteries are vnto vs that were baptized in infancy, on this manner: And for that wee are very imperfect of our selues, and therefore must daily proceed for­ward, that wee may grow into a perfect man in Christ, therefore hath God appointed, that the same incorporation should be often renewed and confir­med in vs by the vses of the holy mysteries (which c [...]nnot be meant of baptisme, for that may not be repeated) Wherein must be considered, that the said holy mysteries doe not begin, but ra­ther continue and confirme this incorporation. All this which he speakes of the vse of the holy mysteries, after incorporation) hee speakes, [Page 207] not of baptisme, as if either wee were ordi­narily, by meanes, first made members and then, baptized: or yet, were not members, although baptized, till by faith wee actually apprehend Christ on our parts; (for then, woe to all infants that dye in infancy) but he speakes directly of the Lords supper, when he saith, those mysteries doe not beginne, but ra­ther continue and confirme this incorporation. And this is cleare by the very next clause follow­ing: First of all, wee our selues must be the body of Christ, and afterwards we must receiue the sa­crament of Christs body: as it is well noted by St Augustine, [...]nf [...]m [...] ad infames, e [...]atur a Pedu in 1. Co [...] 10. Corpus Christi si vis intelligere, &c. If thou wilt vnderstand the body of Christ, he are what S. Paul saith to the faithfull: ye are the body and the mem­bers of Christ. Your mystery is set on the Lords Table. see receiue the mystery of the Lord. To conclude then, the summe of all is but thus much. It is not the bare receiuing of the Lords supper, asM. Harding pleaded that wee are made one body with Christ, in the sacra­ment of the Lords supper; as appeares in the place ci­ted This Iewel denies, saying that some are en­grassed first. by sa th; o­t [...]s, by bapt. but none by the Lords supper: for they must iust be of his body before they can par­take of that sacrament. M. Harding dreamed, that makes vs mem­bers of Christ: but all that partake of that or­dinance, were first, made members of Christ, by faith, if they were such as were not bapti­zed in their infancy, but conuerted first by [Page 208] the word from gentilisme, and then bapti­zed; for vnto such baptisme also is a confirma­tion of their incorporation. But vnto all o­thers, baptisme is the first ordinary meanes that initiateth vs into Christ; and we, from that time, grow vp vnto more and more perfection in his body; then we partake of the mystery of the Lords supper, wherein, and whereby we are yet further nourished and confirmed in the body of Christ: so as M. Harding shot beside the marke when he contendeth that the sacrament of the Lords supper doth first, vnite vs vnto Christ. And this is all that the Bishop aimed at in all these words.

D. Whitaker.In the next place, come wee to D. Whita­ker, whom none but a corrupt Barowist, or Tompsonian will refuse to honour among men of greatest parts and highest worth. He in that learned Treatise of the Sacraments; howeuer he denyeth all manner of efficacy to be in the sacraments ex opere operato, by virtue of the meere externall administrati­on of the sacrament: yet he euery where dis­claimes, as an intollerable calumny, that [Page 209] which Bellarmine & the rest of that rout cease not to lay to our charge: viz. that wee make the sacraments, and particularly Baptisme, to be without all efficacy at the time of admi­nistration: or thatDe Sacram. Controv. de Baptis. quaest. 4. cap. 1. Calumniatur ergo Bellarmi­nus: & sic eti­am Patres Tri­dentini, qui ai­unt nos dicere, peccatum tan­tum radi in baptismo, non tolli: quod olim Augustino Pela­giani obiiccrunt, quorum ille ca­lumniam diluit. Non enim pec­catum in bap­tismo tanquam novacula rese­catur, sic vt ra­dex haereat, & starim renasca­tur, quemad­modum isti in­sulsi nos sentire putant; sed nos in Baptismo du­p [...]tcem gratiam consequimur: prima est remissio peccatorum secunda, regeneratio. Remissio est p [...]riecta, regeneratio inchoa [...]a, propter peccati reliquias, & propter originale peccatum, quod in nobis perpetuo quoad suam substantiam remanet. we will haue sinne to be only pared, and not wholy taken away in baptisme in re­spect of the guilt of it. For sinne is not only shauen or clipt (as some young thing newly sprout vp, which though it be cut, yet the roote still staies be­hind and will presently spring vp afresh againe, may be said to be) as those absurd obiectors imagine vs to hold: but we obtaine a double benefit in baptisme: the first is remission of sinnes; the second is regene­ration. Remission of sinnes is perfect: regeneration, in respect of the remainders of sinne, and of origi­nall sinne, that for substance still abideth in vs, is then only inchoate, or but in the beginning.

Nor doth he speake this only of persons of yeares, (that can haue neither of these, with­out actuall faith to apprehend them, as hee proues strongly and at large, in the first part of thatDe sacram: in genere quaest. 4 cap. 3. Tractate:) but he affirmes it also of infants, that some of them, viz. the elect, are [Page 210] partakers of these graces in their baptisme: as may be seene in sundry passages of his booke collated; for marke, when Bellarmine obiecteth that,Ibid de sacr. in genera quest. 4. multotus. some reape benefit by the sacraments without actuall faith; and parti­cularly, infants, in their baptisme: it is Doctor Whitakers constant answere, not simply to deny that proposition: but to deny it in two respects only: viz. 1 If the proposition be vnderstood of all infants, because, all are not saued that be baptized. 2 If it be meant that they partake of these graces meerely by vir­tue of the outward worke done, or that the outward element should be thought to con­taine in it any efficacy to convey these gra­ces vnto any infant at all: then also he reiect­eth it as false: but otherwise he admits it to be true. So doth he receiue theIbid cap. 2. p g. 72. counsell of Nice; so, the Mileuitane counsel Ibid▪ c [...] 2. pag. 73. Ter [...] ­ [...]n testimoniū surui [...]ur ex Cō [...]lio Milo­vitano. Par­vuli qui nihil peccatorum in semetipsis adhuc com­mittere potu­erunt, ideo in remissionē peccatorum veraciter baptizantur; vt in cis regenera­tione munde­tur quod generatione trax [...] ­runt. Respon­d [...]o, Ba [...]tismum esse sacramen­tum regener [...]ti­onis, et [...] in parvulis, non negamus, sed non ex opere o­perato. Deas o­peratu [...] libere, ei [...] i [...] b [...]tis [...]o sadi [...] at quos [...]i [...]lt, &c. which speaks expresly of infants thus: Litle children who yet cannot commit any actuall sinnes of their owne, are therefore truly baptized for the remission of sinnes, that so that filth which they haue contracted by generation, might be purged out by regeneration. True, saith he, wee deny not Baptisme to be the [Page 211] sacrament of regeneration euen to infants: but not by vertue of the externall worke done. Yea, but (you will say) he denies this to be done in all infants? True; and so doe I. But, of what sort are they that he admitteth to partake of the efficacy of Baptisme? Surely none but the Elect. For, thus He:Deus in bap­tismo ut signifi­cat remissionem peccatotum & salutem, ita re operatur: & veritas cum signo coniuncta est in electis. De sacram. in genere quaest. 4. cap. 2. Jn baptisme, as God doth signifie the remission of sinnes and salvation, so indeed he workes the same: and the truth of the things is i [...]ined together with the signe, in the E­LECT. Againe;Ibid. quaest. 1. cap 3. pag. 15. Quare falsum est quod ait Bellarm. bapti­zari apud nos infantesea so­lum de causa, vt sint membra Ecclesia exter­nae quemadmo­d [...] [...] circii­cisi eli n infan­tes Iudeorum sum, illa tan­tum de causa, sed vt illis signum diuini soederis imprimatur. quod etsi non venati [...] & praedestinatis nal p edest, ta­nun electis predest co modo quo D [...]us nov [...]t. Nam infantes clect [...]s, mo [...]te [...]ies antequom adole­verint, Deus virtute sp ritus sui renovat, si vero vitun longius p [...]opagare illis contigerit, comacis ad studium renouationis accenduntur, quod eius tess [...]ram se infantes accep [...]e sc [...]t. Ergo etsi in­fantes baptizantur, tamen non semper infantes count, sed tandem si vita [...] longiu [...] contedatur vim eius Baptismisentient, quem infantes susciperunt. Wherefore it is false that Bellarmine affirmes that Infants with vs are bap­tized, only that they might become members of the visible Church: for neither were the Infants of the Jewes circumcised only for that reason; but that the signe of Gods covenant might bee stamped on them, which although it profit not such as are nei­ther regenerated nor predestinated, notwithstan­ding it is availeable in the Elect, in such manner as is well knowne to God. For such Infants as be­ing elected, doe die in infancy, God renueth by the [Page 212] power of his spirit: but if it happen that they liue, they are thereby the more incited to the study of re­novation, the badge whereof they then come to know that they received in Infancy. Therefore although they be baptized Infants, yet they will not alwaies remaine such; Tum siverum sit quod Bell [...]r­minus ait, in­fantes persolum sacramentum seruari, tum omnes qui bap­tizatur, serua­rentur. Verum asia causa est, propter quam seruanturia­fantes, nempe diuine bonitate, gratia, electio, non solus baptis­mus. ibid quaest. 4. cap 3. pag. 88.89. but at length, if they liue, they will feele the force of that baptisme, which in their in­fancie they did receiue. And yet againe, to that obiection of Bellarmine that, Infants are saved without actual faith, by baptisme alone; he an­sweres by denying that, only Baptisme saveth them; for, saith he, many Jnfants do perish that are baptized; and many are saved that were never baptized Th [...]s Bern [...]rd made good a­gainst H [...]go [...]t S. Vict. vnder the person of another en­quiring whe­ther infants can be saued without baptisme E [...]st 77. And euen G [...]b. Biel. in 4 sent. dist. 4. quaest 2. dub. 2. was not a­fraid to affirme as much, although ap p [...]sh schooleman saying: Voluit (Deus) ita (que) re­media instituere con ram rburr p cca [...]tun Ecclesia, per sacramenta dispensanda, his qui noti esse poterant Ecclesiae. [...]orum vero qui nondum in lucem notitiae predicrunt remedia in sua potestate sola constituit quos cum voluerit s [...]te exteriori remedio & sanctificare & salvare potest, sicut factum de quibusdam scriptura testatur. Insuper quod paucis in privilegium factum est, potest quibuscun (que) voluit, impartiri qui potentiam suam sacramentis non alligauit.: and a little after, If that were true which Bellarmine affirmeth that Infants are saved only by baptisme, then all that are baptized should be saved. But there is another cause also of the salvation of Jnfants: viz. Gods goodnes, grace, and Election. By all which it is evident that Dr. Whitaker, ever restrained the efficacie of Baptisme to the Elect only, and vnto them [Page 113] he never denyed it.

And that hee meant some present worke of the Spirit to bee wrought vpon elect In­fants in the act of baptisme, will appeare far­ther by his approving of all that the ancient Fathers haue spoken touching this point. Now, we know that they were all for a pre­sent efficacie of baptisme even vpon Infants as well as others, as before hath beene decla­red. I will not repeate what I haueChap. 5. there alledged;Non est falsa etiam in parvu­lorum b ptis­mate, Rem ssio peccatorum, nec verba tenus di­catur, sed vera­citer agitur, Austin. Epist. 157. only I wil adde one place more out of St Augustine. It is no fable that we say Remission of sins is given in the baptisme even of Infants: nor is it said only to make a shew, but it is verily done.

This is not disliked, but both this and all the speeches of the Fathers produced by Bellarmine, are approved by ourDe Sacram. in gen. quest. 4 ca. 2 pag. 73. Author, being rightly vnderstood: viz not as if they held that the outward elements could con­vey this to every infant by vertue of the out­ward worke done; but that the grace of Bap­tisme commeth immediatly from God, and is wrought by the spirit, as he declareth out of Basil. Yea he is not afraid to adde; that, [Page 214] Et quanquam Lutherus & Calvinus scri­buat, quaedam dici a Patribu [...], & esse immodica quaedam apud illos enconna sa­cramentorum, vt sic non esse contemnenda, & esse Iudaicis meliora doce­rent: tamenre vera nullum est ex omnibus te­stimonius, qua Bellarminus of­fert quod non satis commodè sine hyperbole exponi potest. ibid vt immedi­ate supra. pag.74. however Calvine & Luther were pleased to say that some things were spoken by the Fathers hyper­bolically, and that sometimes we shall meet with advancings of the Sacraments beyond measure, in their writings, which no doubt they tooke liberty to doe, meerely to preserue them from contempt, and to preferre them before the Sacraments of the Jewes: notwithstanding to say the truth, there is not one of all those places quoted by Bellarmine, but will ad­mit of a good construction, without any hyperbole at all: Thus He. And if wee obserue how, every where, he expounds them, we shal finde him thus to sense them: viz. that what they say must bee taken not as intending to place any efficacy in the outward element; nor, that grace is given to any but to the Elect; & to them, not by vertue of the outward Bap­tisme outwardly administred, but by the im­mediat operation of the Spirit in that Ordi­nāce, as both the places already alleaged, to­gether with many moe, too long to recite in this place, doe sufficiently proue.

Moreover, when he commeth professed­ly to treat of the efficacie of Baptisme, and of the saith of infants, he first avoucheth that,Nam multi Prtotestantes, etsi non fidem actu­alem infantibus tribuunt, tamen inclinationes quasdam bonas, novos (que) moti [...] in pueris esse di­cunt, cum bap­tizantur. De Sacram. controv. [...] Bapt. quaest. 4. cap. 5. many [Page 193] Protestant Divines, however they ascribe not actuall faith to Infants, yet they affirme that cer­tain good inclinations & new motions are wrought in them, when they are baptized. Which opini­on he doth not, I confesse, take into his pro­tection; because he hath afterwards occa­sion given him to disclaime that imputati­on cast vpon Protestants by Bellarmine; that they ascribe actual faith to Infants: (which, hee acknowledgeth, to haue once vnadvisedly fallen from Luther;) and to make it good that infants do not receiue so much as the habit of that or any other particuler grace, in bap­tisme, as the Papists contend. Howbeit in that very passage hee declares enough to cleare me of novelty, for as much as ma­ny Divines haue gone farther then I haue done: for they that affirme that in baptisme, there are some good inclinations and new motions, in Infants, must needes acknowledge the re­ception of the Spirit, by which those moti­ons are infused: and so they affirme all that I doe, and so much more. And thus that Mir­rour of learning Phillip Melancthon, held, in his Common place of Baptisme: as our Author [Page 216] also hath observed before mee. And this those Divines vse to terme seminal or poten­tial grace.

But what should I stand beating of many bushes? In the Chapter now last cited, Dr Whitaker speakes plaine enough: for hau­ing spoken somewhat of Calvines opinion touching the worke of grace in Infants, he proceedes to Peter Martyr, whose opinion he first briefly, yet fully, sets down; then, explaineth it and embraceth it as the truth. In substance thus he writes.P [...]trus Mar­tyr vir gravissi­mi iudicij ait se non audere eorum senten­tiam amplecti, qui fidem tri­buunt infanti­bus, non quin Deus iis infun­dere fidem pos­sit, si velit, & rationem producere in eorum mentibus ante naturae tempus, et essicere, vt quanquam ipsi non intelligant ne (que) congoscant quae creduntur, tamen spiritus sanctus in iis apprehendat illa & illis consentiat, vt dicitur idem spiritus nobis nescientibus intercedere pro nobis & orare quemadmodum oportet, & deum, cum nouerit eius sensum, illum audiret tamen cum scriptura non dicat parvulos credere, ne (que) hoc videat esse ne­cessarium ad salutem, satis essè indicat, vt dicamus eos qui servantur, cum sint de peculio Do­mini per praedestinationem & electionem, spiritu sancto perfundi, qui radix est si lei, sp [...]i & cha­ritatis, & omnium virtutum, quas postea exerit & declarat in filiis dei, cum per aetatem licet. Posse ergo sic dici fideles, vt dicuntur rationales Nam e [...]si non possunt infantes ratiocinari, lamen ani­mam habent ea facultate praeditam, vt possint, cumaetas accesserit, rati cinari [...] ergo rationales dicuntur, non propter praesentem vsum rationis, sed propter insitum principium rationis, nempe animam, quae artium & doctrinarum om [...]ium capax est: fidem igitur expressam [...] equiri in adultis, in parvulis suffirere fidem inchoatam in suo principio & radice, id est spiritu sancto, quo praediti sunt, ex quo fides, suo tempore, & virtutes a [...]ae manam: nam infantes a spiritu purgari, cum sint in Ecclesia, & ad ecclesiam pertineant: Ecclesiam autem Christus sanctificavit, mundans cam la­vacio aquae per verbum. Si ad ecclesiam pertinent, spiritu ornantur: si in caelum recipiuntur, a peccato purgantur, &c. Peter Martyr, a man of most profound iudgment, saith, he dares not embrace their opinion, that ascribe faith to infants: not but that God can if he will, infuse faith into them, and enable them to reason [Page 218] before the ordinary time; & cause, that though they doe neither vnderstand, nor know the things which are to be beleeued, notwithstanding the spirit, in them, may apprehend and giue consent to those things, for them; as the spirit is said to make inter­cession for vs vnto God, euen when we know not what to pray for, as wee ought; and then God, who knowes the minde of the spirit, heareth the same: Howbeit seeing the. Scriptures doe not say that in­fants doe beleeue, nor doth this seeme necessary to them vnto saluation, he thinkes it sufficient that we say that they who are saued, (for as much as they are part of Gods peculiar by Predestination and election;) are endewed with the Holy Ghost, who is the roote of faith, hope, charity, and all other virtues which afterward he produceth and declar­eth in Gods children, when they come to yeares. Thus farre he voucheth the words of Peter Martyr: then he goes on in his owne words thus to illustrate the same; They may therefore be called faithfull, or beleeuers, as they may be said to be reasonable creatures. For although in­fants cannot rationally discourse, yet they haue a soule, whereby, when they come to some yeares, they may be able to discourse. So that, they are called [Page 218] reasonable creatures, not because they haue present vse of their reasonable faculty, but by reason of the principle of reason in them; to witt, the reasonable soule which is capable of all arts and sciences. Therefore (we say) expresse faith is required in all of yeares, but in infants, only faith begun or in his first principle or roote, namely the HOLY GHOST with which they are endewed, and from whom faith and other graces, in due time, doe, flow or issue forth. For infants are purged by the spirit, seeing they are in the Church, and of the Church. Christ sanctified his Church, purging it in the Lauer of water through the word. If then they belong to the Church, they are adorned with the spirit. if they be receiued vp into heauen, they are then purged by the spirit.

The former passage is aboundantly suffi­cient both to proue that I haue not abused Peter Martyr, and that D. Whitaker is fully of the same iudgment with him. Yet let me haue leaue (since I promised much out of this Author) to alleadge a place or two more to the same purpose. In thePag. 286. Sed ait Christū habitare in in­fantibus per fi­dem: ergo [...]abe­re eos fidem, sal­tem quoad habi­tum? Respon deo. At hoc non minus de actu quam de habitu intelligitur. Quid is enim dicamus in nul­lis Christum habitare, n si qui actu creduat? Et pueri ha­bent tum actum tum habitum fidei in su [...]semi­rie, id est, in spi­ri [...]u sancto, vt antea diximus. Postremo ait, trsands parvu­ [...]s occultam gratiam, cum baptizentur, idq Augustinam docere. Respondeo, Id nos quo (que) ni­cimas, Sed Au­gustimes non ait habitum fidei insued, sed gra­tiam, & Bellar­minus [...]escit an haec gratia sit Charitas cum side & spo, an qualitas alia, cum qua tres illae virtutes perp [...]tuo sunt contunctae. Quis vnquam de eusmodi qualitate audiuit, quae nec spes, nec charitas, nec fides est, sed has secum coniunctas habet? Infundi gratia potest sine harum virtutumaut actu, aut hab [...]tu. Vid [...]r Augustinus id, ens [...]sse, hancgratiam esse spiritum sanctum qui efficit sidem, licet non statim, in infantibus. next page fol­lowing [Page 219] that we last cited, answering that of Bellarmine who obiecteth that Christ is said to dwell in infants by faith, & therefore they must needs haue the habit of faith? He answers thus. But this may as well be vnderstood of actuall faith (which Bellarmine denies to be in them) as of the habit (which the Iesuite saith they haue) And what if wee should say that Christ dwels in none, but such as actually beleeue? (he meanes, what would Bellarmine haue to plead against it, seeing he maintaines ha­bituall fa [...]th:) But euen infants haue both the act and habit of faith in the seede thereof that is to say, in the Holy Ghost, as we before spake. Lastly the Iesuite saith, that Augustine teacheth that there is a secret grace infused into infants when they are bap­tized? I answere, so say we too: but Augustine saith not, the habit of faith is infused; but, grace: and Bellarmine knowes not what to make of this grace, whether he should call it charity, ioyned with faith and hope, or any other quality with which all these graces are perpetually linked. But who euer heard of such a quality which is neither faith, hope, nor loue, & yet hath all these conioyned with it? Grace may be infused without either the act or habit of [Page 220] any of these. S. Austustine seemes to be of this opi­nion, that this grace is the Holy Ghost which in­deed worketh faith, but not instantly, in infants.

Ibid. cap. 6.I will not dissemble that, in the next chap­ter, Dr Whitaker, taking vpon him to lay open the Doctrine of the Fathers, touching the faith by which infants are partakers of the grace of Baptisme, and are saved, if they die in infancie; is very loath to declare himselfe against that charitable conceipt of Antiquity: viz. that for as much as infants having in them no sinne, that is, every way their owne, but originall, which is done a­way in baptisme, if any faith be farther re­quired to bring them to heaven, in case they then depart this life, they may be saved by the faith of their parents. But this he doth, as admitting this rather then the other tou­ching actuall or habituall faith of their own, which, in the ordinarie course, he thinkes (as all other judicious Divines ever doe, and e­ver did to be very incongruous and absurd, whether we consider the nature of grace, or the capacitie of nature in an infant for recep­tion of such grace. But, for a Conclusion [Page 221] (however he, following the iudgment of many more in the ancient schooles of the Papists themseluesVid Alex. H [...]l. par. 4. q. 8. [...] [...]rt. 3. [...] esp [...]t. [...] [...]ast in 4. sen. dist. 4. &c. non Extrast. de Bapt. ma­iores., will not heare of any infusion of so much as of the habit of faith, in infants;) hee commeth backe to his for­mer position, wherein wee saw his accord with Peter Martyr, and S. Augustine, and shuts vp all, thus;Sed etsi in­fantes non habe­re fidem habitu­alem, tamen à spiritu sancto purgari dicimus, & sieri novas creaturas, quia caro & sanguis regnum culorum non possiarbunt, & [...]ex aqua & spiritu san­cto r [...]nati sue­rint. [...] in reg­num [...] [...]cpe­ra [...]t spiritum sa [...]ctum [...]da­biliter [...]. Cont [...]ce Bapt. qu [...]d [...] 4. cap 6. in con­clus. But although infants haue not habitual faith, yet we say that they are purged by the holy Ghost, and made new creatures, for as much as flesh and blood shall not inherit the king­dome of heaven, and vnlesse they be borne againe of water and of the spirit, they cannot enter into the kingdome of God: therefore wee conclude that the spirit of God worketh in them in such a manner as cannot by vs be expressed. I willingly admit that this purging and renuing of infants, which he speakes of, is to be vnderstood of the worke of the Spirit in such as die in infancie, and are saved. Howbeit he yeeldeth the spirit to be in all the rest also that belong to Gods electi­on, although the same effects bee not produ­ced till they co [...] to age, as those two plaine and pregnant p [...]ces alleadged but now our of his 5. Chapter concerning the efficacie of bap­tisme, [Page 222] clearely and fully proclaime to all the world. And so I haue done with him also.

D. White B. of Norwich.Our next witnesse is that learned Doctor Francis White, now L. Bishop of Norwich, in his Answere to Fisher the Jesuite, whom though I haue alleadged before, and might therefore well be excused if I should passe him over here. Yet because some that are resolued neuer to assent to this truth, when they see or heare any testimonie produced out of anie good Author that is clearely for me, they vse to shift it off, among those that either cannot, or will not, examine the Au­thors themselues, with this aspersion cast vp­on me; It is true, say they, that he makes a noise with quotations out of many Authors: but how? He catcheth vp here and there a word, or a sentence that seemeth to make for his purpose, and vseth them quite contrary to the Authors meanings, as would easily appeare by examination of what goeth before and followes after, in those Authors. I am there­fore constrained to bee tedious, in many things, not only to others, but to my selfe al­so, in being more large then I intended at the first, meerely to vindicat my selfe from that, [Page 223] which, I am afraid, they too well know that they vniustly lay to my charge, vpon all oc­casions. And for this reason am I compelled to repeate what formerly I alleadged out of this Author, and to adde therevnto all that he hath spoken of the point; that it may be manifest that I haue not wronged him, as some giue out to their disciples.

The charge which Fisher commeth on withall, vpon all Protestants at once, is this; Their errors against Baptisme, the gate and en­trance into Christian life, wherof they deny the vir­tue to sanctifie men, and the necessity thereof for in­fants, to whom they grant salvation without Bap­tisme. In which complaint the Iesuite would faine perswade, that Protestants deny both the efficacie, and the necessity of Baptisme. Our Author answeres him to both particulers We haue here to deale only with the former, touching which the whole passage runnes thus. viz.

Pag 175.176 Although some persons haue beene Christians before their Baptisme, as S. Augustine saith of Cornclius. Even as in Abraham the iustice of faith was precedent, and the seale of circumcision followed [Page 224] after: so likewise in Cornelius, spirituall sanctification, by the gift of the Holy Ghost, went before, and the Sacra­ment of Regeneration in the Laver of baptisme succee­ded; yet notwithstanding, the ordinary gate, and en­trance into Christian life is baptisme. S. Ambrose (sive Prosper) d. vocat. Gent. li. 1. ca. 5. The beginning of true life and righteousnesse, is laid in the Sacrament of regeneration, that looke where man is new borne, there also the verity of vertues themselues may spring.

Neither doe Protestants deny the virtue and efficacy of Baptisme, to sanctify men; But accor­ding to the Holy scriptures, Ephes. 5.26. Tit. 3.5. Gal. 3.27. 1 Pet 3 21. Act. 22.16. Rom. 6.3. And the ancient church, they teach and maintaine, that this sacrament is an instrument of sanctifica­tion, and remission of sinnes. The Leiturgy of the Church of England, in the forme of administrati­on of Baptisme, hath these words: Seeing now D.B. that these children be regenerate, &c. Wee yeeld thee hearty thankes most mercifull father, that it hath plea­sed thee to regenerate this infant with thy holy spirit, to receiue him for thine owne chi [...]d by adoption, &c. And master Hooker saith; Baptisme is a Sacrament which God hath instituted, in his Church, to the end, that they which receiue the same, might be incorpora­ted into Christ, and so through his most pretious merit, obtaine as well that saving grace of imputation, which taketh away all former guiltinesse, and also that infused diuine virtue of the holy Ghost, which giueth to the [Page 225] powers of the soule their first disposition toward future newnesse of life. Zanchius hath these words, When the Minister baptizeth, I beleeue that Christ with his hand reached as it were from heaven be sprinkleth, the child baptized with water, with his blood, to remission of sinnes. And in another place, The Holy Ghost mo­veth vpon the water of Baptisme, and sanctifieth the same, making it to be a Lauer of Regeneration. Calvine saith, Per Baptismum Christus nos mortis suae partici­pes fecit, vt in eam inseramur, By baptisme Christ hath made vs partakers of his death, that wee may be ingraffed into it. And in another place; If any de­mand, how can infants which want vnderstanding bee regenerate? I answere, Although we are not able to fa­dome or vnfold the manner of this worke of God, yet it followeth not from thence, that the same is not done.

And the same Author, with others of his part, maintaine the former doctrine concerning the effi­cacy of the Sacrament of Baptisme, and they differ only from Lutherans and Pontificians. First, in that they restraine the grace of Sanctification only to the elect. Secondly, in that they deny externall baptisme to bee alwaies effectuall, at the very in­stant time when it is administred. Thus far our Author, word for word. I forbeare to adde his margent, because I am here to vse his words, and not his Authors, from whom he [Page 226] had them. Wee see that, in the name of all sound Protestants, he professeth an efficacy of baptisme even in infants elected; and this, hee tells vs, is the doctrine of our Church, of An­tiquity both in respect of particular Fathers, and of whole Councels also; and this is the professed doctrine of Mr Hooker, Zanchius, Calvine, and of all others that are not Luthe­rans and Papists. So as now, our Author must by all men be confessed to be a Luthe­rane and a Papist, (from both which, in that whole worke, hee sufficiently cleareth him­selfe) or else to bee directly, fully, and euery way of the same opinion with our Church in this point, touching the efficacy of Bap­tisme in and vpon the elect only.

Fourthly, I produce that learned & wor­thy successour of Bishop Iewel in Sarisbury, D. Davenant, D. Dauenant B. of Sarisb. now L. Bishop of Sarum, whose worth is so well knowne, that no man that knowes a profound scholler and sound Di­vine, but will yeeld him to be of the highest forme. He, in his excellent Commentary that he lately put forth in Lattine, vpon the epistle to the Collossians, saith thus, (vpon those words [Page 227] of the Apostle Collos. 2.12 buried with him in baptisme, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, &c.) Non solum in persona Christi, sed in nobis­met-ipsis etiam sepulta dicuntur peccata in bap­tismo: quia illa mortificatio & sepultura pecca­ti non solum sa­cramentaliter vno momento peragitur in actione baptis­mi, sed realiter etiam per spiri­tum gratiae IN BAPTISMO ACCEPTVM, per totam vi­tam Christia­nam protendi­tur. Not only in the person of Christ, but also in our owne selues our sinnes are said to be buried in baptisme: because that mortification and buriall of sinne is performed not only sacramentally in the very moment of baptisme; but also really, by the spirit of grace receiued IN BAPTISME throughout the whole life of a Christian. And a little after, when he speakes of mortification as a grace actually wrought, he saith that,In fieri non in facto [...]sse. it is rather a thing not yet begun, then in the actu­all worke done, in our baptisme. And afterwards, in exposition of that clause, in whom also yee are risen by the faith of the operation of God, he thus explicates the meaning thereof;Non frustra est quod exigi­tur fides ab A­post [...]lo, vt bene­ficium spiri [...]ua­lis resurrectionis obtineamus. Nam vt in bap­tismo adultorum requiritur fides praevia, iuxta dictum Saluatoris Mar. 16.16, qui crediderit & baptizatus fuerit, saluus fuerit. Sic ab illis qui baptizantur cum iam infantes sint requiri­tur fides subsequens: quam si non praestiterint postea, retinent externam tantummodo baptism [...] sanctificationem: interna sanctificationis effecta non habent. The Apostle doth not in vaine require faith, to the end wee may obtaine the benefit of a spirituall resur­rection. For as in the baptisme of those of yeares, precedent faith is required, according to that of our Saviour Mar. 16.16. He that beleeueth, and [Page 228] is baptized shall be saued: so, of those that are baptized in infancy, future faith is required: which if they performe not, they retaine only the externall sanctification of baptisme, not hauing the inward effects thereof. Againe speaking of the faith of infants, he thus determines that doubt:Ibid. in sol. dub. 2 sufficit qu [...]d peccati mortificationē & fidem habe­ant non proprio actu sese exeren­tem, sed in habi­tuali principio gratiae inclusam Spiritus autem Christi principi­um hoc habitu­ale gratiae in il­lis efficere p [...]sse & solere, nemo sanus negauerit It is sufficient that they haue mortificati­on & faith, not actually declaring it selfe by any act of theirs, but included in the habituall princi­ple of grace. And that the spirit of Christ both can and ordinarily doth worke this habituall principle of grace in them, no man well in his wits will deny. Now in these fowre passages who sees not these 6 things. 1 That infants doe not only partake of an externall washing, or obsigna­tion, in baptisme, but they then RECEIVE the Holy Ghost. 2 That though they then re­ceiue the Holy Ghost; yet hee doth not presently regenerate actually: for then, the worke is rather in fieri then in facto esse, as a thing not yet begun, rather then for the present, done. 3 That all that are outwardly baptized, if they liue must attaine actuall faith, ere their baptisme will appeare effectu­all [Page 230] vnto them. 4 That there are some who doe partake only of the outward lauer, with­out the inward effects: else, their faith would spring and shew it selfe, when they come to yeares. 5 That it is ordinary with the Ho­ly Ghost to worke seminall grace in those in­fants that belong indeed vnto Gods electi­on. 6 That they savour of cract braines that deny it. I am afraid the reader wilbe impa­tient to be staied longer in a point so plaine I will therefore adde only one Testimony more out of D. Fulk; and another out of D. Featly, who, vnderstanding from my self how I stated my Position, gaue this answere; nemi­nem habebis aduersarium: sure you will haue no aduersary.

Iudicious and industruous D. Fulk, D. Fulk. in his Answere to the Rhemists Annotations vpon the New Test. saith thus,In 1 Pet. 3.21. Neither is baptisme an efficient cause of saluation vnto infants, but a seale of Gods spirit regenerating them to eternall life. Where he doth not more deny the ouerplus which Papists vniustly attribute to baptisme, then he willingly acknowledgeth, what is due vnto it: viz. that it is outwardly a seale [Page 230] of Gods spirit, which spirit inwardly regene­rateth vnto eternall life. So then Doctor Fulk could also discerne the spirit in the baptisme of those ordained to life.

D. Featly.Lastly that Learned and nimble Author of the second Parallell, (who is thought to make against mee,I was at first much pressed with the Au­thority of the Author of t [...]e perpetuity of the regene [...]a [...]e mans estate. But he that shall pervse page 353. 354. of his booke in the fi [...]st edi­tion, shall find that still he runs vpon these two points. 1 That not all, but only the elect receiue any kind of rege­neration at al in baptisme. 2 That the elect doe re­ceiue a clean­sing and wash­ing from the guilt of original sinne, so as if they dye in their infancy, before their ACTVALL Regeneration, and reall conuersion vnto God, they shall be saued. And all this he saith is done by the spirit. Which is as much for mee as I can desire. If my aduersaries haue no worse weapons to beat me withall, I shall neuer complaine at their blowes. because in page 89 he saith, as I also euer said from the beginning: viz. that all that are regenerated sacramentally, are not necessarily and infallibly regenerated spiritu­ally;) is cleare of this opinion, pag. 90. Al­though the inward grace ordinarily accompany the outward signe, and wee ought to beleeue, by the iudgment of charity, that all who are baptized are truly regenerate: yet indicio veritais as Iunius; distinguisheth; that is; by the iudgment of precise and infallible truth, all are not so, as the Fathers speake roundly & plainly. In which words we see, first a concession of that wee contend for, viz, that the inward grace ordinarily, accom­panieth the outward signe. Secondly, that yet this is not alwaies; for it is not done at all, [Page 231] in the baptisme of some. But who are those some? They that are not elected: for he de­nyes it of all that fall away and perish, as the maine substance and drift of that discourse declares. Thus you see that many English Diuines of best note, speake clearely and fully to this point, as well as I that alone am singled out, and worried by passionate and heady men.

CAP. 9. 6 Obiections against the maine position answered.

I Haue at length gotten through all those particulars propounded in the end of the Second chapter of this Treatise; and I hope, made it euident to Iudi­cious and impartiall readers, that, (in the iudgment of our Church, according to the scriptures, as they haue beene vnderstood by the Ancient Fathers, by the present Churches of Christ beyond the seas, and by particular Divines of cheifest note, both forraine and domesticall;) All elect infants doe ordinarily, re­ceiue [Page 232] from Christ, in Baptisme, the spirit of rege­neration, as the soule and first principle of spirituall life, for the first solemne initiation into Christ, and for their future actuall renouation, in Gods good time. I haue also giuen answers to all such obiections as might occasionally fall in a­gainst my a [...]guments brought for confirma­tion of the point. Now it remaines that I adde Answers to all such Obiections as either haue beene made by others, or conceiued by my selfe as likely to be vrged by others, against the maine assertion it selfe, which I haue laboured all this while to proue and make good by so many witnesses.

In the performance hereof, I shall endea­vour to deale as clearly and plainly as possi­bly I can, although I thereby be constrained to vse more words then may be needfull (or perhaps gratefull) to more acute capacities; that I may not be thought to darken my meaning on purpose in the foggs of needles termes of Art not generally vnderstood, which might giue ordinary Readers cause to complaine of Obscurity or sophistry. And vnto ordinary readers I must premise one [Page 233] aduertisement which others need not: viz. That in this part they expect not further cor­roboration of the maine conclusion; but on­ly, a manifestation of the impertinency and weaknesse of their arguments that obiect a­gainst it. If I can, in that which remaines, make it appeare that, nothing of all that hath beene, or can be said against my position, is able to ouerthrow it, but that it is possible for the point to stand whole and vnbroken, notwithstanding all their battery; I haue don enough how weak so euer mine owne grounds on which I haue hitherto built, may to those that proclaime mee a dreamer and a broacher of a grosse and pesti­lent error seeme to bee.

1 Obiection. Christians are regenerated by Obiect. 1 the word Jam. 1.18. 1 Pet. 1.23. there­fore not by baptisme, in their infancy.

Answ. Answere. The Antecedent Proposition is granted, being vnderstood of actuall regeneration of persons of yeares, as it importeth an actuall and through chang of the whole man, vpon their effectuall vocation, inwardly by the spirit, and outwardly by the Word, in ordi­nary course. And of this only, those places [Page 234] are to be expounded. For, the words are spoken only of the worke of the word in & vpon aged persons called either from Iuda­isme, or Gentilisme, by the preaching of the Gospell; who, as Lidia; (Act. 16.14) had their hearts opened by the spirit, to vnderstand and receiue the things, preached vnto them, and so were begotten anew vnto God: that is, made new men in Christ, to performe new obedience actually vnto God, contra­ry to their former course in the state of cor­rupt nature.

In this actuall conuersion and renouati­on, the spirit is the efficient cause; and the word an instrument only, that he pleaseth to make vse of; not, as if hee could not dis­patch this worke without it: but this is that which he hath sanctified, and commanded vs to attend vpon, so soone as wee are able, by accession of yeares, to vnderstand the vse of it, for conuersion in the ordinary course thereof. Now marke the weaknesse and imperfection of this argument. S. Iames, and S. Peter doe both of them affirme that, the persons to whom they wrote, being persons of yeares, [Page 235] were actually renewed by the Word, therefore, it is false that elect infants doe receiue the spirit in baptisme for their initiation into Christ, and as the soule and principle of after actuall renovation by the word? This is all the strength that this ob­iection hath in it, when they haue impro­ued it to the vtmost. And, how weake this strength is, who doth not see? It doth not reach home so much as to touch (much lesse to peirce) the point in question For, the A­postles speake of persons of yeares; wee, of Infants: they of actuall renouation; wee of initiall regeneration only: They of such as are able to make vse of the word, wee, of such as are not capable of any speech. Those pla­ces therefore doe well proue that which I deny not; viz thatLet the rea­der obserue that Whereas I often vse this phrase my meaning is not at any time to vnder­stand thereby any other thing then what in the stating of the question, c. 2. I haue expres­sed. viz. such a worke of the spirit as doth actually re­new a man and makes him a new man in Christ by effectuall conuersion wherein he receiues the habits of all sauing graces by the spirit, actuall regeneration in persons of yeares is vsually wrought by the word; but they doe not restraine regenera­tion either to persons of yeares only; or, to this meanes only; nor deny the spirit to be giuen to infants before they come to make vse of the word, for their first ingraffing into Christ, and as the first principle of the new Creature.

If any shall doubt whether I be right in expounding the places alleadged: and sup­pose that, the words do not only affirme the Word to be the ordinary meanes of Regene­ration, but the only meanes also of regenera­ting all that are regenerated, in any kinde; or degree whatsoeuer; let them be pleased to consult M. Calvine, who interpret, S. Peter, (that saith the same with S. Iames,) in the ve­ry same sense that I doe, in his answere to the Anabaptists, who were the first Fathers of this obiection, and of all that follow, against this point. Thus, Hee:Qu [...]d c [...]ntra obi [...]ctant spiri­tum in scrip [...]u­ris nullam n [...]si ex incorrupti­bili seruine, id est, Dei verbo regenerationem agnosc [...]re, perpe­ram illam Petri sententiam in­terpretan [...]ur, quâ fid [...]les mo­do comprehen­dit, qui evange­li [...] praed catione ed [...]cti fuerant. Tal [...]bus qu [...]dem f [...]tent [...], ver­bum D mi [...]i spiritualis esse re [...]n [...]r [...]ionis [...]eme [...] v [...]icum: sed ex eo ne [...] ­m [...]s c [...]ligengū, n [...]n po [...]se [...]ei virtute [...]gene­rari inf [...]ntes; quae illi tam [...] ­ci [...]s & prompta e [...]t, [...]n nob [...]s in [...]o [...]hen [...] & adm [...]rabi [...]is. Inst. l. 4. cap. 16. Sect. 1 [...]. Whereas they obiect, that the spirit of God in the Scriptures, doth ac­knowledge no regeneration at all, but that which is by the incorruptible seed of the Word: they do most absurdly interpret that place of Peter; wherein the Apostle only comprehends such as had beene taught and instructed by the preaching of the Gospel. Vnto such, we confesse, the word of God is the seed, and the only seed of spiritual Regeneration: but we de­ny that from thence may be gathered, that God by his power cannot regenerate infants without it: which to him is as easie and ordinary; as it is to vs incomprehensible and admirable. The like hee [Page 237] saith, in the particular of faith, in the very next Section, as there more at large appeares. Nor did this speech fall from him only once, or vnadvisedly: but it was the constant An­swere he ever gaue to this obiection; as him­selfe professeth, in his Answere to Servetus disputing touching the same subiect of the Baptisme of Infants; as may be seene in the end of the same Chapter last cited. For, to Ser­vetus obiecting, that,Obijcit rur­sum, Inf [...]ntes n [...]n posse [...]ovos homine [...] c [...]n [...]eri: quia non gig­n [...]ntur per ser­monem. Ego, ve­re, quod saepius iam dixi nunc quo (que) repeto, ad nos regene­randos d [...]ctri­nam semen esse incor [...]uptibi [...]e, siquid [...]m ad e­am percipiendâ sumus idon [...]i: vbi verò non­dum per aetatem n [...]bis inest d [...]ci­litas, Deum te­nere suos rege­nerandi gradus. Instit 4. ca. 16, sect 31. Infants cannot be thought new men, because they be not regenerated by the Word; Calvin makes this answere: I haue said often, and I now repeat it, that, the Word is the in­corruptible seed of regeneration vnto vs; provided that we be capable of it: but where infancy makes vncapable of instruction by that meanes, God doth retaine his course of working some degrees of rege­neration, without it. If it be replyed; Calvin speakes what may be; and what, in some ex­traordinary cases, sometimes happens; but not what is vsually done in the baptisme of the Elect? I reioine, That, if Calvine meant only thus much, his Answere could not sa­tisfie the Anabaptists, who therefore denie baptisme to infants, because they are not then [Page 238] capable of regeneration and faith: and hee on the contrary, saith they be capable of some regeneration, and therefore ought to be baptized. If he meant not baptismall re­generation, how can their possibility of re­generation be a warrant for baptisme, seeing they haue, or may haue that, without bap­tisme. Lastly, if it were not ordinary with God to regenerate elect infants in baptisme, his answere would fall short too. ‘For they might iustly reply, that an ordinary practise of baptizing all infants is not to bee war­ranted from some extraordinary cases. If you confesse that it is not ordinary that e­lect infants are regenerated in baptisme; what reason haue you to tie all men to that, wherein you cannot promise them the grace that is represented thereby, and pro­mised to all that vse it with vnderstanding and faith.’ This, and much more might be vnanswerable returned vpon Calvine, by Servetus and his Clients; if they had vnder­stood him to deny Initiall Regeneration of elect infants, to be ordinarily communicated to them in Baptisme. I conclude therefore, [Page 239] with iudicious Calvine: However it be true, which the Scriptures speake of the actuall regeneration of persons of yeares; that they are regenerated by the Word; yet Elect in­fants may be, and are, for ought appeares in either of the places of scripture obiected to the contrary, partakers of Initiall Regenerati­on, by the Spirit, in their Baptisme: and so this Obiection doth our Position no harme.

2 Obiection. But there is no such thing as In­itiall Obiect. 2 Regeneration, distinct from Actuall, as here is supposed. Where ever the spirit is infused to re­generate, he doth, in the first instant, actually regene­rate: therefore there being, by your owne confession (say they) no actuall regeneration in any infant ordi­narily, at his baptisme; there is then no regenerati­on at all, this distinction of initial and actual rege­neration being but a toy and a new device, without warrant from the Scripture?

Answ. [...]s [...]ere. If this Obiection containe a truth without equivocation, I confesse the Posi [...]i­on to be a toy indeed. But there may ly some ambiguity in the termes of Initial, and Actu­all; which being cleared, the obiection may perhaps appeare as weake, as they declare [Page 240] themselues rash and vncharitable who tooke vpon them to confute that distinctiō, which they never vnderstood, nor would ever vouchsafe so much as to heare explicated by my selfe, either in publique or private.

Touching the distinction of Initial and Actual Regeneration, I haue sufficiently de­clared before, in my second Chapter, in what sense I vse it. I will therefore forbeare to re­peat what there I haue written. The Rea­der may view it at his pleasure. If any man demande expresse Scriptures for the very termes, he will soone declare of what Spirit he is. But if by sufficient consequence the distinction be not clearely deduced thence, he shall then haue cause to complaine. Let him view the foundation on which it is built, and afterwards tell me his minde, if he re­maine vnsatisfied. In the meane time I shal only adde thus much: that by Initial, and A­ctuall Regeneration, I doe not meane to insi­nuate two severall kindes of spirituall life; for which, I acknowledge, there is no footing in Scripture: but I vnderstand only two di­stinct considerations in respect of the de­grees [Page 241] of spirituall life in the same subiect, which the places of Scripture before allead­ged in Chapt. 2. doe sufficiently warrant. For, by life, in Scripture, is sometimes meant the soule infused as the principle of life: some­times, the very actuall being and enliuening of the subiect by that soule, making it actu­ally to produce the actions of life. Hence I distinguish of life into Initiall, and Actuall: Not as if the Spirit were not actually com­municated, or did not actually worke, or a­ctually beginne, from the very first instant, to dispose and prepare the soule to future a­ctuall newnesse of life, by infusing some po­tentiall and seminall grace; but my meaning is that, the Spirit doth not at that time, ordina­rily, so plenarily change & renew the whole man, as to worke in him either actuall faith, hope, or loue, &c: or so much as the habits of these or other particular graces, for the present as afterward he doth. Something the spirit doth, from his first entrance, toward a­ctual regeneration, therefore we cal that first worke, Initiall: thereby vnderstanding the first disposition to, or degree of actuall rege­neration. [Page 242] But for as much as that first worke doth not (for ought we know) extend to a present actuall change of the whole man in the same manner and degree, that afterwards is wrought in him, at his effectuall calling; therefore we call that latter worke, Actuall Regeneration.

This ought not to seeme strange to any: for iust so is it in the course of nature.Ipse (Deus scil.) ita (que) ani­mae [...]umanae mentem dedit, vbi ratio & in­tellgentia in in­fante sopita est quodammodo, quasi nulla sit, excitand [...] s [...]i­licet at (que) exer­cend [...] aetatis ac­cessu, qua sit sci­entiae capax at (que) doct in [...]e, & habilis percep­tioni veritatis & amoris boni. August. de Civit. Dei lib. 22. c 24. To the same purpose also he w [...]te h, lib 2 [...] Peccat. [...] 25 & ali [...]i. So soone as the reasonable soule is infused, there is in some sense, (not every way, in respect of degrees) a rationall life. But how? The soule is there, and in that soule are included all the principles of reason: but the soule doth not send forth those principles vnto action (vn­lesse in some insensible manner by little and little preparing the infant vnto humane acti­ons) till afterwards that the senses beginne to act. Before that time, the reasonable life cannot wholly be denied to be in an infant, because the soule rationall is actually in his body: yet forasmuch as the infant hath not at that time the actuall vse of reason, for this cause we call the further perfection of his naturall principles by tract of time attained, [Page 243] when reason puts it selfe into act, actuall ra­tionall life; and wee terme the same life, in re­spect of the first degree and principles there­of, which together with the reasonable soule, in the first infusion thereof, it receiued, Initi­all life.

This is no more, in substance, then what wee haue learned from S. Augustine, Calvine, Peter Martyr, Iunius, Daneus, Dr Whitaker, Zanchius, and sundry others, whose iudgments haue beene at large set downe in this treatise in sundry places vpon sundry occasions. And shall any man thinke it nothing in a magisteriall humor, to trāple so many worthies vnder his feete, at once, as if he were wiser than all others? if it be only the termes that displease him, because, per­haps, the same are not found in any of these Authors; he shall but shew himselfe a cauel­ler to quarrell them; vnlesse hee can shew that the termes are vsed to signify that, which, in substance, these Authors doe not allow and teach. Breefly then, this Obiecti­on is grounded vpon a false information, and supposition: for it supposeth mee to vse [Page 244] the termes of Initiall and actuall regenerati­on, as intending thereby to teach that there be two distinct species, or kinds of regenerati­on; whereas my meaning is only to speake of the same spirituall life, in two distinct con­siderations, in respect of degrees. And so the Obiection fights with a shadow, and not with me.

But it will be replyed that, in Regeneration there be no degrees: but that it is performed and dispatcht at an instant, as naturall generation is. It is true say they, that there be degrees in [...]. Renoua­tion which noteth a growth in sanctification, in a man regenerated. But [...] Regeneration is never ta­ken for any other than for the first act of the spirit entring into a Christian, and begetting him a new man in Christ, in the very first moment of his en­trance Therefore the distinction of actuall and ini­tiall regeneration cannot bee admitted in any sense?

I Answere, That those two words, Regene­ration, and Renovation, may perhaps, by some, be vsed, the one, to signifie the first infusion of grace making a man actually a new crea­ture in all parts at once; and the other to note [Page 245] the continual growth of a Christian in grace infused; if men wil before giue notice of their meaning, and for the more cleare expression of themselues, will say; when I speake of the first infusion of grace, I will vse the word regeneration to expresse it by; and when I speake of continuall growth from one degree vnto another, I will ever call that, Renovation. Men may, if they please, make vse of words, as they doe of Counters in casting of accounts, wherein, of the same set, and value, some Counters are made to stand for pounds; some, for shillings; & some for pence. And yet, as those Counters which stand for pence, might as well haue stood for pounds, as those that do stand for poūds, if it had pleased him that set them to haue so disposed them: So men may put words of the same value and natiue signification, to signifie diverse things, by a liberty iustifiable enough in vse of speech: & yet those words, may without wrong, be vsed by others to signifie other things: alwaies provided that when a man vseth a word in a sense diffe­rent either from the prime signification of it, or from the common acceptation of it, he [Page 246] giue warning that, where ever he vseth such a word, he would be vnderstood in such or such a sense, and not according to the etimo­logy of it, nor according to the common vse of it. And thus I graunt, that, if it please any Divine to say that, he will ever restraine Re­generation, to note the first infusion of grace, and by Renovation signifie a dayly encrease of grace, in all his speeches or writings, for want of fitter termes to expresse himselfe in, he may doe it.

But if any man shall say that, ‘the pro­per meaning of the word Regeneration, and of that which the Scriptures call [...], is the first infusion of the Spirit actually to make a man a new Creature in all parts at once, so as in this there can be no de­grees; & affirme that, so the Scriptures doe ever vse that word; and also adde that, by Renovation, the Scripture never meanes the same thing that it intends by Regeneration, but that [...] or Renovation is ever put for another thing, to wit, for continu­all growth in grace once infused:’ I must craue leaue to dissent from him, and to deny [Page 247] his assertion. For, neither is there any such difference in the proper signification of these words, but that they may both signifie one and the same thing: Nor is the Scripture so nice as to obserue such a difference between them, as the Obiectors would perswade vs.

That in the proper signification, there is nothing either why regeneration should signi­fy only the first infusion of grace; or rather this then the daily growth of it; nor, why Renouation should not signify the first begin­ings of the new creature, as well as the growth of it, those that are skilfull in the Tongues, will easily bare me witnesse; and I take them that make this nice distinction betweee these two words, to be better skil­led then to say that these words in their pro­per signification, will iustify this conceit. Therefore they must of necessity fly to the Scriptures, and proue that there, [...], vsually translated Regeneration, is euer so re­strained as that it alwaies signifies the first infusion of grace, and not that further worke of the spirit which admitteth of degrees and is ever expressed by [...], or Renouation: [Page 248] or else their conceit will proue but a fancy too weake to ruine the distinction of Jniti­all and Actuall regeneration.

But the Holy Ghost in the scriptures doth not obserue this nicely of words: for some­times we shall find regeneratiō, put for sancti­fication exprest by obedience vnto Christ & his Gospell, or else for the begining of glory, and not for the first infusion of grace only: So in Mat. 19.28. Our Sauiour thus giues answere to Peter demanding of him what they should haue, who had forsaken all to follow him; verily I say vnto you that ye which haue fol­lowed mee [...], in the regeneration, when the sonne of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, yea also shall sit vpon twelue thrones, &c. where the word regeneration cannot be taken for the first infusion of grace only, because it notes such a thing as Christs disciples did actually exercise and expresse in receiuing of his Gospell, or else, as Beza rather thinketh, it signifies the very state of glory wherewith they shall be invested at the latter day; and the words ought to be read thus: yee that haue followed me, (here making the comma) [Page 249] in the regeneration when the sonne of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, yee shall sit, &c. that is, you that follow me now, shall hereafter, when the elect, being perfectly sanctified, begin their kingdome of glory, namely at the latter day, when I shall come againe in glory, then shall ye sit vpon twelue thrones. And so did Saint Augustine Aug. de Pece. Mer. & Remis. lib, 2. cap. 7. long before ex­pound that text. Therefore the word is not restrained only to signify the first infusion of the spirit, & of grace by the spirit. Againe, sometimes wee shall finde [...] and [...], Regeneration and Renouation put one for another, the one to explicate the o­ther: for so Zanchius saith expresly in his com­mentary vpon Ephes. 5. And he saith the truth: for so the Apostle vseth them, Tit. 3.5. according to his mercy he saued vs [...], by the lauer of re­generation and renewing of the Holy Ghost. Ista vero Rege­neratio & Re­novatio non sunt duo diver­sa. sed haec est il­lius declaratio. Beza in loc. where the Apostle vseth those two words of regeneration and renouation not to signify two things; but the latter declares the mean­ing of the former, as Beza well. Wherefore I conclude that, for as much as the holy [Page 250] scripture doth not restraine the word Rege­neration, to the first infusion of the spirit, or of grace by the spirit, wherein there be no degrees, but extends it further, euen to that further worke of the spirit, wherein (as all grant) there be degrees; the distinction of Regeneration into initiall and actuall, still stands vpright without battering by this se­cond Obiection, that will admit of no de­grees in that, which the scripture euery where calleth by the name of Regeneration.

Obiect. 3 3 Obiection. The Apostle expresly ascribeth the conferring of the spirit, to the word of faith preached. Gal. 3.2. Therefore the spi­rit is not giuen in Baptisme?

Answ. Answere. Consider the quality of the per­sons spoken of by the Apostle, and com­pare them with those of whom we speake in the present question, and then the Ob­iection will fall to the ground of it selfe. If we should consider those Galathians only as persons of age & vnderstanding, that would, in Caluines iudgment, so much alter the case, (if the same words should be vsed to deny the communication of the spirit vnto infants [Page 251] in baptisme) as would giue iust occasion to deny the consequent of that proposition. For so Calvine, to Seruetus obiecting that,Addit postea, neminem fieri fratrem nostrum nisi per spiritum adoptionis qui tantum ex au­ditu fidei con­sertur. Respon­deo; semper in eundem relabi paralogismum: quia praepostere ad infantes tra­hit qu d de solis adultis dictum est. Docet illic Paulus hanc esse deo ordina­rium modum, vt electos suos ad fidem addu­cat, dum illis suscitat fides doctores, quo­rum ministerio & opere manū porrigit. Quis inde legem im­ponere ei audeat quo minus ar­cana alia ratio­ne infantes Chri­sto inserat? Instit: lib. 4. cap. 16. sect 31. resp. [...]d ob­iectionem 15tam Ser­veti. no man is made our brother but by the spirit of adoption which is cōferred only by the hearing of faith; giues this answere. He euer falls into the same sophisme: because preposterously he drawes that to infants which is spoken only of persons of yeares. Paul in that place teacheth that the hearing of faith is Gods ordinary way of calling, whereby he brings on his elect vnto faith, raising them vp faithfull teachers in whose ministry he reacheth out his hand vnto them. Now, who shall dare to set such a law vnto God, that he should not by some other secret way ingraffe infants into Christ.

But there is more in that case of the Gala­thians, and so in that of Cornelius his compa­ny, Act. 10.44. then this, that they were per­sons of yeares, when, in hearing the word preached, they receiued the Holy Ghost: for they were, till that time, no part of the visible Church and flock of Christ, but gentiles and meere aliens from him and all his ordi­nances till the Gospell was preached to them. And it is one thing to be a Gentile, [Page 252] without the Church, that hath nothing to doe with Christ or his spirit, till he heares him published in the preaching of the Gospell, which is the first ordinance of Christ that he partakes of: (for first, Christ is preached vnto him; then, beleeuing, he is to be baptized) and it is another thing to be borne of parents that are visible members of a setled and stablished Church, so as the par­ty so borne is to be held and reputed for one of the faithfull euen from the womb. It is no wonder if the former sort receiue the spirit in the hearing of the word: for, how else should they come by it in the ordinary course of dispensation by meanes? But it can­not but be wondred at, that any should in­ferre that, elect infants borne and baptized in the Church, should not, ordinarily, par­take of the spirit, before they come to age sufficient to be capable of the word prea­ched, vpon this ground that, the Galathians and others mentioned in scripture, that were conuerted by the word, from Paga­nisme, did not receiue the spirit before they heard the Gospell preached. I shall not need [Page 253] to spend time and paper to proue that the A­postle speaks of the former sort only, & not of the latter. Therefore this Objection doth not at all touch the point in hand.

4 Obiection. If the spirit bee given in Bap­tisme, Obiect. 4 then Baptisme can saue without actuall re­generation, which is confessed to be wrought by the Word. But Baptisme, without actual Re­generation cannot saue any, as appeares by that in 1. Pet. 3.21. Therefore the spirit is not gi­ven in Baptisme.

Answ. Answere. A feeble Argument. Neverthelesse let vs examine it. I answere therefore both to the Maior, and to the Minor also.

1. To the Maior, I answere by denying the sequele. For, in the case of infants dying in infancy, the spirit can, and (no doubt) doth actually regenerate them, without the word; how else should they enter into the king­dome of heauen? In what manner the spirit doth regenerate such, is to vs vnknowne. Nor will I take vpon me to determine that which the Scripture is silent in. They that deny all actuall regeneration till the word come, without exception of such as dy in in­fancy, [Page 254] doe conclude all infants dying before they be able to make vse of the Word, to be damned. A damnable conclusion not to be endured in the tongue or penne of any sober Christian. Thus we see in few words that the Consequent of the Major, is an idle non sequitur; grounded on a false supposition. For, al­though we say that, actuall Regeneration is not wrought but by the Word, yet we grant not this Vniuersally of all, but only of per­sons of yeares.

2 To the Minor I answere thus,

1 I deny that the Apostle, in that place, doth speake of Regeneration wrought by the Word: for hee speakes not at all either of Re­generation strictly and formally so called; but only of an act which supposeth regene­ration; nor, of that act, as wrought by the Word; but, of an act wrought, without de­claring by what meanes it is wrought: so as, for ought appeares in the Text to the con­trary, it may be wrought in baptisme, as well as by any other meanes. Therefore in this re­spect, the proposition is weak and lame: be­cause I may as well drawe it to my purpose, [Page 255] and say that, baptisme hath such efficacy in it as to enable a Christian to make answer vnto God, because the Apostle saith that Baptisme (although not the outward washing yet the inward Grace) saueth: as others may vrge it against mee, by inferring thence that, Bap­tisme cannot saue without the VVord. For, there is not, in that place, any mention, or so much as the least insinuation of the Word, but only of Baptisme.

2 I adde that Expositors agree not in the exposition of that Text; and yet not­withstanding their disagreement, there is no­thing to be drawne either from the Exposi­tion of any one of them, or from all of them together, that concludes any thing against this Position. That Expositors agree not in the rendring of the Text, is euident by their different rendrings of the word [...], (which in our last Translation, is rendred, the answere of a good conscience, &c.) in which word lies all the difficulty of the whole passage.

1 Some would not haue it translated, the answere of a good conscience; but, the re­quest or confident demand made by a good con­science [Page 256] vnto God. So, the old Translators; and so M. Cartwright also, in his answere to the Rhemists, vpon Math. 3.11. but what the conscience makes request for, these Authors speake no syllable of And how a request made to God, should be the inward part of baptisme here opposed to the outward washing which purgeth the filthinesse of the flesh, is beyond my capacity to comprehend. But I let that passe wishing they had more clearely explained themselues.

2 Some take it for an allusion to the v­suall Jnterrogatories in baptisme, and to the Stipulation made by the partie baptized, to performe the conditions tendred vnto him, and accepted by him, in his baptisme; which stipulation he must answere and make good, ere hee can expect that his baptisme should saue him. So Beza tooke it, saith D Fulk vpon the place. Yea, and so, Mr Cartwright also, when he comes to write vpon that Text, & to vindicate it from Rhemish falsifications. But he addeth that, those Questions were made to persons of yeares, and vnto such the Apostle writeth: & so, this, in his iudgment, belongs [Page 257] not vnto infants, nor is spoken touching the efficacy of Baptisme vpon infants. How­beit he denieth not the spirit to bee giuen to infants: forT.C. against D. Whitgift, touching in­terrogatories in baptisme. p. 134. the last Section, elsewhere, he saith thus; I will not deny but that children haue the spirit of God, which worketh in them after a wonderfull fashion But this, by the way. All that may by this exposition be concluded hence is this, That baptisme saues none of yeares, no not as an instru­ment, till there bee a faithfull performance of the Covenant on their parts. But in the case of in­fants the matter is farre otherwise, foras­much as they cannot, ordinarily, actually beleeue or repent. So Dr Fulk: Stipulation and solemne promises are necessary to bee acknow­ledged, that baptisme may bee effectuall to them that are of age.

3 Some, as Oecumenius, and others in­terpret the word somewhat otherwise. Oecu­menius, who should best knowe the force of the Greek phrase, expounds [...], by three other words, [...]: an earnest, a pledg, and a demonstration: vsing so many words not to signify divers things, but more fully to set forth the force of that one word, [Page 258] which he could not sufficiently expresse by one. But what hee meanes by this earnest, pledg, and demonstration, hee leaues to his Rea­ders to divine. I thinke it can be vnderstood of nothing else but the inward grace signifi­ed by the outward washing; to wit, the blood and spirit of Christ giuen to a Christi­an in his Baptisme, as a seale and pledg and de­monstratiue evidence both of the remission of his sinnes by the blood of Christ, and also of Re­generation by the Spirit of Christ, whereby the conscience is purged from dead works, and sanctified that a man doth now answere and make good his promise and vow in Bap­tisme, which now, not as a cause, but as a meanes instituted by Christ to seale vnto him iustification by the bl [...]od, and sanctificati­on by the spirit of Christ, is said to saue him. So Basil [...].; [...]. If there bee any grace (or vertue) in the water, it is not from the na­ture of the water, but from the presence of the spirit: for baptisme is not the deposition of the filth of the flesh, but the answere of a good conscience vnto God. Vpon which words of Basil, Vides v m purgandi dene­gari aquae, asse­ri spiritui san­cto praesenti: & quidem argu­mento á verbis Petri De Sa­cram. lib. 2. c. 9 par. 11. Chameir [Page 259] thus descanteth: You see that the power of pur­ging the conscience, is denied to the water, and af­firmed to be in the spirit there present, and this hee proues by an argument drawne from the words of Peter. And in the same manner iudiciousDe sacram. in genere quaest. 4. cap, 2. pag. 73. Whitaker, vnderstandeth & approueth that of Basil.

Bullinger is of the same iudgment; for thusIn 1. Pet. 3.21 Ne quis p [...]aece­dentia de nudo baptismi signo intelli [...]eret, hoc addit: non is quidem baptis­mus nos salva [...], quo abluimus sordes externas humani corporis sed per baptismū intelligo illam vim fidei, illum spiritum & vir­tutem Christi (quae cum ex­terno signo con­iuncta est) qua sit vt conscien­tia nostra paca­ta secure agat coram oculis Dei. Marlorat alleageth him vpon the place. Least any man should vnderstand him to speake those words of the naked signe of baptisme, he addes these; that baptisme saues not, which pur­geth the outward filth of the flesh; but by baptisme J vnderstand that efficacy of faith, the spirit and power of Christ (which, as Marlorat addes, is ioined with the outward signe) whereby it comes to passe that the conscience being pacified, it may con­fidently appeare and plead before the Lord. To the same purpose speakes the English note in our old Bibles, which vnderstands hereby, Christs inward vertue, which the outward bap­tisme shadoweth. So that the purpose of the A­postle here is only to teach what it is in bap­tisme that is so efficacious, as to saue a man: namely, not the outward element, or wash­ing [Page 260] with that element; but the inward grace thereby signified: which grace is here set forth by the effect of it in such as are of yeares, which is, the enabling of them with a good conscience to make good their vowes, as also confidently to depend vpon God through Christ for their saluation. Bu­cer is large in the explication of this Text; his conclusion is this;Ne (que) enim seruat Baptis­ma adultos nisi credentes. Salus quidem baptis­mate offertu [...] omnibus [...] re [...]ipi­uat autem illā [...]dulti non nisi per fidem: infan­tes per arcanam spiritus sancti operationem, qua ad vitam aeternam san­ctificantur. In script. Anglic. de v [...] & essic. Bapt. in calce. Baptisme saues none of yeares but beleeuers. Indeed saluation is offered in Baptisme vnto all but none of yeares receiue it, but by faith. As for infants, they are saued by the se­cret operation of the spirit, which sanctifieth them vnto eternall life.

Now, take the words which way soeuer any of these Worthies haue expounded thē, what doe they make, when they are cleared, so much as in shew, against the present Posi­tion that Elect infants doe ordinarily re­ceiue the spirit in baptisme, as the first effici­ent principle of future actuall regeneration? For, let any man frame an argument from this place (though he make the best improu­ment that any exposition of it will yeeld) he cannot make [...] more forcible then this, viz. [Page 261] ‘Saint Peter saith that, Baptisme is effectu­all to none of yeares, vnlesse they partake of the inward grace of the spirit and blood of Christ by faith, that may both assure then on Christs part that they are ingraf­fed into him, haue their sinnes pardoned, and the old man in them buried; and also enable them to keepe touch with Christ actually on their parts in all such things as they promised. Therefore elect infants doe not receiue the spirit in baptisme, to beget faith and other graces in them af­terwards, by the word, when they come to yeares.’ Would not such a kinde of arguing seeme very ridiculous? It is iust as if one should dispute against the slowing of the water at London Bridg, at any time saue only about three of clock, in this wise. It is neuer high water at London Bridg about three of clock, but when the moone is either at the full, or the chang: therefore there is not the least beginning of any new flood, ordinarily at all, till either it be about three of clo [...]k, or till the moone be at the full o [...] [...]h [...]ng [...] [...]o here persons of ripe [Page 262] age baptisme doth not saue, without faith, therefore, not infants: yea therefore, there can be no seed of grace, no spirit of grace communicated to infants, till they doe come to yeares; as if there could be no beginning of a following of the water, till it be high tide. This and no other is the force of the Obiection founded on this place; so as now I appeale to any ordinary capacity, whether our Positiō haue any cause to feare the least shaking by it I haue beene larger in answere of this obiection then the strength of it de­serueth, because I was willing to cleare the Text, which hath difficulty in it.

Obiect. 5 5 Obiection. Wheresoeuer the spirit is, hee worketh faith and regeneration; else it would follow that the spirit were idle, which were little lesse then blasphemy to affirme: But in elect infants, ordinarily, no such worke appeares, rather on the contrary, many of them shew manifest opposition to all grace and goodnesse for many yeares toge­ther, notwithstanding their baptisme. There­fore we must conclude that either they loose the spirit receiued in Baptisme, so soone as [Page 263] they be able to commit actuall sinne; or else, that they doe not ordinarily receiue him in their Baptisme.

Answ. Answere. This is the argument which of all others is thought to haue in it greatest strength, and is supposed to be impregnable. Wherefore I must endeavor to giue it a full and satisfactory answere, or else I shall loose all my labour in answering of all the rest. And here before I begin to answere to either Proposition, I must entreat the reader to take notice that, this argument would draw the matter vnto an Impossibility that any such thing as the conferring of the spirit on in­fants in Baptisme, should ordinarily be; be­cause of the grosse absurdities that thence doe follow: viz that, then the spirit must either be confest to be idle; which is no bet­ter then blasphemy to affirme; or else, that the spirit of sanctification and adoption may be wholy lost, so as a mā once truly regene­rate, may totally loose all regeneration, & be in the same state in which he was before his baptisme, which is flat Popery to maintaine. [Page 264] The whole company of Remonstrants convented at the synode of Dort in their declaration touching the 5 Art set forth by themselues doe with one consent dis­claime such a falling from grace, as ren­ders him to his former estate before grace, so as he should need any new to­ta [...]l and vni­versa l regene­ration in all parts of his soule; for thē (as they Well saw) it would follow that such a man must b rebaptized, ere he could be againe regene­rated by the ordinary way. Therefore they say, he is only set out of the state of grace (that is, out of the fauour of God so as then it shines not vpon him: for they cannot meane it of grace in the person himselfe, because they confesse, he hath not wholly lost all grace, so as to need a new regeneration) vntill he recouer it againe by repentance. For see what they write, a little before the middle of that declaration. circa. 5. Art. de Pers [...]ver. Ex quo consequitur cum. qui a ver [...] fide deficit, non protinus in eundem illum statum delabi, in quo erat antequam ad fidem vocaretur, ac proinde totali & vniuersali regeneratione quoad omnes animae patres opus non habere, ne (que) vt novo baptismo rebaptizetur necessum esse, sed tantum extra statum gratiae collocari, quamdiu ad statum illum a quo defecit, non revertitur. [...]f therefore I can cleare the point from both these absurdities which are thought to lay an impossibility vpon it; and make it ap­peare that, it is possible for the spirit to be in an e­lect infant from the time of his baptisme vnto his actuall conuersion many yeares after, although no manifest signe of grace, but rather the contrary doe to vs appeare in him; I shall sufficiently quit my selfe of this obiection. And this I will now as­say, by answering distinctly to both propo­sitions in order.

1 Then let vs examine their Maior propo­sition, which hath in it 2 parts, which wee may call the Antecedent, and the Consequent. The antecedēt or the main body of the pro­position is this, wheresoeuer the Spirit is, he work­eth actuall faith and regeneration, the conse­quent, this, or else the spirit is idle. To both [Page 265] these parts I answere thus.

1 I deny the former part, if it bee taken vniversally. For it is not necessary that the spi­rit, from the very first time of his entrance, should worke actuall faith and regeneration (in the sense before expressed) in all in whom he may be said to be, as hath beene suffici­ently proued, in the case of infants, of whom only we treat. I haue made it manifest by a comparison of the reasonable soule with the heauenly spirit, as many others haue done before mee.

The reasonable soule is infused so soone as the body of an infant is organized and made capable of such an inhabitant: yet it doth not presently act, or enable the infant to act rationally, so soone as it is infused. But it will be said, that so soon as the soule comes into the body, the body is quickned, and stirres euen in the womb: true, but that mo­tion is not rationall, but only animall. Euen af­ter the infant is borne, it cannot moue it selfe rationally, till the senses be first able to exer­cise themselues, and be actually conuersant about and vpon their proper obiects, & pre­sent [Page 266] the same vnto the vnderstanding facul­ty by the Phantasy, and Common sense. So it is in the Spirituall being. Therefore it fol­lowes not that infants must be presently made beleeuers & regenerate actually, so as to moue spiritually, so soone as the spirit is giuen vnto them.

This is the answere not only of SaintDicimus in baptizalis par­vulis, quamvis id nesciant, ha­bitare spir [...]tum sanctum. Sic e­nim nesciunt quamvis sit in eis quem [...]dmo­dum nesciunt & mentem, cuius in iis ratio, qua vti nondum p [...]ssunt, veluti quaedā [...]intil [...]a sopita est, exci­tanda aetatis accessi [...]. Augustine in his 57 Epist: ad Dandanum, as I haue shewed before in the 5 chapt. but also of Peter Martyr, D. Whitaker and others which I will not here repeat, hauing already set downe their words at large. Thus also Da­neus, In Augusti­ni Enchirid. cap. 52. nec e­oram animae rationalis ope [...]a vlla ad [...]uc cer­nimus; ne (que) tamen propterea potest negari eos anima rationali esse praeditos, [...]rgo & fidem & regenerationem habent par [...]li electi [...] D [...]i etsi nondum illius opera nobis apparent: & ea dona habent pro ratione aetatis, [...]d est pro capacitate vasis. not only vpon Saint Augustines Enchi­ridion, but also in his Treatise of the Sacraments, where he saith that,Ergo qui effectus baptismi est in adultis, idem est in infanti­bus, qua [...]quam vim eius tam cito infantes non proserunt, ne (que) illius fructus edunt, quam adulti, sed demu n cum ae [...]s adue [...]erit, & vsus rationis. De sacram: lib. 5. cap. 25. looke what efficacy baptisme hath in persons of yeares, the same it hath vpon in­fants, although infants doe not manifest the same, nor bring forth the fruits thereof, as those of yeares doe, but yet afterwards they doe it, when they come to age of discretion. M: Aynsworth, in his Censure of the dialogue of the Anabaptists, is copious in [Page 267] this very particular. See page 44. If (saith he) wee cannot iustly obiect against Gods worke in na­ture, but doe beleeue that our infants are reasona­ble creatures, and are borne not bruit beasts but men; though actually they can manifest no reason or vnderstanding no more then beasts (yea a young lamb knoweth and discerneth his damme sooner, then an infant knoweth his mother) then neither can we iustly obiect, against Gods work in grace, but are to beleeue that our infants are sanctified Crea­tures, &c. And againe page 45. answering that Cauill of theirs, that if infants haue any grace, it would appeare by the acts and exer­cise of it; he saith thus: They reason ignorantly and perversly not only against the light of Gods word, but of nature. As if some bruitish person should plead thus. A man is a liuing creature that hath a reasonable soule; and the proper affections of a man, as he is a man, are the faculty of vnder­standing, of thinking, capablenesse of learning, of remembring, reasoning, iudging, and discerning true and false, good and euill, &c. of willing, of nilling, of speaking, of numbring, &c. Now let them which affirme Jnfants are borne men, as Christ doth Ioh: 16.21) proue that infants doe vnderstand, thinke, [Page 268] remember, iudg, discerne good & euill, approue, will, speake, &c. or else they say nothing. Were not such a disputer worthy to be laughed & hissed at, who re­quireth the actuall vse & manifestation of humane affections & faculties in infants, which are in them but potentially and in the seede & beginning: & be­cause they cannot declare these things by their workes, therefore he denyeth them to be of the gene­ration of man kind, or borne men into the world, or that they haue the faculties of men in them any manner of way? Euen such is the argumentation of these erroneous spirits against the truth of religion. Thus farre he.

By this little, so much is gotten that, if all the diuines, who haue professedly entred in­to the particular consideration of this point, be not out, and, if the Anabaptists be not in the right, there is a possibility for the spirit to be in an infant, and yet not presently manifest his pre­sence by any worke of grace actually, so as it may be seene and knowne either by the infant himselfe, or by the beholders.

2 Wherefore in the next place I say, that since the spirit may be in an infant, and yet not worke actuall faith and regeneration, [Page 269] therefore the consequent of this proposition that concludes the spirit to be idle if hee worke not such grace, must needs bee false also. Must he needs be idle that doth not alwaies let vs see his worke? Shall wee conclude, hee doth nothing, because he will not tell vs what he doth? Hath hee no worke but one, in an in­fant? Doe we knowe all the workes of God? Or shall wee deny all, that wee knowe not? This is a bold speech to say, either the spirit must worke this or that particular worke in an infant, which hee vsually worketh in all persons of yeares where he pleaseth to dwel, or else he is idle. Was Great Basil a blasphe­mer when heDe spiritu sancto cap. 26. [...]. &c. affirmed, that, like as Art is in the Artificer, so is the spirit in him that hath re­ceaued him; hee is alwaies present, but doth not alwaies worke. For Art is alwaies in the Arti­ficer potentially, but then is it said to bee in him, actually, when he exerciseth it; so the spirit is al­waies present to such as are worthy, but he workes only as their benefit and necessity may require? To such therefore as are ready to say to mee of the worke of the spirit, as Thomas of Christ, ex­cept I see and feele, I will not beleeue: I can [Page 270] doe no more then the Disciples did to Tho­mas; viz: let them alone, till the spirit him­selfe doe bid them feele and see, by perswa­ding them to beleeue this truth. For howe­ver I cannot demonstrate in what manner the spirit initially worketh in an infant, the first principles of Regeneration, because the worke is secret, and both the worke & man­ner of working are hidden from vsIlle in quo omnes vivifica­buntur, praeter­quam quod se ad iustitiam ex­emplum imitan­tibus praebuit, dat e [...]iam sui spiritus occul­tissimam fideli­b [...]s gratiam, quam latenter infundit & parvulis. Aug. de peccat. me­riti [...] & remiss. lib. 1. cap 9,: yet I answere such as put mee to it, as Calvine did the Anabaptists:At quomodo, inqui [...]nt, regene­rantur infantes nec bo [...]i nec mali cognitione praediti? Nos autem responde­mus; opus dei, etiamsi captui nostro non sub­iaceat, non ta­menesse nullum Instit. l 4. cap. 16. Sect. 17. There is a worke of the spirit in them; although we cannot comprehend what it is, yet we must not therefore conclude that there is no worke at all: and (as Dr Whitaker determi­ned the question of the worke of grace in in­fants for a close of his disputation touch­ing that subiect)In eis operari spiritum sanctii ineffabiliter di­cimus. De Sacr. Contro. de B [...]pt. Quaest. 4. cap. 6. Wee say that the Holy Ghost workes in them, in a manner to vs inexplicable. Both Calvine, and Peter Martyr, and Doctor Whitaker, are all cleare of opinion that there is some worke of the spirit in an infant, and yet not any of them apart, nor all of them to­gether, dare to determine what that worke is. Calvine saith, it is certaine there is some worke: Peter Martyr saith, it is enough that wee [Page 271] beleeue they haue the spirit, the roote and principle of future grace, and that if they dye in infancy, they are saued Dr Whitaker comes after, and saith the very same, illustrates his and Peter Martyrs opinion by the former comparison of the reasonable soule, commends Calvine for his modesty, and professeth that hee would most willingly be his Scholler that could take off all difficulties from this point. It is therefore an vnreasonable and captious demand of the Aduersaries to this position, to require of me to shew what the spirit doth in an infant, or else to confesse that he is idle, or rather nor there at all. So much for answere to the Ma­jor, which would conclude from a false ground, and groundlesse position, that the spirit cannot be in infants, because where he is, he cannot be idle; and, he cannot but bee idle, if he worke not in them actuall grace.

2 I come now to the Minor Proposition, which was this; But in elect infants, ordinarily, no such worke doth appeare; rather on the contrary, many of them shew manifest opposition to all grace and goodnesse, for many yeares together, notwith­standing their baptisme: and to this I giue a threefold answere.

[Page 272]1C [...]lv. in Mat. 19.14. Tal [...]um est regnum Dei. Sic scribit de Infantibus. Quod poeniten­tiam vita (que) no­vitatem simul il­lic figurati ab [...]i­ciu [...]t, facilis so­lutio est, renoua­ri Dei spiritis pro ae atis modul [...], donec per gradus su [...] t [...]mpore quae in ill [...]s occulta est virtus au [...]e­scat, & palam refulgeat. That infants doe cast off a [...]l repentance and newnesse of life that are ioint [...]y figured in baptisme, the answere (to such as ob­iect this a­gainst the baptizing of in­fants) is easie: that they are renewed by the spirit of God accor­ding to the capacity of their age: vntill by degrees that efficacy or virtue which lies hid in them doe in due season increase, and openly sparkle & shine forth. That although no such worke doth appeare in them, yet this proues not that no such worke is begun secretly in the soule, as I haue before shewed, in answere to the for­mer Proposition. Nor is it impossible that even actuall grace should ly hidden, so as neither others, nor the party himselfe in whom that grace is, can discerne the same at all times, as after shall be declared.

2 That I never affirmed any actuall change of the soule, in the baptisme of in­fants that afterwards liue to yeares of dis­cretion; no, nor so much as any particular habits of particular graces, answerable vnto those that are vsually wrought in others at the time of their actuall Conversion. Yea so farre haue I been from affirming hereof, that I haue alwaies vpon all occasions disclaimed it. But I only say that, the spirit is giuen to elect infants, in baptisme, ordinarily, (pardon my so often repetition of the substance of the Position, which the Adversaries so often forget) to be the first principle of regenerati­on [Page 273] in them, and as the first seed, whereby the heart is seized vpon for Christ, and the whole man taken vp for his vse, and made in a secret manner capable of a further worke, in Gods good time. This spirit is, vnto such, in the roome of grace, asLoc. C [...]m. class 4 cap. 8. sect 14. Peter Martyr affir­meth, & the roote also out of which all grace in due time, floweth, in all Gods children, as the same Author (who is also seconded by Dr Whitaker) further speaketh; and as Calvin had done, before him. This Principle of Grace lies hid, as seed vnder ground; as wheat vnder chaffe; as fire vnder the ashes; as the faculty of reason seemes to lye asleep, till a child bee growne vp to some capacity; and as the spirit of God moued vpon the wa­ters before the severall creatures were actu­ally produced by the word of his power.

By this wee may discerne what answere to giue to that Dilemma, vrged by some to this effect: viz: ‘If the spirit bee giuen to an infant in baptisme, either the infant is aliue or dead; regenerate, or vnregenerate? Re­generate he is not, because there is in him no actuall change: and how can the spi­rit [Page 274] of regeneration abide in him that is vn­regenerate for a long space after the Spirit first entreth into him?’ To this I say that the infant is aliue and regenerate seminally, & initially, in respect of the roote and principle of life, but not actually in respect of the par­ticular habits actually wrought in him. An infant may be said to be aliue so soone as he hath receaued a soule; yet he cannot be said to be aliue actually in respect of a rationall life till the soule bee able to act in a rationall manner. Of such an one wee cannot say hee is not aliue, because hee hath in him the rea­sonable soule the principle of life: nor yet can we say that he liues a rationall life, till his reasonable soule doe put it selfe forth to rati­onall actions. Therefore, all men conclude such an infant to be aliue potentially, and not actually, in respect of that rationall life where­of we now speake. The same distinction wil solue the present Argument: and so is it re­solued by all that touch vpon the point, as I haue often shewed. That which I haue vr­ged out of St Augustine, Calvine, Peter Martyr, D. Whitaker, and Daneus, I will not rehearse in [Page 275] this place, which yet I might doe, in so large a Treatise, for their sakes that cannot easily carry all with them. Only I will adde one passage more of Daneus, not before men­tioned:Deni (que) per baptismum in­fantes Christo inseruntur, quia natura sua à Deo sunt alieni. Baptizantur au­tem non vt sta­tim suae in Chri­sto regeneratio­nis fructus edāt qui sint nobis conspicui sed vt interim foederis sigillo obsignati & donati Deo conserventur et maneant. Nam quum tempus advenerit sui baptismi fructus proserent eosdē quos & ii qui iam adulti bap­tizatisunt. De sacram. lib. 5. cap. 35. Infants by Baptisme are ingraffed into Christ, forasmuch as by nature they are aliens from God. And they are baptized, not that they should presently expresse the fruits of their regene­ration in Christ, which might be conspicuous to vs: but that in the meane season till they come to yeares being confirmed with the seale of the Covenant, & giuen vnto God, they might be preserued and re­maine vnto his vse. For when the time shall be ac­complished they will bring forth the same fruits that they doe who are baptized in riper age. There is then in them a seed of grace howeuer it doe not presently spring vp and beare fruit: and in respect of that seed wee say they are not wholy without life and regeneration; as the smoaking flax, so soone as it beginnes to smoake, is not wholy without fire in it, al­though as yet, it bee not wholy kindled by that fire.

This is, I confesse, a great secret, a deepe mystery of His whose works are vnsearch­able, [Page 276] and his waies, past finding out. How­beit, the incomprehensiblenesse of it, must not make vs to deny it; vnlesse we resolue to beleeue no more then we see, or can fathom with the short line of our weake reason, which were a sinfull resolution that would breed manyAugust. de peccat Mer. & Remiss. l 3. c 8 Ecce vnde ple­run (que) convales­cit error, cum homines idonei sunt bis rebus interrogandis, quibus intelli­gendis non sunt idonei. Idem, de bono persev. c. 14. Nunquid ideo negandum est quod apertum est, quia com­preh [...]ndi non potest qu [...]d oc­cultum est? N [...] ­quid, imp [...]m proptere a dictu­ri sumus, quod i [...]a esse se [...] [...]p [...]ci­mus, non ita esse, quoniam cur ita sit non p [...]ssumus inveni [...]e? errors both in iudgment and practise, of dangerous and desperate conse­quence. There are workes as strange in na­ture, yet no man makes doubt of the truth of them, because he cannot come to see how they are done. Therefore we must take heed how wee deny the spirit to bee in infants to worke in such a strange manner, forasmuch as the workes of grace, are more strange & admirable then any worke in nature. The wise King wisely giues a check to their curi­osity that are too bold in prying into the se­crets of God, and that by posing them in a point of Naturall Philosophy: As thou know­est not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones doe grow in the womb of her that is with child: euen so thou knowest not workes of God who maketh all. Eccles. 11.5.

3 I answere that howeuer I will not [Page 277] affirme any actuall grace to be, ordinarily, in infants; yet we may oft times see strange and admirable sparkes of grace, and footsteps of the spirit, in diuers infants, long before they come to any ability of discourse: so as for ought wee know, the elect might ordi­narily attaine to actuall Regeneration much sooner then many of them doe, if there were that care taken of them by parents, that ought to be, in catechizing and training them vp in their infancy, in the way that they should walke: for so, would they not forget it when they be old, if Solomon mistooke not. (And how could hee mistake in that, which the spirit himselfe dictated vnto him.) That part therefore of the obiection which saith that, for many yeares they make opposition to all grace, &c. howeuer it make a great noise, and seeme to aggrauate the matter much against this Position: yet hath it in it more sounde, than weight For, the reason why so many stand out so long, is not alwaies or ordinarily from the want of efficacy in their Baptisme; but, from defect of education. Either they liued not vnder carefull, faithfull, religious parents [Page 278] that would haue beene diligent with all their might to teach them the feare of the Lord, by all waies and meanes of instructi­on and good example, to pray continually for them, to watch ouer them narrowly to keepe them from euill company and euill practises; or else, they wanted a powerfull Ministry; or both. And if they want either, the other, for the most part, does little good. Cast your eyes vpon such as haue not wan­ted for either of the former helpes; and tell mee how many you can finde of those that euer come to good at all (in respect of the best good,) who doe not, ordinarily, take in Religion and grace insensibly euen from their tender youth: so as many of them can­not, with their best search, finde out, directly, the time of their Conversion, although they cannot (when they bee themselues, free from temptation) deny themselues to be conuerted. As for such as haue enioyed the former meanes, and yet fly out into debauched courses, they seldome or neuer returne to God at all; and therefore no marveile if they stand out long, notwithstād­ing [Page 279] the helpes afforded; for they, by this, de­clare themselues not to be of the number of Gods elect; & so, not of those in whom bap­tisme is so efficacious as here wee affirme it to be. And as for such as stand out longest, & come in at last, you shall, ordinarily, ob­serue them to be such as had vngodly, or carelesse parents; or, no sound and powerfull Ministry; or, had the reins too soone let loose vnto them; or were poisoned with bad ex­amples of Parents, gouernors, or compani­ons, or, were not instantly pluckt out of some delightfull sinnes, ere they were rooted in their wickednesse, by long custome, &c. And then, what wonder if they liue many yeares without apparent conuersion and actuall regeneration. Notwithstanding, if you aske some of these, after they be conuer­ted, whether in the time of their rebellion, they had not sometimes strong conflicts in themselues to breake off their wickednesse, and to come in; and whether they did not sometimes finde inward risings of heart a­gainst their secret sinnes, euen for the very filthinesse of them, as well as for the danger; [Page 280] and they will, for the most part, answere, yea, if they had had the grace to accept and follow those good motions within them: but they found the contrary, that after such inward stirrings vnto con­version, their lusts haue presently raged and burst out more strongly, than at other times. This is the confession, in substance of diuerse of them; which shewes them not to be wholy desti­tute of the spirit, euen when the flesh was most violent and insolent in them, before actuall conuersion. And this obseruation (seconded by others of farre greater experi­ence) is mentioned here meerely to still their cry which tell vs that, ‘many are vncon­uerted thirty, forty, fifty yeares; and is it likely say they, the spirit should be all that while in them, and neuer actually convert them vnto God.’ Although he can worke without meanes; yet that he might grace those of his owne institution, hee doth not, vsually worke without them, when hee vouchsafeth them. And when he vseth them he doth not alwaies performe the worke at the first, or second, or many assaies of his Ministers; because hee would haue vs to [Page 281] know vpon whom, after Paul hath planted and Apolloes watered, the increase dependeth.

By all that haue beene spoken, wee now see that it is not vniuersally true; which the Maior Proposition supposeth: viz. that the spi­rit must either worke actuall faith and regenerati­on, or else be confessed to be idle: and that it is of no validity which the Minor assumeth and affirmeth: viz, that in infants ordinarily no such worke appeareth, but rather the contrary for many yeares after baptisme: For, it is possible for the spirit to worke, although hee doe not worke actuall grace: nor is it materiall, that such grace doth not appeare because there is no ne­cessity that any particular habit of grace should bee at that time in them at all. And therefore I conclude that this Obiection is of no strength, forasmuch as it concludes no­thing against the point in Question, the pre­misses being thus examined and searched to the bottome.

6 Obiection. The very seede of grace cannot Obiect. 6 be in the same subiect in whom there is reigning sinne, as is plaine by that of the A­postle, 1 Ioh. 3.9. Whosoeuer is borne of God [Page 282] sinneth not: for his seede remaineth in him, and he cannot sinne, because he is borne of God. But in infants baptized, till they be actu­ally regenerated, sinne reigneth. Therefore the spirit is not giuen vnto them as the seede of after grace?

Answere. Answere. 1 To the Maior proposition I an­swere three waies.

1 There is an ambiguity in the word, seede. For, seede may be taken two waies, Actiuely, and Passiuely. 1 Actiuely for some actuall efficient principle of grace going be­fore both the acts and habits of particular graces: which, (as in the naturall, so in the spirituall seed) wee may terme seed seeding: Euen as those first plants or hearbs, in the Creation, were termed hearbs [...] se­minificantem semen, vt vertit. Arias Monta­nus. seeding seed. Gen. 1.29. 2 Passiuely, for that yeeld, or fruit which is produced by the actiue principle thereof, which may be called seed seeded. as in the former place of Gen. 1. may also be seene. Now, when, with other Diuines, I say that, the spirit is giuen to elect infants as the seed of future actuall grace, I speake not of seede passiue, or produced; but of seede actiue or pro­duceing [Page 283] a further seed in due time and season. But contrarily, the Apostle S. Iohn speakes of seede in the other sense, which imports at least the particular habits of sanctifying & sauing grace infused by this seeding seed wher­of we treat. This is manifest in the words of the Text; Whosoever is borne of God, sinneth not: that is, whosoever is actually regenera­ted, doth not commit sinne: as all expound the place: and the reason is giuen, because his seede abideth in him, which is no other then the habits of grace infused by the spirit, as all acknowledge. Therefore this proposition speakes not to the point, because it vnder­stands by seede, another thing from that wee meane in our assertion. I speake not of seed in the eare, but of the first seed cast into the ground, that afterwards yeelds and brings forth the blade, the stalke, the eare, and all that growes vpon it.

2 I answere that I cannot see what ab­surdity would follow by granting that initi­all regeneration may stand with actually reign­ing sinne: because howeuer a man hath by the first principle of Regeneration a possibi­lity [Page 284] of making opposition against sinne when that possibility comes into Act: yet he is not by that possibility alone enabled, for the present, actually to resist sinne, (which resistance is a fruit of actuall conuersion) no more than a man is enabled actually to rea­son and discourse so soone as the reasonable soule is infused, before his senses doe actu­ally exercise themselues vpon their proper obiects, and thereby giue occasion to the rationall faculty to exercise it selfe. There­fore, as in an infant which may afterwards proue a very wise man, the principle of rea­son may and doth consist with actuall fol­ly, till that child haue his senses excercised to discerne betweene good and euill, so, in the same infant, the first principle of regenerati­on (which wee terme initiall orI call initi­all regenerati­on potentiall, in respect of the habits & acts of parti­cular graces. potentiall Regeneration) may stand with such sinnes that in outward appearance (for ought any man can discerne) are noe other thē reigning sinnes, which a man giues himselfe vp to the commission of, without reluctation or feare. The ground, wee had but now. No man ei­ther doth or can make actuall opposition a­gainst [Page 285] any sinne, as sinne, from any inward principle of grace, till he be actually a new creature, endowed with habituall and actu­all graces of the spirit: as appeares by that ve­ry text now vrged against mee. For, who is he that giues not himselfe to sinne, but he that is borne of God?

3 I adde further, that if this obiection were of force against infants, it would bee much more such, against persons of yeares actu­ally conuerted. For, it would proue that they haue not the spirit constantly abiding in thē, because it doth not, in great falls euidently shew it selfe at all: but sinne seemeth to pre­vaile so farre, as that (for ought any lookers on, or themselues can iudge) the flesh hath gotten full dominion ouer them. For, they often sinne without any apparent reluctati­on at all. What appearance of the spirit in Pe­ter when through the strength of feare, and weaknesse of faith, hee not only denyed his Master and Sauiour againe and againe, a­gainst his conscience; but (thinking there­by the better to saue himselfe, tooke liberty to shew himselfe in that exigent a man of a­nother [Page 286] stampe and disposition, than Christ and his Disciples were of, and fell to rageing, to swareing and cursing; when as no man, or thing (vnlesse his owne feare and cowardise) vrged him to it? You will say, that was a sudden vnexpected sur­prizall, and so could not bee a premeditated sinne; and, he was no sooner downe, but he got vp againe. True: but this satisfieth not. For, in the carriage of that businesse, as short as that time was, what grace appeared? What degree of evill was wanting to make that, in all outward appearance, a Reigning sinne? You will say (which indeed is the truth, if S. Austine, Chrysostome, and Theophilact, (asDe Pontif. Rom. lib. 4. cap. 3. Bellarmine himselfe shall witnesse, bee not deceaued) the spirit at that time suspended the act of grace, and lay as it were eclypsed in him, to make him (who before hand boa­sted so much of his valour,) the better to knowe himselfe. This I acknowledge to bee true: but this will not serue their turnes, who must ever see the fruits of the spirit, or deny him to be there.

If this of Peter, will not serue for instance [Page 287] sufficient to shew that sinne may (as farre as men can iudge by looking on) so farre prevaile, as that it may seeme to the behol­ders, to reigne in some that are (question­lesse) actually regenerated and renewed, be­cause that was but a sudden assault, and la­sted but for a small space: Then what say you to David? For, howeuer his adultery grew from a sudden temptation occasional­ly obiected, yet his sending for Vriah, the making of him drunke, the murthering of him in the battaile, and the drawing of Ioab into the conspiracy, were deepe premedita­ted plots: and he wallowed in all this mire and blood (as most Divines thinke) for the space of almost a yeare before he recouered himselfe, and ere the spirit stirred in him, sensibly, to any purpose againe. What shew of the spirit heere? What opposi­tion? What was here wanting of reigning sinne? You will say, there might be inward com­bates? I deny not what might bee: but yet shew me what appeared. If no worke ap­peared in all that time, it is then possible that the spirit may lye hid, and that for a [Page 288] long time together, in some persons actual­ly conuerted, and not be discerned. I know Dauid had the spirit all that while, as ap­peares by that prayer of his; take not thy holy spirit from me. Psal. 51.11. But I deny any sen­sible working of it that was able to differēce David, by any outward carrage, in any mans apprehension (I except not his owne) from a meere carnall man that euer made any for­mall shew of religion, in the interim be­tweene his fall and recouery.

If any man reply; Jt is perhaps true that Dauid lay in that miserable estate, for so long a time as you mention: but what is that to so many yeares as euen the elect lye in sinne, before their actuall conuersion? To this I must answere, 1 That if the spirit lie hid a yeare, a weeke, or but an houre, hee may (possibly) ly hid twenty yeares. That which the obiection driues at is, to proue that, such a thing is not possible to be done at all: for, that which is pos­sible to be, for a short time, is not impossible, for a longer space. 2. It is more for the spi­rit to lye hid in a person actually converted, for the space of a yeare together, than for [Page 289] him to lye hid in any other, forty yeares: as it is more for a wise man to play the foole once; then for a child, or a foole, to doe no­thing else. 3. If you thinke the instance of David not to come home enough, then (for a close) take also that of Solomon, his sonne. He lay yeares enow, ere he repented. He fell from God to flat Idolatry, and that not on the sudden, but by slow degrees: when hee was in it, he lay still for long continuance, in so much that some make a doubt whether euer he recouered. Yet those men that doe oppose this position, will not, I thinke, deny Solomon to be regenerated by the spirit be­fore that fall, or to haue the spirit still abi­ding in him in all that time of his fall, to re­store him againe. Therefore it cannot reaso­nably be denied that, forasmuch as the spirit may and sometimes doth lye hid in persons actually regenerate, for a long time together not shewing it selfe apparently in opposition against great and scandalous sinnes; it is not impossible for the spirit to be in an infant e­lected from the time of his Baptisme vntill his actuall conversion without any such ma­nifest [Page 290] opposition against sinne, as may giue the person in whom he is, any ground to be­leeue that the dominion of sinne is taken a­way from out of his soule. So much, in an­swere to the Major.

2 To the Minor Proposition (that, in in­fants sinne raigneth, till they bee actually regenera­ted) I answere that there is a Dominion in the full strength, and a Dominion that is in the wane, like that of a Prince who yet is pos­sessed of his kingdome which daily waxeth (like the house of Saul) weaker and weaker. There is a Dominion which is more intense and in the highest degree: and there is a do­minion which is more remisse, and impro­perly so called. This distinction hath foo­ting in the scripture, which saith of some that sinne shall not haue dominion ouer them: and the reason is added, because they are vnder grace, Rom. 6.14. this is a Dominion in the highest degree. It saith vnto others, let not signe reigne in your mortall bodies, Rom. 6.12. This is a Dominion in a more remisse degree, as sinne is taken for a masterly tyrant that hath, by want of vigilancy in a Christian, gotten the [Page 291] vpper hand in some particular. Vnto this they to whom he wrote were subiect, if they looked not the better about them. For the Apostle himselfe, euen after his actuall rege­neration, complaines that sinne was yet a Law in his members warring against the law of his minde, and bringing him into captiuitie to the law of sinne. Rom. 7.23. Now, in that hee calls the power of sinne by the name of a Law, that did captivate him, hee plainely intendeth to giue vs notice of some kinde of soueraignty which sinne, at some times, exercised ouer him, after his conuersion. This will appeare by comparing this phrase with the very same in ver. 1.2. The Law hath dominion ouer a man as long as he liueth. For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liueth: but if her husband be dead, shee is loosed from the law of her husband: that is, frō the power and soueraigne authority, which in the family her husband did exercise ouer her. So that where there is a law in force, & exercising it selfe, there is a kinde of domini­on: for none can set vp a law, and giue such life vnto it, but such as haue soueraigne au­thority [Page 292] And if it might be thus in Paul; then much more, in the Romanes to whom hee wrote Therefore he bids them to take heed and not to let it raigne that they should obey it in the lusts thereof. And yet they were regene­rated; for hee saith, they were vnder grace (ver. 14.) and so vnder grace, that hee assureth them, sinne should not haue dominion ouer them; as there he speaketh: that is, not an absolute & compleat dominion, which cannot stand with sauing grace; although they were in danger to be vnder some kinde of Dominion of it, not­withstanding Grace. So then, there is an ab­solute dominion which cannot consist with sa­ving grace: and there is an improper & more remisse dominion, which may bee for a while, in the same subiect, with sauing grace. If a­ny man aske me, what that absolute dominion is; in a word I conceiue it be this; viz: Such a compleat soueraignty over the whole man as makes him to be totus, totum, in toto peccato, whole, wholy, in the whole sinne he giues himselfe vp vnto, wittingly, willingly, wilfully; desiring he may euer liue in that sinne and enioy his fill of it, that there were no law forbidding it, nor God to punish it; [Page 293] and, although there be both, yet hee will follow it still, and cannot for his heart so much as get free of the loue of it & desire after it, but will part with any thing rather then with his sinne. This, in scripture, is called, presumptuous sinne. Psalme 19. But this no man can warrantably affirme to be in Elect persons after their baptisme, euen before their actuall re­generation. And I thinke if I should deny the proposition, they that frame it had neede to take day enough to proue it. For to tell me that, they commit many grosse and scan­dalous sinnes; that, they be some of them (as Paul was) persecutors and blasphemers, doth not sufficiently proue that sinne hath any absolute Dominion ouer them, ordinarily, al­though, in respect of their outward carriage, no man can discerne their sinnes to be o­ther then reigning sinnes: for so, you know, doe many sinnes committed by such as are actually renewed. Therefore their outward carriage alone is not enough to warrant such a censure of them. That sinne reigneth and domineereth as a ty­rant ouer them, in a more remisse degree [Page 294] than he doth in reprobates, is too too euidēt by daily leading them into captiuity to the law of sinne. This is not denied But for any man to say that the elect, after their baptisme till their actuall conuersion and regenerati­on, are vnder that absolute and compleat do­minion of sinne, that the diuells and repro­bates are, is a thing which may be said, but will neuer be proued. For, suppose the spirit did not worke any generall dispositions and inclinations vnto grace in infants (which yet the soundest diuines affirme) yet it is something that there is that in them which will so farre abate the edge of the malice of sinne that they cannot sinne that great sinne against the Holy Ghost No elect person can (according to the principles which the ad­versaries to this point and I agree in,) sinne that sinne against the Holy Ghost; as the op­posites will freely confesse: for, if he could, how were it possible for him to be at all con­verted and saued? And if, notwithstanding his want of actuall regeneration, he cannot sinne against the Holy Ghost, I demand then, what is it that keepes him from that [Page 295] sinne? Is it not the spirit that restraines and curbes the malice of his corruption against God and his grace? But you will say this re­straint is common to reprobates as well as to the elect, for the most part; and there­fore I may (say you) as well proue the spirit to be in the one, as in the other; if this be all the ground I haue for it. To which I re­ioyne that there is a maine difference be­tweene the elect and reprobate: viz. that the Elect not only doth not, but cannot commit that sinne: for, the spirit keepes him that hee may be a vessell of grace and honour: but the reprobates are restrained, not by the spi­rit of Christ; but rather by the powerfull proui­dence of God meerely that they might not hurt the Elect, as otherwaies they would doe. And yet notwithstanding that restraint, they are neuer cōuerted nor saued; which shewes that they neuer had the spirit of Christ. Nor is there in the elect so neere approaches to that sinne, as there is in reprobates. But of this I shall haue some occasion to speake more afterwards; therefore I spare to adde more thereof in this place; praying the rea­der [Page 296] to remember that, I haue sundry other grounds beside this; so as, what euer be­comes of this, the point it selfe cannot suffer by it, so long as the other stand vnbattered. And thus much of this sixth Obiection.

CAP. 10. 6 Obiections more against the maine position, answered.

I Haue in the former Chapter giuen answere to such obiections as are thought to be of cheefest ranke, and to make most strongly against the maine tenent here discussed. In performance wher­of, I haue not (God is witnesse) strained my witts to set a shew vpon any one passage Which hath not substance in it; so farre as I am able to iudge betweene substance and shaddowes: but haue dealt candidly and syncerely throughout, to the full satisfaction of mine owne conscience, and I hope to the content of others also that are not studi­ous of parts, but of the truth. I might there­fore iustly demand my quietus est, and craue [Page 297] a discharge here; because the maine worke is ouer, and those obiections that follow after, are of lesse weight. But, because I am willing to giue euery man an answere to the least appearance of an Argument against this position, as well as to those of more strength and substance; I will in this chapter adde answers to all the rest that ever I could yet see, or read, or heare of: so as no man shall haue cause either to complaine that I haue sleighted him by not giuing answere to his obiections; or to triumph ouer my silence, as if, in that, I did acknowledge his reasons to be vnanswerable.

7 Octiection. What circumcision was to the Obiect. 7 beleeuing Iewes, that baptisme is now to e­lect Christians, forasmuch as Baptisme suc­ceeds in the roome of Circumcision. But in Circumcision the spirit was not giuen ordi­narily, to the elect themselues, as appeares in the Apostle Saint Paul himselfe, who long after his circumcision thus complaineth; I am carnall, sold vnder sinne. Rom. 7.14 I was a blasphemer, a persecutor, and iniurious. 1 Tim 1.13. and in Tit. 3.3. he puts him­selfe [Page 298] among the sort of vnhallowed persons: for wee our selues, saith he, were sometimes foo­lish, disobedient, seruing diuers lusts and plea­sures, liuing in malice, and envy, hatefull, and hateing one another. Therefore, the spirit is not, ordinarily, giuen in baptisme, no not to the elect?

I Answere. Answere. 1 To the Maior: then, to the Mi­nor Proposition in order, thus.

1 To the maior; that it may be vnderstood three waies, & it holds true but only in one of the three. For Circumcision may be said to be the same with baptisme, either in re­spect of the substance which both doe lead vnto: viz Christs blood and spirit, or in respect of the manner of representation; or lastly, in respect of the measure of grace conferred. The proposition holds true only in the first of these three. And euen in that, it must be con­sidered that, the Apostles calls Circumcision a seale of the righteousnesse which is by faith Rom: 4.11. that is, of that righteousnesse which the Gospell proclaimeth, and not of that which is expected by the law. Now, the seale of righteousnesse vnto the elect, is not the outward ceremony alone, but the inward [Page 299] grace annexed therevnto, and exhibited & conferred therewith. And the seale where­with they are sealed, is the earnest of the spirit in their hearts. 2 Cor. 1.22. If therefore the elect were sealed in Circumcision, it followes that they receiued the spirit. As for the manner of representing the inward grace of the sa­crament, and for the measure of grace confer­red in the sacrament, I doubt not to say with IudiciousLib. 4. Instit. cap. 14. sect. 22. nec non in An­tidoto. Caluin, (forasmuch asCum Calvino integerrimo Theolog. respon­deo: vetera sa­cramenta vm­bras dici, non quod non omni­no, Christum representarent, sed quod minus clare & signifi­canter id face­rent, quam no­stra, & quod in nostris vbe­rior spiritus gratia se prose­rat quam in illis Whitak. de sa­cram. in gene­quest. 5. cap. 2. D. Whitaker hath so answered before me, and calls Cal­vin a most compleat Diuine, for so saying,) the sa­craments of the old Testament were called shad­dowes, not because they did not at all represent Christ: but because they did it lesse clearly and sig­nificantly, than ours doe; and because there is a more plentifull measure of grace of the spirit con­ferred in ours, then was in them. The Maior proposition then comes short of what it should; because it ought to affirme that, there is no more efficacy in baptisme, in respect of the measure of grace conferred, than was of old, in cir­cumcision: which, both Mr Calvin and Dr Whi­taker do deny. That proposition therefore, proues nothing worth.

[Page 300]2 I deny the Minor: viz: that, in circumcisi­on the spirit was not ordinarily giuen to the Elect, notwithstanding the instance of blessed Paul, For,

1 It is no good arguing; Paul had not the spirit, in circumcision; therefore none of the Elect did ordinarily then receiue it. They that deny our maine position, will not deny that any at all doe receiue the spirit. The on­ly thing they take offence at is, that I say, this is ordinary in the baptisme of the elect. For; say they, some particular cases, doe not proue an ordinary practise. Now then, I retort their owne rule vpon them. What if Paul had not the spirit? Doth this proue that none at all haue him? He that saith, the spirit is ordina­rily giuen, but not, alwaies; may say true, not­withstanding one or two instances, where­in it falls out otherwise. If they like not that I should from the particular instance of Iohn Baptist, inferre that, all are sanctified in the womb: what reason haue they to conclude from one example, that the thing in not or­dinarily done at all. viz: Paul had it not ther­fore, ordinarily, none haue it. This is but trifling and vnequall dealing,

[Page 301]2 I say, that I will not doubt to main­taine that, Paul (who saith of himselfe that, God seperated him from his mothers womb, Gal. 1.15.) did receaue the spirit in circumcision, notwithstanding any thing to the contrary in any of those places alleaged for confirma­tion of the Minor proposition. For, let vs ex­amine them, and we shall finde that they fall short of prouing that which they are produ­ced for.

1 That place in Rom. 7. (I am carnall and sold vnder sinne;) is confessed by all Ortho­dox Divines to bee spoken in the person of a man actually regenerated; to shew, what he is, in part, even after such his Regeneration, in respect of the flesh lusting against the spi­rit, and leading him oft-times, into captiuity to the Law of sinne. And so this confirmes what I formerly affirmed in answere to the sixth Objection, touching some kinde of reigning sinne that the regenerate are not wholy free­ed from.The dominiō of sinne in the regenerate (which is but improperly called a Do­minion) may be distingui­shed from the proper domi­nion of sinne in reprobates, by the instāce in two men swimming in a strong tide one swimming against the tide the other with it. They are both carried downe the streame by the strength of the water, but one striues a­gainst it even when hee is most violently carried away with it, the other is carried away and neuer striues but puts out all his strength to swimme along with the tide willingly and wilfully, with delight and desperate resolution. For, in respect of the victory of sin [Page 302] ouer them, at some times, in som particulars, sinne may be said to reigne; because it hath so gotten the vpper hand, that it leads them captiue: yet it doth not absolutely reigne, be­cause they doe not freely and wholy giue themselues vp vnto it, without any desire to change Lords. They are sold vnder sinne, but yet they doe not, as Ahab, sell thēselues to work wickednesse. They are ouercome; yet they o­bey not willingly, but only vnwillingly suf­fer, in respect of the part regenerate. In the same sense also, the same Apostle calls them carnall. 1. Cor 3.3. whom but a little before (ver: 1.) hee had pronounced babes in Christ. This place therefore proues not Paul to bee without the spirit, in his circumcision: no more then it proues him to bee destitute thereof euen after his actuall Regeneration. Wherefore, now I turne this weapon backe vpon the Obiectors themselues, and vrge it thus against them: If the spirit may be in such as are carnall and sold vnder sinne, then hee may be in elect infants, although carnall and sold vnder sinne. For if he may be yet in part, car­nall, whom no man will deny to haue the [Page 303] spirit: the spirit may bee in elect infants that are not, after Baptisme, vnder an absolute do­minion of sinne, as hath beene before pro­ved. So farre as there is any flesh not totally subdued, so farre there is a want of the spirit even in a person regenerated: therefore so farre as there is the least abatement of the absolute Dominion of sinne, there is the spirit notwithstanding that the party be yet so far carnall, as that he is sold vnder sinne, and led cap­tiue to the law of sinne in the generall course of his conversation, till actuall regeneration be wrought within him.

2 That place in 1. Tim. 1.13. (where Paul saith, J was a blasphemer, a persecutor, & iniurious,) proues not Paul to be vtterly void of the spirit, till his actuall Regeneration: for if it doth, it must bee, either because the facts were so haynous as cannot agree to a rege­nerate man; or, because he committed them with such a witting malice, as cannot subsist with the spirit of God, in the same subiect.

1 For the quality of the facts; David, after his conuersion, committed as great sinnes, for kinde & haynousnesse, as e [...]er [Page 304] Paul did in his kinde, before his conversi­on. What greater did Paul commit, then Adultery, Drunkennesse, and murther committed by Dauid? Now, if the spirit were in Dauid notwithstanding so many crying sinnes at once (especially in a time of warre, when, aboue all other times, he should haue kept himselfe from euery wicked thing, Deut. [...]3.9.) why might hee not bee in Paul? If you say that, to kill a Christian as a Christian, that is, because hee is a Christian, is a greater sinne, then to com­mit any other murther. I answere that it is so indeed, if the Persecutor doe willing­ly murther a Christian, knowing him to be such, and doing it out of malice to Christ and his religion. Otherwise, not. Let vs therefore search a little further in­to the particular of Paul, and wee shall finde.

2 That Paul did not commit those sinnes out of malice to Christ & goodnesse, nor so much as out of knowledge: but onely out of ignorance that, the way which hee blasphemed and persecuted, was the truth. [Page 305] He made conscience of the Law of God, so farre forth as hee knewe it to bee the Law, Phil. 3.6. and was zealous towards God, Act. 22.3. even before his conuersi­on. It was a blind zeale of the Law that made him to persecute the Gospell which he vnderstood not; and not any malice to God. So it followes in that very Text now vrged against me: but I obtained mer­cy, because I did it ignorantly. Yea further he professeth that, he did no more then what he thought himselfe bound in conscience to doe, meerly in obedience vnto God. For, saith he, J verily thought with my selfe that I ought to doe many things contrary to the name of Iesus of Nazareth, Act. 26.9. And vpon this ground, he did all those things, wherewith hee so deeply chargeth him­selfe: Now, if Dauid that committed as great sinnes for kinde, and greater, in re­gard of circumstances, (for hee did it wit­tingly, willingly, with premeditation, knowing very well that hee ought not to haue done any thing of that he did) shall be allowed to haue the spirit, euen at that [Page 306] very time; with what reason can wee de­ny the spirit to St Paul when he did those things, which in that text of 1. Tim. 1.13. he so much bewaileth and condemneth in himselfe; for as much as hee protesteth that all this was but through ignorance of the truth, & blind zeale towards God and the truth, doing nothing wittingly either against God or his conscience, but only that which he erroniously supposed would be acceptable vnto God. All this therefore, makes for mee, and no way a­gainst me.

3 As for that place in Tit 3.3. which is thought to make strongest against me, it is as weake as those other two already exami­ned. Wee were sometimes foolish, &c. saith the Apostle. When was that? After Circumcisi­on, say some But how doth that appeare? Those to whom hee writes were neuer cir­cumcised, for they were Gentiles. Nor is there one syllable of his own Circumcision, nor any circumstance of the Text that re­quires vs so to vnderstand it. But, he himself was circumcised? True: yet there is no men­tion [Page 307] in that place, that he was such after cir­cumcision, as that he could not haue the spi­rit at all in him. He only shewes what he, & they, and all men are by nature, before their effectuall calling, or rather before their first initiation into Christ.

It will bee replied, that this place shewes what he was euen after Circumcision: for it containes a confession of sundry actual sinnes which must needs bee committed after his circumcision, because hee was circumcised the eight day after his birth, at which age he could not commit those actuall sinnes? To this I answere that, hee might be guilty of committing all those sinnes there reckoned vp, and yet not wholy destitute of the spirit; as hath beene proued before▪ If the spirit may bee in such as are not actually conuer­ted, they may commit many grosse sinnes, in their course of life. And in such hee may be, notwithstanding the commission of such sinnes, since they may sometim [...]s commit as grosse sinnes who are actually conuerted; as we saw but now in the instance of David and others. I neuer affirmed (as the Obie­ction [Page 308] drawne from this Text would sup­pose) that the spirit is so giuen either in Cir­cumcision, or in Baptisme, as to keepe the elect from actuall sinnes; it is enough that the spirit takes off that extremity of malice which is to be found in the sinnes of such as are not elected.

But haply, there may bee more pregnant evidence in the words following: viz: in ver. I am content to ioine issue here also. The words are these. But after that the loue and kindnesse of God our Saviour toward man appeared; not by workes of righteousnesse which we haue done, but according to his mercy he saued vs. By what? By the lauer of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on vs abundantly through Iesus Christ our Saviour, that being justified freely by his grace, wee should bee made heyres according to the hope of eternall life. And what of all this? Doth any of this proue that Paul had not the spirit in his Cir­cumcision? Yes, you will say, it doth. For Paul herein declares how, and when, hee and the rest of whom he there speakes, were re­generated: viz: in their Baptisme, of which [Page 309] they were partakers, not till they were of ripe age, so as by faith they apprehended the inward grace, and so came to be partakers of the spirit. But doth this place proue that Paul had not the spirit before his baptisme? I trow not; for then who wrought in him that faith to apprehēd the grace of his baptisme? Rather therfore it proues the contrary, that he receiued it in his circumcision: for it is plaine, he had it before. And if he had it be­fore, why not in his Circumcision? ‘No, may some man say; not so for in Acts 9.17. Ananias deales with him as with a meere carnall man wholy destitute of grace, and tells him that God had sent him to him that, he might be filled with the holy Ghost: and, it followes in the next place, that, he was baptized, which shewes that hee had not the Holy Ghost before that time.’ But to this I answere breefly that, this proues not that he had not the spirit, in any measure, be­fore that time: for, it is not said, that God had sent Ananias vnto him that he might re­ceiue the Holy Ghost; but that he might bee filled with the Holy Ghost: and that not on­ly [Page 310] vnto sanctification but to the perfor­mance of an Apostolicall function: for it is afterward added, that straight way he preached Christ in the Synagogue. ver. 20. Now although he receiued the spirit in his circumcision, yet he was not filled with the spirit, nor was he filled with the spirit in the first instant of his reception of it, at what time soeuer hee first receiued it, for the spirit doth not worke all his graces at once but by degrees. It may here bee remembred what haue beene formerly spoken vpon that place in Acts 2.38. Saint Peter bids those that were pricked at their hearts, to repent and be baptized; telling them that, so they should receiue the gift of the Holy Ghost. Now if they must repent; cer­tainly they must haue the Holy Ghost to en­able them herevnto, else they could not re­pent. Therefore it must be confessed that their receiuing of the spirit in baptisme was no sufficient proofe that they were not at all partakers of him before they were bap­tized. Before they receiued him; but more secretly, and sparingly: now, they receiued him againe; but more solemnely, and plen­tifully. [Page 311] And thus wee see that none of these places apart or together, no not when they be wyre drawne to the vtmost, haue in them any solid proofe to make good the Mi­nor proposition, that the spirit was not giuen in circumcision: and so wee haue ouerthrowne this argument also; without the least preiu­dice to our position.

8. Obiection. Those places of scripture that speake of baptisme, Obiect. 5 doe vsually speake of the spirit giuen before baptisme; as that in Acts 10.44. the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word: and then afterward it followeth in vers. 47. Can any man forbid water, that th [...]se should not be baptized that haue receiued the Holy Ghost as well as we? or else they speake of Faith or repentance going before baptisme which is equivalent to the former speech: for it supposeth a reception of the spirit before baptisme. Therefore, bap­tisme was not intended for the conferring of the spirit; nor can the places of Scripture brought to proue it, be sufficient proofe of it, but rather of the contrary.

Answere. Answere. 1 I confesse it to be very true that some places speake of the giuing of the [Page 312] spirit before baptisme. Howbeit that place in the 10. of the Acts is improperly alleaged for it; because it speakes of an extraordinary bestowing of the spirit vpon such as Peter preached vnto, in respect of the gift of tongues, as appeares in vers. 45.46. where it is said that, they of the circumcision which belee­ued, were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the gentiles also was powred out the gift of the Holy ghost: for they heard them speake with tongues, and magnified God. Not­withstanding, I say, It is manifest that faith and repentance were to precede the bap­tisme of such as were of yeares, at least the publique and solemne profession of those graces was to be made by them, before they were baptized. Yet, as not only SaintVide supra in cap. 7. Am­brose, and SaintQuaest: 84. super Levit. & quaest. 33. in Num. Augustine, and after themInstit▪ lib. 4. cap. 16. Calvin well speaketh,) they receiued the spi­rit in Baptisme more solemnly, which they had receiued more secretly before. They being of yeares, ought to expresse their faith; there­fore there was a necessity of their receiuing of the spirit before Baptisme. But this con­cludes not that, therefore it must needs be so in [Page 313] infants also; forasmuch as in them actuall faith is not required; nor yet that, therfore elect in­fants doe not receiue the spirit in baptisme; be­cause there is no neede of faith to receiue the spirit, but only need of the spirit to work faith in due time.

2 I say that howeuer some places doe suppose the spirit to be giuen before bap­tisme, yet that proues not that therefore those places of scripture which I haue alleadged, doe proue no such thing as I would inferre thence; because I haue not brought one of those places for a proofe, which mention actuall faith and repentance, forasmuch as they concerne persons of yeares only. Now this obiection would haue the world be­leeue that I haue taken vp some of those pla­ces, for my vse, which speake clearly of faith and repentance going before baptisme: which is not so. And so it doth cast an vniust aspertion vpon me, and not giue any blow to the point it selfe.

3 I neuer affirmed that infants doe not at all receiue the spirit before their baptisme; but only that, Baptisme is the first instru­ment or meanes applied for their first solemne [Page 314] receit of the spirit, that may be taken notice of by vs; as also for their first manifest initia­tion and engraffing into the body of Christ. Admit that they had the spirit before, yet it followes not that they receiue him not also in baptisme, in respect of confirmation ther­of, if not in respect of a further degree and measure of his grace. The Holy Ghost de­scended vpon Christ in his baptisme: yet no man will say Christ had not the spirit before he was baptized. They in Acts 2. before mentioned were bid to repent before they were baptized, and no doubt they did so, which yet could not be without the spirit, as I haue often said: And yet for all that, The A­postle assured them that in Baptisme they should receiue the Holy Ghost. What letteth then, why elect infants should not doe so too? I conclude therefore that, in persons of yeares the spirit must goe before, to qualify them with actuall grace thereby to make them capable of the inward grace of bap­tisme: and to elect infants also, the spirit may be giuen before baptisme: but yet both vnto the one and vnto the other he is giuen againe [Page 315] in baptisme, in respect of the more solemne confirmation thereof vnto them: so as those places of scripture that proue the spirit to be giuen before baptisme, doe not disproue him that saith, the spirit is giuen in baptisme.

9 Obiection. Obiect. 9 Jf there be no difference between an heyre and a seruant, an elect child and one not elected, till they come to yeares, and be effectually called by the word, then the spirit is not giuen to elect infants, in their baptisme. But the Antecedent is true; for Saint Paul saith it in expresse termes. Gal. 4.1. No [...] I say, that the heyre, as long as hee is a child, d ffereth nothing from a seru [...]nt, though he be Lord of all; but is vnder Tutors and Gover­nors vntill the time appointed of the Father. Therfore, the Consequent, that the spirit is not giuen to elect infants, in their baptisme, is true also?

Answere. 1 I grant the Maior, Answere. if it can be proued that there is no difference at all betweene one elected & a reprobate, either inwardly or outwardly. But there may be a difference inwardly by some se [...]ret worke of the spirit, although no outward worke ap­peare; as hath beene proued before.

[Page 316]2 I deny the Minor. for, betweene the e­lect and reprobate there may be an inward difference, notwithstanding the place brought to confirme it. For that text is so miserably drawne awry, that any one may discerne it at the first casting of his eye vpon that which followeth in the same place, so as I hold not this Argument, worthy of an An­swere. The Apostle intends not there, to shew the difference betweene the elect and repro­bate, in their infancy; nor to declare that, then they differ when they come to age, by the actuall conversion of the one, and the finall impenitency of the other: but, as Mr Perkins vpon the place well saith; The Apostle vseth a similitude borrowed from the Ciuill Law, and it may be framed thus. Heyres in their minority liue in subiection to Tutors and Gouernors; but when they are of riper yeares, at the appointment of their parents, they are at liberty. Euen so the peo­ple of God, before Christ, were in their infancy, vnder the law, as vnder a Tutor: but when the fulnesse of time was come, which God had appoin­ted, they entred into the fruition of their liberty. Thus hee. And he speakes truly and perti­nently. [Page 317] For, let any man view the place well, and he shall finde the Apostle to haue no other purpose at all, then to proue Chri­stian liberty from Mosaicall ceremonies of the Law, by the comming of Christ in the flesh, who was the body and substance of all those shaddowes; and that vntill this time, even the true heires by virtue of Gods election, were as much bound to the obser­vance of those legall rites; as any others whatsoeuer, but now were freed from them, in the fulnesse of time, by the cōming of Christ. Here is not one sillable touching our present Argument. Therefore, for pitties sake, I will lay aside this Obiection, and goe on to the next.

10 Obiection. 10 Obiect. That Position that ties the spirit of God to meanes, can neither bee safe nor true, for as much as Gods spirit is not tied but bloweth where it listeth, Ioh. 3. But such is this Therefore, it cannot be true?

Answere. If wee distinguish of the Major, Answere. we shall finde that, it doth our assertion no hurt; and, that wee shall haue cause to deny the Minor. That position which ties the spi­rit [Page 318] of God to meanes, where God hath not first tyed and engaged himselfe, can neither be safe nor true. God is a free Agent, & can­not be tied by any creature; and so I admit of that place in Ioh. 3. although, to speak pro­perly and precisely, it is to bee vnderstood, rather of the freedome that Gods spirit takes to worke where, & in what persons he plea­seth; then, of the time when hee worketh in those persons. For howeuer this last, in some sense, be true too, yet it may well deserue to be questioned, whether it bee the true mea­ning of that Text. But admit this also: yet I say, what formerly I haue said in chap. 3. that there is no danger to say that God is tied, so farre forth as he hath vouchsafed to promise to be present in his owne Ordinance, ordi­narily: nor is it vntrue to say so, nor vnwar­rantable to expect it, yea and (in an humble manner) to require it of him. Whatsoeuer God hath promised, we may safely say, hee is tied to performe: for he is tied by that which cannot but hold him: viz: his owne Fideli­ty. Therefore the Psalmist challengeth God as engaged to him, Psal. 119.49. Remember [Page 319] the promise vnto thy seruant, wherein thou hast caused me to put my trust. And God bids his children doe it; yea, to command him: Isay 45.11. Thus saith the Lord, the Holy One of Jsrael and his Maker; Aske of me things to come concer­ning my sonnes, and concerning the worke of my hands COMMAND yee me. That is, what euer I haue promised, require it, spare not, so they doe it in any humble manner. Now that Position which only affirmes God to be present ordinarily, where hee by virtue of his promise hath engaged himselfe to bee, doth not lay any vnwarrantable tye vpon God, but rather giues him the honour of his fidelity, & puts comfort into his people, by giving them assurance of it.

Thus hauing distinguished of the Major and made it appeare that there may bee an affirmation safe and true, which saith, God is tyed or engaged vnto some things, so long as any promise going before can bee found to en­gage him: I come now to deny the Minor, because how euer that Position which ties God where he hath not tied himselfe must needs be not only false, but full of presump­tion [Page 320] also; yet this position is no way guilty of any such thing. For God hath made a pro­mise to shew himselfe thus gratious in the or­dinance of baptisme, ordinarily, when it is administred to elect infants, as the learned Author of the Commentary vpon the Epi­stle to Titus, expresly avoucheth, saying; here by virtue of his PROMISE we may expect it, here we may and ought send out the prayer of faith for it. If any man shall doubt hereof, and de­mand where any such promise is to bee found; I would referre him to Zach. 13.1. to Math. 3 as also to the Institution of Baptisme, wherein a promise is involued: to Tit. 3.5. wherein a promise is supposed; &, to sundry places moe. If the doubting party rest not sa­tisfied with these, thē I referre him to the Au­thor himself, who surely cā name some pro­mise for it, else he would neuer haue set down so much vnder his hand. Hee is still aliue, and hath engaged himselfe both privatly & publiquely to make good any thing written in that Commentary touching this point. Therefore I leaue this worke to him, & ha­sten to another obiection, after I haue added [Page 321] one short Advertisement to such as will not be satisfied either by me, or by him, or by a­ny man else, with any reason. Some there are, who complaine that, howeuer many Scriptures haue beene alleaged by mee and others, to proue that the spirit is giuen in baptisme: yet they cannot see any one place of Scripture that saith directly & in expresse termes, that, The spirit is giuen to elect infants, in Baptisme. Shew them but that they say, and they haue done. But if they bee such as allow of the baptisme of infants, let them sa­tisfie me in another thing, and I will soone giue content to them in their demand. Let them shew me where the Scripture speaks, in expresse termes, of the Baptisme of infants by name, and I will shew them an expresse text for the communication of the spirit vnto elect Jnfants by name, in their baptisme. Here I knowe they will say that, it is not necessa­ry to bring expresse words of Scripture that saith the same thing in so many syllables, but it is enough if it bee concluded thence by sound consequence: and herein they say the truth. Now, if they require that, all Anabap­tists [Page 322] should for euer lay their hands vpon their mouthes (that haue beene opened so freely and erroniously to plead against the baptisme of infants) because however the Scripture saith not, in so many words, let In­fants be baptised; yet the thing is grounded on the Scriptures, and may by sound conse­quence be sufficiently proued thence: Let them forbeare to presse me, or any man else to produce an expresse Text that nameth elect Jnfants, so long as the thing is made good by vndoubted and impregnable con­sequence from many Scriptures alleaged for this purpose And if either I or the Author last aboue named, in this kind of proof haue failed, let them shew vs our error, and they shall finde vs no Hereticks.

11 Obiect.11 Obiection: That Position which offen­siuely trencheth too neere vpon Popish error and a [...]surdity, ought not to bee taught and published by faithfull Ministers of the Go­spell, although the point should not bee alto­gether vntrue. But so doth this, for it seemes to ascribe too much to the outward worke done, and is of neere affinity with that ab­surd [Page 323] fancy of the Indelible Character which Papists talke so much of, and affirme to bee imprinted in Baptisme. Therefore, whether the point be true or false, it was ill done to publish it in such a manner.

Answ: Answere. This Obiection comes double charged: for it falls not only vpon the point it selfe, obliquely charging it with Popery; but vpon mee also, for publishing of that which, if it be not Popery, yet comes too neere Popery, and so should haue beene bu­ried in silence. I answere therefore.

1 To the Major, two waies. 1 by way of protestation. 2 By way of distinction. First, I protest (although I thinke I am so well knowne to all those that take offence at this particular; that I need not to make such a so­lemne protestation) that I doe vtterly from my heart abhorre and renounce all points of Popery whatsoeuer, and that, as I haue done, so I shall euer endeauour to confute them, by all the waies and meanes that pos­sibly I can vpon all occasions. Secondly I distinguish of the present Proposition, that: some things doe, truely and indeed, trench [Page 324] too neere vpon Popish absurdity, and haue such affinity with them, as that whosoeuer venteth them, shall giue iust occasion of su­spition that he hath a Pope in his belly, what euer he hath in his mouth, or pen. And these things, by whomsoeuer they are vented and published, doe giue iust occasion of offence, and so doe argue great indiscretion, if not a false heart to the truth, in him that publish­eth them. Other things there are which doe only seeme to trench too neere vpon Popery, in the opinions of those that heare or read them, either because they doe not, or cannot or will not vnderstand the difference be­tweene those and Popish absurdities. And these, againe, are either Positions, or Actions. As for Actions done, which Actions haue in them no small appearance of euill, in that (in euery mans iudgment, that is a looker on) they symbolize with Popish superstition & and no course being taken to explaine and declare, in what sense they are done, & how they differ from their practise who vse the selfe same Actions in an vnlawfull manner, I ingenuously confesse that it should bee a [Page 325] fault in him that should so neere trench vpon Popery, as to vse those actions in such a manner: because the Apostle giues charge abstaine from all appearance of euill: 1 Thes. 5.22. And the same Apostle professeth in the par­ticular of meats offered vnto Idols, that he would eate no flesh while the world standeth, wher­by he might make his brother to offend▪ 1 Cor. 8.13.

But as for Positions, wherein the truth is explained, and the contrary disclaimed, I must craue leaue to be of another opinion. For I cannot be of their minde who hold that nothing must be deliuered which may seeme to some hearers or Readers to trench too neere vpon Popish absurdity, so long as it be not indeed a popish absurdity, but the truth; and that the difference betweene that truth, and the popish absurdity, to which it is supposed to leane, be so fully manifested and cleared, as all that are capable of truth and willing to receiue the same, may dis­cerne it, if they please. I like not that vaine conceit (which hath drawne after it many absurdities indeed; and those, of dangerous consequence) that wee should, in all points, [Page 326] goe as farre from Papists and other Here­ticks, as possibly wee can This is that which neuer did good; ever did, and will doe hurt, when men will take that to be the truth on­ly which standeth in most direct oppositi­on to that which is knowne and confessed to be a grosse error, for, as in some persons, it is only a degree of heat or cold ouer and a­boue the iust temper, that makes them of such a poisonous quality, so as if they be cor­rected by some other ingredient) they may not only proue safe, but very vsefull to the party to whom they are administred; so it is in many Propositions, which, as they are propounded, may containe some falshood in them; yet may be so qualified and boun­ded as that a small addition, or substraction might make them passe current, by draw­ing out all that venome of falshood contai­ned in them when they stand without those qualifications added to them.

If wee goe any one step, in any one point, from the grossest Hereticks in the world fur­ther than meere necessity of truth compel­eth, they will soone (and that iustly) open [Page 327] their mouthes against vs, and complaine that, wee study, not so much to maintaine the truth as to crosse them; and, that it is e­nough for vs to disclaime any truth, because they hold it. What can follow hence but ex­treme obstinacy in such as are out of the way, (and vnder obloquy for it) when they shall discerne and be able to plead that, wee doe hold that, a direct opposition to them in all things, is the best and safest rule to walk by; whereas they, in the meane time, can make it appeare that, howeuer they may be wide in some degrees from the truth, yet not so many degrees as we would make the world beleeue: for, in such and such particu­lars they can proue it to all men capable of vnderstanding, that they erre not; and yet we will not consent vnto them so farre, as e­uery ingenious man will confesse them to haue truth on their side? For my part, I will not giue such an advantage vnto any aduer­versary, but rather hold my selfe bound to assent vnto him, be he Papist, Familist, Turk, or Iew, in any truth whatsoeuer: so that I may haue liberty to expresse my selfe clearly, [Page 328] how and to what end I hold that truth with him, and that I disclaime all such vses as he puts that truth abusiuely vnto.

Nor doe I take vp this resolution with­out warrant, but haue vnquarrellable presi­dent for it For marke. Saint Paul who pro­fessed that, in matter of practise, hee would be carefull not to offend a weake brother, euen in those things which are not in them­selues simply vnlawfull; yet hee would not; for any mans sake, refuse to declare his iudg­ment concerning the lawfulnesse of the things that cannot be simply and absolutly condemned, how much soeuer they haue beene, and perhaps still are vnlawfully abu­sed in their vse. Hee giues instance in the matter of meats offered vnto Idols, in that 1 Cor. 8. before mentioned. Some were of o­pinion that they might be lawfully eaten, being receiued with thanksgiuing and pray­er, and without reference to the Idoll, or doubting about it. Others held the contrary, and were so stiffe in their opinion that they not only refused to eat thereof themselues, but tooke great offence at others, that vpon [Page 313] any reason whatsoeuer tooke more liberty therein, than they did. The Apostle comes in as an Vmpire betweene them. He conclu­deth that for matter of practise he would so farre gratify the weake that he would for­beare to eate of such meats: yet first protest­ing in that very place, that he could not suf­fer his iudgment to be so farre captivated: nor the truth to be so much wronged, as not to hold the thing lawfull in it selfe. Therfore in point of iudgment he concurred with those that held the truth, but in matter of practise he professeth his dissent from them because th [...]y abused their liberty to the of­fence of the weake, and so did swarue from the rule of Charity. By which wee see that the abuse of any truth must not make any man vnwilling to hold it euen with those that doe abuse it, so long as he abstaine from the abuse wherof they are guilty. Therefore my discretion will not be much wounded by this obiection; vnlesse it can appeare that this doth indeed, as well as in shew, trench too neere vpon Popish absurdities, as the Mi­nor affirmeth; which now I come vnto.

[Page 330]2 To the Minor I answere, by denying it, and by making good my deniall of it. 1. I deny that this assertion of Baptismall regeneration of elect infants, as it hath beene before stated, & prosecuted, doth trench vpon any Popish ab­surdity at all. 2 I make my deniall good thus. If this assertion be any way guilty of what it is charged withall, it must be either because it ascribes such a Physicall efficacy (as they terme it) to the outward element of water, after consecration, that the very wa­ter should haue force in it, ipso facto to con­ferre the inward grace to euery person bap­tized; at least, to the elect, so soone as they are sprinkled or washed with it in the name of the Father, and of the sonne, and of the Holy Ghost, by vertue of that externall worke done and performed outwardly by the Minister: or else because it iumps with, or at least drawes too neere to that other ab­surdity of theirs, touching the impression of an indelible character vpon the soule of euery one that is outwardly baptized, whether he be elected, or not.

1 Of the former it cannot be guilty; be­cause, [Page 331] (as in my preaching of the point, all that heard me with attention and vnder­standing; so in my publishing of it thus to the world) all that will vouchsafe to pervse and consider the second chapter of this trea­tise, cannot but beare me witnesse, that I doe not hold, nor euer did affirme, that all that partake of the outward baptisme, bee also partakers of the spirit, in it: nor, that the elect themselues doe partake thereof by ver­tue of the outward worke done; or that the water containes in it the spirit, or hath in it any physicall effi [...]acy to convey the spirit, as if the water were as a channel or conduit pipe th [...]ough which the spirit passeth vnto the soules of elect infants in that ordinance. But I say expresly that the spirit is giuen immediatly by Christ him­selfe at the same instant wherein the Minister performeth the outward act of baptisme. Now the Popish tenent is directly contrary to all this, as they well know that vnderstand what the Papists hold in this particular. And it were but an vnthrifty wast of time & paper, to set downe the same more at large.

2 It is no lesse free from the other absur­dity [Page 332] of the Indeleble character. This may bee sufficiently euident, by shewing their doct­rine herein, & cōparing it with the point in hand. It is very true that the popish schoole­men speake much and often of this supposed character, which euery one that is baptized, according to their fancy, receiueth in bap­tisme; and this Character, they say, can ne­uer be blotted out againe, in any of those that haue once receiued it. Howbeit, (as Soto, out of Scotus affirmeth and confesseth) this doctrine was neuer knowne to the Anci­ents, because neither Lombard nor Gratian, who tooke vpon them to collect all that the Fathers had written touching baptisme, doe make any mention of it. Therefore it ap­peares to be a new device of the latter schoolemen, hatched after Lombard was dead and rotten. But that Position which is here defended is of more antiquity in the Church of Christ, as appeares by those testimonies of the Fathers before alleadged, to which it were easy to adde many more, if neede re­quired.

After that toy was set abroach in the [Page 333] schooles, there quickly grew as many diffe­rent Opinions about it, as there were Au­thors and abettors of it. This is manifest to all that are conuersant in their writings, of which the learnedDe Sacram. l. 2. cap. 12. &c. Chameir among many others, haue drawne a short survey. And as men differed about it when they were apart; so they were not able to compose the diffe­rences, when they met together in their Grand Councell of Trent it selfe, where there was no small stirre about it, as we are infor­med by the Author of thePag. 239. History of that Councell. ‘It was worth the knowing, saith he, what thing they meant by it, & where situated, in such multiplicity of Schoole opinions. Some made it a quality: and a­mong those were fowre opinions, accor­ding to the fowre kinds of qualities: some, a spirituall power: some, an habit or dispo­sition: others, a spirituall figure: and the opinion that it was a sensible metaphorical quality, wanted not abettors. Some would haue it a reall relation: some, a fabricke of the minde, who had somewhat to doe to declare how farre it differed from nothing.’

‘The same variety of opinions concer­ning the subiect, was troublesome. Some placed it in the essence of the soule: some, in the vnderstanding: some, in the Will. And there wanted not, who gaue it place in the hands and tongue. Hierome of Por­tugall, a Dominican Frier, thought that the Sacrament did imprint a spirituall qua­lity before the comming of grace; & that it was of two sorts▪ One, which can neuer be abolished; the other, which may bee lost, and regained. The former was called a Character; the latter, a certaine orna­ment. The Sacraments which giue the first, cannot be reiterated, because their ef­fect euer remaineth: the other, may, when their effect is lost. This carried a faire shew, but was not approued of by many, be­cause there was no other Author of that ornament, but their S. Thomas of Aquine; who also, though he begat it, yet did not thinke it worthy of education.’

In so much perplexed contrariety of Opi­nions they durst not conclude expresly, what that Jndeleble Character was. Yet in [Page 335] their seauenth Session Can. 9. they boldly a­nathematized all, that, in Baptisme, Confirma­tion, & Orders, shall say, no indeleble Character is imprinted vpon the soule. Nor haue their grea­test Champions, Vasquez, Suarez, Bellarmine, Valentian, and others, who haue stood vp in the defence of that Councell, beene able to bring the point to any head: no, nor yet his Holinesse himselfe, with all his infallible­ship, hath vouchsafed to explaine his Coun­cell, or to helpe out his Vassalls in defining precisely what that thing is. Surely, here is need of implicit faith indeed, when euen the very greatest and most admired Gran­dees of the Church, cannot yet tel what they hold and beleeue distinctly herein. It is not to be denied but that (with much labour) a man might find out those particulars where­in they doe in some sort agree. But they a­gree rather in declaring negatiuely what it is not; then in concluding positiuely and af­firmatiuely what the thing is. This I shal be able to make good out of the industrious collections ofIbid. Chameir, wherein wee shall find that the Papals doe agree in these things [Page 336] (if wee may take Bellarmines words for it;) viz:

1 In determining what it is not: viz: that it is not any grace, but a thing distinct from it, which makes them disposed and capa­ble to receiue or administer things apper­taining to Divine Worship. They will not haue it to be faith, iustification, rege­neration, or the gift of the spirit himselfe. All these Bellarmine disclaimes.

2 In determining to whom it is giuen: viz. to all that receiue the Sacraments, whether worthily or vnworthily: so as it is not a­ny thing peculiar to such as are saued, but common also to such as are damned, who doe carry this indeleble Character with them to Hell it selfe.

3 In determining in what Sacraments the Character is giuen: viz: not only in Bap­tisme, but in Confirmation, and in Orders al­so; both of which they put into the num­ber of their Sacraments; as they doe also, Marriage, Pennance, and Extreme Vnction.

4 In determining in what manner it is confer­red: viz, ex opere operato, meerely by virtue [Page 337] of the externall administration of those their Sacraments; so as (if the Papists say true) no man can misse of that supposed Character, so soone as he partakes of the outward part (I meane, the outward signes) of thoseAlthough I vse their man­ner of speech, in calling Cō ­firmation and Orders, by the name of Sa­craments, as they doe: yet I disclaime the error which allowes of a­ny Sacramēts of the New Test. properly so called, but only Baptisme, and the Lords Supper. I vse their termes, because I am speaking of their Tenets. Sacraments.

By all this it appeareth that there is a vast difference betweene that figment & Popish absurdity of the indeleble Character, and this position which is here defended. For, 1. they are yet to seeke touching the very substance of the thing; and howeuer in the generall they hold it to be a kinde of quality, yet they will haue it to bee such as differs from all grace, and from the spirit of grace. But I af­firme clearely and roundly that, it is the spi­rit of grace that is giuen in baptisme, which they deny 2. They teach that their Cha­racter is giuen to all, without exception of any of the reprobates themselues. I affirme that the spirit is giuen only vnto the Elect,; and, to them, ordinarily, not alwaies, but that some may and doe receiue the spirit, before baptisme; some, after it. 3. They teach that there is a Character giuen in Confirmation, & [Page 338] Orders, as well as in Baptisme I speake only of what is giuen in Baptisme. 4. They af­firme their Character to be giuen by virtue of the outward worke done: I say the spirit is gi­ven only by Christ himselfe immediatly.

Wherefore I conclude that this position doth every way so far differ from that ab­surdity, that it hath no likenesse in it there­vnto, in any respect at all. I neuer taught other thing then that, the spirit is giuen ordina­rily, to elect Infants, in their baptisme, to be the first principle of future grace, and, in the meane time, to seale them vp for Christ. If any please to call this an Indeleble Character, So Scharp. Cur­su Theol. de Bapt. Danaeus de Sacram. lib. 5. cap. 28. Etsi enim in Baptis­mo, Regio & divino charac­tere, vt ita lo­quar, signatisu­mus, &c. I would not bee afraid to affirme that in Baptisme there is such a thing ordinarily, giuen in Baptisme to elect infants who are sealed by the holy spi­rit vnto the day of Redemption; which spi­rit; is also an oyntment that shall abide with them foreuer.

12 Obiect.12 Obiection. This position will, by some, bee taken to be of this ill consequence in carnall Persons, (who naturally are ouer apt there­vnto) that thereby occasion will bee taken of too great a reliance vpon, and vaine opinion of that ordinance, with more neglect, or [Page 339] sleight and perfunctory vse of the meanes of grace and saluation: whereas the doctrine of baptisme otherwise deliuered, would en­force the contrary care & diligence. There­fore, say some, it was very vnadvisedly done, to publish such a doctrine vnto the peo­ple?

Answ. Answ [...]. Because it was a friend that made this Obiection, and because by his friendly letter I haue beene made acquainted with moe obiections against the point, then o­therwise I should haue come to the know­ledge of, (for which I truly professe my selfe beholding to him) I will purposely forbeare to aggrauate such slips as are made in some passages of the Antecedent: viz: that, Baptisme seemes to be turned out of the society of the meanes of grace and saluation: and (which is in­sinuated further) that, for the ill consequen­ces which, by accident, carnall persons may, haply, drawe from it, I should rather haue taught the contrary doctrine (as some others seeme to doe;) or else haue held my tongue, what euer the truth be in this point, & how deeply soeuer I haue beene charged with [Page 340] Error, and Heresie, in which cases no good man ought to be so patient as not, in a faire manner, to cleare himselfe, if he know him­selfe to be innocent. Forbearing, I say, all such aggravations, I deny the Antecedent, and render a reason of my deniall, as followeth. The bare and cleare propounding of this truth giues no occasion at all of any such corrupt deductiōs. If any such abuses follow; Occasion, by accident, is taken vp by them who are too apt, & doe too vsually attempt to abuse all other the ordinary meanes of saluation, to their owne destruction, as well as this. This giues no more occasion of such ill consequences, then the doctrines of Gods free and absolute Election of particular per­sons vnto life and glory, and of the finall perseuerance of the Saints, doe. For what ever ill collection may be drawne from this Position, may as well be drawne from either of those but now mentioned.

A carnall person, say you, when he heares it proued and so much inculcated that, the Elect doe, ordinarily, receiue the spirit and first principle of grace, in their Baptisme, will be ouer [Page 342] apt to conclude thence, as followeth; Why then, there is no such need of so much preaching, hearing, praying, fasting, &c. For if I belong to God, J haue the spirit in me already, how wicked soeuer J appeare to others to be; and I haue had the spirit, euer since I was baptized. And, if the spirit, I cannot misse of grace and saluation, though J ne­uer heare sermon nor pray, all the daies of my life, but follow my lusts as freely as any man.

To this I say, that if a man will be so wick­ed, he may. But who is in fault but him­selfe? May not he conclude as much from both the other? & is it not perpetually baw­led by the Arminians: viz. ‘that the doctrine of Gods absolute election taught by the Calvinists (as they please to nickname all maintainers therof) doth make many men exceedingly presumptuous and secure; it occasioneth in them such desperate con­clusions as these, If I bee elected I shall cer­tainly be saued, let me liue as J list, and doe what I will; what need I care for prayer, sermons, holinesse of life, &c. If I shall be saued; I shall bee saued, let mee doe what I will to hinder it. But if J be not elected, I shall be dam­ned, [Page 342] let me doe what I can to preuent it. A­gaine, how is the comfortable Doctrine of finall perseuerance daily calumniated; as if it taught no lesse security and presumption, than the former. will not this, saith the Arminian, make men carelesse and impe­nitent, when they shall be told that, let them doe what they will, they cannot either final­ly or totally loose all grace, if euer they had any at all? Will not such persons cōclude against any man that shall exhort them, vpon any falls into some grosse sinnes, to speedy and serious repentance; that, hee is much mista­ken in them: they are sure that they had grace once, and they are taught by such and such Di­vines, that they can neuer loose all grace againe, by any sinnes never so grosse and scandalous: therfore, no necessity of any such hast vnto repen­tance, as he pretendeth. Their state is good and sure enough. They haue that in them which can­not be lost: and that being not lost, they cannot miscarry.’

It may not be dissembled that such wick­ed conclusions may be made from those heauenly Doctrines by hellish men. But yet [Page 343] we can finde answers to all such obiections, easily enough: and those, not shifts; but, suf­ficient abstertions of all such calumnies. We can tell such obiectors, that the Doctrines of Election and Perseuerance doe not, in them­selues, lay any grounds for such divelish con­clusions, (no more than good meat intends to yeeld matter of corrupt humors, in a bad stomack) but doe sufficiently declare and teach the contrary, and all that are vnder the one, and partakers of the other, doe take out the contrary lesson from them. Wee can tell thē that, they who are elected to the end, are elected to the meanes, & to a conscionable vse of the means wherby the end may be at­tained. So also the doctrine of perseuerance teacheth that, though perseuerance be cer­taine yet it is also of the nature of that grace in which men perseuere, to make and keepe them diligent in the vse of all good means wherby they may, and doe perseuere, and worke out their saluation with feare and trembling: according to that of Saint Peter 2 Epist 1.8.) If these things be in you and abound, they make you that ye shall neuer be barren nor vn­fruitfull [Page 344] in the knowledge of our Lord and sauiour Iesus Christ. Therfore, we vsually adde, that, if any shall or doe make any other vses of these sweet and divine Truths, therby to continue in sinne, this is not to be imputed to the Doctrines themselues, but to their wicked heads & hearts that dare thus dam­nably to draw them awry. The Gospell which is the wisdome of God, and the power of God vnto salvation to all that are saued, is yet held for no better than foolishnesse to the rest of the foolish and vnbeleeuing world. So the law which was ordained for the means of life, worketh death in all that abuse it. But neither the law nor Gospell are in fault of this; nor must therfore be concealed & not taught & inculcated, because wicked men doe daily wrest them to their owne damnation.

And will not the same answere be good enough to vphold the point in hand against the same obiection? And, if it will: why should it be held a greater indiscretion to publish this doctrine so daily vsefull, and so fully comfortable to all the Elect, both pa­rents [Page 345] and children: than to publish those o­ther points before touched, as deepely char­ged with the same ill consequences, as this is? When I say, that, Jn the baptisme of Elect infants, Christ doth, ordinarily, bestow his spirit; I adde withall, that, this is not sufficient for the saluation of such as liue to yeares of discretion, but actuall conversion and renouation is to be expected and laboured for, in due and conscionable atten­dance vpon the vse of all those further helps and means which God hath sanctified to that purpose. For so God vouchsafeth to grace all his or­dinances, that hee will not haue any of them despised nor neglected, by leauing ei­ther of them vnvsefull, through such an effi­cacy of any one that haue gone before, as might leaue nothing to be done by those that follow after. As he puts his spirit in the hearts of the elect, in their baptisme; so he afterwards puts power into his word effectu­ally to call them home vnto himselfe: & then the same spirit workes mightily by that word, and infuseth the habits of faith and all sanctifying graces that doe accompany sal­vation. The word therfore, and the rest of [Page 346] Gods ordinances must be carefully humbly and constantly attended vpon, by all that expect any actuall and sensible assurance, & comfortable feeling of the spirit bestowed on them in their baptisme. As for such as re­ly vpon baptisme, alone, making no consci­ence of the word, and other means of grace ordained of Christ, but liue securely in their sinnes; they therby giue iust cause of suspiti­on that they neuer receiued the spirit, in their baptisme, nor were in the number of Gods elect whose names are written in the booke of life. If they will needs take offence at this doctrine, they take what was neuer giuen. The Godly Will imploy it better: and, for their sakes, it ought to be not only somtimes taught, but often pressed to the vttermost; vnlesse wee should suppresse euery good & necessary truth wherof wicked men will make an evill vse.

Musculus on Math: 19.14.

Ratio humana non sustinet agnoscere gatiam Dei in hacre, sed putat vbique opus esse vsu ratio­nis & scientiae, alioqui nihil commercij posse ho­mini [Page 347] infanti esse cum Deo. Videmus autem hic potiores esse in regno Dei infantes, tam abest vt non sint illius participes.

Humane Reason cannot endure to acknowledg the grace of God in this particular, but thinkes that (without all difference) there is need of the vse of reason and knowledge, or else that a man whiles hee is an infant can haue no com­merce with God. But by this Text wee see that infants rather than others haue interest in the kingdome of God; so farre are they from not be­ing at all partakers of it.



PAge. 5. line 14. read see. p. 8. l. 15. r. of battaile. p. 12. l. 20. r saui ur p. 20. l. 19. r. Ordinary. p 37. l. 3. r. race. p. 45. l 11. dele the first when p. 41. l. 1 r professe. p. 52. in marg. l. penult. r. de Sacram. l. 5: p: 58. in mar. r. D. George p 69. l. 12. 1: Art. p: 77 l. 10. r: vnto p. 83. in marg. l. 9. r. [...]. ibid. l. 12. r: [...] p. 106. in marg. l. vlt r. 16 cap. p. 117 l: 17. r: in the Churches. p. 151 l. 11 r: [...]dhere p. 154, in marg. r. Dan. Chameir. tom. 4 l b. 2. De sacram [...] ip. 2. par. 8. p. 157. in marg. l antepenult: r. Migrabimus p. 174. l. 10. in mar. r. perfundi. p. 176 mar. l. 14. dele vt [...] & r. verò p. 181. l. the last. r. abrood. p. 187 l 5 r: doe giue. somtimes in the top of the leafe, viz▪ p 231. pag 240. odiections is put for obiections. p. 248 l. 5. r. nicity, p. 262. l 6. r. slowing p. 266. l. 9. r. Dardanum p. 297. l. 15. r. obiection. p. 300. l. 22. r. is.

There are also some errors in the pointing, which haue happened by the Authors absence from the presse: and those the Charitable rea­der is requested to correct or pardon, as he passeth by them.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.