03.03. On Baptism

ON BAPTISM.

1. The first use of Baptism to he a token of our cleansing, and, therefore, not a mark of recognisance and a sign of profession only, as some would have it. — Baptism is a sign of entering, whereby we are received into the fellowship of the Church; that beeen grafted into Christ, we may be reckoned among the children of God. Now it was given us by God for this end, (which I have taught to be common to all the mysteries,) first, that it should serve to our faith with him, and to our confession before men. We will orderly declare the manner of both purposes. Baptism bringeth three things to our faith, which also must be separately treated of. This is the first which the Lord setteth out unto us, that it should be a token and proof of our cleansing; or (to express my mind better) it is like a certain sealed charter, whereby he confirmeth that all our sins are so erased, cancelled and blotted out, that they may never come in his sight, nor be rehearsed, nor be imputed. For he hath appointed that all they who believe should be baptized into forgiveness of sins. Therefore, they who thought that baptism is nothing else but a mark and token whereby we profess our religion before men, as soldiers bear the conusance of their captain for a mark of their profession, weigh not that which was the chief thing in baptism. That is this, tliat we should receive it with this promise, that whosoever believe and are baptized, shall be saved. Mark 16:16.

2. Our cleansing not made by Baptism as by a cause, but manifested by it as by a Sign. — In this sense is to be understood which Paul writeth, that the church is sanctified by Christ her spouse, and cleansed with the washing of water in the word of life. Ephesians 5:26. Yet in another place, that we are saved according to his mercy by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost. Titus 3:5. And that which Peter writeth that baptism saveth us, 1 Peter 3:21. Paul’s will was not to signify, that our washing and salvation is perfectly made by water, or that water containeth in itself the power to cleanse, regenerate, and renew. Neither did Peter mean the cause of salvation, but only the knowledge and certainty of such gifts to be received in this sacrament, which is evidently enough expressed in the words themselves. For Paul joineth together the word of life, and baptism of water; as if he had said, that by the Gospel the message of washing and sanctifying is brought us, that by baptism such message is sealed. And Peter immediately addeth, that baptism is not the putting away of the filthiness of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience before God, which is of faith. Yea, baptism promiseth us no other cleansing, but by the sprinkling of the blood of Christ, which is figured by water, for its likeness of cleansing and washing. Who therefore can say that we are cleansed by this water, which certainly testifieth that the blood of Christ is our true and only washing? so that there cannot be brought a surer reason to confute their blind error who refer all things to the power of water, than from the signification of baptism itself, which doth withdraw us as well from that visible element which is set before our eyes, as from all other means, that it may bind our minds to Christ alone.

3. Baptism a confirmation of the washing out of all sin, and not only of sins past^ before we he baptized. — Neither is it to be thought that baptism is applied only to the time past, that for new offences, into which we fall after baptism, we must seek new remedies of cleansing, in I know not what other sacraments, as though the force of baptism were worn out of use. By this error it came to pass in old time, that some would not be baptized but when in the uttermost peril of life, and at the last gasp, that so they may obtain pardon of their whole life. Against which wayward subtle provision the old bishops so often inveigh in their writings. But thus we ought to think, that at what time soever we are baptized, we are at once washed and cleansed for all our life. Therefore, so oft as we fall, we must go back to the remembrance of baptism, and therewith we must arm our mind, that it may be always certain and assured of the forgiveness of sin. For though, when it is once administered, it seemeth to be past, yet, by later sins, it is not abolished. For the purity of Christ is therein offered us; that always flouiisheth, is oppressed with no spots, but overwhelmeth and wipeth away all our filthiness; yet ought we not to take from this a liberty to sin in time to come, (as verily we are not hereby armed to such holdness) but this doctrine is given only to them, who when they have sinned, do groan, wearied and oppressed under their sins, that they may rise up and comfort themselves, lest they should fall into confusion and despair. So Paul saith, Romans 3:25, that Christ was made to us a propitiator, unto the forgiveness of faults going before. Wherein he denieth not that therein is obtained perpetual and continual forgiveness of sins even unto death; but he meaneth that it was given by the Father only to poor sinners, who, wounded with the searing iron of conscience, do sigh for the physician. To these the mercy of God is offered. They, who by escaping of punishment, do bunt for matter and liberty to sin, do but provoke to themselves the wrath and judgment of God.

4. The force nf Baptism as well as Repentance extended throughout our whole life. — I know indeed that it is commonly thought otherwise; that by the benefit of repentance and of the keys we do after baptism obtain forgiveness, which, at our first regeneration, is given us only by baptism. But they who devise this err herein, because they do not remember that the power of the keys, whereof they speak, is so joined with baptism that it ought not to be separated. The sinner receiveth forgiveness by the ministry of the Church, namely, not without the preaching of the Gospel. But what manner of preaching is that? That we are cleansed from sins by the blood of Christ. But what sign and testimony is there of that washing, but baptism? We see, therefore, how that absolution is referred to baptism. And this error hath bred us the feigned sacrament of penance; of which I have touched somewhat before, and the residue I will make an end • of in place fit for it. But it is no wonder if men who, according to the grossness of their wit, were beyond measure tied to outward things, have in this behalf also betrayed that fault, that not content with the pure institution of God, they thrust in new helps feigned by themselves. As though baptism itself were not a sacrament of repentance. But if repentance be commended to us for our whole life, the force of baptism ought to be extended as far. Wherefore, there is no doubt but all the godly, through their whole life, so oft as they are vexed with knowledge in conscience of their own sins, dare call themselves back to the remembrance of baptism, that they may confirm themselves in the confidence of that only and continual washing which we have in the hlood of Christ.

5. A second use of Baptism to show us our mortification and newness of life — It bringeth, also, another fruit, because it showeth us our mortification in Christ, and new life in him. For, as the apostle saith, we are baptized into his death, being buried together with him into death, that we may walk in newness of life. Romans 6:3. By which words he doth not only exhort us to follow him, (as though he said that we are by baptism put in mind, that after a certain example of the death of Christ, we should die to our lusts; and after the example of his resurrection, we should be raised up to righteousness.) but he fetcheth the matter much deeper, that is to say, that by baptism Christ hath made us partakers of his death, that we may be grafted into it. And as the graff receiveth substance and nourishment from the root into which it is grafted, both they that receive baptism with such faith as they ought, do truly feel the power of the death of Christ in the mortifying of their flesh; and also they feel the effect of his resurrection in the quickening of the Spirit. Hence he gathereth matter of exhortation; that if we be Christians, we ought to be dead to sin, and to live to righteousness. Colossians 2:12. This self-same argument he useth in another place that we are circumcised, and have put off the old man, since we have been buried in Christ by baptism. Titus 3:6. And in this sense, in the same place which we have before alleged, he called it the washing of regeneration and of renewing. Therefore, the free forgiveness of sins, and imputation of righteousness, is first promised us, and then the grace of the Holy Ghost, which may reform us into newness of life.

6. A third use of Baptism to signify our ingrafting into Christ, and partaking of his graces. — Last of all our faith receiveth this benefit by baptism, that it certainly testifieth unto us, that we are not only grafted into the death and life of Christ, but that we are so united to Christ himself that we are partakers of all his good things. Therefore, be hath dedicated and hallowed baptism in his own body, Matthew 3:13, that he might have it in common with us, as a most strong bond of the unity and fellowship which he vouchsafed to enter into with us, thus Paul proveth thereby that we are the children of God, because ’we we have put on Christ in baptism. Galatians 3:27. So we see that the fulfilling of baptism is in Christ, whom also for this reason we call the proper object of baptism. Therefore, it is no marvel if it be reported that the apostles baptized into his name. Acts 8:16, and Acts 19:5, who yet were commanded to baptize into the name of the Father also, and of the Holy Ghost. Matthew 28:19. For whatever gifts of God are set forth in baptism, are found in Christ alone. And yet it cannot be, but that he who baptizeth into Christ doth therewithal call upon the name of the Father and of the Holy Ghost. For we are therefore cleansed with his blood, because the merciful Father according to his incomparable kindness, willing to receive us into favor, hath set him as a mediator in the midst to procure us favor with him. But regeneration we only obtain, by his death and resurrection, if being sanctified by the Spirit we are endued with a new and spiritual nature. Whereof both of our cleansing and regeneration we obtain and after a certain manner distinctly perceive the cause in the Father, the matter in the Son, and the effect in the Holy Ghost. So John first baptized, so afterwards the apostles, with the baptism of repentance into the forgiveness of sin, meaning by this word repentance, such regeneration, and by forgiveness of sins, washing.

7. The Baptism of John, the same with that which the Apostles ministered, howsoever the old writers, Chrysostome and Augustine, separate the one from the other. — Whereby also it is made most certain, that the ministry of John was altogether the same which was afterward committed to the apostles. For the different hands wherewith it is ministered, make not the baptism different; but the same doctrine show« eth it to be the same baptism. John and the apostles agreed in one doctrine; both baptized into repentance, both into the forgiveness of sins, both into the name of Christ, from whom flowed repentance and forgiveness of sins. Acts 2:28. John said that He was the lamb of God, by whom the sins of the world should be taken away, John 1:29, where he made him the sacrifice acceptable to the Father, the propitiator of righteousness, the author of salvation. What could the apostles add to this confession? Wherefore let it trouble no man, that the old writers labor to separate the one from the other, whose voice we ought not so much to esteem that it should shake the certainty of the Scripture. For who will rather hearken to Chrysostome denying that forgiveness of sins was comprehended in the baptism of John, than to Luke on the contrary affirming that John preached the baptism of repentance into the forgiveness of sin? Luke 3:3. Neither is that subtlety of Augustine to be received, that in the baptism of John sins were forgiven id hope, but in the baptism of Christ they are forgiven indeed. Whereas the evangelist plainly testifieth, that John in his baptism promised the forgiveness of sins, Luke 3:16, what need we abate this title of commandment, when no necessity compelleth us unto it? But if any may seek for a difference out of the Word of God, he will find no other but this, that John baptized into him that was to come, the apostles into him that had already presented himself.

8. The Baptizing not different, because the graces of the Spirit were various, which followed the ministry of John; and of Christ’s apostles, yea, even of the apostles before and after Christ’s ascension,— As for this, that more abundant graces of the Spirit, were poured out since the resurrection of Christ, it maketh nothing to establish a diversity of baptism. For the baptism which the apostle administered, while he was yet conversant in earth, was called his; yet it had no larger plentifulness of the Spirit, than the baptism of John Yea, even after his ascension, the Spirit was not given to the Samaritans above the common measure of the faithful before the ascension, although they were baptized into the name of Jesus, till Peter and John were sent unto them to lay their hands upon them. This only thing, as I think, deceived the old writers, that they said that the baptism of John was but a preparation to the baptism of Christ, because they read. Acts 8:14, that they were baptized again by Paul, who had once received the baptism of John But how much they were herein deceived, shall els6whei’e b6 plainly declared in place fit for it. ^yhat is it, therefore, that John said, that he baptized indeed with water, but that Christ should come who should baptize with the Holy Ghost, and with fire? Matthew 3:11. This may in few words be cleared. For he meant not to put a difference between the one baptism and the other, but he compared his own person with the person of Christ, saying, that himself was a minister of water, but that Christ was the giver of the Holy Ghost, and should declare his power by a visible miracle the same day that he should send the Holy Ghost to the apostles in the likeness of fiery tongues. Acts 2:8. What could the apostles boast of more than this? What more could they, also, that baptize at this day? For they are only ministers of the outward sign, and Christ is the author of the inward grace: as the old writers themselves everywhere teach, and especially Augustine, whose principal argument against the Donatists is this, that what man soever he be that baptizeth, yet only Christ is ruler of it.

9. The grace of mortification and purification assured unto us hj Baptism, shadowed to the people of Israel darkly under other figures. — These things which we have spoken, both of mortification and of washing, are shadowed out in the people of Israel, whom, for the same cause, the apostle saith to have been baptized in the cloud and in the sea. Mortifying was figured, when the Lord delivering them out of the hand of Pharaoh, and from crwel bondage, made for them a way through the Red Sea, and drowned Pharaoh himself and the Egyptians their enemies, that followed them hard at their backs, and were even in their necks to overtake them. 1 Corinthians 10:2. For after the same manner, also, he promiseth to ns in baptism, and, by a sign given, showeth us that we are by his power brought forth and delivered out of the thraldom of Egypt, that is to say, out of the bondage of sin; that our Pharaoh is drowned, that is to say, the devil, although even so, also, he ceaseth not to exercise and weary us. But as that Egyptian was not thrown down into the bottom of the sea, but being overthrown on the shore, did yet, with terrible sight, make the Israelites afraid, but could not hurt them; so this our enemy yet indeed threateneth, showeth his weapons, is felt, but cannot overcome. In the cloud was a sign of cleansing. For as then the Lord covered them with a cloud cast over them, and gave them refreshing cold, lest they should faint and pine away with too cruel, burning of the sun. Numbers 9:14, so in baptism we acknowledge ourselves covered and defended with the blood of Christ, lest the severity of God, which is indeed an intolerable flame, should lie upon us. But although this mystery was then dark and known to few; yet, because there is no other way to obtain salvation, but in those two benefits, God would not take away the sign of them both from the old fathers, whom he had adopted to be heirs.

10. Faithful men by Baptism not rid of original sin but certified first that condemnation whereunto the corruption of their nature hath made them subject, is done away. Now it is clear, how false that is which some have lately taught, and wherein some yet continue, that by baptism we are loosed and delivered from original sin, and from the corruption which was from Adam spread abroad into his whole posterity, and that we are restored into the same righteousness and pureness of nature, which Adam should have obtained, if he had stood fast in the same uprightness wherein he was first created. For such kind of teachers never understood what was original sin, nor what was original righteousness, nor what was the grace of baptism. But we have already proved, that original sin is the perverseness and corruption of our nature, which first maketh us guilty of the wrath of God, and then, also bringeth forth works in us, which the Scripture calleth the works of the flesh. Galatians 5:19. Therefore these two points are distinctly to be marked, namely, that we being in all parts of our nature defiled and corrupted, are already for such corruption only, holden worthily condemned and convicted before God, to whom nothing is acceptable but righteousness, innocency, and cleanness. Yea, and very infants themselves bring their own damnation with them from their mother’s womb. Who, although they have not yet brought forth the fruits of their iniquity, yet have the seed thereof enclosed within them. Yea, their whole nature is a certain seed of sin, therefore it cannot but be hateful and abominable to God. The faithful are certified by baptism that this damnation is taken away, and driven from them; forasmuch, as we have already said, the Lord doth by this sign promise us that full and perfect forgiveness is granted both of the fault which should have been imputed to us, and of the pain which we should have suffered for the fault; they take hold also of righteousness, but such as the people of God may obtain in this life, that is to say by imputation only, because the Lord of his own mercy taketh them for righteous and innocent.

11. Secondly, that the works of the flesh shall not hear rule and have dominion over them. — The other point is, that this perverseness never ceaseth in us, but continually bringeth forth new fruits, namely those works of the flesh which we have before described; no otherwise than a burning furnace continually bloweth out flame and sparkles, or as a spring incessantly casteth out water. For lust never utterly dieth nor is quenched in men, until being by death delivered out of the body of death, they have utterly put off themselves. Baptism, indeed, promiseth us that our Pharaoh is drowned, and the mortification of sin; yet not so that it is no more, or may no more trouble us, but only that it may not overcome us. For so long as we live inclosed within this prison of our body, the remnants of sin shall dwell in us; but if we hold fast by faith the promise given us of God in baptism, they shall not bear rule nor reign. But let no man deceive himself; let no man flatter himself in his own evil, when he feareth that sin always dwelleth in us. These things are not spoken to this end, that they should carelessly sleep upon their sins, who are otherwise too much inclined to sin; but only, that they should not faint and be discouraged, who are tickled and pricked of their flesh. Let them rather think that they are yet in the way, and let them believe that they have much profited, when they feel that there is daily somewhat diminished of their lust, till they have attained thither whither they travail, namely, to the last death of their flesh, which shall be ended in the dying of this mortal life. In the meantime, let them not cease both to strive valiantly, and to encourage them to go forward and to stir them up to full victory. For this also ought more to whet on their endeavors, that they see that after they have long labored, they have yet no small business remaining. This we ought to hold; we are baptized into the mortifying of our flesh, which is begun by baptism in us, which we daily follow; but it shall be made perfect when we shall remove out of this life to the Lord.

12. Baptism, according to St. Paul, the earnest of our regeneration,, the weakness of our nature hereunto, and the greatness of our comfort notwithstanding this weakness.— Here we say no other thing than the Apostle Paul in the seventh chapter to the Romans most clearly setteth out. For after that he had disputed of free righteousness, because some wicked men did thereof gather, that we might live after our own lust, because we should not be acceptable to God by the deservings of works; he addeth, that all they that are clothed with the righteousness of Christ are therewith regenerate in spirit, and that of his regeneration we have an earnest in baptism. Hereupon he exhorteth the faithful, that they suffer not sin to have dominion in their members. Now because he knew that there is always some weakness in the faithful; that they should not therefore be discouraged, he adjoineth a comfort, that they are not under the law. Ilom. 6:14. Because, again it might seem, that Christians might grow insolent, because they are not under the yoke of the law, he treateth what manner of abrogating thai is, and therewithal what is the use of the law, which question he bad now the second time discussed. The sum is, that we are delivered from the rigor of the law, that we should cleave to Christ; but that the office of the law is, that we being convinced of our perverseness, should confess our own weakness and misery. How forasmuch as that perverseness of nature doth not so easily appear in a profane man, who followeth his own lust without fear of God; he setteth an example in a man regenerate, namely, in himself. He saith, therefore, that he hath a continual wrestling with the remnants of his flesh, and that he is holden bound with miserable bondage, that he cannot consecrate himself wholly to the obedience of the law of God. Therefore, he is compelled with groaning to cry out, O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me out of this body subject to death! Romans 7:24. If the children of God be holden captive in prison so long as they live, they must needs be much carefully grieved with thinking upon their own peril, unless this fear be met withal. Therefore, he adjoineth to this use a comfort, that there is no more damnation to them that are in Christ Jesus. Where he teacheth, that they whom the Lord hath once received into favor, engrafted into the communion of his Christ, hath, by baptism, admitted into the fellowship of his church, while they continue in the faith of Christ, although they be besieged of sin, yea, and carry sin about with them, yet are acquitted from guiltiness and condemnation. If this be the simple and natural exposition of Paul, there is no cause why we should seem to teach any new unwonted thing.

13. Baptism the Badge of our Profession. — But baptism so serveth our confession before men. For it is a mark whereby we openly profess that we should be accounted among the people of God, whereby we testify that we agree with all Christians unto the worshipping of one God and into one religion: Finally, whereby we openly affirm our faith, that not only our hearts should breathedout the praise of God, but also our tongues, and all the members of our body should sound it out with such utterances as they are able. For so, as we ought, all our things are employed to the service of the glory of God, whereof nothing ought to be void, and others may by our example be stirred up to the same endeavors. Hereunto Paul had respect, when he asked the Corinthians whether they had not been baptized into the name of Christ, 1 Corinthians 1:1, meaning, verily, that even in this that they were baptized into his name, they avowed themselves unto him, swore to his name, and bound their faith to him before men, that they could no more confess any other but Christ alone, unless they would forsake the confession which they had made in baptism.

14. The Author of Baptism is also the worker of grace spiritual therein figured, not enclosed. — Now, since it is declared what our Lord had regard unto in the institution of baptism, it is plain to judge what is the way for us to use and receive it. For so far as it is given to the raising, nourishing, and confirming of our faith, it is to be taken as from the hand of the author himself; we ought to hold it certain and fully persuaded, that it is he who speaketh to us by the sign, that it is he who cleanseth us, washeth us, and putteth away the remembrance of our sins, that it is he who maketh us partakers of his death, who taketh away from Satan his kingdom, who feebleth the forces of our lusts, yea, who groweth into one with us, that being clothed with him, we may be reckoned the children of God; that these things, I say, lie doth inwardly so truly and certainly perform to our soul, as we certainly see our body outwardly to be washed, dipped, and clothed. For this either relation, or similitude, is the most sure rule of sacraments; that in bodily things we should behold spiritual things, as if they were presently set before our eyes, forasmuch as it hath pleased the Lord to represent them by such figures; not for that such benefits are bound and enclosed in the sacrament, that they should be given us by the force thereof, but only because the Lord doth by this token testify his will unto us, that is, that he will give us all these things. Neither doth he only feed our eyes with a naked sight, but he bringeth us to the thing present, and together fulfilleth that which it figureth.

13. Cornelius and Paul, by Baptism, not endued with Grace, hut assured that they were endued through Faith, without which JBaptism doth but testify our unthankfulness. — Hereof let Cornelius, the captain, be an example, who was baptized, having before received forgiveness of sins and visible graces of the Holy Ghost, Acts 10:48; seeking not by baptism a larger forgiveness, but a more certain exercising of faith, yea, an increase of confidence by a pledge. Peradventure some man will object: why, therefore, did Ananias say to Paul, that he should wash away his sins by baptism, Acts 9:17, if sins are not washed away by the power of baptism itself? I answer, We are said to receive, to obtain, to get that which, so far as concerneth the feeling of our faith, is given us of the Lord, whether he do then first testify it, or being testified, doth more and certainlier confirm it. This, therefore, only was the meaning of Ananias; that thou mayest be assured Paul that thy sins are forgiven thee, be baptized. For the Lord doth in baptism promise forgiveness of sins; receive this, and be out of care. Howbeit I mean not to diminish the force of baptism, but that the thing and the truth is present with the sign, so far as God worketh by outward means. But of this sacrament, as of all others, we obtain nothing but so much as we receive by faith. If we want faith, it shall be for a witness of our unthankfulness, whereby we may be declared guilty before God, because we have not believed the promise there given. But so far as it is a sign of our confession, we ought by it to testify that assurance is in the mercy of God, and our cleanness is in the forgiveness of sins, which is gotten us by Jesus Christ; and that by it vie enter into the Church of Christ, that we may with one consent of faith and charity live of one mind with all the faithful. This last point did Paul mean, when he saith that we are all baptized into one Spirit, that we may be one body. 1 Corinthians 12:13.

16. Nothing added unto, or taken from Baptism by their worthiness or unworthiness which are ministers of it, and therefore rebaptization not to be received. — Now, if this be true which we determine, that a sacrament is not to be weighed according to his hand of whom it is ministered, but as of the very hand of God from whom, without doubt, it proceeded; whereupon we may gather, that nothing is added to it, nor taken from it, by the worthiness of him by whose hand it is delivered. And even as among men, if a letter be sent, so that the hand and the seal be well known, it maketh no matter who or what manner of man be the carrier; so it ought to suffice to know the hand and seal of the Lord in his sacraments, by what carrier soever they be brought. Hereby the Donatists are very well confuted, who measured the force and value of the sacrament by the worthiness of the minister. Such at this day are our Carabaptists, who deny that we are rightly baptized, because we were baptized by wicked men and idolaters in the Popish kingdom; therefore they furiously call upon us to be baptized again. Against whose follies we shall be armed with a reason strong enough, if we think that we were professed by baptism, not into the name of any man, but into the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, Matthew 28:19; and that therefore it is not the baptism of man, but of God, of whomsoever it be ministered. Although they were never so much ignorant or despisers of God and all godliness, who baptized us, yet they did not baptize us into the fellowship of their own ignorance or sacrilege, but into the faith of Jesus Christ; because they called not upon their own name, but the name of God, nor baptized us into any other name. Now, if it were the baptism of God, it hath, verily, enclosed in it a promise of the forgiveness of sins, the mortifying of the flesh, the spiritual quickening, and the partaking of Christ. So it nothing hindered the Jews to have been circumcised of unclean priests and apostates, neither was the sign therefore void, that it needeth to be done of new; but it was sufficient to return to the natural beginning. Where they object that baptism ought to be celebrate in the assemblies of the godly, that proveth not, that that which is faulty in part should destroy the whole force thereof. For when we teach what ought to be done, that baptism may be pure and void of all defiling, we do not abolish the ordinance of God, although idolaters corrupt it. For when, in old time, circumcision was corrupted with many superstitions, yet it ceased not to be taken for a sign of grace; neither did Josiah and Hezekiah, when they gathered out of all Israel them that had departed from God, call them to a second circumcision.

17. Baptism not made void by their remaining a long time in blindness that are baptized. — Now, whereas they ask us, what faith of ours hath yet followed baptism in certain years past, that they thereby might prove that baptism is void when it is not sanctified unto us, but by the word of promise received by faith: to this question we answer, that we indeed being blind and unbelieving, did for a long time not hold fast the promise given us in baptism; yet the promise itself, for as much as it was of God, continued always stayed, steadfast, and true. Although all men be liars and faithbreakers, yet God ceaseth not to be true; although all men be lost, yet Christ remaineth salvation. We confess, therefore, that baptism, for that time, profited us nothing at all; for as much as in it the promise offered us, without which baptism is nothing, lay nothing regarded. Now since, by the grace of God, we have begun to wax wiser, we accuse our own blindness and hardness of heart, who have so long been unthankful to his so great goodness. Romans 3:3. But we believe that the promise itself is not vanished away; but rather thus we consider, God by baptism promiseth the forgiveness of sins, and since he hath promised it, he will undoubtedly perform it to all that believe it. That promise was offered us in baptism; by faith, therefore, let us embrace it. It hath indeed long been buried from us because of infidelity, now, therefore, let us receive it by faith. Wherefore, where the Lord calleth the Jewish people to repentance, he giveth them no commandment of a second circumcision, who being (as we have said) circumcised with a wicked and ungodly hand, lived a certain time entangled with the same wickedness. But he earnestly calleth upon the turning of the heart only. Because, howsoever the covenant was broken of them, yet the sign of the covenant, by the ordinance of the Lord, remained always steadfast and inviolable. Therefore, with the condition of repentance only, they were restored into the covenant which the Lord had once made with them in circumcision, which yet being received by the hand of a leaguebreaker priest, so much as in them lay they had defiled again, and the effect whereof they had quenched.

18. They whom John had Baptized, not rebaptized by Paul— But they think that they shake a fiery dart at us, when they allege that Paul rebaptized them which were once baptized with the baptism of John Acts 19:3. For if by our own confession, the baptism of John was altogether the same that ours is now; even as they having been before perversely instructed, when they were taught the true faith, they were again baptized into it; so that baptism, which was without true doctrine, is to be taken for nothing, and we ought to be newly baptized again into the true religion, wherein we are now just instructed. Some think that there was some ill affected man to John, who had entered them with their first baptism rather to a vain superstition. Of which thing to gather a conjecture hereupon, because they confessed themselves to be utterly ignorant of the Holy Ghost Whereas John verily should never have sent away from himself scholars so untaught. But neither is it likely that the Jews, although they had been baptized at all, were destitute of all knowledge of the Holy Ghost, which is famously spoken of by so many testimonies of Scripture. Whereas, therefore, they answer that they know not whether there be any Holy Ghost, it is to be understood as if they had said that they have not yet heard whether the graces of the Spirit, of which Paul asked them, were given to the disciples of Christ. But I grant that that was the true baptism of John, and all ore and the selfsame with the baptism of Christ; but I deny that they were baptized again. What, then, mean these words, they were baptized in the name of Jesus? Some do expound it, that they were but instructed of Paul with true doctrine. But I had rather understand it more simply to be the baptism of the Holy Ghost, that is to say, that the visible graces of the Spirit were given them by the laying on of hands; which to be expressed by the name of baptism, is no new thing. As on the day of Pentecost, it is said that the apostles remembered the words of the Lord, concerning the baptism of fire and of the Spirit. Acts 1:6. And Peter saith that the same came to his remembrance, when he saw those graces poured out upon Cornelius, and his household, and kindred. Neither is that contrary which is afterwards adjoined; when he had laid his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came down upon them. For Luke doth not tell of two divers things, but followeth the manner of telling commonly used among the Hebrews, who do first propound the sum of the matter, and then do set it out more at large. Which every man may perceive by the very framing together of the words. For he saith, When they heard these things, they were baptized in the name of Jesus. And when Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came down upon them. In this latter sentence we see what manner of baptism that was. If ignorance do so corrupt a former baptism, that it must be amended with a second baptism; the apostles should have been rebaptized first of all, who, in whole three years after their baptism, had scarcely tasted any small parcel of purer doctrine. And now, among us, what rivers might suffice to renew so many washings, as there are ignorances, by the mercy of the Lord, daily amended in us?

19. Accessory inventions of men added unto Christ’s institution of baptism. — The force, dignity, profit, and end of the mystery, if I be not deceived, ought, by this time, to be plain enough. So much as concerneth the outward sign, I would to God the natural institution of Christ had prevailed so much as was meet, to restrain the boldness of men. For as though it were a contemptible thing to be baptized with water, according to the precept of Christ, there is invented blessing, or rather enchanting, to defile the true hallowing of the water. Afterwards was added a taper with chresme; but the blowing seemeth to open the gate to baptism. But although I am not ignorant how ancient is the beginning of this added pack; yet it is lawful, both for me and all the godly, to refuse whatsoever things men have presumed to add to the ordinance of Christ. When Satan saw that, by he foolish light credit of the world, at the very beginnings of the Gospel his deceits were easily received, he brake forth into grosser mockeries. Hereupon spittle, and like trifles, were openly brought in with unbridled liberty to the reproach of baptism. By which experiences let us learn, that nothing is either holier, or better, or safer, than to be content with the authority of Christ .alone. How much better, therefore, was it, leaving stage-like pomps, which dazzle the eyes of the simple, and dull their minds, so oft as any was to be baptized, that he should be presented to the assembly of the faithful, and be offered to God, the whole church looking on as a witness, and praying over him; that the confession of faith should be rehearsed, wherewith he that is to be catechized should be instructed; the promises should be declared which are contained in baptism; that the instructed should be baptized in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost; at length that he be sent away with prayers and thanksgiving. S is nothing omitted that might make to the matter, an 1 that the only ceremony which proceeded from God, the author thereof, should most clearly shine, being not overwhelmed with any foreign filthiness. But whether he be wholly dipped who is baptized, and that thrice or once, or whether he be but sprinkled with water only poured upon him, it maketh very little matter; but that ought to be at liberty to churches according to the diversity of countries. Howbeit, the very word of baptizing signifieth to dip, and it is certain that the manner of dipping was used of the old church.

20. Baptism not to he administered by private men, — This also pertaineth to the purpose, to know that it is done amiss if private men take upon themselves the administration of baptism. For as well the distribution of this as the supper is a part of the ecclesiastical ministry. For Christ did not command women, nor yet every sort of men, that they should baptize; but whom he had ordained his apostles, to them he gave .this .commandment. And when he commanded his disciples to do that in the ministration of the supper which they had seen him do, when he executed the office of a right distributor; he would, without doubt, that they should therein follow his example. As for this that in many ages past, yea, and in a manner at the very beginning of the church, it hath been received in use, that laymen might baptize in peril of death, if the minister were not present in time. I see not with how strong a reason it may be defended. The very old fathers themselves, which either held or suffered this manner, were not sure whether it were well done. For Augustine seemeth to have this doubt, when he saith, (Lib. contra, epi. parm. 2. cap. 13,) although a layman compelled by necessity do give baptism, I cannot tell whether a man may godlily say that it ought to be reiterate. For if it be done when no necessity compelleth, it is the usurping of another man’s office; but if necessity enforceth, it is either none or a venial sin. Moreover, of women it was decreed without any exception in the council at Carthage, that they should not presume to baptize at all. But there is danger, lest if he who is sick should die without baptism, he should be deprived of the grace of regeneration. Not so, God pronounceth that he adopteth our infants to be his own, before they are born, when he promiseth that he will be a God to us and to our seed after us. In this word is contained their salvation. Neither shall any man dare to be so reproachful against God, to deny that his promise is of itself sufficient to work the effect thereof. How much harm that doctrine being evil expounded, that baptism is of necessity to salvation, hath brought in, few do mark, and therefore they take less heed themselves. For where this opinion is grown in force, that all are lost to whom it hath not happened to be washed with water, our state is worse than the state of the old people, as though the grace of God were now more narrowly strengthened than it was under the law. For Christ shall be thought to be come, not to fulfill the promises, but to abolish them; forasmuch as the promise which then was of itself effectual enough to give health before the eighth day, now should not be of force without help of the sign.

21. Women not authorised to Baptize. — But how the custom was before that Augustine was born, first is gathered of Tertullian, that it is not permitted to a woman to speak in the church, nor to teach, nor to baptize, nor to offer, that she should not claim to herself the execution of any man’s office, much less of the priest’s. (Lib. cont. Pere. 1.) Of the same thing Epiphanius is a substantial witness, where he reproacheth Marcion, that he gave women liberty to baptize. Neither am I ignorant of their answer who think otherwise, that is, that common use much differeth from extraordinary remedy, when extreme necessity enforceth; but when he pronouncing that it is a mockery to give women liberty to baptize, excepteth nothing, it sufficiently appeareth that he condemneth this corruption, so that it is by no color excusable. Also in the third book, where teaching that it was not permitted even to the Holy Mother of Christ, he addeth no restraint.

22. Zipporah no precedent for women s taking upon them to baptize. — The example of Zipporah is unseasonably alleged. For whereas the angel of God was appeased, after that she, taking a stone, circumcised her son, thereupon it was wrongfully gathered that her doing was allowed of God. Otherwise it ought to be said, that the worshipping which the nations that were brought out of Assyria raised up, pleased God, but by other strong reasons it is proved, that that which a foolish woman did, is wrongfully drawn to an example of imitation. If I should say that it is a certain singular case, which ought not to be made an example, and especially that since it is no where read that in old time there was given to the priests a special commandment to circumcise, the order of circumcision and baptism is unlike; this should be strong enough to confute them. For the words of Christ are plain; Matthew 28:19, Go ye, teach all nations and baptize. When he ordained the self-same men publishers of the Gospel, and ministers of baptism; and none, as the apostle witnesseth, doth take honor upon himself in the church, but he that is called as Aaron, Hebrews 5:4, whosoever without lawful calling baptizeth, he rusheth into another man’s office. Even in the smallest things, as in meat and drink, whatsoever we enterprize with a doubtful conscience, Paul openly crieth out to be sin. Romans 14:23. Therefore, in women’s baptizing is much more grievously sin, where it is evident that they brake the rule appointed by Christ, forasmuch as we know that it is unlawful to pluck asunder those things that God conjoineth. But all this I pass over. Only I would have the readers to note, that Zipporah’s purpose was not to do any service to God. Seeing her son to be in danger, she grudged, and murmured, and not without stomaching threw the foreskin upon the ground, she so taunted her husband, that she was also angry with God. Finally, it is plain that all this came of a furiousness of mind, because she murmured against God and her husband, for that she was compelled to shed the blood of her son. Moreover, if she had in all other things behaved herself well, yet herein is an inexcusable rash presumption that she circumcised her son, her husband being present, not any private man, but Moses, the principal prophet of God, than whom there never rose any greater in Israel; which was no more lawful for her to do, than it is at this day for women in the sight of the bishop. But this controversy shall by and by be easily taken away by this principle, that infants are not debarred from the kingdom of heaven where it happeneth to depart out of this present life before that it be granted them to be dipped in water. But it is already proved that no small wrong is done to the covenant of God, if we do not rest in it, as though it were weak of itself; whereas the effect thereof dependeth neither upon baptism, nor upon any additions. There is afterward added to it a sacrament; i.e. a seal, not that it bringeth effectualness to the promise of God as to a thing weak of itself, but only confirmeth it to us. Whereupon followeth, that the children of the faithful are not therefore baptized, that they may then first be made the children of God, which before were & angers from the Church, but rather that they are therefore received by a solemn sign into the Church, because by the benefit of the promise they did already belong to the body of Christ. Therefore, if in omitting the sign there be neither slothfulness, nor contempt, nor negligence, we are free from all danger. It is, therefore, much more holy, to give this reverence to the ordinance of God, that we seek sacraments from no where else, than where the Lord hath left them. When we may not have them of the Church, the grace of God is not so bound to them but that we may obtain them by faith out of the Word of the Lord. THAT THE BAPTISM OF INFANTS DOTH VERY WELL AGREE WITH THE INSTITUTION OF CHRIST AND THE NATURE OF THE SIGN.

1. The Baptizing of Infants not devised and received only by rashness of men without warrant from God himself. — But forasmuch as in this age, certain frantic spirits have raised up sore troubles in the church for the baptism of infants, and do not yet cease to turmoil, I cannot choose but join here an addition to restrain their furiousness. If, peradveuture, it shall seem to some man to be very much too long, let him, I beseech him, weigh with himself, that we ought so much to esteem the pureness of doctrine in a most great matter, together with the peace of the church, that nothing ought to be loathsomely received, which may avail to procure them both. Beside that, I so study to frame this discourse, that it shall be of no small importance to the clearer declaration of the mystery of baptism. They assail the baptism of infants with an argument, indeed, favorable in show, saying, that it is grounded upon no institution of Christ, but that it was brought in only by the boldness of men, and perverse curiousness, and then afterward with fond easiness rashly received in use. For a sacrament, unless it rest upon a certain foundation of the Word of God, hangeth but by a thread. But what if, when the matter is well considered, it shall appear that the Lord’s holy ordinance is falsely and unjustly charged with such a slander? Let us, therefore, search out the first beginning of it. And if it shall appear that it was by the rashness of men only, then bidding it farewell, let us measure the true observation of baptism by the will of God only. But if it shall be proved that it is not destitute of this certain authority, we must beware lest in pinching the holy ordinances of God, we be also slanderous against the author himself.

2. The right consideration of Baptism grounded upon the promise and spiritual mystery thereof, not upon the outward ceremony alone. — First, it is a doctrine well enough known, and confessed among all the godly, that the right consideration of the signs, consisteth not only in the outward ceremonies, but principally dependeth upon the promise, and upon the spiritual mysteries, for figuring whereof the Lord ordaineth the ceremonies themselves. Therefore, he that will perfectly learn of what value baptism is, to what end it tendeth, finally, what it is; let him not stay his thought upon the element and bodily fight; but rather let him raise it up to the promises of God which are therein offered us, and to the inward secrets which are therein represented unto us. He that knoweth these things hath attained the sound truth of baptism, and the whole substance thereof, as 1 may so call it; and thereby also he shall be taught, what is the reason, and what is the use of the outward sprinkling. Again, he that contemptuously passing over these, shall have his raind wholly fastened and bound to the visible ceremony, shall understand neither the force nor property of baptism, nor yet so much as this, what the water meaneth, or what use it hath. Which sentence is proved with so many and so clear testimonies of Scripture, that we need not at this present to tarry long about it. Therefore it remaineth now, that we seek out of the promises given in baptism, what is the force and nature of it. The Scripture showeth, that the cleansing of sins, which we obtain of the blood of Christ, is here first showed; then the mortifying of the flesh, which standeth upon the partaking of his death, by which the faithful are regenerate into newness of life, yea, and into the fellowship of Christ. To this sum may be referred whatsoever is taught in the Scriptures concerning baptism; saving that beside this it is a sign to testify religion before men.

3. The use of Circumcision under the Law. — But forasmuch as before the institution of baptism, the people of God had circumcision instead thereof; let us see in what these two signs differ the one from the other, and in what likeness they agree together. Whereupon may appear what is the relation of the one to the other. Where the Lord gave circumcision to Abraham to be kept, he telleth him before, that he would be God to him and to his seed, adding that with him is the flowing store and sufficience of all things, that Abraham should account that his hand should be to him a spring of all good things. In which words the promise of eternal life is contained, as Christ expoundeth it, bringing an argument from hence to prove the immortality of the faithful and the resurrection. For God, saith he, is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Matthew 22:32. Luke 20:38. Wherefore, Paul also showing to the Ephesians from what destruction the Lord had delivered them, gathereth by this that they had not been admitted into the covenant of circumcision, that they were without Christ, without God, without hope, strangers from the covenants of the promise, Ephesians 2:12; all which things the covenant itself contained. But the first access to God, the first entry to immortal life, is the forgiveness of sins. Whereupon is gathered, that this forgiveness answereth to the promise of baptism concerning our cleansing. Afterward the Lord taketh covenant of Abraham that he should walk before him in pureness and innocency of heart which belongeth to mortifying or regeneration. And that no man should doubt, that circumcision is a sign of mortifying, Moses in another place doth more plainly declare it, when lie exhorteth the people of Israel, to circumcise the uncircumcised skin of the heart, because they were separate chosen to be the people of God out of all the nations of the earth. Deuteronomy 10:16. As God, where he adopteth the posterity of Abraham to be his people, commandeth them to he circumcised; so Moses pronounceth that the hearts ought be circumcised, declaring, verily, what is the truth of this circumcision. Then that no man should endeavor toward it by his own strength, he teacheth that they need the grace of God. Deuteronomy 30:6. All these things are so often repeated of the prophets, that I need not to heap into this place many testimonies which do each where offer themselves. We have proved, therefore, that in circumcision a spiritual promise was uttered to the fathers, such as in baptism is given; forasmuch as it figured to them the forgiveness of sins, and the mortifying of the flesh. Moreover as we have taught that Christ is the foundation of baptism, in whom both these things remain; so it is evident that he is also of circumcision. For he is promised to Abraham, and in the blessing of all nations, to the sealing of which grace the sign of circumcision is added.

4. The argument and difference between Circumcision and Baptism. — Now, we may easily see, what there is like in these two signs, or what there is differing. The promises, whereupon we have declared that the power of the signs consisteth, is all one in both, namely, of the fatherly favor of God, of the forgiveness of sins, of life everlasting. Then, the thing figured also is all one and the same, namely, regeneration. The foundation whereupon the fulfilling of these things standeth, is all one in both. Wherefore, there is no difference in the inward mystery, whereby the whole force and property of the sacraments is to be worked. The unlikeliness that remaineth, lieth in the outward ceremony, which is the smallest portion, whereas the chiefest part dependeth upon the promise and the thing signified. Therefore we may determine, that whatsoever agreeth with circumcision, doth also belong to baptism, except the difference of the visible ceremony. To this relation and comparison, the apostle’s rule leadeth us by the hand, whereby we are commanded to examine all exposition of Scripture by the proportion of faith. Romans 12:3. And truly the truth doth in this behalf almost offer itself to be felt. For as circumcision, because it was a certain token to the Jews, whereby they were certified that they were chosen to be the people and household of God, and they again, on their behalf, professed that they yielded themselves to God, was their first entry into the Church; so now, also, we by baptism enter into profession of God, that we may be reckoned among his people, and mutually swear to his name. Whereby it appeareth out of controversy, that baptism is come into the place of circumcision, that it may have the same office with us.

5. Infants being partakers of the spiritual Grace, may not he denied the outward sign of Baptism, more than Jewish children Circumcision. — Now, if we list to search out, whether baptism be lawfully communicate to infants, shall we not say that he doth too much play the fool, yea dote, which will rest only upon the element of water and the outward observation, but cannot abide to bend his mind to the spiritual mystery? Whereof if there be any consideration had, it shall, without doubt, certainly appear that baptism is rightfully given to infants, as the thing that is due unto them. For the Lord, in old time, did not vouchsafe to admit them to circumcision, but that he made them partakers of all those things which were then signified by circumcision. Otherwise, he should with mere deceits have mocked his people, if he had fed them with deceitful signs, which is horrible even to be heard of. For he pronounceth expressly, that the circumcision of a little infant should be instead of a seal, to seal the promise of the covenant. But if the covenant remain unbroken and steadfast, it doth at this day no less belong to the children of Christians, than under the Old Testament it pertained to the infants of the Jews. But if they be partakers of the thing signified, why shall they be debarred from the sign? If they have the truth, why shall they be put back from the figure? Although the outward sign cleave fast together with the word in the sacrament, so that they cannot be plucked in sunder; yet if they be separately considered, whether of them, I pray you, shall we esteem of more value? Truly, since we see that the sign seeth the word, we must say that it is under it, and must set it in the inferior place. Since, therefore, the word of baptism is extended to infants, why shall the sign, that is to say, the addition annexed to the word, be debarred from them? This one reason, if there were no more, were abundantly enough to confute all them that will speak to the contrary. That which is objected, that there was a day certainly set for circumcision, is altogether but a shift. We grant that we are not now bound to certain days like the Jews; but when the Lord, howsoever he certainly appointeth no day, yet declareth that he is pleased that infants should, with a solemn formal usage, be received into his covenant; what seek we more?

6. The children of Christian parents being holy seed as Abrahams were, as necessarily the one bound to be Baptized as the other to be Circumcised. — Howbeit the Scripture openeth unto us yet a certainer knowledge of the truth. For it is most evident, that the covenant which the Lord once made with Abraham, is at this day no less in force to Christians, than it was in old time to the Jewish people; yea, and that this word hath no less respect to Christians than it then had respect to the Jews. Unless, perhaps, we think, that Christ hath by his coming diminished, or cat short, the grace of his father. Which saying, is not without abominable blasphemy. Wherefore, as even the children of the Jews were called a holy seed, because being made heirs of the same covenant, they were made differing from the children of the ungodly; for the same reason, even yet also the children of Christians are accounted holy, yea, although they be the issue but of one faithful parent; and (as the apostle witnesseth, 1 Corinthians 7:14,) they differ from the unclean seed of idolaters. Now, when the Lord, immediately after the covenant made with Abraham, commanded the same to be sealed in infants with an outward sacrament. Genesis 17:12, what cause will Christians allege why they should not at this day testify and seal the same in their children? Neither let any man object against me, that the Lord commanded his covenant to be confirmed with no other sign than of circumcision, which is long ago taken away. For we have in readiness to answer, that for the time of the Old-Testament, he ordained circumcision to confirm his covenant; but circumcision being taken away, yet always remaineth the same manner of confirming, which we have common with the Jews. Wherefore we must always diligently consider what i-s common to both, and what they have distinct from us. The covenant is common, the cause of confirming it is common. Only the manner of confirming is diverse, because circumcision was that to them, in place whereof baptism hath succeeded among us. Otherwise, if the testimony whereby the Jews were assured of the salvation of their seed be taken away from us, it should be brought to pass by the coming of Christ, that the grace of God should be darker and less approved by testimonies to us than it was before to the Jews. If that cannot be said without extreme slander of Christ, by whom the infinite goodness of the Father bath more clearly and liberally than ever heretofore been poured forth upon the earth, and declared to men, we must needs giant, that it is at the least, not more pinchingly to be suppressed, nor to be set forth with less testimony, than it was under the dark shadows of the law.

7. Infants embraced, prayed fully, termed the heirs of the kingdom of heaven by our Savior Christ, and therefore not to be excluded from Baptism. — Wherefore the Lord Jesus, minding to show a token whereby the world might understand that he was come rather to enlarge than to limit the mercy of God, gently embraced children offered unto him, rebuking the disciples who went about to forbid them to come to him; forasmuch as they did lead those, to whom the kingdom of heaven belongeth, away from him by whom alone the entry is open into heaven. But (will some man say) what like thing hath baptism with this embracing of Christ? For neither is it reported that he baptized them, but that he received them, embraced them, and wished them well. Therefore, if we list to follow his example, let us help infants with prayer, but not baptize them. But let us weigh the doings of Christ somewhat more heedfully than such kind of men do. For neither is this to be lightly passed over, that Christ commandeth infants to be brought unto him, adding a reason why, — because of such is the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 19:14. And afterward he witnesseth his will with deed, when embracing them, he commendeth them to his Father with his prayer and blessing. If it be meet that infants be brought to Christ, why is it not also meet that they be received to baptism, the sign of our communion and fellowship with Christ? If the kingdom of heaven be theirs, why shall the sign be denied them, whereby there is, as it were, an entry opened into the Church, that being admitted into it, they may be numbered among the heirs of the heavenly kingdom? How unjust shall we be, if we drive away them whom Christ calleth unto him? If we spoil them whom he garnisheth with his gifts? If we shut out them whom he willingly receiveth? But if we will examine how much that which Christ there did differeth from baptism, yet of how much greater price shall we have baptism, (whereby we testify that infants are contained in the covenant of God,) than receiving, embracing, laying on of hands, and prayer, whereby Christ himself being present, declareth that they both are his, and are sanctified of him? By the other cavillations, whereby they labor to mock out this place, they do nothing but bewray their own ignorance. For they gather an argument of this which Christ saith: Let little ones come to me, that they were in age good big ones which were already able to go. But they are called of the evangelists, ηιερηε, and ραιδια, by which words the Greeks do signify babes yet hanging on the breasts. Therefore, this word (to come) is simply set for (to have access.) Lo, what snares they are compelled to make, who are grown hard against the truth. Now, where they say, that the kingdom of heaven is not given to them, but to such as be like them, because it is said to be of such, not of them; that is no sounder than the rest. For if that be granted, what manner of reason shall the reason of Christ be, whereby he meaneth to show, that infants in age are not strangers from him? When he commandeth that infants be suffered to have access unto him, nothing is plainer, than that very infancy indeed is there spoken of. And that this should not seem an absurdity, he by and by addeth, of such is the kingdom of heaven. But if it must needs be that infants be comprehended herein, it must be plain, that by this word (such) are meant very infants themselves, and such as are like them.

8. Though it be not expressly mentioned in Scripture what infants were Baptized by the Apostles, yet when they are reported to have Baptized families, we have no reason to think that the Children in such families were not Baptized; no writer so old that maketh not the Baptism of infants as ancient as the Apostles’ times — Now, there is no man that seeth not that baptism of infants was not framed by roan, which is upholden by so great approving of Scripture. Neither do they colorably enough play the fool, which object that it is no where found, that any one infant was baptized by the hands of the apostles. For although it be not expressly by name rehearsed of the evangelists, yet because again they are not excluded so oft as mention happeneth to be made of the baptizing of any household, who, unless he be mad, can reason thereupon that they were not baptized? If such arguments were of any force, women should be forbidden to partake of the Lord’s Supper, whom we read not to have been received unto it in the time of the apostles. But here we are content with the rule of faith. For when we consider what the institution of the supper requireth, thereby, also, we may easily judge to whom the use thereof ought to be communicated. which we observe also in baptism. For when we mark to what end it was ordained, we evidently see, that it belongeth no less to infants than to elder folks. Therefore they cannot be deprived of it, hut that the will of the Author must be manifestly defrauded. But whereas they spread abroad among the simple people, that there passed a long row of years after the resurrection of Christ, in which the baptism of infants was unknown, therein they most foully do misstate. For there is no writer so old, that doth not certainly refer the beginning ther of to the time of the apostles.

9. The fruit that cometh by Baptism both to children presented, and to such also as present them thereunto. — Now remaineth that we briefly show, what fruit cometh of this observation, both to the faithful which present their children to the Church to be baptized, and also to the infants themselves that are baptized with the holy water; that no man should despise it as unprofitable or idle. But if it come in any man’s mind, upon this pretence to mock at the baptism of infants, scorneth the commandment of circumcision given by the Lord. For what will they bring forth to impugn the baptism of infants, which may not also be thrown bark against circumcision? So the Lord taketh vengeance of their arrogance, who do, by and by, condemn that which they comprehend not with the sense of their own flesh. Bat God furnisheth us with other armours, whereby their foolishness may be beaten flat. For this his holy institution, by which we feel our faith to be helpen with singular comfort, deserteth not to be called superfluous. For God’s sign, communicated to a child, doth, as it were by an imprinted seal, confirm the promise given to the godly parent, and declareth that it is ratified, that the Lord will be God not only to him but also to his seed, and will continually show his good-will and grace, not to him only, but also to his posterity, even to the thousandth generation. Where, when the great kindness of God uttereth itself, first it yieldeth most largely to advance his glory, and overspreadeth godly hearts with singular gladness, because they are therewithal more earnestly moved to love again so godly a father, whom they see to have care of their posterity for their sakes. Neither do I regard, if any man take exception, and say that the promise ought to suffice to confirm the salvation of our children; forasmuch as it hath pleased God otherwise, who, as he knoweth out weakness, willed in this behalf, so much to bear tenderly with it. Therefore, let them that embrace the promise of God’s mercy to be extended to their children, think that it is their duty to ofifer them to the church to be signed with the sign of mercy, and thereby to encourage themselves to a more assured confidence, because they do, with present eye, behold the covenant of the Lord graven in the bodies of their children. Again, the children receive some benefit of their baptism, that being engrafted into the body of the church, they are somewhat the more commended to the other members. Then when they are grown to riper age, they are not slenderly stirred up to earnest endeavor to worship God, of whom they have been received into his children by a solemn sign of adoption, before that they could by age acknowledge him for their Father. Finally, that same condemnation ought greatly to make us afraid, that God will take vengeance of it, if any man despise to mark his son with the sign of the covenant, Genesis 17:14, because by such contempt the grace offered is refused, and as it were foresworn.

10. The difference which the enemies of Baptism ministered unto children do put between the thing signified by Baptism and Circumcision, overthroweth them, their difference between the one and the other covenant most false. — Now let us examine the arguments, whereby certain furious men do not cease to assail this holy institution of God. First, because they see that they be exceedingly near driven and hard strained with the likeness of baptism and circumcision, they labor to pluck in sunder these two signs with great difference, that the one should not seem to have any thing common with the other. For they say that both divers things are signified, and that the covenant is altogether divers, and that the naming of the children is not all one. But while they go about to prove that first point, they allege that circumcision was a figure of mortification and not of baptism. Which verily we do most willingly grant them. For it maketh very well for our side. Neither do we use any other proof of our sentence, than that baptism and circumcision are signs of mortification. Hereupon we determine that baptism is set in the place of circumcision, that it should represent unto us the same thing which in old time it signified to the Jews. In affirming the difference of the covenant, with how barbarous boldness do they turmoil and corrupt the Scripture and that not in one place alone, but so as they leave nothing safe or whole? For they paint unto us the Jews so to be carnal that they are liker beasts than men; with whom forsooth the covenant made proceedeth not beyond the temporal life to whom the promises given do rest in present and bodily good things. If this doctrine take place, what remaineth but that the nation of the Jews were, for a time, filled with the benefits of God, no otherwise than as they fat a herd of swine in a sty, that at length they should perish with eternal damnation. For so soon as we allege circumcision and the promises annexed unto it, they answer that circumcision was a literal sign, and the promises thereof were carnal.

11. Promises spiritual and heavenly, not earthly and carnal, only made to the fathers in the Old Testament. — Truly, if circumcision was a literal sign, there is no otherwise to be thought of baptism. For the apostle in the second chapter to the Colossians maketh the one no more spiritual than the other. For he saith that we are circumcised in Christ, with a circumcision not made with hands, putting away the body of sin that dwelleth in our flesh; which he calleth the circumcision of Christ. Colossians 2:11. Afterward, for declaration of that saying, he adjoineth, that we are buried with Christ by baptism. What meaneth he by these words, but that the fulfilling and truth of baptism, is also the truth and fulfilling of circumcision, because they figure both one thing? For he laboreth to show that baptism is the same to Christians, which circumcision had been before to the Jews. But forasmuch as we have now evidently declared that the promises of both the signs, and the mysteries that are represented in them, do agree together, we will for this present tarry no longer upon them. Only I will put the faithful in mind, that though I hold my peace, they should weigh with themselves whether it be taken for an earthly and literal sign, under which nothing is contained but spiritual and heavenly. , But that they should not mislead the simple, we will by the way confute one objection wherewith they color this most shameless misrepresentation. It is most certain that the principal promises, wherein were contained the covenant which in the Old Testament God established with the Israelites, were spiritual and tended to eternal life; and then again, that they were received of the fathers spiritually, as it was meet, that they might thereof receive affiance of the life to come, whereunto they longed with the whole affection of their heart. But, in the mean time, we deny not but that he witnessed his good-will toward them with earthly and carnal benefits; by which also we say that the same promise of spiritual things was confirmed. As when he promised everlasting blessedness to his servant Abraham, that he might set before his eyes a manifest token of his favor, he addeth another proraise concerning the possession of the land of Canaan. Genesis 15:1; Genesis 15:18. After this manner we understand all the earthly promises that are given to the Jewish nation, that the spiritual promise, as the head whereunto they are directed, should always have the chief place. But since I have more largely treated of these things in the difference of the New and Old Testaments, therefore now I do the more slightly touch upon them here.

12. The supposed difference which the adversaries of Infant Baptism do put between the ancient Circumcised, and the new Baptized seed of Abraham. — In the naming of the children they find this difference, that in the Old Testament they were called the children of Abraham, who issued of his seed, but that now they are called by that name, who follow his faith; and that, therefore, that carnal infancy, which was by circumcision grafted into the fellowship of the covenant, figured the infants of the New Testament, which are regenerate by the Word of God to immortal life. In which words we behold indeed, a small sparkle of truth; but herein these light spirits grievously offend, that when they catch hold of that which first cometh to their hand, when they should go further and compare many things together, they stand stiffly upon one word. Whereby it cannot otherwise be but that they must sometime be deceived who rest upon the sound knowledge of nothing. We grant, indeed, that the carnal seed of Abraham did, for a time, hold the place of the spiritual seed which is by faith grafted into him. For we are called his children, howsoever there is no natural kindred between him and us. But if they mean, as they plainly show that they do, that there was never spiritual blessings promised to the carnal seed of Abraham, herein they are much deceived. Wherefore we must level to a better mark, whereunto we are directed by the most certain guiding of the Scripture. The Lord, therefore, promised to Abraham that he should have a seed, wherein all nations of the earth shall be blessed; and therewithal assureth him, that he would be a God to him and Iris seed. Whosoever do, by faith, receive Christ, the author of blessing, are heirs of this promise, and therefore, are called the children of Abraham. Galatians 4:28; Romans 4:12.

13. The dignity of Abrahams children circumcised and uncircumcised, equal. — But although, since the resurrection of Christ, the bounds of the kingdom of God have begun to be far and wide enlarged into all nations without difference, that according to the saying of Christ, faithful ones should be gathered from every part to sit down in the heavenly glory with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Matthew 8:11, yet he had many ages before, extended that same so great mercy to the Jews. And, because, passing over all other, he had chosen out that nation only in which be would restrain his grace for a time, called them his peculiar possession, and his purchased people. Exodus 19:5. For testifying of such liberality, circumcision was given, by the sign whereof the Jews might be taught that God is to them the author of salvation; by which knowledge their minds were raised into hope of eternal life. For what shall he want, whom God hath once received into his charge? Wherefore, the apostle, meaning to prove that the Gentiles were the children of Abraham as well as the Jews, speaketh in this manner. Romans 4:10. Abraham, saith he, was justified by faith in uncircumcision. Afterward he received the sign of circumcision, the seal of the righteousness of faith, that he should be the father of all the faithful, both of uncircumcision and of circumcision, not of them that glory of circumcision only, but of them that follow to the faith which our father Abraham had in uncircumcision. Do not we see that both sorts are made equal in dignity? For during the time appointed by the decree of God, he ^vas the father of circumcision. When the wall being broken down, as the apostle writeth in another place, by which the Jews were severed from the Gentiles, the entry was made open to them also into the kingdom of God, he was made their father, and that without the sign of circumcision, because they have baptism instead of circumcision. But where he expressly, by name, denieth that Abraham is father to them who are of circumcision only, that same was spoken to abate the pride of certain, who, omitting the care of godliness, did boast themselves only of ceremonies. After which manner, at this day also, their vanity may be confuted who seek in baptism nothing but water.

14. The carnal and spiritual seed of Abraham heretofore, with the estimation due to them both. — But another place of the apostle out of the ninth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans shall be alleged to the contrary, where he teacheth that they who are of the flesh, are not the children of Abraham; but they only are counted as seed, who are the children of promise. For he seemeth to signify, that the carnal kindred of Abraham is nothing, which yet we do set some degree. But it is more diligently to be marked, what matter the apostle there treateth of. For, meaning to show to the Jews how much the goodness of God was not bound to the seed of Abraham, yea, how it nothing availeth of itself, he bringeth forth Israel and Esau for example to prove it; whom being refused, as if they were strangers, although they were according to the flesh the natural offspring of Abraham, the blessing rested in Isaac and Jacob. Whereupon is gathered that which he afterwards affirmeth, that salvation dependeth on the mercy of God, which he extendeth to whom it pleaseth him; and that there is no cause why the Jews should stand in their own conceit, or boast upon the name of the covenant, unless they keep the law of the covenant, that is to say, obey the word. Again, when he had thrown them down from vain confidence of their kindred, yet because on the other side he saw that the covenant which was once made of God with the posterity of Abraham, could in no wise be made void, in the eleventh chapter, he argueth that the carnal kindred is not to be spoiled of his due dignity; by the beneficial mean whereof he teacheth that the Jews are the first and natural heirs of the Gospel, but in respect that by their unthankfulness, they were forsaken as unworthy; yet so that the heavenly blessing is not utterly removed from their nation. For which reason, how much soever they were stubborn and covenant-breakers, nevertheless he calleth them holy, so much honor he giveth to the holy generation, with whom God had vouchsafed to make his holy covenant, but calleth us, if we be compared with them, as it were after born, yea, or the untimely born children of Abraham, and that by adoption, not by nature; as if a twig broken off from his natural tree, should be graffed into a strange stock. Therefore, that they should not be defrauded of their prerogative, it behoveth that the Gospel should be first preached to them; for they are in the household of God as it were the first begotten children. Wherefore this honor was to be given them, until they refused it being offered them, and by their unthankfulness brought to pass that it was carried away to the Gentiles. Neither yet, with how great obstinacy soever they continue to make war against the Gospel, ought they to be despised of us; if we consider that for the promises’ sake, the blessing of God doth yet still remain among them; as verily the apostle testifieth that it shall never utterly depart from thence, because the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. Romans 11:29.

15. The like difference between the one and the other now in the Christian Church, — Behold of what force is the promise given to the posterity of Abraham, and with what balance it is to be weighed. Wherefore, although in discerning the heirs of the kingdom from bastards and strangers, we doubt not that the election of God only ruleth with free right of government; yet we also therewithal perceive, that it pleased him peculiarly to embrace the seed of Abraham with his mercy, and that the same mercy might be the more surely witnessed, to seal it with circumcision. No\v altogether like state is there of the Christian Church. For as Paul there reasoneth that the Jews are sanctified of their parents; so in another place he teacheth, that the children of Christians receive the same sanctification of their parents. 1 Corinthians 7:14. Whereupon is gathered, that they are worthily severed from the rest, which on the other side are condemned of uncleanness. Now who can doubt, but that it is most false which they do thereupon conclude, that say, that the infants which, in old time, were circumcised, did only figure spiritual infancy, which ariseth of the regeneration of the Word of God. For Paul doth not so subtlety play the philosopher, where he writeth that Christ is the minister of circumcision, to fulfill the promises which had been made to the fathers, Romans 15:8, as if he had said thus: Forasmuch as the covenant made with Abraham hath respect to his seed, Christ to perform and discharge the promise once made by his Father, came to salvation to the nation of the Jews. See you not how also after the resurrection of Christ, he judgeth that the promise of the covenant is lo be fulfilled not only by way of allegory, but as the very words do sound to the carnal seed of Abraham. To the same intent serveth that which Peter, in the second chapter of the Acts, declareth to the Jews, Acts 2:39, that the benefit of the Gospel is due to them and their seed by right of the covenant, and in the chapter next following, he calleth them the children of the testament, that is to say heirs. Acts 3:25. From which, also, not much disaccordeth the other place of the apostle above alleged, where he accounteth and setteth circumcision imprinted in infants, for a testimony of that communion which they have with Christ. Ephesians 2:21. But if we hearken to their trifles, what shall be wrought by that promise, whereby the Lord, in the second article of his law undertaketh to his servants, that he will be favourable to their seed even to the thousandth generation. Shall we here flee to allegories? But that were too trifling a shift. Or shall we say this is abolished? But so the law should be destroyed, which Christ came rather to establish, so far as it turneth us to good unto life. Let it, therefore, be out of controversy, that God is so good and liberal to his, that for their sakes, he will save also their children, whom they shall beget, to be numbered among his people.

16. Absurd differences between Baptism and Circumcision to exclude children from the one, though from the other they were not excluded. — Moreover, the differences which they go about to put between baptism and circumcision are not only worthy to be laughed at, and void of all color of reason, but also disagreeing with themselves. For when they have affirmed that baptism hath relation to the first day of the spiritual battle, but circumcision to the eighth, when mortification is already ended, by and by forgetting the same, they turn their song, and call circumcision a figure of the flesh to be mortified, but baptism they call burial, into which none are to be put till they be already dead. What dotages of frantic men, can with so great lightness leap into sundry diversities? For, in the first sentence. Baptism must go before circumcision; by the other it is thrust back into the latter place. Yet is it no new example, that the wits of men be so tossed up and down, when instead of the most certain Word of God they worship whatsoever they have dreamed. We, therefore, say that that former differences a mere dream. If they listed to expound byway of allegory upon the eighth day, yet it agreed not in that manner. It were much fitter, according to the opinion of the old writers, to refer the number of eight to the resurrection which was done on the eighth day, whereupon we know that the newness of life dependeth; or to the whole course of this present life, wherein mortification ought always to go forward, till when life is ended, mortification itself may also be ended. Howbeit God may seem to have minded to provide for the tenderness of age, in deferring circumcision to the eighth day, because the wound should have been more dangerous to the children new born and yet fed from their mother. How much stronger is that, that we being dead before, are buried by baptism; when the Scripture expressly crieth to the contrary that we are buried into death to this intent, that we should die, and from thenceforth should endeavor to this mortification? Now, by a like method of arguing, they maintain that women ought not to be baptized, if baptism must be framed like to circumcision. For if it be most certain that the sanctifying of the seed of Israel was testified by the sign of circumcision; thereby also it is undoubted, that it was given to sanctify both males and females. But the bodies of male children only were marked with it, which might by nature be marked; yet so that women were by them after a certain manner companions and partners of circumcision. Therefore sending far away such follies of theirs, let us stick fast in the likeness of baptism and circumcision, which we most largely see to agree in the inward mystery, in the promises, in use, in effectualness.

17. Children s want of understanding no reason to keep them from being Baptized, which is the seal of that sanctity whereof they are capable. — They think, also, that they bring forth a most strong reason why children are to be debarred from baptism, when they allege that they are not yet for age able to understand the mystery there signified. That is spiritual regeneration, which cannot be in the first infancy. Therefore they gather, that they are to be taken for no other than the children of Adam, till they are grown to age meet for a second birth. But the truth of God eachwhere speaketh against all these things. For if they are to be left among the children of Adam, then they are left in death; forasmuch as in Adam we can do nothing but die. But, contrariwise, Christ commandeth them to be brought unto him. Why so? because he is life. Therefore that be may give life to them, he maketh them partakers of himself, when, in the meantime, these fellows driving them far away do adjudge them to death. For if they say, for a shift, that infants do not therefore perish if their be accounted the children of Adam, their error is abundantly confuted by witness of the Scripture. For, whereas it pronounceth that all do die in Adam, 1 Corinthians 15:22, it followeth that there remaineth no hope of life but in Christ. Therefore that we may be made heirs of life, we must communicate with him: Ephesians 2:5. Again, when it is written in another place, that by nature we are subject to the wrath of God, and conceived in sin, Psalms 51:5, whereunto damnation perpetually cleaveth, we must depart out of our own nature, before that the entry be open to us into the kingdom of God. And what can be more plainly spoken, than that flesh and blood cannot possess the kingdom of God? 1 Corinthians 15:50. Therefore let all be done away whatsoever is ours, (which shall not be done without regeneration,) then we shall see this possession of the kingdom. Finally, if Christ say truly, when he reporteth that he is life, John 11:25; John 14:6, it is necessary that we be grafted into him, that we may be delivered out of the bondage of death. But, say they, how are infants regenerate, who are not endued with knowledge neither of good nor of evil? But we answer, that the work of God is not yet no work at all, although it be not subject to our capacity. Moreover, it is not doubtful that the infants who are to be saved (as verily of that age some are saved) are before regenerate of the Lord. For if they bring with them from their mother’s womb the corruption naturally planted in them, they must be purged thereof before that they be admitted into the kingdom of God, whereinto nothing entereth that is defiled or spotted. Revelation 21:27. If they are born sinners, as both David and Paul affirm, Ephesians 2:3, Psalms 51:5, either they remain out of favour and hateful to God, or they must needs be justified. And what seek we more, when the Judge himself openly affirmeth that the entry into heavenly life is open to none but to them that are born again? John 3:3. And to put such carpers to silence, he showed an example in John the Baptist, whom he sanctified in his mother’s womb, what he was able to do in the rest; Neither do they any thing prevail by the shift wherewith they here mock, that that was but once done; whereupon it doth not of necessity follow that the Lord is wont commonly to do so with infants. For neither do we reason after that manner, only our purpose is to show, that the power of God is by them unjustly and enviously limited within those narrow bounds within which it suffereth not itself to be bound. Their other by-shift is even of as great weight. They allege, that by the usual manner of the Scripture, this word (from the womb) is as much in effect, as if it were said, from childhood. But we may clearly see, that the angel, when he declared the same to Zachariah, meant another thing; that is, that it which was not yet born, should be filled with the Holy Ghost. Luke 1:15. Let us not therefore attempt to appoint a law to God, but that he may sanctify whom it pleaseth him, as he sanctified this child, forasmuch as his power is nothing diminished.

18. Christ in his infancy sanctified, to show that Christian infants are capable of sanctity, — And truly Christ was therefore sanctified from his first infancy, that he might sanctify in himself his elect out of every age without difference. For as, to do away the fault of disobedience which had been committed in our flesh, he hath put on the same flesh upon himself, that he might in it, for us, and in our stead, perform perfect obedience; so he was conceived of the Holy Ghost, that having the holiness thereof fully poured into him in the flesh which he had taken upon him, he might pour forth the same into us. If we have in Christ a most perfect pattern of all the graces which God continually showeth to his children, verily, in this behalf also, he shall be a proof unto us, that the age of infancy it not so far unfit for sanctification. But howsoever it be, yet this we hold out of controversy, that none of the elect are called out of this present life, who is not first made holy and regenerate by the Spirit of God. Whereas they object to the contrary, that in the Scriptures, the Spirit acknowledgeth no other regeneration but of incorruptible seed, that is, of the Word of God, 1 Peter 1:23; they do wrongfully expound that saying of Peter, wherein he comprehendeth only the faithful who had been taught only by preaching of the Gospel. To such, indeed, we grant that the Word of the Lord is the only seed of spiritual regeneration; but we deny that it ought thereupon to be gathered, that infants cannot be regenerate by the power of God, which is to him as easy and ready as to us it is incomprehensible and wonderful. Moreover, it should not be safe enough for us to take this away from the Lord, that he may not be able to show himself to be known to them by whatsoever way he will.

19. No absurdity that infants have some spark of that heavenly light here, whereof in heaven the full brightness doth shine unto them though they die in their infancy.— But faith, say they, is by hearing, whereof they have not yet gotten the use, neither can they be able to know God, whom Moses teacheth to be destitute of the knowledge both of good and evil. But they consider not that the apostle, when he maketh hearing the beginning of faith, describeth only the ordinary distribution of the Lord, and disposition which he useth to keep in calling them that are his; but appointeth not to him a perpetual rule, that he may not use any other way. Which way, verily, he hath used in the calling of many, to whom he hath given the true knowledge of himself by an inward manner, by the enlightening of tlie Spirit, without any preaching used for mean thereof. But whereas they think it shall be a great absurdity if any knowledge of God be given to infants, from whom Moses taketh away the understanding of good and evil, Deuteronomy 1:39, I beseech them to answer me, what danger is there if they be said to receive some part of that grace, whereof a little after they shall enjoy the full plentifulness. For if the fulness of life standeth in the perfect knowledge of God, when many of them, whom in their very first infancy death by and by taketh away, do pass into eternal life, truly they are received to behold the immediate presence of God. Whom therefore the Lord will enlighten with the full brightness of his light, why may be not presently also, if it so please him, send out to shine upon them some small sparkle thereof; especially if he do not first unclothe them of ignorance before that he take them out of the prison of the flesh? Not that 1 mean rashly to affirm that they are endued with the same faith which we feel in ourselves, or have altogether like knowledge of faith, (which I had rather leave in suspense,) but somewhat to restrain their foolish arrogance, who, according as their mouth is puffed up with fulness, do boldly deny or affirm they care not what.

20. Infants not excluded from Baptism more than from Circumcision, for want of Faith and Repentance. — But that they may yet stand more strongly in this point, they add, that baptism is a sacrament of repentance and faith, wherefore, since neither of these can befall in tender infancy, we ought to beware lest if they be admitted to the communion of baptism, the signification of it be made void and vain. But these darts are thrown rather against God than against us. For it is most evident by many testimonies of Scripture, that circumcision also was a sign of repentance. Moreover, it is called of Paul the seal of the righteousness of faith. Romans 4:11. Let therefore a reason be required of God himself, why he commanded it to be marked in the bodies of infants. For since baptism and circumcision are both in one case, they can give nothing to the one but that they must also therewithal grant the same to the other. If they look back to their wonted starling point, that then by the age of infancy were figured spiritual infants, the way is already stopped up against them. We say, therefore, since God hath communicated to infants circumcision, a sacrament of repentance and faith, it seeth no absurdity if they be made partakers of baptism, unless they list openly to rage against the ordinance of God. But both in all the doings of God, and in this selfsame doing also, shineth wisdom and righteousness enough to beat down the backbitings of the wicked. For though infants, at the same instant that they were circumcised, did not comprehend in understanding what that sign meant, yet they were truly circumcised into the mortification of their corrupt and defiled nature, in which mortification they should afterward exercise themselves when they were grown to riper age. Finally, it is very easy to assoil this objection, with saying that they are baptized unto repentance and faith to come, which although they be not formed in them, yet, by secret working of the Spirit, the seed of both lie dormant in them. With this answer, at once is overthrown whatever they wrest against us which they have fetched out of the signification of baptism. Of which sort is that title wherewith it is commended of Paul, where he calleth it the washing of regeneration and renewing. Titus 3:5. Whereupon they gather, that it is to be given to none but to such a one as is able to conceive those things. But we on the contrary side may answer, that neither was circumcision, which betokened regeneration, to be given to any other but to them that were regenerate. And so also we condemn the ordinance of God. Wherefore, (as we have already touched in divers places,) whatsoever arguments do tend to the shaking of circumcision, they have no force in the assailing of baptism. Neither do they escape, if they admit that we ought to take that for determined and certain, which standeth upon the authority of God, although there appear no reason of it; but that this reverence is not due to the baptism of infants, nor to such other things which are not commended unto us by the express word of God, since they are still fast holden with this double argument. For the commandment of God concerning infants to be circumcised, was either lawful and subject to no cavils, or worthy to be found fault with. If there were no inconvenience nor absurdity in the commandment of circumcision, neither can there any absurdity be noted in observing the baptism of infants.

21. No necessity that the understanding should go before the receiving of the holy mystery of Baptism — As for the spot of absurdity which in this place they go about to lay upon it, we thus wipe it away. Whom the Lord hath vouchsafed to elect, if having received the sign of regeneration, they depart out of this present life before that they be come to riper age; he reneweth them with the power of his Spirit incomprehensible to us, in such manner as he alone foreseeth to be expedient. If they chance to grow up to age, whereby they may be taught the truth of baptism, they shall hereby be the more enkindled to the endeavor of renewing the token, whereof they shall learn to have been given them from their first infancy, that they should exercise themselves in it throughout the whole course of their life. To the same intent ought that to be applied which Paul teacheth in two places, that by baptism we are buried together with Christ, Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12. For he doth not mean thereby, that he who is to be baptized, must be already first buried together with Christ, but simply declareth what doctrine is contained under baptism, yea, and that to them that are already baptized; so that very madmen would not affirm by this place that it goeth before baptism. After this manner, Moses and the prophets did put the people in mind what circumcision meant, wherewith yet they had been marked while they were infants. Of the same effect, also, is that which he writeth to the Galatians, that they when they were baptized did put on Christ. Galatians 3:27. To what end? Verily, that they should from thenceforth live unto Christ, because they had not lived before. And although in the older sort the receiving of the sign ought to follow the understanding of the mystery, yet it shall be by and by declared, that infants ought to be otherwise esteemed and accounted of. And no otherwise ought we to judge of that place in Peter, in which they think that they have a strong handle, when he saith that it is not a washing to wipe away the filthiness of the body, but the answer of a good conscience before God by the resurrection of Christ. 1 Peter 3:21. They, indeed, do gather thereby, that nothing is left to the baptism of infants, but that it should be a vain smoke; — from which this truth is far distant. But they often offend in this error, that they will have the thing in order of time to go always before the sign. For the truth of circumcision also consisted of the same witness of a good conscience. If it ought of necessity to have gone before, infants should never have been circumcised by the commandment of God. But he showing, that the answer of a good conscience was contained under the truth of circumcision, and yet therewithal also commanding infants to be circumcised, doth in that point sufficiently declare, that circumcision is applied to the time to come. Wherefore there is no more present efficacy to be required in baptism of infants, than that it should confirm and establish the covenant made by the Lord with them. The rest of the signification of that sacrament, shall afterward follow at such time as God himself foreseeth.

22. Baptism of infants proved by allegations brought to disprove it, as that it is ministered to the forgiveness of sins, that the Church is therewith cleansed of the Lord in the Word of Life, that thereby we are engrafted into our body of Christ. — Now, I think there is no man that doth not clearly see that all such reasons of theirs are mere misconstruings of Scripture. As for the rest that are of a near kind to these, we will lightly run through them by the way. They object that baptism is given unto the forgiveness of sins; which, when it is granted, will largely make for defense of our sentence. For, since we are born sinners, we do, even from our mother’s womb, need forgiveness and pardon. Now, seeing the Lord doth not cut off, but rather assure to that age the hope of mercy, why should we take from them the sign which is much inferior to the thing itself? Wherefore that which they go about to throw against us, we thus throw back against themselves; infants have remission of sins given them, therefore they ought not to have the sign taken from them. They allege also this, out of the Epistle to the Ephesians, Ephesians 5:26, that the church is cleansed of the Lord, with the washing of water in the Word of life. Than which there could be nothing alleged more fit to overthrow this error; for thereupon groweth an easy proof of our side. If the Lord will have that washing, wherewith be cleanseth his church, to be testified by baptism; it seemeth not right that it should want the testimony of it in infants, which are rightfully accounted part of the church, forasmuch as they be called heirs of the heavenly kingdom. For Paul speaketh of the whole church, where he saith that it was cleansed with the baptism of water. 1 Corinthians 12:13. Likewise of this, that in another place he saith that we are by baptism grafted into the body of Christ, we gather that infants, whom he reckoneth among Christ’s members, ought to be baptized, lest they be plucked away from his body. Behold with what violence, as with so many engines, they assault the fortresses of our faith.

23. The apostles in not baptizing any come unto years of discretion without repentance and profession made of their faith, meant not hereby to teach that none should be baptized hut only such as were of years to do this. — Then they come down to the practice and example of the time of the apostles, wherein none is found to have been admitted to baptism, but he who hath before professed faith and repentance. For where Peter was asked of them that were minded to repent, what was needful to be done, he counseled them first to repent and then to be baptized into the forgiveness of sins. Acts 2:37. Likewise Philip, when the eunuch required to be baptized, answered that he might be baptized if he believed with all his heart. Acts 7:37. Hereby they think that they may conclude that it is not lawful that baptism be granted to any, but where faith and repentance go before; truly if we yield to this reason, the first of these two places where is no mention made of faith, will prove that repentance alone sufficeth; and the other place, wherein repentance is not required, will prove that faith only is enough. I think they will answer that the one place is helpen with the other, and therefore must be joined together. I say, likewise, that other places must be laid together, which make somewhat to the undoing of this knot; forasmuch as there be many sentences in Scripture, the understanding whereof dependeth upon the circumstances of the place. As this presently is an example. For they to whom Peter and Philip spake these things were of. age sufficient to have practice of repentance and to conceive faith. We earnestly deny that such ought to be baptized, until after perceiving of their con. version and faith, at least so far as it may be searched out by the judgment of men. But, that infants ought to be accounted in another number, it is more than evident enough. For, in old time, if any man did join himself into communion of religion with Israel, it behooves that he should first be taught the covenant of the Lord, and instructed in the law, before that he were marked with circumcision, because in birth he was a stranger from the people of Israel, with whom the covenant had been made with circumcision established.

24. As Abrahams faith went before circumcision, hut in his seed circumcision before faith, so it is with baptism in Christian men and children. — As also the Lord, when be adopteth Abraham to himself, doth not begin at circumcision, hiding, in the meantime, what he meaneth by that sign; but first he declareth what covenant he intendeth to make with him, and then, after faith given to the promise, he maketh him partaker of the sacrament. Why doth, in Abraham, the sacrament follow faith, and in Isaac, his son, it goeth before all understanding? Genesis 15:1; Genesis 17:16. Because it is meet that he, who being in full grown age is received into fellowship of the covenant, from which he had been hitherto a stranger, should first learn the conditions thereof; but an infant, begotten of him, needed not so, which by right of inheritance, according to the form of the promise, is even from his mother’s womb contained in the covenant. Or (that the matter may be more clearly and briefly showed) if the children of the faithful, without the help of understanding, are partakers of the covenant, there is no cause why they should be debarred from the sign for this that they cannot swear to the form of the covenant. This, verily, is the reason why in some places God affirmeth that the infants which are issued of the Israelites, are begotten and born to him. Genesis 16:10; Genesis 22:17. For, without doubt, he esteemeth as his children, the children of them to whose seed be promiseth that he will be a Father. But he who is unfaithful, issued of godly parents, till he be by faith united to God, is judged a stranger from the communion of the covenant. Therefore, it is no wonder if he be not partaker of the sign, the signification whereof should be deceitful and void in him. To this effect Paul also writeth, that the Gentiles, so long as they were drowned in their idolatry, were out of the testament. Ephesians 2:12. With this short sum, as I think, the whole matter may be clearly opened; that they who, in grown age, embrace the faith of Christ, forasmuch as they were hitherto strangers from the covenant, are not to be marked with . baptism, unless faith and repentance come between, which only can open them the entry into the fellowship of the covenant; but the infants that are issued of Christians, as they are received of God into the inheritance of the covenant, so soon as they are born, so ought to be received to baptise. Hereunto must that be applied which the evangelist speaketh of, that they were baptized of John who confessed their sins. Matthew 3:6. Which example, at this day, also, we think meet to be kept. For if a Turk offer himself to baptism, he should not be rashly baptized of us, namely, not till after confession, whereby he may satisfy the church.

25. The words of Christ concerning birth of water and the spirit, nothing less than a proof that actual regeneration must presently always concur with Baptism. — Moreover they bring forth the words of \Christ, which are rehearsed in John 3:5, whereby they think that a. present regeneration is required in baptism. Unless a man he born again of water and the Spirit, be cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Lo, say they, how baptism is by the Lord’s own mouth called regeneration. Then therefore whom it is more than enough known to be unable to receive regeneration, by what color do we admit to baptism which cannot be without regeneration? First, they are deceived in this that they think in this place mention is made of baptism, because they bear the name of water. For after that Christ had declared to Nicodemus the corruption of nature, and taught him, that men must be born of new, because Nicodemus dreamed of a bodily new birth, he there showed the manner how God doth regenerate us, namely by water and the Spirit; as though he should say by the Spirit which in cleansing and watering faithful souls, doth the office of water. Therefore, take water and the Spirit simply for the Spirit, which is water. Neither is this a new form of speech, for it altogether agreeth with the same which is in the third chapter of Matthew; he that followeth me, it is he that baptizeth in the Holy Ghost and fire. Matthew 3:11. Therefore, as to baptize in the Holy Ghost and fire, is to give the Holy Ghost, which hath the office and nature of fire; so to be born again of water and the Spirit, is nothing else but to receive that power of the Holy Spirit which doth the same thing in the soul that, water doth in the body. I know that others do otherwise expound it; but I am out of doubt that this is the natural meaning, because the purpose of Christ is no other but to teach that all they must put off their own nature who aspire to the heavenly kingdom. Howbeit, if we list to cavil unsavorily as they do, it were easy for us, when we have granted, as they would have it, to infer upon them that baptism is before faith and repentance; forasmuch as in the words of Christ it goeth before the spirit. It is certain that this is understood of Spiritual gifts, which, if it come after baptism, I have obtained what I require. But leaving cavils, we must hold fast the plain exposition, which I have brought, that no man, till he has been renewed with living water, that is, with the Spirit, can enter into the kingdom of God. 26. All unbaptized not to he adjudged to eternal death. — Now, hereby also it is evident, that their feigned invention is to be hissed out, who adjudge all the unbaptized to eternal death. Therefore, let us, according to their request, imagine baptism to be ministered to none but to them that are grown in age; what will they say, shall become of a child who is rightly and well instructed with the introductions of godliness, if, when the day of baptizing is at hand, he happen to be taken away with sudden death beside all men’s hope? The Lord’s promise is clear, that whosoever hath believed in the Son, shall not see death, nor shall come into judgment, but is already passed from death into life; and it is nowhere found that he ever damned him that was not yet baptized. 1 would not be so understood as though I meant that baptism might freely be despised, by which despising I affirm that the Lord’s covenant is defiled, so much less can I abide to excuse it, only it is enough for me to prove, that it is not so necessary, that he should be immediately thought to be lost, from whom power is taken away to obtain it. But if we agree to their feigned advice, we should damn all them without exception, whom any chance withholdeth from baptism, with how great faith soever, by which Christ himself is possessed, otherwise they are endued. Moreover, they make all infants guilty of eternal death, to whom they deny baptism, which by their own confession is necessary to salvation. Now let them look how trimly they agree with the words of Christ, by which the kingdom of heaven is adjudged to that age. Matthew 19:14. But, to grant them every thing so much as pertaineth to the understanding of this place, yet they shall gather nothing thereof, unless they overthrow the former doctrine which we have stablished concerning the regeneration of infants.

27. The Baptism of infants not disproved by the commandment which Christ gave to teach and baptize, nor by the premise of salvation which he maketh to every one that believeth and is baptized.— But they glory that they have the strongest hold of all in the very institution of baptism, which they fetch out of the last chapter of Matthew, Matthew 28:19, where Christ sending forth his apostles to all nations, giving them the first commandment to teach them, and the second to baptize them. Then also out of the last of Mark, they adjoin this, Mark 16:16, he that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved. Whatseek we further, say they, when the Lord’s own words do openly sound, that we must first teach ere we baptize, and do assign to baptism the second state after faith? Of which order the Lord also showed an example in himself, who would be baptized not till the thirtieth year. But in how many ways do they both entangle themselves, and betray their own ignorance! For herein they now more than childishly err, that they fetch the first institution of baptism from thence, which Christ had from the beginning of his preaching given in charge to his apostles to minister. Therefore, there is no cause why they should affirm that the law and rule of baptism ia to be fetched out of these places, as though they contained the first institution thereof. But to bear with them for this fault, yet how strong is this manner of reasoning? Truly if I listed to dally with them, there is not a little lurking hole, but a most wide field offereth itself open for us to escape them. For when they stick so fast to the order of words, that they gather that because it is said, go, preach and baptize, Luke 3:23. Again, he that believeth and is baptized, Mark 16:16, therefore they must preach before that they baptize, and believe before that they require baptism; why may not we again answer them with saying that we must baptize before that we must teach the keeping of those things that Christ hath commanded, namely, since it said, baptize ye, teaching them to keep whatsoever things 1 have commanded you? which same things we have noted in that saying of Christ which hath been even now alleged conceiving the regeneration of water and the Spirit. For if it be so understood, as they would have it, verily in that place baptism must be before spiritual regeneration, because it is named in the first place. For Christ doth teach that we must be regenerate, not of the Spirit and water, but of water and the Spirit.

28. The Gospel by Christ’s appointment, to he preached to men of capacity, and they to believe before they be baptized; but not infants therefore to be unbaptized till they come unto years of ability to hear and believe. — Now this invincible reason, whereupon they bear themselves so bold, seemeth to be somewhat shaken; but because truth hath defense enough in simplicity, I will not escape away with such light arguments. Therefore, let them take with them a full answer. Christ, in this place, giveth the chief commandment concerning the preaching of the Gospel, whereunto he adjoineth the ministry of baptism as an addition annexed to it. Again, he speaketh none otherwise of baptism, but in so far as the ministration of it is under the office of teaching. For Christ sendeth the apostles to publish the Gospel to all the nations of the world, that they should from each where, with the doctrine of salvation, gather together into his kingdom men that before were lost. But whom, or what manner of men? It is certain that there is no mention but of them that are able to receive teaching. Afterward he addeth that such, when they are instructed, ought to be baptized, adjoining a promise, that they who believe and are baptized shall be saved. Is there in all that so much as one syllable of infants. What form, therefore, of reasoning shall this be wherewith they assail us; they who are of grown age, must first be instructed, that they may believe ere they be baptized; therefore, it is unlawful to make baptism common to infants? Although they would burst themselves, they shall prove nothing else by this place but that the Gospel must be preached to them that are of a capacity able to hear it, before that they be baptized, forasmuch as he there speaketh of such only. Let them hereof if they can, make a stop to debar infants from baptism.

29. Children no more excluded from Baptism, by commandment given, that no men should he baptized before they believe, than from merely by the Apostle s injunction, that none should eat that labor eth not. — But that even blind men also may, with groping, find out their deceits, I will point them out with a very clear similitude. If any man cavil that infants ought to have meat taken from them, upon this pretence that the apostle suffereth none to eat but them that labor, shall he not be worthy that all men should despise him? Why so? Because he, without difference, draweth that to all men, which was spoken of one kind and one certain age of men. No whit better is their handling in this present cause. For that which every man seeth to belong to one age alone, they draw to infants, that this age also may be subject to the rule which was made for none but them that were more grown in years. As for the example of Christ it nothing upholdeth their side; he was not baptized before he was thirty years old. That is indeed true; but there is a reason thereof ready to be shown; because be then purposed by his preaching to lay a sound foundation of baptism, or rather to establish the foundation which had before been laid of John Therefore, when he intended along with his doctrine, to institute baptism, to procure the greater authority to his institution, he sanctified it with his own body, and that in such fitness of time as was most convenient, namely, when he began his preaching. Finally, they shall gather nothing else hereof, but that baptism took its origin and beginning at the preaching of the Gospel. If they list to appoint the thirtieth year, why do they not keep it, but do receive every one to baptism as he hath in their judgment sufficiently profited? yea, and Servetus, one of their masters, when he stiffly required this time, yet began at the twenty-first year of his age to boast himself to be a prophet. As though he were to be suffered that taketh on himself the place of a teacher in the church, before that he be a member of the church.

30. The Scripture showeth reason why the Lord’s Supper should not be given unto infants, but with Baptism, none — At the last they object, that there is no greater cause why baptism should be given to infants, than the Lord’s Supper, which yet is not granted them. As though the Scripture and not every way express a large difference. The same was indeed usually done in the old church, as it appeareth by Cyprian and Augustine; but that manner is properly grown out of use. For if we consider the nature and property of baptism, it is truly an entry into the church, and as it were a form of admission, whereby we are numbered among the people of God, a sign of our spiritual regeneration by which we are born again into the children of God; whereas on the other side the supper is given to them that are more grown in age, who, having passed tender infancy, are now able to bear strong meat. Which difference is very evidently showed in the Scripture. For there the Lord, so much as pertaineth to baptism, maketh no choice of ages. But he doth not likewise give the supper to all to take part of it, but only to them who are fit to discern the body and blood of the Lord, to examine their own conscience, to declare the Lord’s death, to weigh the power thereof. Would we have any thing plainer than that which the apostle teacheth, when he exhorteth that every man should prove and examine himself, and then eat of this bread and drink of this cup? Therefore examination must go before, which should in vain be looked for of infants. Again, he that eateth unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. 1 Corinthians 11:29. If none can partake worthily but they that can well discern the holiness of the Lord’s body, why should we give to our tender children, poison instead of lively food? What is that commandment of the Lord, — Ye shall do it in remembrance of me? What is that other which the apostle deriveth from the same, — So oft as ye shall eat of this bread, ye shall declare the Lord’s death till he come? What remembrance, I beseech you, shall we require at our infants of the thing which they never attained with understanding, what preaching of the cross of Christ, the force and benefit whereof they do not yet comprehend in mind? None of these things is prescribed in baptism. Therefore, between these two signs is great difference, which we note also in like signs in the Old Testament, circumcision which IS known to answer to our baptism, was appointed for infants. But the passover, into whose place the supper hath now succeeded, did not receive all manner of guests without difference, but was rightly eaten of them only that might by age inquire of the signification of it. If these men had remaining one crumb of sound brain, would they be blind to a thing so clear and manifest?

31. Twenty arguments of Servetus against Baptism of children answered. — Although it grieveth me to load the readers with a heap of trifles, yet it shall be worth the pains briefly to wipe away such light reasons as Servetus not the least of the Anabaptists, yea, the great glory of that company, thought himself to bring when he prepared himself to conflict. 1. He allegeth that Christ’s signs as they are perfect, so do require that the receivers be perfect or able to conceive perfection. But the solution is easy; that the perfection of baptism, which extendeth even to death, is wrongfully restrained to one point of time. I say yet further, that perfection is foolishly required in man at the first day, whereunto baptism allureth us all our life long, by continual degrees. 2. He objecteth that Christ’s signs were ordained for remembrance, that every man should remember that he was buried together with Christ. I answer that that which he hath feigned of his own head, needeth no confutation; yea, that which he draweth to baptism, Paul’s words show to be proper to the holy supper, that every man should examine himself, but of baptism there is nowhere any such thing. Whereupon we gather that they are rightly baptized who for their smallness of age, are not yet able to receive examination. 3. Whereas he, thirdly, allegeth that all they abide in death who believe not the Son of God, and that the wrath of God abideth upon them, John 3:36; and therefore, that infants which cannot believe, lie in their damnation; I answer that Christ there speaketh not of the general guiltiness wherewith all the posterity of Adam are enwrapped, but only threateneth the despisers of the Gospel, which do proudly and stubbornly refuse the grace offered them. But this nothing pertaineth to infants. Also I set a contrary reason against them; that whomsoever Christ blesseth, he is discharged from the curse of Adam and the wrath of God; since, therefore, it is known that infants are blessed of him, it followeth, that they are discharged from death. Then he falsely cited that which is nowhere read, that whosoever is born of the Spirit heareth the voice of the Spirit, which, although we grant to be written, yet shall prove nothing else but that the faithful are framed to obedience, according as the Spirit worketh in them. But that which is spoken of a certain number, it is faulty to draw indifferently to all. 4. Fourthly, he objecteth, because that goeth before which is natural, 1 Corinthians 15:46, we must tarry ripe time for baptism, which is spiritual. But although I grant that all the posterity of Adam, begotten of the flesh, from the very womb bear their own damnation, yet I deny that that withstandeth but that God may presently bring remedy. For neither shall Servetus prove that there were many years appointed by God before the spiritualness of life did begin. As Paul testifieth, although they who are born of the faithful are by nature damned; yet by supernatural grace they are saved. 1 Corinthians 7:14-15. Then he bringeth forth an allegory, that David going up into the tower of Zion, did lead neither blind men nor lame men with him, but strong soldiers. 2 Samuel 5:8. But what if I set a parable against it, wherein God calleth to the heavenly banquet blind men and lame men, Luke 14:21, how will Servetus unmnd himself out of this knot? I ask, also, whether lame and maimed men had not first been soldiers with David. But it is superfluous to tarry longer upon this reason, which the readers shall find by the holy history to be made of mere falsehood. 6. There followeth another allegory, that the apostles were fishers of men, not of little children. Matthew 4:19. But I ask, what that saying of Christ meaneth, that into the net of the Gospel are gathered all kinds of fishes. Matthew 13:47. But because I like not to play with allegories, I answer that when the office of teacliing was enjoined to the apostles, yet they were not forbidden from baptizing of infants. Howbeit I would yet know, when the evangelist nameth them Anthropous, men, (in which word is comprehended all mankind without exception) why they should deny infants to be men. 7. Seventhly, he allegeth, that since spiritual things agree with spiritual, 1 Corinthians 2:13, infants who are not spiritual are also not meet for baptism. But, first, it is plainly evident how wrongfully they wrest the place of Paul. There is treated of doctrine; when the Corinthians did too much stand in their own conceit for vain sharpness of wit, Paul rebuketh their sluggishness, for that they were yet to be instructed in the first introduction of heavenly wisdom. Who can thereof gather that baptism is to be denied to infants, whom being begotten of the flesh, God doth, by free adoption, make holy to himself? Whereas he saith, that they must be fed with spiritual meat, if they be new men, the solution is easy, that by baptism they are admitted into the flock of Christ, and that the sign of adoption sufficeth them, till, being grown to age, they are able to bear strong meat; that, therefore, the time of examination which God expressly requireth in the holy supper, must be taiTied for. Afterward he objecteth that Christ calleth all his to the holy supper. But it is certain enough that he admitteth none but them that are already prepared to celebrate the remembrance of his death. Whereupon followeth that infants whom he vouchsafeth to embrace, do stay in a separate and proper degree by themselves till they grow to age, and yet are not strangers. 8. Whereas he saith, that it is monstrous that a man after that he is born, should not eat i I answer, that souls are otherwise fed than by the outward eating of the supper; and that, therefore, Christ is nevertheless meat to infants, although they abstain from the sign. But of baptism the case is otherwise, by which only the gate into the church is opened to them. 9. Again, he objecteth that a good steward distributeth meat to the household in due time. Matthew 24:45. Which although I willingly grant, yet by what right will he appoint unto us the certain time of baptism, that he may prove that it is not given to infants out of time.10. Moreover he bringeth in that commandment of Christ to the apostles, that they should make haste into the harvest, while the 6elds wax white. John 4:35. Verily, Christ meaneth this only, that the apostles seeing the fruit of their labor present, should the more cheerfully prepare themselves to teach. Who shall therefore gather that the only time of harvest is the ripe time for baptism? 11. His eleventh reason is, that in the first church, Christians and disciples were all one, Acts 11:26, but we see now that he foolishly reasoneth from the part to the whole. Disciples are called men of full age, who had been already thoroughly taught, and had professed Christ; as it behoved that the Jews under the law should he the disciples of Moses; yet no man shall thereof rightly gather, that infants were strangers whom the Lord hath testified to be of his own household. 12. Besides these, he allegeth that all Christians are brethren, in which number infants are not unto us, so long as we debar them from the supper. But I retcin to that principle, that none are heirs of the kingdom of heaven, but they that are the members of Christ; then, that the embracing of Christ was a true token of the adoption, whereby infants are joined in common with full grown men, and that they, abstaining for a time from the supper forbiddeth not but that they pertain to the body of the church. Neither did the thief that was converted on the cross, cease to be brother to the godly, although he never came to the supper. 13. Afterward he addeth, that none is made our brother but by the spirit of adoption, which is given only by the hearing of faith. I answer, that he still falleth back into the same deceitful argument, because he wiredrawetb that to infants which was spoken only of grown men. Paul teacheth there that this is God’s ordinary manner of calling to bring his elect to the faith, when he stirreth up to them faithful teachers, by whose ministry and labor he reachetli his hand to them. Who’ dare thereby appoint a law to him, but that he may by some other secret way graff infants into Christ? 14. Where he objecteth that Cornelius was baptized after he had received the Holy Ghost, Acts 10:44, how wrongfully he doth out of one example gather a general rule, appeareth by the eunuch and the Samaritans, Acts 8:16, in whom the Lord kept a contrary order, that baptism went before the gifts of the Holy Ghost. 15. The fifteenth reason is more than foolish. He saith that we are by regeneration made gods, and that they be gods to whom the Word of God is spoken, John 10:35, which accordeth not to children that be infants. Whereas he feigneth a godhead to the faithful, that is one of his dotages, which pertaineth not to this present place to examine. But to wrest the place of the Psalm to so contrary a sense, is a point of desperate shamelessness. Christ saith, that kings and magistrates are called of the prophets gods, because they bear an office appointed them of God. But that which, concerning the special commandment of government, is directed to certain men, this handsome expositor draweth to the doctrine of the Gospel, that he may banish infants out of the church. 16. Again he objecteth, that infants cannot be accounted new men, because they are not begotten by the word. But I do now again repeat that which I have often said, that to regenerate us, doctrine is the incorruptible seed, if we be fit to receive it; but when by reason of age tnere is not yet in us aptness to learn, God keepeth his decrees of regenerating. 17. Afterward he cometh back to his allegories, that in the law a sheep and a goat were not offered in sacrifice so soon as they came out of the womb. If I listed to draw figures to this purpose, I could readily object against them, that all first begotten things were consecrate to God so soon as they had opened the womb, then that a lamb must be killed at a year’s age. Exodus 13:2; Exodus 12:5. Whereupon followeth that manly strength is not to be tarried for, but rather that the new and yet tender issues are chosen of God for sacrifices. 18. Furthermore, he affirmeth that none can come to Christ but they that have been prepared of John, as though John’s office were not enduring but for a time. But to omit this, truly that same preparation was not in thfe children whom Christ embraced and blessed. Wherefore let him go with his false principle. 19. At length he calleth for patrons Trismegistus and the Sibylles, to prove that holy washings pertain not but lo them that are of grown age. Lo, how honorably he thinketh of the baptism of Christ, which he reduceth to the ceremonies of the Gentiles, that it may be no otherwise ministered than pleaseth Trismegistus. But we more esteem the authority of God, whom it hath pleased to make infants holy to himself, and to admit them with the holy sign, the force whereof they did not yet by age understand. Neither do we count it lawful to borrow out of the cleansings of the Gentiles any thing that may charge in our baptism the everlasting and inviolable law of God, which he hath stablished concerning circumcision. Last of all, he maketh this argument; that if it be lawful to baptize infants without understanding, then baptism may irreverently and in sport be ministered to boys when they play. But in this matter let him quarrel with God, by whose commandment circumcision was common to infants before that they had attained understanding. Was it therefore a matter of sport, or subject to the follies of children, that they might overthrow the holy ordinance of God? But it is no wonder that these reprobate spirits, as though they were vexed with a phrensy, do thrust in all the grossest absurdities for defense of their errors, because God doth with such giddiness justly take vengeance of their pride and stubbornness. Verily I trust I have made plain with how feeble succors Servetus hath helpen his silly brethren the Anabaptists.

32. The drift of Satan in stirring up contention about the Baptism of infants. — Now, 1 think it will be doubtful to no sober man, how rashly they trouble the Church of Christ, that move brawls and contentions against the baptism of infants. But it is profitable to consider, what Satan goeth about with this so great subtlety, even to take away from us the singular fruit of affiance and spiritual joy which is to be gathered hereof, and to diminish as much also the glory of the goodness of God. For how sweet is it to godly minds, to be certified not only by word, but also by sight to be seen with eyes, that they obtain so much favor with the heavenly Father, that he hath also care of their posterity? For here it is to be seen, how he taketh upon him the person of a most provident father of household toward us, which even after our death doth not lay away liis carefulness of us, but provideth and foreseeth for our children. Ought we not here, after the example of David, with all our heart to leap up unto thanksgiving, that by such show of his goodness his name may be sanctified? This, verily, Satan intendeth, in assailing with so great armies the baptism of infants, namely, that this testifying of the grace of God being taken away, the promise which by it is present before our eyes, may at length by little and little vanish away. Whereupon should grow not only a wicked unthankfulness toward the mercy of God, but also a certain slothfulness in instructing our children to godliness. For by this spur we are not a little pricked forward, to bring them up in the earnest fear of God and in the keeping of his law, when we consider, that even immediately from their birth, he taketh and acknowledgeth them for his children. Wherefore, unless we list enviously to darken the bountifalness of God, let us offer to him our children, to whom he giveth a place among them that are of his family and household, that is to say, the members of the church.