The loyal Baptist, or, An apology for the baptized believers ... occasioned by the great and long continued sufferings of the baptized believers in this nation / by Thomas Grantham ...

ANSWER.

1. If the major Proposition be taken universally, that to whom∣soever Christ granted imposition of Hands (or touching) in any case, that to them belongs Baptism, then the Major is not true; for he touched or put his hand upon the dead, yet Baptism belongs not to the dead, Luke 7. 14. If it be said, Christ touched the Bier, not the Dead; I answer: He touched the Childrens Cloaths, when he took them in his Arms; but he took the dead Damsel by the hand, and said, Talitha, cumi, Damsel, I say unto thee, Arise. Mark 5. 41. Thus much to the Major; now to the Minor.

2. If by laying on of hands, you understand that which by Christ's Doctrine, Heb. 6. 2. is made a standing Ordinance in his Church, and in order next to Baptism, as is evident you do; then I deny your Minor: For that Ordinance was not yet insti∣tuted, nor useful, because the End of it was not yet to be recei∣ved; for the Spirit of Promise was not yet given, nor as yet to be given, because Jesus was not yet glorified, John 7. Wherefore your Misinterpretation of Mat. 19. 13, 14, 15. is injurious to Truth, and would prefer these Infants to the Apostles, in the re∣ception of the First-fruits of the Spirit, unless you think Christ laid hands on the Children, without obtaining the End or Essect of the Service. So then it's clear, that this laying on of hands, or touch∣ing Infants, (for so it is expressed both by St. Mark and St. Luke) cannot with any fairness be understood of that laying on of hands which follows Baptism, and therefore is no Proof at all for your Minor.

3. The Church of England does not believe that Infants are fit Subjects for laying on of hands, and therefore does not under∣stand this Text, Mat. 19. of that laying on of hands which fol∣lows Baptism; neither does Mr. Taylor himself believe that Con∣firmation belongs to Infants: If otherwise, they are very un∣faithful, in that they were never known to lay hands upon any one Infant for confirmation, as I can hear of. But how comes it to pass that Mr. Taylor will baptize Infants, when yet he confesses their Baptism is not mentioned in the New Testament, and yet not plead for their Confirmation, till they be capable to own their Co∣venant made in Baptism, when yet he pretends, (tho I dare say he

believes it not) that Text, Mat. 19. 13, &c. is express for that laying on of hands which follows Baptism, to be granted to Christ to Infants? pag. 56.

4. Mr. Taylor says, That Christ confirmed, or laid hands on the Bap∣tized. I shall entreat him to make this plain, for I would gladly see it well proved; however, I am sure his Doctrine orders it to be done, and that's sufficient. What you say further here, is ei∣ther what we oppose not, or what is answered elsewhere, save only your last Particular, which now we shall consider.

5. Their coming to Christ (say you) is their becoming his Disciples or Proselites: Suffer them, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be Proselites to me. If to this I should answer, with Tertullian, Veniant ergo dum adolescunt, &c. Let them come therefore when they are grown up; it will be thought too little, tho God knows (how hasty soever Men are to get them sprinkled) they are slow enough to bring them to Christ, when they are capable to be taught; I will therefore answer further: Do you think that when Infants are brought to a Priest to be sprinkled and crossed, that then they are brought to Christ? Or can Christians no other way bring their Infants to Christ? Or do no Infants belong to Christ, but those who are so brought? These Things will not be asserted, I think, yet let us go as far as we can by the Light of the Text. By this Exam∣ple of Christ, I think the Ministers of Christ may lawfully pray for a Blessing in behalf of all the Infants of those that shall desire it; and that it is well done in those Parents that do desire the Pray∣ers of the Church, or her Ministers, for their Infants. And this is as much as can be fairly urged from this Text, as imitable for us. For the touching by our Saviour's hands, may be a Point too high for us, unless we will also touch the Dead, &c. which (I hope) is not written for our Example. But now if the Minister will needs baptize my Child, because I bring it into the Congre∣gation, and desire Prayer to be made to God for his Blessing upon it, he herein goes beyond the Example of Christ, and beyond the Text, and therefore there I must leave him, his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 notwithstanding. For 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ex verbo 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, quod est advenio quoniam veniebant, est Ethnicis ad Judaismum, saith the Learned, and I think Infants cannot change their Religion, nor was it fit to call an Infant of a Jew, a Proselite when it was brought to Circumcision; and consequently as improper to call the Child of a Christian a Proselite. However, all that can lawfully be done

to proselite an Infant (if you will needs have that Term used) is but to devote them to Christ by Prayers for his Blessing, but not a Syllable for baptizing them.