Gold refin'd, or, Baptism in its primitive purity proving baptism in water an holy institution of Jesus Christ ... : wherein it is clearly evinced that baptism ... is immersion, or dipping the whole body, &c : also that believers are only the true subjects (and not infants) of that holy sacrament : likewise Mr. Smythies arguments for infant-baptism in his late book entitled, The non-communicant ... fully answered / by Benj. Keach ...

CHAP. III. Proving that Baptism is dipping, plunging, and covering the Body all over in Water from the Practice of the Pri∣mitive Times. (Book 3)

CErtainly no better course or way in the next place we can take to find out what Baptism is, than to examine the Scripture, and see what the thing was which the Saints practi∣sed in the Primitive Time, where we read they did baptize, or were baptized: for as the Jews in Circumcision all along were to practise that Rite, as it was commanded, and practised by Abraham; and keep the Passeover as it was given to them from the Lord by Moses, together with all other Ordinances and Services whatsoever, it behoved them to observe the first or Primi∣tive Institution and Practice of every particular Duty, and were not to derogate from thence in any thing whatsoever; and for their adulte∣rating

any of the Ordinances of God, they brought themselves under the Wrath of God, and many heavy Judgments from him, as the Old Testament doth sufficiently witness; so it behoveth us, I say, to see to the first or Pri∣mary Institution and Practice of Baptism in the Gospel-Time, that being a Pattern or Rule to us, and to all Christians to the end of the World, in respect of every Gospel-Ordinance; and if we derogate from that Rule, we must expect to meet with sharp Rebuke from the Almighty first or last. Now that that Ordinance which is called Baptism, is Immersion, Dipping, or Plunging into Water, will appear, if we observe the Practice of John the Baptist, who was the first that was sent by Christ to baptize; read Mat. 3. 6. he 'tis positively said baptized in a River, viz. in the River Jordan.

Diodate on this place in his Annotations,* 1.1 saith he plunged them in Water; and our late Anno∣tators say he dipp'd them in Jordan.* 1.2

Moreover 'tis said that John was baptizing in Aenon near Salim;* 1.3 the Reason is given, because there was much Water. Now if it had not been dipping or covering the Body in Water, this could be no reason, for a little Water would have served to sprinkle thousands, as Cornelius à Lapide notes.

Piscator on this Passage saith,* 1.4 that Baptism was dipping the Body in Water.

Also our late Annotators* 1.5 upon the place say thus, viz. It is from hence apparent, that both Christ and John baptized by dipping the Body in the Water, else they need not have sought places where had been a great plenty of Water. They say well, and less they could not speak unless they would stifle their Consciences, or offer Violence to their

Reason: but if they had from hence said, it is apparent that Christ and John Baptized, and not Rantized Persons, they had come off better, and had undeceived the People.

Secondly, 'Tis said when our blessed Saviour was baptized by John in Jordan,* 1.6 he went up straightway out of the Water,* 1.7 &c. and Philip and the Eunuch 'tis said went both down into the Water, and that they came up out of the Water.

The Assembly in their Annotations on this Text, say, they were wont to dip the whole Bo∣dy; and Piscator on the place (as I find him quoted by a worthy Divine) saith, the ancient manner of Baptism was that the whole Body was dipp'd into the Water.

Certainly it had been a vain and weak thing for them to have gone down into the River to be sprinkled with a little Water.

There is no ground to think they would ever have done so, if Sprinkling or Rantism had been the Ordinance required of them, the manner was not to apply Water to the Subject, as some do, but the Subject to (nay into) the Water.

In Mark 1. 9. 'Tis said, Jesus was baptized of John in Jordan: Now, saith one on this place, it had been non-sense for Mark to say that Jesus was baptized in Jordan, if it had been sprink∣ling, because the Greek reads it into Jordan, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, could Jesus be said to be sprinkled into Jordan? 'tis proper to say he was baptiz'd, that is, dipp'd into Jordan, and that was the Act and nothing else, as all the Learned acknowledg.

Moreover, Philip needed not to have put that noble Person, who was a Man of great Authority under Candace Queen of the Ethiopians, to the

trouble to come out of his Chariot (if Sprink∣ling had been Baptism) and to go into the Water and dip him; or if Sprinkling might have done as well as Dipping, sure Philp would on this occasion have dispensed with Immersion, and let Rantism have served, considering he was a great Man and on a Journey; he might have fetch'd a little Water in his hand and have sprinkled him in the Chariot. But as Philip had preach'd Baptism to him, so there is like ground to think that the Eunuch very well un∣derstood what it was, and readily submitted to it; but if Sprinkling would not excuse them, I know not how any Christian can think it may excuse us in these days; we have no Reason to think Christ Jesus, or his Apostles, did do or teach any thing in vain, yet so we must con∣clude, if he went into a River to receive no more than Sprinkling; and so we must think of Philip and the Eunuch also.

But to proceed, here I cannot well omit that which Mr. Daniel Rogers,* 1.8 a most worthy English Writer, hath said in a Treatise of his, It ought (saith he) to be the Churches part to cleave to the Institution, which is Dipping, especially it being not left arbitrary by our Church to the Discretion of the Minister; but required to dip or dive: And further saith, that he betrays the Church, whose Officer he is, to a disorder'd Error, if he cleave not to the Instituti∣on, which is to Dip. What abundance of Be∣trayers of the Truth and Church too have we in these days? How little is the Institution or Practice of the Primitive Christians minded a∣mongst many good Men? and where is the Spi∣rit of Reformation? And doubtless that fa∣mous Author, and Learned Critick Casaubon was in the right; will you have his words;

I doubt not,* 1.9 saith he, but, contrary to our Churches Intention, this Error having once crept in, is maintained still by the Carnal Ease of such as, looking more at themselves than at God, stretch the Liberty of the Church in this case deeper and further than either the Church her self would, or the So∣lemness of this Sacrament may well and safely admit.—Afterwards further saith, I confess my self unconvinced by Demonstration of Scripture for Infants Sprinkling.

But Oh! how hard is it to retract an Error which has been so long and generally received, especially when there is Carnal Ease and Profit attending the keeping of it up, and when the contrary Practice, I mean dipping, is look'd up∣on so contemptible a thing, and those who do it are daily, by the ignorance of foolish Men, reproached and vilified, as it is now as well as in former days.

Acts. 8. 38.—And they went both down into the Water, both Philip and the Eunuch, and he baptized him.

We may see,* 1.10 saith Calvin, what fashion the Ancients had to administer Baptism, for they plunged the whole Body into the Water: The use with us is now, saith he, that the Minister casts a few drops of Water only upon the Body, o•• upon the Head.

And upon John's baptizing in Aenon near Sa∣lim, Joh. 3. 23. saith the same Calvin,

From this place we may gather that John and Christ administred Baptism by plunging the whole Body into the Water.

The Learned Cajetan upon Mat. 3. 5. saith,* 1.11 Christ ascended out of the Water; therefore Christ was baptized by John, not by sprinking

or by pouring Water upon him, but by Immer∣sion, that is, by dipping or plunging into the Water.

Moreover,* 1.12 Musculus on Mat. 3. calls Baptism Dipping, and saith, the Parties baptized were dipped, not sprinkled.

Object. But it is still objected, Sprinkling is Baptizing, say you what you will; and Baptism signifies Sprinkling as well as Dipping.

Answ. To this we always answer, and again say and testify, that the Greek word to sprinkle, is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Rantizo; and that the Translators themselves never so much as once, in all the New Testament, render Baptism, Sprinkling; and where is the Man that affirms the word signifies Sprinkling?

Object. But the word Baptizo will bear VVash∣ing.

Answ. VVe answer then, 'Tis such washing as is done by dipping; so much as is baptized, or washed, is dip'd, and your Rantism is no wash∣ing; and we also say, and that too with good Authority, that though the word Baptizo doth sometimes allow of that Acceptation, yet it is not the direct, immediate, genuine, and prima∣ry signification of it, for that is to dip, or plunge, as you see in the Lexicons. But at the best 'tis but indirectly, collaterally, by the by (as one observes) so meant, or improperly and re∣motely, that it so signifies: And we ask, Whe∣ther when we try any Matter by the signification of the word as 'tis in the Original, we shall go to the direct, original, prime, and proper, or to the occasional, remote, indirect and impro∣per signification to be tried by? Your practice it seems is built only upon the indirect, impro∣per and remote acceptation of the word, and

therefore is at best only an uncouth, indirect, im∣proper and far-fetch'd practice; and indeed, as the word is found in Scripture, respecting Christ's Ordinance of Baptism, it is evident to all what it signifies.

Object. But the Pharisees, Mark 7. 4. held the washing of Hands, Vessels, Cups, Pots, and Beds, &c. and there VVashings are called Bap∣tism.

Answ. Yea, and what then, for, saith Mr. Wilson, to baptize, is to dip or plunge primarily, and signifies such a washing as is used in Bucks where∣in Linnen is plunged and dip'd; and thus they wash'd their Vessels, Hands, and Cups, viz. they swilled, rinsed, cleansed, and totally washed, dip'd, or wetted them all over with VVater, or else you may be sure it could never be said they baptized them. But, Sirs, who-ever washes Hands, Cups, Pots, or Beds, by sprinkling a few Drops of VVater upon them? there is no washing by such a kind of Sprinkling. O that you would give over such Arguing, since the practice of Baptism in the Primitive Times doth, as you have heard, evidently shew that the Baptized were always dipped all over in VVater; Certainly 'tis no Baptism at all, if not so administred.

Object. Doth it follow that we must Baptize so now? That was in a hot Country; but we live in a cool Climate, and when Children were Dipt, some of them died; and God will have Mercy, not Sacrifice.

Answ. Ought you not to make God's VVord your Rule? Have you a Dispensation to make the Commandments of God void by your Tradi∣tions? VVe conclude, the Institution of Christ and the Practice of the Primitive Church, ought

to be followed in all things as near as we can. But you say this is a cold Climate: Pray, Sirs, did not Christ, when he gave forth his Commission to his Apostles, to teach and make Disciples, and Baptize, bid them go into all the World, and into all Nations? VVere they not to go into cold Countries as well as Hot? And, were they not to teach the same Doctrine, and administer the same Ordinances alike where-ever they come? Or, did he tell them they should Baptize those in hot Countries that were Disciples, and Rantize such who received the Word in cold Countries? Unless you can prove this, I am sure all you say is nothing.

Certainly you were as good never pretend to Baptize, but wholly deny it, and cast it off as a low and carnal Thing, as some do, as to do another thing in the room of it, which Christ never commanded, and call it his Ordinance; Which we do declare and testify, by the Autho∣rity of God's VVord, and a great Cloud of VVit∣nesses, who all understand the Greek Tongue, (may be better than some of you do) that 'tis no Baptism at all, but a thing of Man's devising brought in, in the room of Christ's Baptism, and unjustly fathered upon him.

Sirs, How dare you, In the Name of the Fa∣ther, Son, and Holy Ghost, say, I Baptize thee, &c. when you do but Rantize the Person? for you neither dip the Person, nor wash him. Has the Holy Trinity given you any Authority so to do? For God's sake, for time to come, use the Names of those Persons by whose Authority it was first set on foot and given forth, till you can shew you have Authority from Jesus Christ to sprin∣kle, or pour a little VVater upon the Face of a poor Infant, or an adult Person. Nor is it any

marvel, when they did dip poor Children in VVater, that some of them died, sith they are not the true Subjects of Baptism; if they had, no doubt God would have preserved them, as well as he did those Babes whom once he re∣quired to be Circumcised. Can any believe God would command any such thing to be done, that should endanger the Life of a Child? that was doubtless a just Re••uke for the prophanation of Christ's blessed Ordinance; he will one day, I fear, say, Who hath required this at your hands? Nay, and who knows what Judgments and VVrath may come upon this Land for the abo∣minable abuse of the Sacred Institution of Bap∣tism. God many times shews Men their Sin, by the punishment he brings upon them, if you are so fond of Humane Traditions and Innovati∣ons.

Object. But why must the whole Body be dipp'd? may not the Head be sufficient, that be∣ing the principal Part?

Answ. I must confess, in a late Discourse I had with a Minister of the Church of England, he pleaded for this, seeing he could not defend Ran∣tism. But to give a direct Answer, pray consider whether it be the Person, (viz. the Man or Wo∣man) or part of the Person that Christ com∣manded to be baptized; if not the whole Body, why might it not serve only to wash or dip the Hands? But if it were the Hands only, or the Feet, or the Head only that was to be Baptized, i. e. dipped, a small Vessel of Water would have served, and no need for Christ or John to have gone into Rivers and Places where there was much VVater, to baptize.

2. It is not said, John baptized him, i. e. our blessed Saviour, not part of him: But as the bles∣sed

Virgin bore him in her VVomb, and brought him forth, and laid him in a Manger; so John bap∣tized, or dipped him, that is, his whole Body in∣to Jordan, or in the River Jordan. Moreover, 'tis said, Acts 8. 12. They were baptized, both Men and Women, (that is, the Bodies, the whole Bodies of those Men and Women) and not some Part or Members of them: If this be not granted, we shall be run into many strange Absurdities al∣most every where in reading the Scriptures.

3. To put this out of doubt, 'tis evident the whole Body ought to be dipp'd or baptiz'd, be∣cause (as we shall shew in the next Chapter) Baptism is a Figure of the Burial and Resur∣rection of Jesus Christ, nay, called a Burial. Now a Person is not said to be buried, that is not totally covered in the Earth; no more can a Man be said to be baptiz'd, except he be covered all over in the VVater.

4. VVe have shewed how all the Learned a∣gree, and positively assert, that Baptism was ad∣ministred in the Primitive Times, by a total dipping the Body in VVater. And indeed at first, when this Innovation of Rantism came in, they used to sprinkle the Body all over, being sure it was not one Part, but the whole Body that was to be baptized, and so they Rantiz'd the whole Body. But you are gone here too, for you in (your Practice, and in your own Sense) Baptize but the Face only; so that all your Peo∣ple are unbaptized Persons, as evident as any thing can be, take it how you will, if it should be granted. I mean, that Sprinkling is Bap∣tism.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Diodate Annotat.
• * 1.2

  Pool's Annotat.
• * 1.3

  Joh. 3. 23.
• * 1.4

  See Mr. Gosnold's Doctrine of Baptism, pag. 20.
• * 1.5

  Pool's Annot. on Joh. 3. 23.
• * 1.6

  Mat. 3. 16.
• * 1.7

  Acts 8. 38, 39.
• * 1.8

  Rogers in his Treatise of the two Sacraments, part 1. chap. 5.
• * 1.9

  Casaubon on Mat. 3. 11.
• * 1.10

  Calvin on Act. 8. 38.
• * 1.11

  Cajetan on Mat. 3. 5.
• * 1.12

  Muscul. on Mat. 3.