Laying on of hands upon baptized believers, as such, proved an ordinance of Christ in answer to Mr. Danvers's former book intituled, A treatise of laying on of hands : with a brief answer to a late book called, A treatise concerning laying on of hands, written by a nameless author
Keach, Benjamin, 1640-1704.
Page  102

CHAP. IX.

In answer to the Conclusion of Mr. Danvers's Book.

Mr. Danvers's Con∣clusion.

THus you have had a candid Account of the rise, growth, and pro∣gress of this Rite of Con∣firmation, or Laying on of hands, from the begin∣ning to this day, (amongst all that have owned it) with the Authorities on which it hath been found, and imposed; together with a genuine Exami∣nation of the Grounds and Reasons each Party have given to justify the same: And may we not upon the whole, fairly come to the following Conclusions? viz.

1. That there doth not appear to be the least Scripture - precept, or Practice for any such Ordinance of Confirma∣tion, or an imposing of Page  103 hands upon all the Bap∣tized before they break bread, or are admitted into Church-communion.

2. That the Instances produced to prove it an Apostolical Tradition, are impious Lies and Forgeries.

3. That the Autho∣rities by which it hath been heretofore enjoined, were nothing but Anti∣christian Can. & Decrees.

4. That the most emi∣nent Witnesses and Con∣fessors that opposed the Antichristian Ʋsurpati∣ons and Innovations, have all along witnessed against, and impugned this of Confirmation, viz. the Novations, Dona∣tists, Waldenses, Greek Churches, & Wicklissians.

All which are worthy the serious consideration of all sober and judicious Christians, and especially recommended to them, who having rejected In∣fants, and imbraced Be∣lievers Baptism, do yet cleave to this Practice, Page  104 with these following Ob∣servations, viz.

1. It is most manifest that those Popes, Councils and Fathers, that have enjoined and imposed In∣fants sprinkling for a Sa∣crament, or an Ordi∣nance of Christ, have enjoined this also as such.

2. That the principal Arguments pretended for the one, have been urged and pleaded for the other also, viz. Apostolical Tradition, and pretend∣ed Inferences and Conse∣quences from Scripture.

3. That the famous Churches and Confessors, that have opposed Infants sprinkling as superstitious, Popish and Antichristian, have upon the same ac∣count opposed this also.

4. That it doth not appear that any baptized Church or People, did ever in any Age or Country own such a Prin∣ciple, or Practice to this day, except some in this Nation in these late times.