which time Israel was circumcised to qualifie them to eat the Passover. For no uncircum∣cised Person may eat thereof; Exod. XII.
A third mention of Baptism is at Sinai. So the Jews. And they speak of Proselytes Admission now.
The Anabaptists will not hear this: nothing but the letter of Scripture. But that is a dangerous Text. Tis true, we are to require it for the foundation of Faith, but by in∣insisting upon it too rigorously for other matters, we lose infinite profit, that may ac∣crue to us by Examples and Explications.
But let us reason with them, that Baptism could be no new thing in those times. First, The Scribes and Pharisees were not so easie to be brought to follow Novelty. But they came in multitudes to Johns Baptism, Matth. III. 7. Secondly, See I. Joh. 25. The Jews sent Pharisees to John the Baptist, and they asked him why baptisest thou then, if thou be not that Christ? Whereby you may see they never questioned the thing, and shewed also that they were easily perswaded, that the Messias would make use of their rite of baptizing for the admitting Disciples.
Take this in the dispute about Poedobaptism. They tell us, that there is no example in the Scripture of children baptized. I answer, True, but no such example needed to be recorded; for Christ took up Baptism as he found it in the Jewish Church; and they baptized Infants as well as grown persons. And if Christ would not that Baptism should have been administred to children, he would have forbidden it. Therefore there is no Rule or Example given in Scripture of baptising children. Luke wrote enough in XVI. Act. 15. & 32. where he tells us of the Baptism of Lydia and her houshold; and of the Jaylor and all his. Now one reading these passages in Judaea, how would he have understood it? Undoubtedly, according to the ordinary practise of Baptism, as it was used among them in admitting of their Proselytes; which was that when the Master of the house was baptized for a Proselyte, all his family, children and all, were baptized too. Tis the best rule to come to the understanding of the Phrases of Scripture, to consider in what sence they were taken in that Country and among that People where they were written.
II. They were All baptized. Who? All our Fathers, vers. 1. All passed through the Sea. Were there not children here? How? Was there no child in arms, did they carry none on their backs, when they passed through the Sea? What say the Anabaptists here? This Text saith All were baptized. They say, None ought to be baptized that are children, because they are not capable of understanding the Ordinance. What then? Were the Jewish children more capable than the children of Christians?
There are two opinions of the Anabaptists, which we are to be informed in, else we may fall into mistake.
First, That Baptism is not to be administred to any that are without knowledge.
Secondly, That it is not to be administred to any, unless he be verus filius foederis, a true son of the Covenant. To these I will put answer into your mouths.
To the first, God never ordained Sacraments, that their nature should be changed pro captu recipientis, according to the capacity of him that received them. Ordinances retain their nature, whosoever receives them. As sin is sin, though not felt: and the Word is the Word of God, though he that hears it is not benefitted by it: So Sacraments are Sacra∣ments, as to their nature, whatsoever the Receivers be. Tis true their fruit is pro captu recipientis, but not their nature. The Sacrament is a seal whosoever receives it.
Again, You read of Baptism without knowledge in Matth. XXVIII. 19, 20. Go and Disciple all Nations baptizing them in the Name, &c. Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you, &c. Baptize and Teach. True indeed, the Adults that were baptized confessed their sins, but this restrains not baptism to them alone: because there are several ends of it applicable to those that know not, especially that in the next par∣ticular.
As to the second, That Baptism belongs to none but such as are in the Covenant, and that it is a seal of our righteousness. This phrase is fetched from IV. Rom. 11. And he recei∣ved the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the Faith. Which place is ex∣pounded to mean a seal of the persons righteousness that receives it. But to examine this place.
1. It is said to be a sign, now a sign is to help unbelief and to confirm doctrine, Exod. IV. Moses miracles there mentioned were to be signs, to make the Israelites believe his message, 1 Cor. XIV. 22. Tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not. And to that purpose is that of our Saviour, Except ye see signs and wonders ye will not believe.
2. The Doctrines there delivered are well worth such a Confirmation; namely first, That a sinner upon his believing in Christ becomes righteous, this is the greatest truth. Secondly, That he becomes righteous by another, this was a wonder to the Jews. Thirdly,