A just vindication of the covenant and church-estate of children of church-members as also of their right unto bastisme : wherein such things as have been brought by divers to the contrary, especially by Ioh. Spilsbury, A.R. Ch. Blackwood, and H. Den are revised and answered : hereunto is annexed a refutation of a certain pamphlet styled The plain and wel-grounded treatise touching baptism
Cobbet, Thomas, 1608-1685.
Page  189
SECT. VII.

Object.
YEa but the Jewes children were not then baptized, Acts 2.

Answ.
It's more then such as so speake can prove from the Text.

No, will some say, but it is not. For they that gladly received the word, saith the Text, were baptized, vers. 41. And they conti∣nued in the Apostles Doctrine, and fellowship, and breaking of bread and prayers, vers. 42. and 44. All that beleeved had all things common, 44. and sold their possessions, &c. vers. 45. and continued daily in the Temple, &c. vers. 46. which are not appliable to In∣fants. And what then? therefore other things there mentioned were not so too? non sequitur; what more usuall in Scripture then to speake of things in a collective way of persons which are not all and each of them appliable to all and each particular person of that company, but by a Synecdoche some things are spoken of the whole wholly, but others are onely appliable to some parts of that whole. It's said in this place all that beleeved were together, and had all thing common, and sold their possessions, vers. 44, 45. will any take this of the whole company in all the parts of it? all were not capable of such an act applied to all, as not all having possessions to sell, for some were in need rather of supply from others, vers. 45. It is therefore a Synecdoche so in the other, so all are said to continue in the Apostles doctrine and prayers, &c. as be∣fore this Infants were not capable of, and therein it is as in the other Synecdochicall, for of other things mentioned they were capable, and they were appliable to them, they had things in com∣mon too, and had supplies of clothing or food, &c. according to their need; unlesse any will say, that these persons spoken of had no children needing such supplies as well as themselves, or else if they had, yet their needs were not supplied, so when they all eate their meate in severall houses, &c. what were the children shut out of doores if they had any, or had none of those families any children in them? Suppose they could not eate meate with such singlenesse of heart, yet were they not of them that did eate their meate and were refreshed with them: there were doubtlesse some hypocrites in heart amongst them, and they could not eate with them with a single heart, but were rather spots in their feasts of charitie, as Judes phrase is, Jude 12. yet by a Synecdoche, all did eate with heart singlenesse, in that some which were capable of the Page  190 act doing, did so among them, all added were such as should bee saved too by a Synecdoche, and in a Church sense; yea their In∣fants some of them were such really, and all of them in an exter∣nall and ecclesiasticall respect of covenant and Church interest: they were capable of that adjunct, albeit not of some others, so were they capable of being added to the visible Church of Christians, as they were of that true visible Church of the Jewes before. And as all the Infants of covenant and inchurched Parents which stand right in the Church, are also in that right inchoatively members of that Church, albeit not perfectly. And inchoative actuall mem∣bership of a true visible Church, doth externally inright to the initiatory Church and Covenant seale of baptisme; of which two these members children were enrighted, as well as others then pre∣sent. And for further clearing of this way of application of some common acts to an assembly where are children, which are not appliable to the whole company, wholly, see Acts 21. 5. bringing on the Apostle and his company is appliable to all those of Ephe∣sus, men, women and children, but that act of praying not so pro∣perly appliable to the little ones, but rather to the growne persons present. Weeping and swearing is applyed to the whole company assembled, whereof many were children, Ezra 10. 1. 5. compared, yet proper to the growne part; albeit the other of being assembled before the house of God, &c. were common, as that sinne confessed on the behalfe of the whole assembly, vers. 2. was understood of the whole figuratively. In respect of that part of the assembly which had so sinned, which were not the children as is evident; no nor all the growne ones, but some onely amongst them, as vers. 18. 23, 24, 25. declare, so Deut. 31. 11, 12. men women, and children must bee all gathered to have the Law read in their hearing, that they may heare and learne, and feare the Lord, and observe all the words of his Law: it is all applyed to all indefinitely, yet sense and reason tells us, that sundry of the children were neither capable then of such observing of all Gods words, no nor so much as hea∣ring the words read at that time in such sort, as thereby at pre∣sent to bee stirred up to feare or obey the Lord, but some things onely are appliable to the whole assembly wholly, other things now mentioned to the whole at present onely, in respect of the growne part, and to the others no other thn as involved in any such acts of their parents at most, so Joel 14. . solemne assembly of all the inhabitants of the land, is to 〈◊〉 convented for fasting, Page  191 so chap. 2. 1. againe repeated, and ver. 15, 16, 17. instance is given in the sucklings, as to bee a part of that assembly for that end, and the maine dutie vers. 13, 14 is laid forth as required of them all, which are called to this solemne fast, scil. not meerely to abstaine from food, or to expresse sorrow by rending their garments, but to rend their hearts by godly compunction and sorrow, &c. all will yeeld that such things are not properly applyable to sucklings, but to some of the assembly: nor yet will any in reason exclude Infants from being of that Church assembly, for such Church use according as they were capable of any thing mentioned, albeit not capable of all mentioned, Jer. 43. 4. 6, 7, disobedience to Gods voyce is applied to all the people, yet not properly verified in all the children which were of that people and company, Deut. 29. 1. All Israel is said to have seene those wonders in Egypt, and yet ma∣ny of them that were then growne, it being 40. yeares after their comming out thence, vers. 5. never saw the same, much lesse did the little ones, which were a part of that assembly, vers. 14. yet who will conclude, because little ones were not Israel seeing thee wonders, that therefore they were not Israel entring into Covenant, vers. 11, 12. and marke the phrase applied to the little ones, that they also entred into covenant with God, ibid. as well as God is said to make his covenant with them, vers. 14, 15. this was a covenant of grace, as hath been proved, so that Hen. Dens notion holds not concerning God being in a sense in covenant with Infants, but they may not bee said to enter into covenant with him, that by the way. To returne to that in hand; nations baptized, Matth. 28. are to bee taught to observe Christs comman∣dements, but non sequitur that Infants are no part of the Churches in the nation to bee baptized; so here, Infants beleeve not actually, &c. non sequitur, ergo, not to bee added to the Church in a solemne way of initiation to Church estate inchoatively by externall bap∣tisme. Both may stand together and have their truth of the whole in some things wholly, wherein they are capable as of Church estate and baptisme, in others true of the whole in respect of some part thereof as actuall beleeving. To like purpose C. B. argueth weakely in his sixth argument, that the whole citie was baptized men and women mentioned, not their children too, as if therefore excluded; I may as well argue from Gen. 14. 11, 12. That those Kings tooke all the goods of Sodome and Lot, ergo, they tooke no people besides contrary to vers. 16. or if they did take people and Page  192 women, yet not children too. And if Lot were first taken and then redeemed by Abraham with others, yet not ergo his children or daughters, or if then under the notion of women, yet not a word of children, wherefore either they were left behind in the Citie without their Parents when they were taken, or if taken with the Cities and persons, yet not brought backe againe, which would bee absurd to affirme.

Secondly, suppose the beleeving Jewes children were not just at that time baptized, when their Parents were thus solemnly admit∣ted to that Church of Christians, yet non sequitur that they were not baptized afterwards. When members are solemnly admitted to compleat and fixed membership in our Churches, wee baptize not oft times their little ones the first day of that their admittance, yet doe it afterwards as occasion is offered, and their desire thereof signified.