A sober discourse of right to church-communion wherein is proved by Scripture, the example of the primitive times, and the practice of all that have prosessed the Christian religion, that no unbaptized person may be regularly admitted to the Lords Supper / by W. Kiffin ...

CHAP. II. Reasons why Ʋnbaptized Members may not be admitted to the Lords Supper. (Book 2)

THat persons Unbaptized may regularly be admitted to the Communion of the Lords Supper, is denied from these Reasons:

1. Because this Opinion tends to destroy the Nature, Ends, and Uses of these Gospel Ordinan∣ces. The nature of Baptism is Spiritual, when rightly Admini∣stred: Was it not submitted unto by the Primitive Christians? Was it not the first Act done by them, after their Conversion? Act. 2.41,42. Whereby they became visible Professors of the Gospel of Truth, which figured their Death, Burial, and Resurrection with Christ. Rom. 6.4. Col. 2.12.

Is it not an Institution stampt with as Divine a Character, and as Sa∣cred a Sanction as any in Scripture? All Nations taught, being to re∣ceive it, and being of the same duration with Preaching, submit∣ted to by Christ himself, before he entred upon his Publick Mini∣stry (which is the most Illustri∣ous Example in the World) wit∣nessed unto by the Renowned Worthies of all Ages.

Now that this Ordinance, being of that quality, enforced by so great Authority, submitted to by such Examples, and serving for such gracious ends, (as to be the Symbol of Regeneration, in which a Believer is made a Parta∣ker of those Divine Conveyances, those communications of Grace, and increasings of Faith, promised by the Lord Jesus to his sincere followers,) should be put in dan∣ger of being quite abolisht, and the practise lost by an unseasona∣ble

and mistaken apprehension, and that by such persons as own Baptism to be as here represented, is a matter something strange, and 'tis to be feared, will prove in the consequence of ill Effect, not on∣ly to this but the succeeding Ge∣neration, if they that Espouse it should go about to propagate this new Principle: to prevent which, (if it may please the Divine Will to bless these lines) was the only end of this Essay, and that purely out of the Zeal I have to preserve (as much as in me lies) the Ordi∣nances in their purity, as they were delivered to us by Christ; for we all know what a vast trouble and hazard the Reformers (and indeed many that are alive at present) had to Rescue this as well other Truths and Ordinances, from the Ridicu∣lous Additions of Sanguinary Per∣secuting Romanists, under whose Captivity it groaned for some Ages.

To enforce what is said, I shall endeavour to shew here some of the ill consequences of this Opi∣nion, and the small reason our Bre∣thren have to propagate it, though I still reserve much to the Chap∣ter of Objections, where their Rea∣sons will be more largly reply'd to.

1. This Opinion has a direct tendency to invalidate, or indeed, quite throw out of doors, and discontinue the use of a Founda∣tion Ordinance, or Principle of the Gospel of Christ, Heb. 6.2. For if Unbaptized Persons may be ad∣mitted to all Church Priviledges, does not such a practice plainly suppose that it is unnecessary? * 1.1for to what purpose is it to be Bapti∣zed (may one Reason with him∣self) if he may enjoy all Church Priviledges without it? The Bap∣tists (if once such a belief pre∣vails,) would be easily tempted to lay aside that reproached Practice,

(which Envious Men have un∣justly derided and aspersed,) of being dipt, that is Baptized, and challenge their Church Commu∣nion by vertue of their Faith only; and such as Baptized Infants would be satisfied to discontinue the practice, when one they are per∣swaded, that their Children may be Regular Church-Members without it; for if it be superflu∣ous, discreet and thrifty People would willingly be rid of the trou∣ble of Christning-Feasts, (as they call them) and all the appurtenan∣ces thereto belonging: so that in a short time we should have neither old nor young baptized, and by consequence be in a likely condi∣tion to lose one of the Sacraments, which would easily make way for the loss of the other, both having an equal Sanction in Scripture; and the Arguments that disanul the one, will destroy the other, and consequently all Ordinances,

and Modes of Worship, and last∣ly, Religion it self. For if a thing expresly commanded, and practi∣sed by Christ, be lookt upon as un∣necessary, every man will con∣clude, that 'tis all one, whether he takes or leaves it, and will, if he can choose, rather leave it, since the taking it up, is somthing trou∣blesome and of no use, (as is supposed) which begets an O∣pinion, That Christs Laws may be dispens'd withal by men, and so lessens that Reverence and Esteem which persons ought to have for Christ: and when such do once make a Breach in those Boundaries & Limits, which they are enjoyned not to pass, they sel∣dom stop in that extravagant Ca∣reer till they run beyond all Reli∣gion into Atheism, or pretended Enthusiasm. So that (at best) this Opinion tends to encourage persons in the neglect or con∣tempt of Religious Duty, or to

the loss thereof quite and clean; which is, no less, than to be, not only an Accessary, but (in a great measure) the Cause of that sin.

2. This Opinion gives up a Cause and Truth that has been by judicious Pens well Defended both from Scripture and Antiqui∣ty, and which these Brethren themselves are convinced to be a Gospel Truth: for if it be once admitted that it is not necessary to Church-Communion, every Man of sence will infer, That our contentions for it were frivolous, our Separation Schismatical, and our Suffering the Penalties of Humane Laws, foolish: and con∣sequently, we shall be exposed to the Reproaches of such as are (without this advantage) ready enough to Revile and Persecute us.

3. This Opinion perverts or ra∣ther destroys Order: & flatly con∣tradicts the Practice of the Primi∣tive

Christians; It is said, Act 2.41. Then they that gladly received his Word were Baptized. Here is the right Gospel Order, First, they that gladly received the Word; that is, they that believed, and no o∣ther, were immediately Baptised, (that it was immediately, appears by the Adverb then) which was the second Work, and the same day (viz. after they believed and were Baptized) there were added unto them, (that is, received into Church-Fellowship, by Faith and Baptism) about Three thousand Souls. ver. 42. And they continued stead∣fastly in the Apostles Doctrine and Fellowship (that is in the same Faith and Communion,) and in break∣ing of Bread and Prayers (that is in the enjoyment and Administra∣tion of Church Ordinances:) Is not here a famous Instance or President of their Practice, which answers those frequent and unde∣cent Clamours of such, who call

for Scripture to justifie the Exclusi∣on of our holy Brethren that have not been so Baptized.* 1.2 Whereas in the fore-going Pages, there is a Scripture cited, That justifies our withdrawing from disorderly walkers; and such as make this Out-cry own the practices of In∣fant Baptism in that particular to be such, and therefore our Sepa∣ration for that Reason (pursuant to that Express Command) lawful; which they must grant, or deny Infant Baptism to be dis∣orderly; or else must say, that there be some disorderly walkers, that we may and ought to have Communion with, notwithstand∣ing that solemn Prohibition of it, 2 Thess. 3.6.

And whereas it is said, That Baptism was never Ordained of God to be a Wall of Division, be∣tween the holy, and the holy; the holy that are, and the holy that are not so Baptized with

Water, as we, &c. It is Answered,

1. The Phrase [Wall of Divi∣sion] is ambiguous; If it be meant of a total Exclusion of other Chri∣stians from our Love, Charity, and Christian-Communion, as far as we agree; we do not look up∣on Baptism to be such a Wall of Division, neither do we so practice it.

2. If it be meant, of an Exclud∣ing from immediate Church-fellowship, although we meet not with this Phrase, [viz. Wall of Division] in those very words, yet we find what is equivalent in 2 Thess. 3.6. and several other Texts: and it is remarkable, that the Word Translated * 1.3 disorderly, is a metaphor borrowed from the Custom of War, wherein every Souldier hath his Station assigned him, from which, when he swerves, he becomes disorderly, which the Apostle Elegantly uses, to denote, That every Christian is a Souldi∣er

that's Listed under the Banner of Christ, and must keep his ex∣act Station appointed him, with∣out the least inclining to the right or left hand, backward or for∣ward, without the Word of Com∣mand. Beza upon the place tells us, that Livius was wont to use this word of Soldiers, that kept not their Station: And Stephanus calls those Souldiers by this Name, who are disorderly. From this Em∣phasis of the word, we may gather, That if Military Commanders ex∣pect a punctual and regular Obe∣dience from their Soldiers; and severely punish such as break their Array, or quit their Stations; The Lord (who is a Jealous God with respect to his Worship, and posi∣tive Institutions) will call any, that presume to break the Order he has prescribed, to a severe account, as hath been, and shall be further de∣monstrated.

3. This Assertion reaches any

other Gospel-Ordinance, as well as Baptism: For if it should be said, That the Supper was never Or∣dained of God to be a Wall of Division between the Holy and the Holy, that do not so receive it as we, it will as rationally fol∣low with respect to this, as well as Baptism, that we should not exclude a person that doubts it, or positively asserts it to be need∣less, from our Communion, which may be likewise said of any Church-Ordinance whatsoever; and consequently, the Rule of Communion must not be what we find written, but the Sanctity of the Party (whether pretended or real) that proposes himself as a Member. For I would ask those that pretend tenderness, and for that cause admit Persons to the Lords Supper that are Unbaptized, that if any person should desire to joyn to a Church, and yet de∣clares, he wants Light to practice

the Ordinance of the Supper, but in other things would be of their Communion, whether they would admit him upon those terms, he wanting Light in that Ordinance of Christ wherein the Communi∣on of the Church doth chiefly consist? If they would admit him, they open so wide a gap, that any Ordinance upon the like pre∣tence may be dispenced with, and two or three, yea all, as well as one, may be Cashier'd, and Church-Order may be quite turned to an Anarchy. If they would not ad∣mit a person upon the said terms, then 'tis necessary to produce some Divine Law that makes the Sup∣per more Essential than Baptism, or else the practice can never be justified. But that no such Autho∣rity can be shewn, is undenyable; for that Divine Law that Ordain∣ed the Supper, did also Establish Baptism. If it be said, Matt. 26.26. Luk. 22.19. 1 Cor. 11.

24. Take eate, this is my Body. This do in Remembrance of me, &c. It is al∣so said, Matt. 28.19. Go teach all Na∣tions Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son and holy Ghost. Act. 2.38. Repent & be Bapti∣zed every one of you for the Remission of Sins, &c. Act. 22.16. Arise and be Baptized, & wash away thy Sins, &c.

Do the former Scriptures Insti∣tute the Supper, and Command its constant Observation? The lat∣ter do as well Institute Baptism, and Command its constant Obser∣vation, the very same Sanction, the same Spirit, with equal Au∣thority Establishes both, giving Baptism precedency in order of time, as being the Sacrament of the Spiritual Birth, and the other of Spiritual Nourishment and Growth; and surely there is as much need of being New Born, as being Spiritually fed, that being of absolute necessity with respect to priority, in order to this.

Did Christ himself Celebrate this Supper, as before? Why the same Lord Jesus before he entred upon his Publick Ministry, was Baptized, Matt. 3.16,17. And Jesus when he was Baptized, went up straight-way out of the Water: and lo the Heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a Dove, and light∣ing upon him; saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well plea∣sed. Here the whole Trinity ap∣pears, the Father by a Voice, the Son in his Body, and the Holy Ghost like a Dove: All Three make the Triumph, and Ratifie the Affair; never was any Ordinance graced with such a Presence, nor made Authentick by a more Illustrious Example.

Does the Supper shew forth the Lords Death till he come? 1 Cor- 11.26. So Baptism is a lively sym∣bol of the Death, Burial, and Re∣surrection of Christ, Rom. 6.4. Col. 2.12.

Does Examination go before the Supper? 1 Cor. 11.28. So Faith and Repentance, the two great Gospel Graces, with Confession of sins, are necessary Antecedents to Baptism, Act. 2.38. Act. 8.37. and all these are altogether as ne∣cessary before the Supper.

Is it said John 6.54. Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life? &c. So it is said Mark 16.16. He that be∣lieveth and is baptized shall be sa∣ved, &c. 1 Pet. 3.21. The like figure whereunto, even Baptism doth also now save us, (not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the * 1.4stipulation (or answer) of a good Conscience toward God, by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. As the Supper is a Spiritual parti∣cipation of the Body and Blood of Christ by Faith, and so (not meerly by the work done) is a means of Salvation; so Baptism Signs and Seals our Salvation to

us, which lies in Justification and discharge of sin, &c.

By this brief Parallel we may see that Baptism is not only or∣dained and ratified by the great Law-giver, as well as the Sup∣per, but that it is dignified with as Spiritual Encomiums as any Gospel Ordinance can be; and if the advantage inclines to either of them, it is evident that the New Testament more frequently men∣tions the Command and Practice of Baptism than of the Supper: for besides the Great Commission, Matth. 28.19. Mark 16.15,16. &c. you have frequent Precepts and Examples of it. Act. 2.38. Act. 8.38. Act. 9.18. Act. 10.48. Act. 16.15,33. Act. 18.8. &c. Nei∣ther do we find any one Ordi∣nance of the New Testament so made use of by the Apostle to in∣cite Christians to dye to sin and live to God, as this Ordinance of Baptism, being that which

is signified thereby is called a Bu∣rial with Christ, Rom. 6.4. A put∣ting on of Christ. Gal. 3.27. The signification of the washing away of our sins by the blood of Christ, Act. 22.16. That having an interest in Christ, and being buryed with him, We may walk in newness of life, &c. Whereas besides the In∣stitution of the Lords Supper by Jesus Christ, instanced by the se∣veral Evangelists, that Ordinance is but four times mentioned, viz. Act. 2.42. Act. 20.7. 1 Cor. 10.16. and 11.23. By all which it appears that the Ordinance of Baptism, as it has the Precedency in point of Order, so it is more frequently mentioned, and more earnestly inculcated, than the o∣ther, & therefore the Obligation to preserve it, as Delivered by Christ and his Apostles, is indispensable.

4. In regard it is granted by such as hold the opinion here argued against, that Baptism and the Sup∣per,

&c. are positive Institutions It will unavoidably follow, tha•• all the Force and Authority they have upon the Conscience in point of Practice, is to be derived from the plain express Law and Word of God, which made them Ordinances; from whence only we are to seek both a Warrant for, and the Method and manner of Practising them. The Dire∣ction given to Moses was, See that thou make ALL things according to the PATTERN shewed thee in the Mount, Heb. 8.5. Exod. 25.9. to 40. And no less exact are Chri∣stians to be in the Administration of Gospel Ordinances; since to deviate from the express Rule, is branded with the odious Title of Will-Worship, and humane Tradi∣tion.

All Sound and Orthodox Wri∣ters with one mind agree (and meer Reason teaches it) that where a Rule and express Law is

prescribed to men, that very Pre∣scription, is an express prohibiti∣on of the contrary: * 1.5Here we have the Order of Gospel Administra∣tion, not only Commanded, but Practised. First they Preached; and such as were Converted, were Baptized; such as were Baptized, walkt in Church-Fellowship, &c. Breaking of Bread and Prayers; which being so express, what ne∣cessity is there to be wise above what is written, and to clamour for Precept or Example, to prove that Baptism is a bar to Commu∣nion, since we read every where, (where Gospel order is set down,) that all such as were received, were first Baptized; and not one instance in the whole Bible, that any were received without it. Nor is it rational to think that any were admitted to Church-Fellowship any other way, unless we will say that these positive Precepts were calculated for some

only, and not for all Christians, which is not only absurd, but a∣gainst the very Letter of the Scri∣pture, Matth. 28.19. Teach all Na∣tions Baptizing them, that is eve∣ry individual that gladly receives the Word in every Nation: Take Eat, &c. Drink ye all of it, Matth. 26.26. &c. That is, every indivi∣dual Member of the Church. Which Interpretation must needs stand, until the Maintainers of this new Opinion can assign to what sort of Christians these Divine Precepts are obligatory, and to what sort they are not; a thing impossible to be made out. Which I shall shut up in the words of Mr. Coxe, in his late Discourse of the Covenants, page 131. In matters of Positive Right (saith he) we can have no warrant for our practice, but from a Positive Precept: for things of this kind fall not within the compass of Common Light, or ge∣neral Principles of Natural Reli∣gion;

but have their Original from a particular, distinct, and indepen∣dent Will of the Law-giver. And therefore Inferences built upon Ge∣neral Notions may soon lead us into mistakes about them; if upon such inferences we Form a Rule to our selves of larger extent than the ex∣press words of the Institution do warrant. Which as it is a sound and excellent Truth, quite over∣throws this practice of admitting Unbaptized persons to the Com∣munion of the Lords Supper, there being no positive Precept to warrant it:* 1.6 and therefore is que∣ried how this their Opinion can be consistent, or reconciled with these expressions?

To conclude: The ends and uses of Baptism being (1.) To repre∣sent to the Eye and Understanding by a visible sign or figure what hath been Preacht to the Ear and Heart. (2.) To witness Repentance, Matth. 3.6,11. Act. 2.38. Mark

1.4. (3.) To evidence Regene∣ration, called in allusion to it the washing of Regeneration, Tit. 3.5. A being born of the Water and the Spirit, John 3.5. (4.) A Symbol of our dying unto sin, and living again to Christian newness of life, Rom. 6.4. Col. 2.12. &c. It is therefore an Ordinance of very great significancy, and such as go about to lay it aside, (as this Opi∣nion in its tendency and Conse∣quence must needs do) deserve no thanks from the Churches of Christ, who have experienced much of the Lords presence in its Regular and Orderly Administra∣tion.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Supra sic per plura quod sieri potest per∣p•…•…ciora.
• * 1.2

  2. Thess. 3.6.
• * 1.3

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ex a priv. & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Ordinatus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. inordina∣tus vel ex ordine, out of Order.
• * 1.4

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Stipulatio.
• * 1.5

  Act. 2.38. to 42.
• * 1.6

  Quere how consi∣stent, &c.