the doctrine of baptism/chapter 24

committed to historic Baptist & Reformed beliefs

history

documents

library

biography

A Plain Christian Treatise, explaining
the Doctrine of Baptism, and the two
Covenants made with Abraham, and
his two-fold Seed.

Again, as you have heard before in Eph. 4:3,4, there is by the Apostle mentioned these things that are essential to a particular, visible Church-union, which are these.

First, to be all called into one hope of our calling. The poor children whom some admit into their society by sprinkling, are not called to the same hope that believers are called into.

Again, one Body, one Spirit, one Faith, one Lord, and one Baptism, one God and Father of us all.

It is impossible that a people should walk together acceptably who have not one hope of one and the same glorious Inheritance, and who have not one and the same Spirit and assistance and guidance in His holy worship, and that have not one and the same faith, but in the doctrine of faith, they do mainly differ one from another. It is an essential difference, inconsistent with Communion, that the members of one Church should own two Baptisms, the sprinkling of Infants, and dipping of Believers. This Ordinance of Baptism is one of the essentials of a true visible Church.

Lastly, they are to own one God and Father of all. You have from this text a ground why such who are not enlightened in the Lord's baptism cannot be admitted into Church-fellowship, because in one and the same fellowship, there is to be owned as one Hope, one Spirit, one Lord, one Faith, and so one and the same Baptism.

The main end of Church fellowship is, that they there do practice whatsoever Christ has commanded, Matt. 28:20 and as Cornelius says in Acts 10. "We are here (he says) to hear whatsoever is commanded thee of God;" and Christ says, "Ye are my friends if you do whatsoever I have commanded you."

It is without doubt, that the true and lawful Ministry in Christ's Church is to see that all the members practice the observation of whatsoever he has commanded, and so to see all the Laws of Christ put in execution. For that cause Christ has given into His Church not only the key of doctrine, but also the key of Discipline, so that if any soul in a Church shall be known, wittingly or willingly, to neglect any duty that the Lord has commanded by His holy word, especially a fundamental Ordinance of the New Testament, as is Baptism and the Supper of the Lord, it is without all question that such a soul, standing out in that disobedience, ought to be cast out of the Church speedily for the same. Without which the Church allowing or conniving at, or tolerating a soul in one course of known disobedience, does thereby make the sin their own, the whole people becoming really guilty of his sin and impiety. As the Apostle says, "Thus will the whole Lump be leavened," and that Church unchurched.

Amongst men, he that conceals murder, and is privy and consenting to it, and will agree to tolerate it, is reckoned a murderer. In like manner, it is so in the case of theft. Now the main end of Church fellowship and ministerial power is to destroy sin, and to execute the power of Christ against it, and not to be fosterers and Countenancers of sin, which you are if you agree to admit any person into your fellowship who refuses to submit to Baptism that plain, solemn Ordinance of the New Testament,. Let his pretense be what it will be, that person who is not brought over to yield obedience to whatsoever Christ has commanded, is not (while so disobedient) fit matter for a visible Gospel Church, especially in those His fundamental Ordinances as Prayer, Hearing, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord, Thanksgiving, Contribution to the necessity of the Saints, and maintenance of an official ministry according to the ability that God gives them. By the same rule and upon the same ground that you will tolerate some members in the Church to live in the neglect of baptism, you must tolerate such as neglect to hear the word, and others who will not, according to ability, contribute to pious charitable uses; and others who will not pray in half a year or a twelve month together, under the pretense that they are not moved to that duty, and others who will in a gross manner neglect the duty of particular callings or relations, which the Apostle in 2 Thes. 3 does give rule to be withdrawn from, which is as the rest but the neglect of duty. Nay, this practice lays a foundation for all disobedience and for gathering an Assembly of Rebels, "let me alone in my sin, and I will let thee alone in thine."

But may some say, is a godly man's omitting to be baptized or dipped a sin? Yes, certainly it is, for in 1 John 3:6 the Apostle says, "sin is a transgression of the Law."

Now you have heard that several Laws of the New Testament do command such as believe and repent should be baptized. Therefore, to neglect, is a transgression of those Laws. Sincere obedience is universal obedience. By this says David, "I know I shall not be ashamed when I have respect to all thy Commandments."

Questions and Answers as To Why
UNBAPTIZED PERSONS ARE NOT TO BE ADMITTED
INTO CHURCH FELLOWSHIP

But further consider, if you receive a person into Communion who does not submit to the Lord's baptism, that soul justifies still a corrupt baptism that he had in his infancy, and consequently is not ashamed of all he has done amiss, which Ezekiel speaks of, but still stands in fellowship and Communion with a Church and Ministry, which by the Bishop's power dispensed the same. When you receive such a soul into Communion, you receive that Church and Ministry from which he had his supposed baptism, and must certainly own all those Churches which that ministry stood in fellowship with that so baptized him. Therefore, it is a sad and serious matter, who it is that is admitted into fellowship in the true Church of Christ. I would admonish souls to be careful that they do what they do in good order. For God is said to have made a breach upon Uzzah because he did not do what he did in due order.

But some may say, Faith in Christ brings a soul into Sonship, and so to a right in all the privileges in God's house.

Christ's Church Is To Receive the Weak In The Faith According To Christ's Order Which By Faith and Baptism

It's true, Faith and Repentance do entitle a soul. But repentance, according to the Gospel, is a change of the heart and a resolution to obey God in all His Commandments. This is only such a Repentance as the Church of Christ ought to own in those members they receive. Therefore, though they ought to receive the weak in faith, yet they have no rule to receive them but by faith and baptism. So that though faith gives an interest to baptism, yet faith and baptism are to prepare and fit a soul for Communion. "So many as gladly received the word, were baptized, and the same day there were added to the Church about three thousand souls, and they continued in the Apostles' doctrine, and fellowship, in breaking of bread and prayer."

So here you see the Word of Christ our Lord (unto whom we ought to submit). Those only who were baptized, were admitted into the fellowship of the Saints and to breaking bread. Therefore, we, upon these grounds, may not admit any member in communion into the church of Christ but by baptism.

But some may object and say, There are some godly souls who do think they are baptized already in their infancy. And till they be convinced of that error, cannot you have Church Communion with them?

To this I answer, I dare not say, but precious souls to God, in these times as well as formerly, may be (in that point) in darkness, I do not censure the case of such. But sure I am, that if they judge their own baptism or sprinkling in their infancy to be an Ordinance of God, they cannot but judge it a duty still to practice the same upon their own infants, being faithful to their principle. Then, how can a church and true ministry that judges dipping of believers a duty, and the other to be a grievous and provoking sin, admit such a person into Communion that resolves to live not only in the neglect of a solemn duty, but in a great and heinous sin in the judgment of that Church and Ministry that is to admit him, which the justifying of his Baptism must needs be?

Why has Christ set up in His Gospel church His Ordinance of Excommunication or casting forth out of the Church, if such persons may be admitted who are resolved to live in both a sin of omission and commission, and such as have not repented of that sin of sprinkling children?

So then, the person who lives impenitently in any one known sin, (known I mean to the Church), and if the Church have communion with that person in their sin, the sin becomes the church's sin.

This we presuppose, or else the Scripture would send us little hopes of charity as to his good estate. For to know a sin to be a sin, and to live in it doubtless, it cannot stand with grace. Therefore, it is generally concluded that the contempt of any Ordinance of God is damnable, but not the simple neglect of it being upon scruples or doubts of conscience unanswered. But the church knows it to be a sin and therefore they are not to have communion with it.

But may some say, I am afraid some persons do rest in Ordinances and place that in them which is due to Christ only, which is some offense to me and has kept me off from that practice.

Before We Baptize We Prove Whether Any Do Have A True Work of Conversion and Union With Christ

There is no sound ground for this objection from either our profession or practice. For we do profess salvation, justification and the spiritual welfare to be merely of the grace of God in Christ, and that by faith only. Our obedience to Christ ought to be performed from a principle of regeneration and union with Christ by faith. This is answerable to our practice, in that we dare not put any soul on obedience but from that root. For before we baptize any soul, we prove whether a true work of conversion be wrought in his heart or not, and whether he has union with Christ. We dare not admit children, because that, we judge, that they have not a principle of Christ in them from whence they should submit to baptism.

Further let me say, that it is easy for a soul to forbear resting in duties when it does not perform them. But that which is worthy in a Christian, is, to walk as strictly in obedience to all the commands of God as though he would be saved by his obedience, and to rest as fully upon Christ and His blood and the love of God therein revealed as if he had done nothing at all, simply accounting himself as an unprofitable servant. Whereas you say you fear they rest in duties who fear. Jealousy in you (I fear) is your sin and possibly it may flow from that inbred enmity and prejudice that is apt to be in every man's heart, against the pure ways of God. Or else, it proceeds from the malice of the devil suggesting such thoughts into your heart, for you enter into the hearts of such people, and judge their very intents in this, your fear and jealousy and therefore, beware of this snare.

But further, suppose some souls should be left of God so far, who walk in the practice of Ordinances, as to rest in them. Is that a ground for you to excuse yourself and to live in a sinful neglect of them? In a word, there can be no objection come into your heart, tending to hinder you from this duty and to keep you from your obedience to your Lord and King, but it must needs be from the flesh or from the Devil. Therefore, beware of them. Suppose your judgment inclined to such a latitude, as that you could have communion with unbaptized persons, consider with a tender conscience what has been said, and I hope it may much satisfy you in that objection.

But suppose you should not be satisfied with what has been said, but still judge that is your liberty. You cannot but say it's clear in the New Testament, and out of doubt that such believing and being baptized, ought to have Church fellowship together with the practice of Ordinances. Is this a justifiable argument to keep you off from communion with such as (out of doubt) you may, according to rule, have communion with, and further that you cannot but say, is your duty to have communion with?

Therefore, I would, in all tenderness, admonish and warn all who fear God, to be more conformable and observe the rules of Christ, and not to harbor such a gross error in your mind, as to think you may at your pleasure dispute the commands and Ordinances of Christ.

The Apostle Paul in Gal. 1:16 says, "He conferred not with flesh and blood, but he presently obeyed the heavenly voice." Christ, when God by His Spirit, directed Him to go to the Doctors in the Temple to hear them, and ask questions, He, without so much as acquainting His Father or Mother, obeyed the Lord, though to their great grief and trouble in doing. Then in Phil. 2:14, our obedience should be without murmuring, repining or any more ado. In Luke 5:5, Peter had been fishing all night and caught nothing, therefore had little hopes to catch any fish, yet he says, "At thy word I will cast down my net;" he did not dispute the commands of Christ though his own experience and skill did utterly testify against what Christ had commanded as to sense, that there could be no good effect produced, "yet at thy word," he says, "I will cast in my net." As David said in Psalm 119, "I made haste to keep thy righteous precepts;" for delaying of obedience does harden the heart and give place to the tempter: Therefore, I would advise all godly souls to drink in this as a Maxim, that if you find an express Law of Christ given to a believer, that it is utterly unlawful to dispute or to question the practice of it upon any pretense whatsoever, or to admit any objection against it. For amongst men who may err greatly in making those Laws, both in Civil and Military Authority, they will not have their Laws disputed. But, our righteous God (whose Laws are sure are just) will not have His disputed;. Therefore, as before, when Christ bid Peter cast down his net into the sea, he says, "I have been all night and caught nothing, yet notwithstanding at thy word I will cast down my net.." Here observe, though what Christ commanded him, his skill, experience and reason might have strongly objected against, yet he learned this, that there could not be any justifiable ground to bear him out in disputing Christ's Laws.

Thus you have an example by Abraham's sacrificing of Isaac, who was the promised seed, "And when God called him, he followed God, not knowing whether he went.." Noah built an Ark for the saving of his house. Jacob, upon the command of God, carried away his family three days journey before Laban, and the family knew of it.

There might have been much dispute against these things, but these holy men of God had learned not to give place to the pride and rebellion of their unmortified reason and understanding. Many souls, for want of more grace and soundness of judgment, give way to, in our days. But, they did obey the word of God's command without any more ado, as the Apostles' rule is, Phil. 2:12-15. "Wherefore my Beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation, with fear and trembling, for it is God that worketh in you to will and to do of his own good pleasure; Do all things without murmurings and disputings, that you may be blameless and harmless, the Sons of God without rebuke in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, amongst whom you shine as Lights in the world."