A Christian Directory, Part 3: Christian Ecclesiastics

2. But the same that is a pastor is not at once a mere layman.

3. That men in the same office may so differ in age, experience, and degrees of knowledge, as that young pastors may, and often ought, many years to continue, not only in occasional reception of their help, but also in an ordinary stated way of receiving it, and so be related to them as their ordinary teachers, by such gradual advantages, is past all doubt. And that all juniors and novices owe a certain reverence and audience, and some obedience, to the elder and wiser.

4. But this is not to be a disciple to him as in lower order or office, but as of lower gifts and grace.

5. It is lawful and very good for the church, that some ordained persons continue long as pupils to their tutors in schools or academies (e. g. to learn the holy languages, if they have them not, &c.) But this is a relation left to voluntary contractors.

6. In the ancient churches the particular churches had one bishop, and some presbyters and deacons, usually of much lower parts, who lived all together (single or chaste) in the bishop's or church house, which was as a college, where he daily edified them by doctrine and example.

7. The controversy about different orders by divine institution, belongeth not to me here to meddle with: but as to the natural and acquired imparity of age and gifts, and the unspeakable benefit to the juniors and the churches, that it is desirable that there were such a way of their education and edification, I take to be discernible to any that are impartial and judicious.

Ambrose was at once a teacher and a learner, Beda, Eccl. Hist. mentioneth one in England, that was at once a pastor and disciple. And in Scotland some that became bishops were still to be under the government of the abbot of their monasteries according to their first devotion, though the abbot was but a presbyter.

8. Whether a settled, private church member may not at once continue his very formal relation to the pastor of that church, and yet be of the same order with him in another church, as their pastor, at the same time, (as he may in case of necessity continue his apprenticeship or civil service,) is a case that I will not determine. But he that denieth it, must prove his opinion (or affirmation of its unlawfulness) by sufficient evidence from Scripture or nature; which is hard.

Quest. XXXI. Who hath the power of making church canons?

This is sufficiently resolved before. 1. The magistrate only hath the power of making such canons or laws for church matters as shall be enforced by the sword.

2. Every pastor hath power to make canons for his own congregation; that is, to determine what hour or at what place they shall meet; what translation of Scripture, or version of Psalms, shall be used in his church; what chapter shall be read; what psalm shall be sung, &c.: except the magistrate contradict him, and determine it otherwise, in such points as are not proper to the ministerial office.

3. Councils or assemblies of pastors have the power of making such canons for many churches, as shall be laws to the people, and agreements to themselves.

4. None have power to make church laws or canons about any thing, save, (1.) To put God's own laws in execution. (2.) To determine to that end, of such circumstances as God hath left undetermined in his word.

5. Canon-making under pretence of order and concord, hath done a great deal of mischief to the churches; whilst clergymen have grown up from agreements, to tyrannical usurpations and impositions, and from concord about needful accidents of worship, to frame new worship ordinances, and to force them on all others: but especially, (1.) By encroaching on the power of kings, and telling them that they are bound in conscience to put all their canons into execution by force. (2.) And by laying the union of the churches and the communion of christians upon things needless and doubtful, yea, and at last on many sinful things; whereby the churches have been most effectually divided, and the christian world set together by the ears; and schisms, yea, and wars have been raised: and these maladies cannot possibly be healed, till the tormenting, tearing engines be broken and cast away, and the voluminous canons of numerous councils (which themselves also are matter of undeterminable controversy) be turned into the primitive simplicity; and a few necessary things made the terms of concord. Doubtless if every pastor were left wholly to himself for the ordering of worship circumstances and accidents in his own church, without any common canons, save the Scriptures, and the laws of the land, there would have been much less division, than that is, which these numerous canons of all the councils, obtruded on the church, have made.

Quest. XXXII. Doth baptism as such enter the baptized into the universal church, or into a particular church, or both? And is baptism the particular church covenant as such?

Answ. 1. Baptism as such doth enter us into the universal church, and into it alone; and is no particular church covenant, but the solemnizing of the great christian covenant of grace, between God, and a believer and his seed.

For, (1.) There is not essentially any mention of a particular church in it.

(2.) A man may be baptized by a general unfixed minister, who is not the pastor of any particular church:²⁷³ and he may be baptized in solitude, where there is no particular church. The eunuch, Acts viii. was not baptized into any particular church.

(3.) Baptism doth but make us christians, but a man may be a christian who is no member of any particular church.

(4.) Otherwise baptism should oblige us necessarily to a man, and be a covenant between the baptized and the pastor and church into which he is baptized: but it is only our covenant with Christ.

(5.) We may frequently change our particular church relation, without being baptized again. But we never change our relation to the church which we are baptized into, unless by apostasy.

2. Yet the same person at the same time that he is baptized may be entered into the universal church, and into a particular; and ordinarily it ought to be so where it can be had.

3. And the covenant which we make in baptism with Christ, doth oblige us to obey him, and consequently to use his instituted means, and so to hear his ministers, and hold due communion with his churches.

4. But this doth no more enter us into a particular church, than into a particular family. For we as well oblige ourselves to obey him in family relations as in church relations.

5. When the baptized therefore is at once entered into the universal and particular church, it is done by a double consent to the double relation. By baptism he professeth his consent to be a member of Christ and his universal church; and additionally he consenteth to be guided by that particular pastor in that particular church; which is another covenant or consent.

Quest. XXXIII. Whether infants should be baptized, I have answered long ago in a treatise on that subject. Also what infants should be baptized? and who have right to sacraments? and whether hypocrites are univocally or equivocally christians and church members? I have resolved in my "Disput. of Right to Sacraments."

Quest. XXXIV. Whether an unbaptized person who yet maketh a public profession of christianity, be a member of the visible church? And so of the infants of believers unbaptized

Answ. 1. Such persons have a certain imperfect, irregular kind of profession, and so of membership; their visibility or visible christianity is not such as Christ hath appointed. As those that are married, but not by legal celebration, and as those that in cases of necessity are ministers without ordination; so are such christians as Constantine and many of old without baptism.

2. Such persons ordinarily are not to be admitted to the rights and communion of the visible church, because we must know Christ's sheep by his own mark; but yet they are so far visible christians, as that we may be persuaded nevertheless of their salvation. As to visible communion, they have but a remote and incomplete jus ad rem, and no jus ad re, or legal investiture and possession.

3. The same is the case of unbaptized infants of believers, because they are not of the church merely as they are their natural seed; but because it is supposed that a person himself devoted to God, doth also devote his children to God: therefore not nature only, but this supposition arising from the true nature of his own dedication to God, is the reason why believers' children have their right to baptism: therefore till he hath actually devoted them to God in baptism, they are not legally members of the visible church, but only in fieri and imperfectly, as is said. Of which more anon.

Quest. XXXV. Is it certain by the word of God that all infants baptized, and dying before actual sin, are undoubtedly saved; or what infants may we say so of?

Answ. I. 1. We must distinguish between certainty objective and subjective; or plainlier, the reality or truth of the thing, and the certain apprehension of it.²⁷⁴

2. And this certainty of apprehension, sometimes signifieth only the truth of that apprehension, when a man indeed is not deceived, or more usually that clearness of apprehension joined with truth, which fully quieteth the mind and excludeth doubting.

3. We must distinguish of infants as baptized lawfully upon just title, or unlawfully without title.

4. And also of title before God, which maketh a lawful claim and reception at his bar; and title before the church, which maketh only the administration lawful before God, and the reception lawful only in foro ecclesia, or externo.

5. The word baptism signifieth either the external part only, consisting in the words and outward action, or the internal covenanting of the heart also.

6. And that internal covenant is either sincere, which giveth right to the benefits of God's covenant, or only partial, reserved, and unsound, such as is common to hypocrites.

Conclus. 1. God hath been pleased to speak so little in Scripture of the case of infants, that modest men will use the words certainly and undoubtedly, about their case, with very great caution. And many great divines have maintained that their very baptism itself, cannot be certainly and undoubtedly proved by the word of God, but by tradition; though I have endeavoured to prove the contrary in a special Treatise on that point.

2. No man can tell what is objectively certain or revealed in God's word, who hath not subjective certainty or knowledge of it.

3. A man's apprehension may be true, when it is but a wavering opinion, with the greatest doubtfulness. Therefore we do not usually by a certain apprehension, mean only a true apprehension, but a clear and quieting one.

4. It is possible to baptize infants unlawfully, or without any right, so that their reception and baptizing shall be a great sin, as is the misapplying of other ordinances. For instance: one in America, where there is neither church to receive them, nor christian parents, nor sponsors, may take up the Indians' children and baptize them against the parents' wills: or if the parents consent to have their children outwardly baptized, and not themselves, as not knowing what baptizing meaneth, or desire it only for outward advantages to their children; or if they offer them to be baptized only in open derision and scorn of Christ; such children have no right to be received. And many other instances nearer may be given.

5. It is possible the person may have no authority at all from Christ who doth baptize them. And Christ's part in reception of the person, and collation and investiture in his benefits, must be done by his commission, or else how can we say that Christ doth it? But open infidels, women, children, mad-men, scorners, may do it that have none of his commission.

6. That all infants baptized without title or right by misapplication, and so dying, are not undoubtedly saved, nor any word of God doth certainly say so, we have reason to believe on these following grounds.

1. Because we can find no such text, nor could ever prevail with them that say so, to show us such an ascertaining word of God.

2. Because else gross sin would certainly be the way to salvation. For such misapplication of baptism, by the demanders at least, would certainly be gross sin, as well as misapplying the Lord's supper.

3. Because it is clean contrary to the tenor of the new covenant, which promiseth salvation to none but penitent believers and their seed: what God may do for others unknown to us, we have nothing to do with; but his covenant hath made no other promise that I can find; and we are certain of no man's salvation by baptism, to whom God never made a promise of it. If by the children of the faithful, be meant not only their natural seed, but the adopted or bought also, of which they are true proprietors, yet that is nothing to all others.

4. To add to God's words, especially to his very promise or covenant, is so terrible a presumption, as we dare not be guilty of.

5. Because this tieth grace or salvation so to the outward washing of the body, or opus operatum, as is contrary to the nature of God's ordinances, and to the tenor of Scripture, and the judgment of the protestant divines.

6. Because this would make a strange disparity between the two sacraments of the same covenant of grace: when a man receiveth the Lord's supper unworthily, (in scorn, in drunkenness, or impenitency,) much more without any right, (as infidels,) he doth eat and drink damnation or judgment to himself, and maketh his sin greater; therefore he that gets a child baptized unworthily and without right, doth not therefore infallibly procure his salvation.

7. Because the apostle saith, 1 Cor. vii. 14, "Else were your children unclean, but now are they holy;" and the Scripture giveth this privilege to the children of the faithful above others: whereas the contrary opinion levelleth them with the seed of infidels and heathens, as if these had right to salvation by mere baptism, as well as the others.

8. Because else it would be the greatest act of charity in the world, to send soldiers to catch up all heathens' and infidels' children, and baptize them; which no christians ever yet thought their duty. Yea, it would be too strong a temptation to them to kill them when they had done, that they might be all undoubtedly saved.

Object. But that were to do evil that good might come by it. Answ. But God is not to be dishonoured as to be supposed to make such laws, as shall forbid men the greatest good in the world, and then to tempt them by the greatness of the benefit to take it to be no evil: as if he said, If soldiers would go take up a million of heathens' children and baptize them, it will put them into an undoubted state of salvation; but yet I forbid them doing it: and if they presently kill them, lest they sin after, they shall undoubtedly be saved; but yet I forbid them doing it. I need not aggravate this temptation to them that know the power of the law of nature, which is the law of love and good works, and how God that is most good is pleased in our doing good. Though he tried Abraham's obedience once, as if he should have killed his son, yet he stopped him before the execution. And doth he ordinarily exercise men's obedience, by forbidding them to save the souls of others, when it is easily in their power? especially when with the adult the greatest labour and powerfullest preaching, is frequently so frustrate, that not one of many is converted by it?

9. Because else God should deal with unaccountable disparity with infants and the adult in the same ordinance of baptism. It is certain that all adult persons baptized, if they died immediately, should not be saved; even none that had no right to the covenant and to baptism; such as infidels, heathens, impenitent persons, hypocrites, that have not true repentance and faith. And why should baptism save an infant without title, any more than the adult without title? I still suppose that some infants have no title, and that now I speak of them alone.

Object. But the church giveth them all right by receiving them.

Answ. This is to be further examined anon. If you mean a particular church, perhaps they are baptized into none such. Baptism as such is a reception only into the universal church, as in the eunuch's case, Acts viii. appeareth. If you mean the universal church, it may be but one single ignorant man in an infidel country that baptizeth, and he is not the universal church! yea, perhaps is not a lawfully called minister of that church! However, this is but to say, that baptism giveth right to baptism; for this receiving is nothing but baptizing. But there must be a right to this reception, if baptism be a distinguishing ordinance, and all the world have not right to it. Christ saith, Matt. xxviii. 19, "Disciple me all nations, baptizing them – :" they must be initially made disciples first, by consent, and then be invested in the visible state of christianity by baptism.

10. If the children of heathens have right to baptism, and salvation thereby, it is either, 1. As they are men, and all have right; or, 2. Because the parents give them right; 3. Or because remote ancestors give them right; 4. Or because the universal church gives them right; 5. Or because a particular church gives them right; 6. Or because the sponsors give them right; 7. Or the magistrate; 8. Or the baptizer. But it is none of all these, as shall anon be proved.

11. But as to the second question, I answer, 1. It will help us to understand the case the better, if we prepare the way by opening the case of the adult, because in Scripture times, they were the most famous subjects of baptism. And it is certain of such, 1. That every one outwardly baptized is not in a state of salvation. That no hypocrite that is not a true penitent believer is in such a state. 2. That every true penitent believer is before God in a state of salvation, as soon as he is such; and before the church as soon as he is baptized. 3. That we are not to use the word baptism as a physical term only, but as a moral, theological term. Because words (as in law, physic, &c.) are to be understood according to the art or science in which they are treated of. And baptism taken theologically doth as essentially include the will's consent or heart covenanting with God, as matrimony includeth marriage consent, and as a man containeth the soul as well as the body. And thus it is certain that all truly baptized persons are in a state of salvation; that is, all that sincerely consent to the baptismal covenant when they profess consent by baptism (but not hypocrites). 4. And in this sense all the ancient pastors of the churches did concur that baptism did wash away all sin, and put the baptized into a present right to life eternal: as he that examineth their writings will perceive: not the outward washing and words alone, but when the inward and outward parts concur, or when by true faith and repentance the receiver hath right to the covenant of God. 5. In this sense it is no unfit language to imitate the fathers, and to say that the truly baptized are in a state of justification, adoption, and salvation, unless when men's misunderstanding maketh it unsafe. 6. The sober papists themselves say the same thing, and when they have said that even ex opere operato baptism saveth, they add, that it is only the meet receiver; that is, the penitent believer, and no other of the adult. So that hitherto there is no difference.

2. Now let us by this try the case of infants; concerning which there are all these several opinions among divines.

(1.) Some think that all infants (baptized or not) are saved from hell, and positive punishment, but are not brought to heaven, as being not capable of such joys.

(2.) Some think that all infants (dying such) are saved as others are, by actual felicity in heaven, though in a lower degree. Both these sorts suppose that Christ's death saveth all that reject it not, and that infants reject it not.

(3.) Some think that all unbaptized infants do suffer the pœnam damni, and are shut out of heaven and happiness, but not sensibly punished or cast into hell. For this Jansenius hath wrote a treatise; and many other papists think so.

(4.) Some think that all the children of sincere believers dying in infancy are saved, (that is, glorified,) whether baptized or not; and no others.

(5.) Some think that God hath not at all revealed what he will do with any infants.

(6.) Some think that he hath promised salvation as aforesaid to believers and their seed, but hath not at all revealed to us what he will do with all the rest.

(7.) Some think that only the baptized children of true believers are certainly (by promise) saved.

(8.) Some think that all the adopted and bought children of true christians, as well as the natural, are saved (if baptized, say some; or if not, say others).

(9.) Some think that elect infants are saved, and no other, but no man can know who those are. And of these, 1. Some deny infant baptism. 2. Most say that they are to be baptized, and that thereby the non-elect are only received into the visible church and its privileges, but not to any promise or certainty of justification, or a state of salvation.

(10.) Some think that all that are baptized by the dedication of christian sponsors are saved.

(11.) Some think that all that the pastor dedicateth to God are saved (because so dedicated by him, say some; or because baptized ex opere operato, say others). And so all baptized infants are in a state of salvation.

(12.) Some think that this is to be limited to all that have right to baptism coram Deo; which some think the church's reception giveth them, of which anon.

(13.) And some think it is to be limited to those that have right coram ecclesia, or are rightfully baptized ex parte ministrantis, where some make the magistrate's command sufficient, and some the bishop's, and some the baptizer's will.

Of the title to baptism I shall speak anon. Of the salvation of infants, it is too tedious to confute all that I dissent from: not presuming in such darkness and diversity of opinions to be peremptory, nor to say, I am certain by the word of God who are undoubtedly saved, nor yet to deny the undoubted certainty of wiser men, who may know that which such as I do doubt of, but submitting what I say to the judgment of the church of God and my superiors, I humbly lay down my own thoughts as followeth.

1. I think that there can no promise or proof be produced that all unbaptized infants are saved, either from the pœna damni or sensus, or both.

2. I think that no man can prove that all unbaptized infants are damned, or denied heaven. Nay, I think I can prove a promise of the contrary.

3. All that are rightfully baptized in foro externo are visible church members, and have ecclesiastical right to the privileges of the visible church.

4. I think Christ never instituted baptism for collation of these outward privileges alone, unless as on supposition that persons culpably fail of the better ends.

5. I think baptism is a solemn mutual contract or covenant between Christ and the baptized person. And that it is but one covenant, even the covenant of grace which is the sum of the gospel, which is sealed and received in baptism; and that this covenant essentially containeth our saving relation to God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and our pardon, justification, and adoption or right to life everlasting; and that God never made any distinct covenant of outward privileges alone, to be sealed by baptism. But that outward mercies are the second and lesser gift of the same covenant which giveth first the great and saving blessings.

6. And therefore that whoever hath right before God, to claim and receive baptism, hath right also to the benefits of the covenant of God, and that is, to salvation; though I say not so of every one that hath such right before the church, as that God doth require the minister to baptize him. For by right before God, or in foro cœli, I mean such a right as will justify the claim before God immediately, the person being one whom he commandeth in that present state to claim and receive baptism. For many a one hath no such right before God to claim or receive it, when yet the minister hath right to give it them if they do claim it.

The case stands thus. God saith in his covenant, He that believeth shall be saved, and ought to be baptized, to profess that belief, and be invested in the benefits of the covenant; and he that professeth to believe, (whether he do or not,) is by the church to be taken for a visible believer, and by baptism to be received into the visible church. Here God calleth none but true believers (and their seed) to be baptized, nor maketh an actual promise or covenant with any other; and so I say that none other have right in foro cœli. But yet the church knoweth not men's hearts, and must take a serious profession for a credible sign of the faith professed, and for that outward title upon which it is a duty of the pastor to baptize the claimer.²⁷⁵ So that the most malignant, scornful hypocrite, that maketh a seemingly serious profession, hath right coram ecclesia, but not coram Deo, save in this sense, that God would have the minister baptize him. But this I have largelier opened in my "Disputations of Right to Sacraments."

7. I think therefore that all the children of true christians, do by baptism receive a public investiture by God's appointment into a state of remission, adoption, and right to salvation at the present; though I dare not say that I am undoubtedly certain of it, as knowing how much is said against it. But I say as the synod of Dort, art. 1. That believing parents have no cause to doubt of the salvation of their children that die in infancy, before they commit actual sin; that is, not to trouble themselves with fears about it.

The reasons that move me to be of this judgment (though not without doubting and hesitancy) are these; 1. Because whoever hath right to the present investiture, delivery, and possession of the first and great benefits of God's covenant made with man in baptism, hath right to pardon, and adoption, and everlasting life: but the infants of true christians have right to the present investiture, delivery and possession of the first and great benefits of God's covenant made with man in baptism; therefore they have right to pardon and everlasting life.

Either infants are in the same covenant (that is, are subjects of the same promise of God) with their believing parents, or in some other covenant, or in no covenant. If they be under no covenant, (or promise,) or under some other promise or covenant only, and not the same, they are not to be baptized. For baptism is a mutual covenanting; where the minister by Christ's commission in his name acteth his part, and the believer his own and his infant's part: and God hath but one covenant, which is to be made, sealed, and delivered in baptism. Baptism is not an equivocal word, so as to signify divers covenants of God.

Object. But the same covenant of God hath divers sorts of benefits; the special God giveth to the sincere, and the common to the common and hypocritical receiver.

Answ. 1. God indeed requireth the minister to take profession for the visible church title; and so it being the minister's duty so far to believe a liar, and to receive dissemblers who had no right to lay that claim, you may say that God indirectly and improperly giveth them church privileges: but properly, that is, by his promise or covenant deed or gift, he giveth them nothing at all; for his covenant is one and undivided in its action, though it give several benefits, and though providence may give one and not another, yet the covenant giveth all or none. God saith that godliness hath the promise of this life and of that to come; but he never said (that I know of) to the hypocrite or unsound believer, I promise or give right to common mercies.²⁷⁶

2. But suppose it were otherwise, yet either the children of true believers have the true condition of right to the special blessings of the covenant, or they have not the condition of any at all. For there can no more be required of an infant, as to any special blessings of the covenant, than that he be the child of believing parents, and by them dedicated to God. Either this condition entitleth them to all the covenant promises which the adult believer is entitled to, (as far as their natures are capable,) or it entitleth them to none at all; nor are they to be baptized; for God hath in Scripture instituted but one baptism, (to profess one faith,) and that one is ever for the remission of sins:²⁷⁷ "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved," Mark xvi. 16.

3. Or if all the rest were granted you, yet it would follow that all infants in the world, even of true believers, are left out of God's covenant of grace, that is, the covenant or promise of pardon and life; and are only taken into the covenant of church privileges. And so, 1. You will make two covenants, (which you denied,) and not only two sorts of benefits of one covenant. 2. And two species of baptism; while all infants in the world are only under a covenant of outward privileges, and have no baptism, but the seal of that covenant, while believers have the covenant, promise, and seal of pardon and life.

2. And this is my second reason; because then we have no promise or certainty, or ground of faith, for the pardon and salvation of any individual infants in the world. And so parents are left to little comfort for their children. And if there be no promise there is no faith of it, nor any baptism to seal it; and so we still make antipædobaptism unavoidable. For who dare set God's seal to such as have no promise? or pretend to invest any in a near and saving relation to God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, (which is the very nature of baptism,) when God hath given no such commission?