must do, in many other rules of holy Scripture? namely, to understand them thus:-That this is God's ordinary rule, or the ordinary condition of salvation; but that, in ertraordinary cases (where his providence cuts off all our opportunity of using it) he has also extraordinary mercy to save without it. The antients, as I shall shew, did hope, and even conclude so, in case of a convert believing, and many in the following ages, of an infant. ༣. * If the objection be, that it is not easy to conceive how an infant can be born or regenerate of the Spirit (which is mentioned in the text as well as of water) since he is not capable of any operations of the Spirit an his will, &c. it is not only owned by all other Christians that the Holy Spirit, besides his office of converting the heart, does seal and apply pardon of sin, and other promises of the covenant, but also by the Antipædobaptists, that the Spirit of Christ is given or applied to infants. So says Mr. Danvers: "That they are capable of salvation by Christ's purchase, and the application of Christ's blood and Spirit to them, who doubts it? I am sure I never affirmed the contrary." And Mr. Tombs: "The grace of God electing them, putting them into Christ, uniting them to him by his Spirit t.' * The Antipædobaptists do themselves make use of this place of Scripture against the Quakers and other Anabaptists (and that with good reason) to prove the necessity of baptism. Some of them also, that can read no other than the English translation, will sometimes very unwarily urge it against the Pædobaptists; and will observe that it is said, Except a man be born, &c.-it is not said a child; concluding from the word that he who is so born must be a man grown. But these, you will say, are right English divines. This may be retorted on them; for the original is not av un ἀνὴρ, οι, ἔαν μὴ ἄνθρωπος except a man ; but ἔαν μὴ Answer to Appeal, p. 9. VOL. II. + Examen, § 10. ris, except any one. So the text is understood by the antients, and by all who can read the original. It is a common thing with the Antipædobaptists when they are attacked with that argument, that women's receiving the communion is no more plainly expressed in Scripture than infant baptism, to answer by citing that text, — Δοκιμαζέτω ἑαυτὸν ἄνθρωπος, &c. Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat, &c." and to urge that the word "Av0pwros, being of the common gender, includes women as well as men; and they will frequently boast and say, "Do but produce as good proof for baptizing infants as this text affords for women's receiving, and we will comply." Nevertheless, it is not advisable for them to venture any more on this challenge than they can be content to lose; for the word is used here, tav un ris, does (much more naturally than the word av0owroc) signify any one, or any person, man, woman, or child. It is only an Anglicism to say Except a man, instead of Except a person be born of water, &c. Though the antients understood the foresaid text to mean baptism, and though the words are peremptory, yet they were of opinion that God Almighty did in some extraordinary cases, when baptism could not be had, dispense with his own law; and one case, which they all agreed to be exempted, was that of martyrs. If any one had such faith in Christ as willingly to sacrifice his life for the testimony of his truth; they concluded that such a man, whether he had as yet been baptized or not, was received into the king dom of Heaven. This they called Baptismum Sanguinis, a being baptized in blood,' referring to that of our Savicur, Mat. xx. 22, You shall be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with. So Tertullian [100]: "We have also another bap tism (which as well as the other can be used but once) namely, that of blood. "Hic est baptismus qui lavaerum & non acceptum repræsentat, & perditum reddit." De Baptismo, c. 16. This is a baptism which will either supply the place of water-baptism to one that has not received it, or will restore it to one that has lost [or defaced] it.” [150]. The same thing is owned by Cyprian* [250]. St. Cyril, who says thus:-"If one be ever so upright, and yet do not receive the seal of water, he cannot enter into the kingdom of Heaven. This is a bold speech, but it is none of mine; it is Jesus Christ that has made this decree." Yet afterward, in the same oration, excepts martyrs. So likewise Fulgentius [107], as positive as he is that none can be saved without baptism, yet puts it t Exceptis iis qui pro Christi nomine suo sanguine baptizantur." Except those who are for the name of Christ, baptized in their own blood.' Gennadius [395] speaks to the same purpose §. St. Austin says, || "Ever since the time that our Saviour said Except any one be born again of water, &c.—and at another place, He that shall lose his life for my sake, shall find it, no person is made a member of Christ but either by baptism in Christ, or by death for Christ. Besides the case of martyrs, if a heathen man was arrived to some degree of belief of the Christian religion, and confession of it, and yet died without baptism, they judged of his case with some distinction; for if the man had shewn a contempt or gross neglect of baptism as a needless thing, and then were cut off by death without receiving it, they judged such a case to be hopeless. Tertullian himself calls that a wicked doctrine [100]; " to think that baptism is not necessary to those that have faith." His words you have before, Part I. ch. 4. St. Ambrose [274] ¶ speaks of it as a received opinion, that "a catechumen, though he believe in the cross [or death] of the Lord + Catech. 3. * Epist. 73, ad Jubaianum. Jesus, yet unless he be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, cannot receive remission of sins, nor be partaker of the gift of spiritual grace." He must mean, of those that refuse or contemn baptism, as will appear by what I shall quote from him by and by. Gregory Nazianzen [260], speaking of three sorts of persons that die unbaptized, reckons these the worst, and likely to have the greatest punishment. His words are recited in Part I. ch. 11. St. Austin's words also I produced before, Part I. ch. 15. "But when a man goes without it, by his wilful neglect of it, he is involved in guilt; for that must not be called a conversion of the heart to God, when God's sacra ment is contemned." So that the learned Vossius, in his book of Baptism, Disp. 6, Th. 6, having spoke of some points of baptism, in which the opinions of the fathers differed, owns them to have been unanimous in this." This is (says he) the judgment of all antiquity, that they perish eternally who despise baptism; ie. will not be baptized when they may." If it were one that intended to be baptized some time or other, but put it off from time to time, either out of a negligent delay, or out of a desire of enjoying unlawful lusts some time longer, and then happened finally to miss it, as St. Chrysostom says he had known it happen too often, they judged such an one lost, though not liable to so great a punishment as he that had absolutely despised it [260]. So, Gregory Nazianzen determines in the place last mentioned; and their sayings to that purpose are too cominon to need repeating. I shall recite only one of Hermas for its antiquity, being wrote in the apostles' time. He speaks of a vision which he saw of the building of the Church Triumphant, under the emblem of a tower built with several stones; and he saw many sorts of stones rejected and cast far from the tower; and, among the rest, some cadentes juxta aquam, nec posse volvi in aquam, volentibus quidem eis intrare in *Pastor, lib. 1, Vis. 3. + Cap. 2. aquam, that fell near the water [on which the tower was built]; and though they seemed desirous to gọi into the water, could not roll into it. And in the explication* [in the apostles' time], he asks "What are those other that fell near the water, and could not roll into the water ?"-answer is made, "They are such as heard the word, and had a mind to be baptized in the name of the Lord; but considering the great holiness which the truth requires, withdrew themselves, and walked again after their wicked desires.' And I think it very probable that St. James means this sort of men, chap. i. 6, 7, 8, where he speaks of some that were double-minded, wavering, unstable, tossed to and fro in their resolutions; and he says there, that such shall receive nothing of the Lord. Some put off their baptism a long time, fearing lest after it they might fall into sin again. These Tertullian [100] commends, and advises to stay till the danger of lust is over; and says at one place t, that to such men, if they should happen to miss of baptism, "an entire faith is secure of salvation." But all the rest do much discommend this practice; as appears at large in the sermons made to the catechumens by St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Gregory Nyssen, St. Chrysostom, and others. Nazianzen says [260]; "This is the deceit of the Devil counterfeiting holiness, and cheating men of the grace of baptism, by persuading them to an over-cau tion; that by means of their fear of staining their bap tism, they may altogether miss of it.' دو Nyssen says [260], & That of the two, it is better to receive it now, though one should fall into sin after, than to hazard the loss, of it by this caution; for to those that sin afterward, he allows hope of pardon upon repentance; but of those that die without being baptized at all, he says "When I hear that peremptory sentence, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except * Cap. 7. + See Part I. ch. 4. + Or. 40. |