A Rejoinder to Mr. Wills His Vindiciæ

p. 1GHAP. I. Wherein the Antiquity of Believers, and Novelty of Infants Baptism is further confirmed; and that the Baptism after Faith was the only Baptism that was owned in the first Centuries, to be Christs Ordinance and the Churches Practise, in full Answer to Mr. Wills his Vindiciae.

THE main question discussed between Mr. Wills and me, has been, whether the Anabaptists (so called) or the Paedobaptists have most to plead from Antiquity for their Way; viz. Those that only Baptize Men and Women after Profession of Faith and Repentance, or those that Baptize Infants that are capable of neither.

The former of which I first asserted in my Treatise, and since defended, in my Reply to Mr. Wills, Mr. Baxter, and others, viz. That the Anabaptists, notwithstanding the great Cry to the contrary, have the Antiquity of their side for the first Centuries.

p. 2And which notwithstanding all the noise and clamour after the full discussion of that point on both hands, is now clearly manifested (if not by their own grants confirmed) to us. The which you may receive in the following brief Account.

[1. Cent. gives Examples only for Ad • lt Baptism.] FIrst it is most manifest as is confest on all hands, that the Scripture Story for the first Century gives us an account of no other Baptism, but that after Faith and Repentance, viz. Produceth Instances, or gives us Examples only for adult Believers, and not Infants Baptism; As we have observed the Magdeburgs themselves those Paedobaptists have so fully own'd acknowledging, That they find Examples in the 2, 8, 10, 16, 19. of the Acts for the Baptizing of adult Believers, hut of Bap◊izing of Infants they read of no Example De Infantibus Baptizatis Exempla quidem non leguntur: To which Mr. Wills subscribes, acknowledging, That there are no particular Examples for Infants Baptism upon Record, p. 3. 53. vind. Mr. Whitston confessing the same as generally owned by them.

As for the Allegation, That the Apostles Writings do not expresly exclude In◊ants, as p. 3Mr. Wills and Mr. Whitston from the Magd. affirm is so weak and frivolous, that needs no Reply, which would establish Baptizing of Bells, Chrysm, and what not of the Popish Inventions.

And that if not asserted in Scripture, is yet found in the Writings of Origen and Cyprian to have been the Apostles practise, is as utterly insignificant; for as it has, and will further appear to you they have writ no such thing; nor secondly if they had, would what they writ in the third Age, upon their single Testimonies, prove such a matter of fact in the first Age, when as 'tis confest the Scripture is wholly silent therein.

Therefore I hope it cannot be denyed, that for what appears in Scripture Story▪ our Enemies themselves being Judges, that Antiquity for the first Century is wholly on our side; so that no mention need be made of the Epistles of Clement and Ignatius in Confirmation thereof.

SEcondly, as to the Second Century [2. Cent. gives Examples only for Adult Baptism.] we find upon the fullest discussion, it produceth as few Examples for Infants Baptism, as the first, and that only those are mentioned to have been Baptized in this Age, that first p. 4made a profession of Faith, and Repentance, as appears by that most remarkable account given us out of Justin Martyrs Apology, the most Authentick piece of Antiquity of this Age (not to mention what is said from Dionysius, and Clem◊nt. Alexandrinus Treat. p. 49, 50. which is not gainsaid by our Antagonist, only Mr. Wills would insinuate, that the Magd. did suppose, That the Order Justin Martyr lays down, respected the reception of Aliens to Baptism, which would not hurt us, because all are Aliens till Converted, no mention being made of any that were otherwise received. But Justins own words are full for satisfaction in the point, as Treat p. 49. viz. I will declare unto you how we offer up our selves to God after we are renewed through Christ, &c. Which respected the Order and Method observed by the Saints and Believers in the Church at that day, and how all of them had their admission therein.

So that for the first 200 Years we carry it, having Examples as is confest for the one, but none to be produced for the other: Whereby I should be sufficiently justified, (should we proceed no farther) in that assertion Mr. Wills so complains of, p. 2. vind. By affirming, That Antiquity it self is altogether for Believers, and not for Infants Baptism. p. 5For if it be manifest, that there be 200 Years for the one before the other, well may I say, That there is Antiqity for the one, and not for the other; for if Antiquity be writ upon Believers Baptism, Novelty then must needs be writ upon Infants Baptism. Nor but that I grant some that were called the Ancient Fathers of the 5th. Age, as Austin, Chrysostom, and others affirmed it; from whence Mr. Wills again and again upbraids me, and Mr. Whitston also, That I do contradict my self, in saying Antiquity was altogether for the one, and not for the other, they not considering, or willingly omit that I mean Primitive Antiquity; the Elder Brother was to carry away, as the dignity and preheminency, so the Inheritance from the Younger, much more the true born, from the base born Child.

IN the 3d. Century we have as few Examples to be produced for Infants Baptism, [No Example for any but Adult Baptism in the 3. Cen.] as in the two former; but that they Baptized in this Age after the Profession of Faith, we have an ample account from Tertullian, Origen and Cyprian, and several others, as Treat. p. 51, &c. And which our Antagonists are so far from opposing, that they p. 6abundantly confirm, viz. Mr. Baxter, in his Saints Rest, p. 1. cap. 8. sect. 5. telling us, That Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, who lived (saith he) in the 2d. and 3d. Centuries, do all of them affirm, That in the Primitive times none were Baptized without an express Covenanting, wherein they renounced the World; Flesh, and Devil, and engaged themselves to Christ, and promised to obey him. And Mr. Wills also, 2. part. p. 6. of Infants Baptism, acknowledgeth, That the Magdeburgs do tell us, Thaet Tertullian in this age opposed himself to some that asserted Infants Baptism, affirming, That the Adult were only proper Subjects.