form his oath, that he will keep God's righteous judgments," as David acted, Psalm cxix. 106. And thus "he calls upon the name of the Lord" in accepting and confirming the covenant, when he suffers himself to be baptized," with Paul, Acts xxii. 16. With this agrees another passage, which the instructor cites from Mark xvi. 16, where the Saviour saith, "He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." We enter by faith into the covenant, which promiseth the washing away of sins; the Lord confirms these promises of his by the seal of baptism, and the believer receiving this seal, protests that he will conduct himself worthily of the Lord, in consequence of the promises and the sealing of them; to which then the promise of salvation is annexed not that baptism effects salvation by itself, and is therefore absolutely necessary, as the Papists teach; but we obtain salvation by faith, which embraceth Christ the Saviour and Mediator of the covenant, and baptism is the seal of it. Therefore the passage, Mark xvi. 16, doth not threaten the unbaptized with damnation, but the unbelieving, who despise Christ, and thus also his institution of baptism, like the Pharisees, Luke vii 30.

The instructor proceeds and says, "This promise is also repeated, whe e the scripture calls baptism the washing of regeneration, and the washing away of sins." Thus Paul calls bap ism," the washing of regeneration, Iitus iii. 5, and Ananias calls baptism, "the washing away of sins," Acts xxii. 15. Waterbaptism is so called, not because it regenerates a person, and washes away his sins, as the Papists erroneously conceive here, which we will show upon the twenty seventh Lord's day; but because it is a seal of regeneration, and the washing away of sins, by virtue of the divine promise, that the believer, who is baptized, is as truly regenerated, and cleansed from his sins by the blood and Spirit of Christ, as he is washed with water. And so baptism is called the washing away of sins by a sacramental phraseology, which ascribes the properties of the thing signified to the sign. That outward baptism doth not effect regeneration, and the washing away of sins, this the apostle of the circumcision teacheth us, when he saith, 1 Peter iii. 21. "The like figure whereunto, even baptism, doth also now save us, (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." He denies therefore that outward waterbaptism saves: but what is the answer of a good conscience toward God? A good conscience is that which is reconciled and pacified by the blood and perfect sacrifice of Christ, and which also exerciseth itself to a holiness that is acceptable to

God. See Heb. ix. 14. x. 2, 22. 1 Peter iii. 26. By the question, eferotema of this good conscience some understand a question asked in consequence of another persons question, or the condition which God proposeth to the person, who is baptized, in which he asks, whether, he will maintain a good conscience toward God; and they say that God asks this question, when the person who is baptized asks whether he will be his God; or they understand by it an answer, or promise of maintaining a good conscience, which the person who is baptized makes to God.

Although this is a learned invention, it is nevertheless not altogethimpertinent to observe, that it is not necessary to explain the word eperotema, a question, by a question asked in consequence of a foregoing question, or by a condition, answer or promise; we may take it for a simple question, by which the good conscience asks in prayer to God for his sealing grace; for it is of no importance here in what sense the word eperotema is used by certain writers, and how in the law; but how, and in what sense the holy writers use it. It is certain that this noun substantive, which is found in only one passage in the New Testament, is derived from the verb eperotao, We find this verb fifty and nine times in the New Testament; it is translated once to desire, thrice to inquire, and fifty and five times to ask, according to Trommius's concordance. And doth this word ever denote a question, asked in consequence of another person's question, it doth not proceed from the nature of the word, as being compounded of two words, but because the connexion of the foregoing words requires it, as we see in the simple, uncompounded verb erolao, Matt. xxi. 24, 25. Luke xx. 3, 4, xxii. 67, 68. But in these words of Peter we find no foregoing question, to which the question in the text should refer. Further, we cannot easily connect the words, "a good conscience," with the words, "to God;" but we can easily refer the word " question," to the words "to God," and so the good conscience of the believer, who is baptized, asks in prayer, Father, wilt thou not give me now that necessary grace which thou hast promised? wilt thou not wash away my sins? hast thou not been satisfied for all mine iniquity, and hath not all that salvation been purchased for me? didst not thou thyself declare it, when thou raisedst thy Son, my Surety from the dead, when thou dischargedst him from his prison, when thou justifiedst him in the Spirit, and gavest him thus an acquittance, witnessing that thou wast satisfied? hast thou not now assured me of this, and sealed it to me by baptism? This agrees also exceedingly well with the words of Peter, when he calls this question a baptism by a sacramental phrase, which

ascribes the name of the sign to the thing signified; and this baptism saveth us, because the answer of a good conscience toward God is the act of faith, which seeks salvation in God through Christ, raised from the dead.

5. Therefore baptism is a most precious and holy institution, given by God to his church; consequently we must beware that we do not profane it, with respect to its circumstances of persons, time, or place.

1. The Papists, who make a great ado about waterbaptism, and seek the holiness and virtue of baptism only in the act of sprinkling with water, as though that washed away sins, and salvation depended thereon; think that a woman, yea, that any other person hath a right to administer baptism in a case of necessity; but this is a profanation of baptism, and of the institution of the Lord; for Christ committed the administration of baptism only to the ministers of the word, when he said to his apostles, "Teach all nations, and baptize them," Matt. xviii. 19. They are "servants of Christ, and thus stewards of the mysteries of God," 1 Cor. iv, 1. Will no man dare to stamp and seal any thing with the seal of the prince, unless he be commissioned for that purpose, and shall a woman then, or any other human being presume to apply the seal of God to a person, who hath entered into covenant with him? Did Zipparoh venture to do this, Exod. iv. 24, 25, 26, we ought not to imitate her in that action; for she did not do it agreeably to the divine command, but hastily, and in boisterous anger. God, who would slay Moses, because he had not circumcised his Son, forbore to do it, because his son was circumcised, but not on account of the circumstances of the action, for they were sinful, because the woman acted with so little deliberation, and so precipitately. Moses, the prophet of the Lord, was present: but will the Papists permit a woman to baptize, when a priest is at hand? I judge not. Baptism was however not so restrained to the apostles, that the ordinary preachers of the gospel had no right to administer it, and therefore they also baptized: surely not like laymen, as the Papists assert, but as called to the office of preachers. We see it in Philip and Ananias, Acts. viii. 12, 38. ix. 10-18.

The Papists are not only guilty of presumption in permitting any person to baptize, but they are also guilty of profaneness in administering baptism in the name of the Holy Trinity to bells, in order to consecrate them, that they may lay storms, expel the devil and diabolical apparitions, and deliver souls out of purgatory. To what hath the Romish whore and mother of whoredoms and of abominations not apostatized? Jesus hath not taught us to baptize bells, but

1

"nations," Matt. xxviii. 19, and therefore human creatures; but we may not baptize human creatures in general, they must first "be taught and discipled," according to the institution of Christ, Matt. xxviii. 19. and they must consequently have entered into covenant with God, and believe, according to Mark xvi. 15, they must be able to profess their faith, like the Eunuch, Acts viii. 36, 37, 38, and exercise it by the answer of a good consience; for baptism is a seal of the covenant. When Christ saith that we must baptize all nations, he shows that baptism is not a privilege of any one nation in particular as circumcision was the advantage of the Jews; The New Testament should introduce all nations to fellowship with God, and baptism, the sacrament of the New Testament, should seal them. We shall inquire on the next Lord's day, whether we may baptize children.

2. As the difference of places hath ceased under the New Testament, therefore baptism is also not confined to any particular place. The ancients sometimes made use of the burying-places of the Christians, especially of the martyrs for this purpose, to which some refer, 1 Cor. xv. 29, but erroneously; for that custom had not taken place in Paul's time. They left off at length baptizing on the graves, because it savoured of superstition. John, Christ, the apostles and evangelists baptized wherever it was convenient, and especially where they preached; but the church being at length reduced to a settled condition, it was judged proper to baptize in the congregation of the people. This is also commendable, inasmuch as baptism must be joined to the word, and is an incorporation into the church.

3. It is thus also with respect to the time of administering bap-tism. Children were indeed circumcised on the eighth day under the Old Testament, but as the ceremonial difference of time is now abolished, we are not therefore bound any longer to a particular time for administering baptism. We cannot approve of the conduct of the ancients, who, from an erroneous opinion, that baptism washed away all past sins, deferred it until the end of their lives, and baptized persons on their sickbeds, neither can we approve of their setting apart the festivals of Easter, and Whitsuntide for this purpose; for this agrees not with the spirituality of the New Testament church. John the Baptist, the apostles and evangelists baptized persons as soon as they believed, and confessed their faith: otherwise the most proper time for baptizing is when the congregation is assembled, although we might also observe other seasons for baptizing in times of persecution and other inconveniencies.

After baptism hath been once rightly administered, we may not repeat it, and use it often: for baptism being a sacrament of regeneration and of incorporation into the church, both of which take take place only once, it is not necessary to repeat it, as it is to repeat the Lord's supper, which being a sacrament of nourishment and of confirmation, must therefore be often received. It is with these sacraments, as it was with the ordinary sacraments of the Old Testament, circumcision and the passover; for baptism is come in the stead of circumcision, which was administered but once, and the Lord's supper was instituted in the stead of the passover, which used to be repeated yearly; but when the essentials of baptism have not been rightly observed by baptizing in the name of the Trinity, and when that fundamental article of the faith is denied, as is done by the Socinians, then we must look upon such a baptism as no baptism. and we must re-baptize those who have been so baptized, when they repent, believe in the Triune God, and confess him. Whether the Mennonites do ill, when they re-baptize those whom we and others have baptized in their youth, this belongs to the controversy about infantbaptism: but of that we will speak on the twenty-seventh Lord's day.

APPLICATION.

What think ye now, hearers, is it not a great blessing, that the Lord God hath given baptism to his church for a sacrament? surely yes. That the Triune God should receive the sinner into such a well ordered covenant, and unite him to himself, that each Person should contribute his part to favour him, to cleanse and wash him from his sins for ever, and should thus set his heart upon him with an admirable love, this is an inconceivable grace: but it surpasseth even this, that he should join to this grace not only his word, but also this sacrament, that he may render this grace clear and lively to him, yea, even assure him of it, and seal it to him, that he may render his joy and comfort complete. The word of God would have been su cient to confirm the believing sinner, as it is infallible; but "God willing to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have strong cosolation," Heb. vi. 17, 18. Behold, in this