A TREATISE ON THE LAYING ON OF HANDS ON BAPTIZED BELIEVERS

Henry D'Anvers was against the laying on of hands on all baptized believers - ed.

A

TREATISE

OF

LAYING ON OF HANDS,

WITH THE

HISTORY

THEREOF!

Both from the Scripture and Antiquity.

Wherein an account is given how it hath been practiced in all ages since Christ, the mistakes about it rectified and the sense of Heb. 6:2; cleared.

By H. D’ANVERS.
Isa. 57:14 Take up the stumbling block out of the way of my people.

LONDON,

Printed for Fran Smith, at the Elephant and Cattle near the Royal Exchange in Cornhill. 1674

INTRODUCTION:
Having given you an account both from Scripture and Antiquity of the business of Baptism in its institution, Subject, Manner, End, &c. It may neither be unnecessary nor unprofitable to give you here some account of that of Laying on of Hands, not only because it immediately follows that of Baptisms, Heb. 6:1-2, but more especially, because for confirmation, as it hath been called, it hath been next after Baptism, so solemnly affected, practiced, and enjoined both in former and latter times, as an ordinance of Christ and essentially necessary to Church-Communion. But what this laying on of Hands is, and how that of confirmation is founded upon the Word of God, we shall here consider and examine, and recommend to the judgment of all discerning and impartial Christians.

The method I shall observe herein shall be, 

First to give you an Account of what we find of this rite in the New Testament. 

Secondly, How asserted and practiced by the Ancients, with the opinions of the Fathers and Decrees of councils upon it. 

Thirdly, how practiced and enjoined by the Church of Rome. 

Fourthly, how by the Church of England. 

Fifthly, how asserted by some of the Presbyterian and Independent persuasion. 

Sixthly, how practiced enjoined by several of the Baptized Churches in this Nation, with some remarks upon each of them for the better discovery of Truth.

I. HOW LAYING ON OF HANDS IS USED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
First, in benediction, Mark 10:16; He took the young children up in his Arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.

​Secondly, In the cure of disease and healing of the sick

Mark 6:5 - And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them. Mark 16:17-18 - And In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. Acts 28:8 - And it came to pass, that the father of Publius lay sick of a fever and of a bloody flux: to whom Paul entered in, and prayed, and laid his hands on him, and healed him.

​Thirdly, for the conferring the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. Viz.
1. Before Baptism, Acts 9:17 - And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou might receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
2. After Baptism, Acts 8:14-20 - Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they came down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with you because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. &c.

​Fourthly, In Ordination or setting apart to office, viz. Acts 6:6 - Whom they set before the apostles: (viz, the seven deacons the Church had chosen) and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them. And the Word of God increased, &c. 1 Tim. 4:14 - Neglect, not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. 2 Tim 1:6 - Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands. 1Tim. 5:22 - Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure.

Act 13:3 - And when they had fasted and prayed and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.

In which Scripture speaks of this rite, we may take notice of these things.
1. First, the several kinds of it, viz. for Benediction, Healing, Ordination, and giving of the Spirit.
2. Secondly, What is called, viz. Laying on of Hands?
3. Thirdly, the subjects, viz. Little Children, Sick persons, and such upon whom the Spirit had not fallen, and Church Officers.
4. Fourthly, the administrators, viz. Christ Jesus Himself, any gifted Believer, the Elders, or Presbyters, The gifted Apostles.
5. Fifthly, the end, to bless little Children, to give Miraculous healing. And for Extraordinary gifts of the Spirit to confirm the Gospel. And for the Ordination of Church Officers.

II. HOW ASSERTED BY THE ANCIENTS

Secondly, how asserted by the Ancients, and by the canons and decrees of several Councils.

Dionysim the Arepagite Pauls convert at Athens supposed to be the first writer about the year 70, in his Ecclesiastical Hierarchy Cap. De Baptist. Faith, after Baptism, let the Sacraments of confirmation be adjoined with unison, then let the Eucharist be given, Contempt. 3, Serm. 8.

Pope Clement in his fourth Epistle, saith, Let them be Baptized, and then consigned by the Bishop for the Holy Spirit, for without confirmation no perfection, Joseph, Vice comes to De Baptist Ritibus P. 369. c. 18.

Justin Martyr's Responses 137, Quest. Saith, after Baptism we are to anoint with Holy Chrysin for Spiritual benefit, Vice com. Ch. 28. P. 369.

Pope Hyginus in his decree, as saith Gratian p. hygi. L. Osiand. Cent. 2. L, 2. C. 5. Saith, in Catechism, Baptism, and Confirmation, let there be a gossip if necessity requires.

Pope Calixtus, Anno. 218. Ordained confirmation be performed with Chrism, Flores Temporun confes. Fabo. C.7.

Pope Urban in, in his decretal Epistle enjoins, that the Sacrament of Confirmation be immediately given after Baptism and that all the faithful are to wait for the Spirit by the imposition of the Hands of the Bishop, Vice Co. C. 38. P. 370.

Pope Melchiades, or Meltiades about 310. Ordained Imposition was of hands as necessary to perfect Baptism. And in his universal Decretal Epistle, answering the question, which of the sacraments Baptism or Confirmation was of greater efficacy and virtue, saith they are to be joined together, there being such affinity betwixt them, that one is not to be done without the other; neither of them being perfect alone, Vice comes P.

Pope Eusebius in his Decretal Epistle calls the Imposition of hands a sacrament which was not lawful to be administered but by the Bishop. Magd. Cent.4. p. 478. Also in his Epistle to the Bishop of Tusea, prefers laying on of hands or confirmation before Baptism, Magdeburg. Center. 4. C. 7. P. 581

Cyprian in his 73 Epistle to Jubajan saith, that Baptism is consummated by the Sacrament of Confirmation. And again in Ep. 72. Lev. I. Persons are fully sanctified and may be sons of God if they were born of both Sacraments, viz. Baptism and Confirmation, Vice. Com. P. 370.

Ambrose after the Font or Baptism, let there be perfection or confirmation, for so he calls imposition of hands, Lib. 2. C. 7.

Jerome advers. Lucif. Contending for the Rites of the Church, saith, "And do not you know that it is the custom of the Church, that upon the baptized, hands should be imposed," Magdeburg Center. 4. P. 420.

Augustin; that Imposition of Hands after Baptism was necessary for the gifts of the Spirit. And that if ignorant infants be brought to be baptized, let them answer for them that brought them, and being baptized let the be confirmed and anointed with holy chrysme, and so let them receive the Eucharist, lib. De Eccles. Dogm. Vice comes, c. 28. P. 371.

Pope Innocent in his first Ep. 22. Magdeburg. Center. 5. Shows how impious and sacrilegious it is to repeat the Baptism of Infants or Adult, and how requisite to lay hands on the Baptized after the example of Peter and John, Acts 8:17. And Paul Acts 19:6. Vice comes e. 3. P. 376

Isidore saith, that the Imposition of hands did belong not to the Bishop's Vicars, but to the Bishops themselves; and the Reason he renders is that none of the 70 disciples who represented the Apostles, had power by laying on of hands to give the Spirit, Magdeburg. Cent. 6. P. 675.

Haimo upon Hebrews 6: says, Imposition of hands is called confirmation, which by the Spirit is received, and later Baptism confirms the Unity of the Church, and that children, as well as Adults, were to partake thereof, Magdeburg. Cen. 9.

Rabanus Maurus Lib. I. Inft. Cler. C. 30. says, that there are two laying on of hands, one by the Priest in Baptism, the other by the Bishop in Confirmation, as Christ gave the Spirit by blowing upon them before the resurrection and after upon the day of Pentecost.



CANONS AND DECREES OF COUNCILS
In the council of Laodicea in Phrygia Pacatians, held under P. Sylvester the first of that name, was Bishop of Rome about 315. It was decreed in the 48 Canon, that the baptized ought to receive after Baptism the most sacred Chrysine, and be made partakers of the heavenly Kingdom. Vice Com. P. 371

In the Council of Eliberis in Span, held 305, under Pope Mercellius it was decreed in the 38 Canon. That such as sailed into strange countries, or if a Church be not near at hand, a believer if he hath baptism entire viz. Baptism and confirmation, and have not two wives, may Baptize a catechumen in case of necessity through sickness, but so that if he recovers, he brings him to the Bishop that he may be perfected by Imposition of Hands, and Canon 77. If any Deacon shall without a Presbyter Baptize the Bishop ought by blessing to perfect or confirm them.

In the 4th council of Carthage under P. Innocent the first, about 418. It was decreed that there would be an Imposition of hands for the absolving of the Penitent, Vicler. L. 2. De persecute. Vandal.

The council of Spalence, ordained that the baptized were to have bands laid upon them and to be signed with Chrism, and that the Bishops only were to perform it. Magdeburg, Center. 7. Pl 148.

The Council of Barcerens C. 7. Commanded that a little Balsam should be put into the consecrated oil, and that no less Reverence should be paid to this ceremony, than to Baptism itself. Magdeburg, Center 7. P. 148.

The Council of Constantinople Chapter 7. None were to be admitted to confirmation but those that were intrusted by Catechism, and could say the creed and Lord's prayer by heart. Magdeburg, Center 7. P. 148

The Council of Cabilloucsis Chapter 6. In the time of Pope Eugenius, it Decreed that the Baptism of the Adult should presently, of Infants after some years of understanding, be confirmed with consignation and Chrysne and that confirmation should not be reiterated, Magdeburg, Center 8. P. 350.

In the Galician Council, it was decreed, that when the Bishop goes his canonical Circuit to confirm, the Priests be always ready for his assistance, and that there be Gossips as well in this, as in Baptism; and that the confirmed have his hair cut, Magdeburg, Center 8. P. 350.

THE COUNCIL OF TRENT ABOUT CONFIRMATION DECREED:
1. That whosoever said it was an Idle Ceremony not a Sacrament properly, or that it was formerly used that Children might give an account of their Faith. 

2. That to ascribe virtue to Chrysm was to wrong the Holy Spirit. 

3. That every simple Priest is the ordinary minister for confirmation and not the Bishop only should be accursed. Osian Center 16. P. 417

By which sayings f the Ancients, Canons, and Decrees of Councils, it appears they had early set a foot something for an Ordinance of the Church enjoined to be practiced after Baptism, and whereof we give you this brief account from them.

I. NAME
First, as to the name by which it was called viz. 

1. Confirmation, 

2. Anointing or Chrysim 

3. Imposition of hands. Or perfection.

1. Confirmation, because both Baptism and the Unity of the Church were thereby confirmed. 2. Chrysim or anointing, because Oyl mingled with Balsam, the thing used herewith in imitation of the holy Oyl used of Old. 

3. Imposition of hands in allusion to the Apostle's practice Acts 8:19. Who laid on hands for the Spirit although this could not properly be called because it was but creasing the forehead with the finger.)? 

4. Perfection, because they esteemed Baptism imperfect without it, therefore for the first time they used to practice it together.

II. GROUND
As to the grounds upon which it was practiced, viz. as an Apostolic tradition handed to them from the Apostles times by the eminent Doctors of the three first Centuries, upon whose Authority it was practiced, till confirmed by the Councils before mentioned, viz. Laodicea, Eliberis, &c.

III. MANNER
As to the manner of performing it viz. by crossing and anointing the forehead of the Confirmed party, with Oyl and Cheysm

IV. ADMINISTRATORS
As to the Administrators, viz. only a Bishop to whom in an especial manner it was entailed, it is unlawful for any other to do it from Peter and Johns’ being sent by the Church of Jerusalem, to impose hands which Philip did not do.

V. SUBJECTS
As to the Subjects, viz. All Baptized persons, who were either adults, or infants, immediately, or afterward, baptized infants at years of discretion. The adult was first the Catechumens, who were either the children or Heathen that inclined to Christianity, or the Children of Christians newly come to the Faith, who to their completing in Christianity, were to take these five steps, thus known and distinguished.

Firstly, they were to be Catechized, taught, and instructed, and then were called the Catechumen. 

2. Upon their propounding themselves to Baptism, were called the competencies. 

3. Being admitted to Baptism, was called the illuminui or intiati. 

4. After Baptism was confirmed, were called the perfecta. 

5. After Confirmation and receiving the Eucharist, they were called the fideles.

Or, Secondly, Infants who were the 4, 5, 6, and 7. Cent. The subjects of it, and with Baptism, did receive confirmation and the Eucharist immediately, and so esteemed perfect and complete Christians, then it began to be deferred for a week after Baptism, the Children wearing the Baptismal white Garment all the week and upon the 8-day baptism was perfected by confirmation, as saith Raban Meurus L. Inst. Chr. C. 30.

Or, Thirdly; Such infants who after they had been baptized, did arrive to knowledge and discretion, and were able to say the Lord's Prayer, 10 Commandments, and Creed by heart, as appears by some of those latter councils.

And the reason for the said alteration, as says Vice comes, p. 378 was because of Charles the First’s time, in the 8th Century. Adult Baptism did very much wear off. The people for the most part being now Christians, their Children became so numerous, that the Bishop found it too hard a task to perform his part.

Therefore they appointed certain Visitations, especially at Easter and Whitsonide, to confirm those in their dioceses, that having been baptized in Infancy, were able to give an account of their faith, which, saith Vice Comes, was practiced in several places in the Latin Church.

VI. THE END
As to the end of this rise, viz. For the giving of the Spirit, and conferring of Grace, to perfect and confirm imperfect Baptism, and therefore esteemed a Sacrament of greater force and virtue than Baptism itself, and therefore to be done with Oyl. Typing, figuring, or signing the Spirit.

VII. CEREMONIES
As to the Ceremonies; they were divers, viz. The party to be confirmed was to be in white Garments, his head bound up in linen, the hair of the head to be cut, and to have gossips to undertake for them.

VIII. THE ORDER
As to the order of Administering it, viz. especially after Baptism (though some of the Catechumens in imitation of Ananias his imposing hands upon Paul Acts 9: had it before) and then had they an immediate right given them to partake of the Eucharist, without which they could not be admitted to partake thereof.

IX. THE FORM
As to the form in which the Bishop administered it, viz. in these words, I sign thee with the sign of the cross and confirm thee with the Chrysm of Salvation in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

THE STAGE OF THE CHURCH OF ROME
The Church of Rome observed the very same order and answer with the same rites and ceremonies to the same ends and upon the same ground as an Apostolic Tradition, which the former centuries had done; only whereas there began to be some space betwixt the infants Baptism, and their confirmation, that they for the most part especially in the latter centuries have performed them together.

Contarnus, Lib. De Sacrament, a great popish writer saith, that Thomas Aquinas though that this Sacrament ought to be given to very young infants, because they obtain more grace and therefore more Glory, which custom, saith be, we have kept, leaning upon the Authority of so great a man. Aq. Part 3, Q 72. Ar. 8.

Didoclavius Saith in Altar damase. Many think it to be expedient rather in the time of infancy because the Infant Age is not capable of fiction, whereby the effect of the Sacrament may be hindered, and the Ancient use of the church favors that opinion.

In the ordo Romanis An old popish missal, it is recorded that the bishop having seated himself in the Church, the arch-Deacon holding the Chrysm, the priest presents the Baptized infants with their names to the Bishop, who dipping his finger in the Oyl, and Crossing every one in the forehead, saith, I sign the with the Sign of the Cross, and confirm thee with the Chrysm of Salvation in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit; and which rise they say is confirmed by the act of the Apostles and opinion of the Fathers from the Scriptures, viz. Act 8:17. Acts 19:6 and Heb. 6:2 and called confirmation because the unity of the Church was confirmed by the Bishop as saith Ambrose upon Heb. 6: Haimo and Ansel. Joseph Vice Comes C. 30. P. 375.

The Council of Trent, as before, decreed, that whosoever should say that Children should first give an account of their Faith before confirmation should be accursed.

Bellarmine de Sacrament. L. C. II saith, that confirmation confers greater Grace than Baptism, neither can Baptism be perfected without it.

And again in the same Tom. 2. That it is more perfect than Baptism itself, for whereas Baptism may be administered by Ordinary priests or deacons yea even women themselves in case of necessity, this is not to be performed but by the holy hands of a Bishop.

THE STAGE OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
The Church of England, though they lop off many of the ancient and popish superstitions and Ceremonies herein; yet do they retain the thing, viz. Confirmation after Baptism by a Bishop only, and the subjects, viz. Baptized Children, were able to say their catechism, according to the decrees of the Council of Constance, and the Galiean Councils before-mentioned. The whole rite and ceremony thereof, with what appertains thereto, you have at large in the England Liturgy, in the Rubrick; the substance whereof you may please to take as followeth.

THE ORDER OF CONFIRMATION OR LAYING ON OF HANDS UPON CHILDREN BAPTIZED, AND ABLE TO RENDER AN ACCOUNT OF THEIR FAITH ACCORDING TO THE CATECHISM.
To the end that Confirmation may be administered to the more edifying of such as shall receive it (according to St. Paul’s Doctrine, which teacheth that all things should be done in the church to the edification of the same) it is thought good that none hereafter shall be confirmed, but such as can say in their Mother-Tongue the Articles of the Faith, the Lord’s Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, and can also answer to such questions of the short Catechism as the Bishop or such as he shall appoint) shall by his discretion oppose him; and this order is most convenient to be observed, for divers consideration;

First, because when children come to the years of discretion and have learned what their godfathers and godmothers promised for them in Baptism, they may then themselves, with their own mouth, and with their own consent, openly before the Church, ratify and confirm the same, and also promise that by the Grace of God, they will evermore endeavor themselves faithfully to observe and keep such things as they by their own mouths and confession have assented unto.

Secondly, forasmuch as confirmation has ministered to them that are baptized, that by the imposition of hands and Prayer, they may receive strength and defense against all Temptations to Sin, and the assaults of the world and the Devils -------- --- to have ministered when Children come to the age, that part by the frailty of their own flesh, partly by the Assaults of the word and the Devil, they begin to be in danger to fall into sundry kinds of sin.

Thirdly, for that it is agreeable with the usage of the Church in times past; whereby it was ordained that confirmation should be ministered to them that reach perfect age; that they being instructed in Christ’s religion, should openly profess their own Faith, and promise to be obedient to the will of God.

THE ORDER ITSELF, THIS FOLLOWING PRAYER BEING SAID.
all mighty and everlasting god, who hast vouchsafed to regenerate these thy servants by water, and the holy ghost, and hast given unto them forgiveness of all their sins; strengthen them, we beseech thee, dear lord, with the holy ghost the comforter, and daily increase in them thy manifold gifts of grace, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and ghostly strength, the spirit of knowledge and true godliness, and fill them, dear lord, with the spirit of thy holy fear, amen.

THEN SHALL THE BISHOP LAY HIS HAND UPON EVERY CHILD SEVERALLY, SAYING,
Defend, dear lord, this child with thy heavenly grace, that he may continue thine forever and daily increase in thy holy spirit more and more, until he comes into thy everlasting kingdom, amen.

THEN SHALL THE BISHOP SAY,
Almighty and everlasting god, which maketh us both to will and to do those things that be good and acceptable unto thy majesty, we make our humble supplications unto thee for these children, upon whom, after the example of the holy apostles, we have laid our hands, to certify them (by this sign) of thy favor and gracious goodness towards them, let thy fatherly hand, we beseech thee, be over them, let thy holy spirit ever be with them, and so lead them in the knowledge and obedience of thy world, that in the end, they may obtain the everlasting life, through our lord Jesus, who with thee and the holy ghost, liveth, and reigneth, one god, world without end, amen.

THE BISHOP SHALL BLESS THE CHILDREN SAYING,
The blessing of God Almighty, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, be upon you and remain with you forever and ever, Amen.

After are added these directions relating to confirmation, viz.

That the Curate of every parish, or some other at his appointment, shall diligently on Sundays and holy days, half an hour before Evening Prayer, openly in the Church, instruct and examine So many Children of his Parish sent unto him, as the time will serve, and as he shall think convenient, in some part of this Catechism.

And all Fathers, Mothers, Masters, and Dames shall cause their Children, Servants, and Apprentices (who have not learned their catechism) to come to the Church at the time appointed, and obediently to hear and be ordered by the curate, until such time as they have learned all that is here appointed for them to learn; and whenever the Bishop shall give knowledge for Children to be brought before him to any convenient place for their confirmation, then shall the Curate of ever parish either bring or send in writing the names of all those children of his parish which can say the Articles of the Faith, the Lord’s Prayer and the Ten Commandments, and, also how many of them can answer to the other questions commanded in this catechism.

And these shall none be admitted to the Holy Communion until such time as he can say the Catechism, and be confirmed.

Dr. Cave, in his late primitive Christianity, upon the subject, saith of our English confirmation, that almost exactly according to the Primitive usage, it is still retained and practiced in our church at this day; and happy were it for us, was it kept up in its due power and vigor; sure I am that many of our chiefest breaches and controversies in religion, do, if not wholly, in a great measure, owe their birth and rise to the neglect and contempt of this excellent usage of the Church p. 219.

Concerning which rite, as used by the Church of England, we observe,
1. The Name was given it, viz. Confirmation.
2. The Subjects, viz. Children baptized in their infancy are taught their Catechism and are able to say the Creed, Lord’s Prayer, and Ten Commandments in the English Tongue.
3. The Administrators, a Bishop only; therefore the Ceremony was so vulgarly called Bishoping.
4. The Force and manner, as expressed by the Bishop’s putting the hand upon the head of the Children, and saying that form of words directed.
5. The Ends, as declared, viz. 1. To confirm infants Baptized and the promise of the sureties made for them therein. 2. To give the Spirit for the increase of Grace, and strength against temptations. 3. To confirm the unity and Order of the Church, and orderly to admit them therein.
6. The time when administered; betwixt their Baptism and the Supper, as soon as they can say their catechism.
7. The Grounds upon which they assert; viz. The usage of the ancient Church, decrees of Councils, and Apostles practice.

Performed them with very little reverence or caution, either how or upon whom they do it, saith Mr. Hanmer and Mr. Baxter.

Mr. Hanmer, p. 42: Though they deem it to be of some weight and consequences, yet as used by them, it is little less than ridiculous, a mere vain and empty Ceremony or (as the Saxon-Confession terms the Romish sacrament of confirmation) Inanis Vmbra, an empty shadow; and Hommius, a vain invention of superstitious men.

Mr. Baxter, in his book of confirmation, p. 155, saith, to his knowledge it was done by the best of them in a careless building way, mumbling over a few formal Prayers upon persons that they knew not whether they were Christians or Infidels, or that they did so much as know there was a God.

In the fifth place, we come to give you an account of how this rite hath been asserted and pleaded by some, both of the independent and Presbyterian Persuasion; so especially by Mr. Jonathan Hanmer, in his book called Confirmation the ancient way of Completing Church-Members: Written with great applause in the year 1657. And Mr. Baxter, in confirmation thereof, in his book called Confirmation and Restoration the necessary means of Reformation and reconciliation: Who do therein undertake to prove the necessity of confirmation, a laying on of the hands of the Presbytery for the confirming and completing infants-Baptism, perfecting their Church Membership upon their profession and confession of Faith; and which they endeavor to make good by this five-fold argument.

1. By Scripture. 2. By the Testimony of Fathers. 3. By Councils. 4. By the Judgment and practice of the Waldenses. 5. By the Judgment of many of the reformed divines.

I. AS TO SCRIPTURE
The main Scripture he incites on to prove this confirmation (and which as modestly said, is a probable ground for the same) is that of Heb. 6:2. And laying on of Hands. Where, as urged, it is made one of the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ? Where,
1. Its place is to be taken notice of, being next after Baptism, and as it were, an appendix thereof, and for the most part immediately following it in such adult as were baptized, and the next privilege in the Church as such did enjoy who were baptized in Infancy.

2. Because the best interpreters do usually understand this of one or more of the three particulars that imposition of hands hath relation to, viz.

1. Of the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, which was conferred at first upon many new converts by the laying on of the Apostle's hands, Acts 8:17-19
2. Of the Officers of the Church who were ordained and set apart unto their offices by Prayer and Imposition of hands. This Pareus in Heb. 6:1. Initiata Erat Doctrines de Denis Spirvualibus and Ministerio Ecclesie; It was an Initial Doctrine concerning Spiritual Gifts and the Ministry of the Church, Ames. In Bellarm. Encruat. By Imposition of Hands is meant the whole Ministry; Per Imposition Mankum Ministerium totum inseltigitur.
3. Of the Confirmation of such who had been baptized who before the Church made a profession of Faith, the Adult before baptism, the baptized infant before confirmation. So Piseator, Bezs, Rivet, Doctors of Leyden, Anselm, Calvin, Hyperius, Illyricus, Mr. Deering upon the place. By these and other expositors, it is said, is this place of Scripture understood, in part at least, of Imposition of hands in confirmation; which therefore in their apprehension, is warranted by it, as a doctrine fundamental that ought to be known by all, and a thing practiced by, and taking its rise from the Apostles. And,

II. BY TESTIMONY OF FAITH
That it was also as an apostolic practice received by the Church in after-ages, Cassander (that learned Papist, ans. so well versed in the ancients, even to miracle) tells us, Semper in Ecclesus religiosisstmi observantum fuisse, To have been always most religiously observed in the Church; and therefore have you an account thereof from many of the Fathers, viz. Dienys. Areopag. Clem. Roman. Justin Martyr’s Responses, Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose, Jerom, &c. which being all before mentioned, we need not repeat. And,

III. DECREES OF COUNCILS,
The decrees of councils confirming Confirmation to have been an ancient and GE-councils neural Practice in the Churches of Christ; of which two only are mentioned, viz. The Land. Before recited about the year 300, and the council of Eligeris in Spain, in 305. And,

IV. WALDENSES PRACTICE
By the judgment and practice of the Waldenses who received it as an Apostolic institution, as appears by their apology and confession of Faith exhibited to Valdislam K. of Hungary, Anno 1504; witnessing to infants Baptism, and their confirmation after, upon their personal confession; which he mentions at large out of the same apology. And,

V. REFORMED CHURCHES
From the compliance of the succeeding reformed churches; amongst whom the church of England is mentioned as one, who took much of the order of confirmation (as he saith) from that of the Waldenses; part whereof he repeats; especially the conclusion, that debars any from the Holy Communion, that was not confirmed; and adds thereto the good wishes that Hommius, Calvin, the Leyd. Professors, &c. that this business of confirmation was drained from Antichristian Mixtures, both as to Name, Nature, Matter, Form, Administrator and Subject also; the Romish Church confirming Children in their infancies.

IN WHOSE HYPOTHESIS WE HAVE FIRST
1. The name they give this Rite; namely, Confirmation. 2. The Subjects, Adult persons, all baptized in infancy. 3. The Administrators, viz. The Presbytery-Eldership. 4. The End, viz. To confirm Baptism, give the Spirit, and orderly to admit into the church, 5. The Time when to be administered, viz. Betwixt Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, when they give an account of their Faith and desire Church-Communion. 6. The Grounds upon which they assert it, viz. 1. Scriptural; especially from Heb. 6:2: 2. 2. The sayings of the Ancients, and Decrees of councils, conforming it to be an apostolic Practice. 7. The usage and practice of the Ancient and Modern Churches, especially that of the famous Waldenses.

VI. THE USAGE OF SEVERAL BAPTIZED CHURCHES IN THE NATION
Sixthly and lastly, we come to give you an account of how this rite of laying o of hands hath been asserted and practiced by several baptized congregations, who have by their writings maintained and defended, that laying on of Hands upon all Baptized Believers, is an Ordinance of Jesus Christ; essentially necessary to Church-Fellowship and Communion, and that none are to be admitted to the Lord’s Supper without it; and which they endeavor to make good, especially from Heb. 6:2. Which they conclude to be a laying on of Hands upon all baptized Believers.

1. Because it is reckoned amongst the foundation-Principles, Doctrines, and Oracles of God. And, 2. Because they find the Church of Samaria, Acts 8:17, and the Church of Ephesus did practice accordingly immediately after Baptism; therefore they do conclude was both Christ’s precept and the practice of all the Churches in the New Testament.

Amongst those respecting this practice, we observe,
1. The Name they give this Rite, viz. laying on of Hands
2. The subjects, viz. All Baptized Believers, Men, and Women.
3. The Administrators viz. The elders or Presbyters.
4. The End, for the promise Spirit to confirm the Baptized, and orderly to admit into the Church.
5. The time or Order in which this is administered; betwixt Baptism and the Supper, or presently after the Baptism.
6. The principal Ground upon which they assert it, viz. The Scripture; especially from Heb. 6:2; Acts 8:17,19.

Thus have you an account of this Rite, not only from Scriptures but how it hath been owned and practiced since the first times, by several sorts; and who notwithstanding the vast differences among them in the Ceremonial part, yet do all of them harmoniously agree in the following substantial, viz.

That there is a warrantable ground to conclude that the hands of the Bishop, Elder, or Presbyter should be imposed upon every Baptized person for the receiving of the Spirit, or confirmation and that without it none ought to be admitted to the Lord’s Supper.

It remains therefore in the next place that we consider the said Grounds upon which so great an ordinance is enjoined, and which we find to be either Tradition or the Scripture.
1. That Tradition (which is principally asserted by the first four) is made good either from the sayings of the Ancients, and Decrees of Councils, or the usage of the ancient Churches.
2. And that of Scripture, which is principally urged by the two latter, is especially from Heb. 6:2 compared Acts 8:17 and 19:6; which we shall examine distinctly and apart.

And first, as to the Sayings of the Ancients, that are considered what they say about this Rites; and second, Of that credit and Authority the said Authors are who be produced for the same.

TRADITION
And First, as to the Rite itself, which they would make us believe to be so great an ordinance of Jesus Christ, we find it to be so blasphemes and Ridiculous, that the very naming of the particulars thereof, may be sufficient to detect the folly and impiety thereof to all discerning Christians. Whether respecting the Name, which they call Chrysm, Unction, Perfection, Confirmation, of which the Scripture is so much a stranger; or the Nature which must be by putting the sign of the Cross with a Bishop greased finger, in the forehead of the confirmed, with these words of Blasphemy, I sign thee with the sign of the Cross, and with the Chrysim of Salvation, in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit, the party being in a white Garment, his head bound with linen, his Hair cut, and attended with gossips or Sureties. And this is that which the several for-cited popes and Fathers have reported being apostolic, and the several councils have by their canons and degrees determined and enjoined as the great sacrament of confirmation, and so transcendent also to Baptism it felt; and which without dispute (we must believe) was so much the appointment and practice of Christ and the Apostles, and as yet practiced accordingly by the Church of Rome to this day.

Concerning which Hommius tells us, that it is not only unknown and contrary to the Scriptures, but also blasphemous and idolatrous, and trained invention of superstitious men.

And Tilenus upon their lifting it up above Baptism and confirming it only to a Bishop’s hand, saith, that they make excrement or Antichrist so much more excellent than the sacrament of Christ, by how much they make a Bishop excel a common Priest or an ordinary person. Sytag. Part 2.c. 58. S. 15.

And Amesius saith, The reasons given by the Papists for the same, are both empty and impious. Bel. Enervat. C. 4.

And notably Mr. Calvin, In Prof. Ante Catechis, inter Opuseul. That beyond measure they have dacha this adulterous confirmation like a Harlot, with great splendor of ceremonies, and many prosperous Gauderies; moreover, while they will adorn it, they do it with execrable blasphemies, boasting that it is a sacrament more worthy than Baptism, and calling them half-Christians, whoever has not been besmeared with their stinking Oyl; but in the meanwhile their whole action contains nothing else but Histrionically Gestures, or rather wanton apish plays without any art or emulation, &c.

WHAT THEIR AUTHORITIES
Secondly, from the authorities themselves urged in proof hereof; concerning whom, we may so well say, as is the Doctrine, so are the Doctors, viz. Those that are first cited to deliver the same, the very naming of whom, may be sufficient to detect the cheat, we had already by substantial evidence proved, that all those first recited authorities, viz. Dienys. Areopag. Clem. 4. Ep. Justine Martyr’s Response. Hyginus’s decree, and the decretal Epistles of those first Popes, to have been impious lies and forgeries, things that in aft-ages, by the rise of the Mystery of Iniquity, were feigned and invented by some monks and friars, and put upon those men of the name of the first ages, the better to continence those Anti-Christian Impieties that were to be imposed upon the world, for Apostolic; for by such lies and forgeries, did the man of sin ascend the thrones. And is there, not good ground think you, to suspect the Justice and Truth of that cause, that cannot otherwise be defended nor maintained, but by suborned witnesses, and knights of the post; for upon no better authority, have they imposed this which they call the Sacred Rite of Confirmation, Infants-Baptism, Exorcism, and a hundred ridiculous Ceremonies more, which they would persuade us to believe were apostolic; though as to this confirmation, some of themselves are constrained to acknowledge, NEC ah Apostles, NEC a Christo fuisse Institutio, &c. That it was neither instituted by Christ nor his Apostles, but by Pope Caliztus, Anno 218. Rivet’s Controv. Tom. 2. Yet so intoxicated with the Whores Cup were all these councils, upon no better grounds decree it, and all these after-Doctors, as Ambrose, Jerom, Austin, and others, to assert and plead it for an Ordinance of Christ; which was not only so contrary to the Scripture but so blasphemous and ridiculous, as before.

And if it had been an Apostolic Tradition to practice this, as the first councils decreed, and the Fathers and others practiced, viz. for many hundred years, as a Baptismal Rite, to be performed at one and the same time with Baptism, whether upon Infants or Adult and to whom also as perfect and complete Christians, they gave the Eucharist; how came the after-councils to be so bold, to alter and change it from infancy to the Adult state, putting it upon them only for so many ages; and the Church of Rome afterward to alter and change it again, returning it to its first practice, leaning upon the validity of those first Authorities; concerning whom, though it is no wonder that they should hold fast such impious forgeries, and have recourse to such lying fables, maintain it; yet it is a matter of admiration, to find our Protestant writers and churches to fly to these authorities, both Fathers and Councils, to create some colorable pretense for confirmation?

To which I say, That it is most manifest, as I have already demonstrated that that apology was not from the Waldenses, as the Preamble itself declares: but from some of those professors distinguished by the name Hufsites, who held much with those of the reformed way in Germany: And not the Taberitesor Waldensian Brethren, who also inhabited in Bohemis, and other parts of Germany, Poland, and Hungary. And that those true Waldenses were of a quite contrary opinion, appears by their ancient confessions of Faith; an eminent instance whereof you’ll find in their Treatise of Sacraments, in Paou Perin, P. 329, and in Merland’s History, P. 175, in these words; viz.

As for the Sacrament of Confirmation, which we find not instituted either by Christ or his Apostles; for Christ, the pattern of all his Church was not confirmed in his person, and he doth not require that there should be any such thing in Baptism, but only pure water; and that such a sacrament is not found needful for Salvation; whereby God is blasphemed, and which was introduced by the Devil’s instigation, to seduce the people, and to deprive them of the Faith of the Church, and that by such means they might be drawn the more to believe the Ceremonies and the necessity of Bishops.

It is also to be taken notice of, that Justin Martyr, in his Apology, given an account of the Faith and Practice of the Churches in those days to Antonius Pius, takes not the least notice hereof, though he recounts all their Services and Ceremonies in worship with great plainness.

It is also not unworthy our observation, that the Novations, that worthy famous Church and People, did, as Joseph Vicecomes Tellus, oppose this business of confirmation in century 3, Vicecomes, l, 28. P. 372.

And also it is manifest out of Breerwood, the eminent Recorder of the Antiquities of the Greek Churches, that the Greeks did impugn and reject that of Confirmation. Br. P. 127, out of Pas. De Rep. Moseb. P. 40. And particularly tells us that the Nestorians did not practice it. p. 124, out of Bib. Pat. P. 1054.

That the Abyssines inhabiting prester John’s Country did not practice it. Br. P. 167. Ex Alv. Hist. Aethiop. C. 5.

And that the Muscovites omit it, Br. P. 136. Ex Jo. Metrop. Russ. In Epistle. Ad Epise. Rom. Apud Sigism. De Reb. Muse. P. 31.

And that there is no mention either of the Caphti in Egypt or Jacobites in Syria, that ever practiced this Rite.

It is also manifest in the confession of Faith of the Belgick Churches, esteeming themselves the true and immediate successors of the Waldenses; recorded at large in the Dutch Martyrol. Or Bloody Theater, printed in 1660. That there is no mention of any such practice as the imposition of Hands upon all baptized persons amongst them either formerly or latterly.

THE SCRIPTURES GROUNDED
In the next place we shall consider the Scripture-ground that is urged and produced in proof hereof, especially by the two latter; which we find to be principally from Heb. 6:2 The Doctrine of Baptism, laying on of Hands, (epithesis te Cheir), which Mr. Hanmer acknowledgeth to be the chief; and (though as he modestly expresseth himself) but a probable ground from the Scripture to sound it upon, being there made one of the Principles of the Doctrine of Christ, and placed next after Baptism, and as it were an Appendix thereof, and which for the most part, immediately followed it in such adults as were baptized, and the next privilege of the Church (he saith) that such did enjoy as had been baptized in infancy; and that many of the best interpreters did usually understand this place to mean, in part at least, of imposition of Hands in Confirmation; though he doth confess others did also take it to mean Imposition of Hands in Ordination; and others, the whole doctrine of laying on of hands, as expressed in Scripture; but especially leans upon the tradition, and the usage, and practice of the Church in all ages, p. 26-27.

1. To whom, and to all of his persuasion, I say, that if their infants baptism be a nullity, which they pretend hereby especially to conform, and is the main design of his and Mr. Baxter’s Treatises; that their practice hereupon falls to the ground; for if their Hypothesis be naught and rotten, their thesis cannot be found that is built upon it: But that it is so, the foregoing Treatise of that subject doth amply discover; proving with great clearness, that it was an invention and institution of man, yea, of the man of Sin; calculated on purpose to out Christ Baptism, and to defile his church; and this appearing to be of the same piece, contrived and ordered by the same heads and hands, it is meet, that as they have lived, so they should die together.

And secondly, we may conclude rationally, if infants were capable of baptism, they were as capable at the same time, of laying on of hands (as first instituted and practiced) and of the Supper also, as Austin and others tell us they had them all together, and not first baptize them, and then many years after (and nobody knows how and when) confirm them; for if one be a Foundation or beginning doctrine, as the other, they have done best and most according to rule and reason that have practiced it immediately, and not deferred it.

And Thirdly, since the Scripture is, as confessed, but a probably ground, and that of Tradition, Antiquity, and Constant usage of the Church, the more certain; the latter appearing so invalid upon all the foregoing considerations, that faint insinuation from that Scripture, cannot be ground sufficient to build that practice upon.

And to which lastly, we will add Mr. Baxter’s sober cautions, enough to shake the confidence of any that have no better Ground for the Practice; as we find them on p. 127, 128, 129, of his confirmation: Where, after he had with all his might endeavor to establish it both from Scripture and Antiquity, doth, according to his wonted manner, in a few lines unsay more than he had said in all the rest, viz.

MR. BAXTER’S SOBER CAUTIONS
1. That we do not find that God instituted this sign as a matter of necessity, still without interruption to be used; but only that Holy men it was applied as a convenient Sign or Gesture to the works in which they used it; even as lifting up of bands in Prayer, was ordinarily used as a fit gesture, not willfully to be neglected without cause, and yet not of flat necessity; or as kneeling in prayer, in ordinarily meet, but not always necessary; we find no more Scripture for the one or for the other: which shows how little reason there is to make it a matter of necessity. The Ancient Church also used it so variously, as that it is plain they fixed it to no one case alone; of the divers cases in which they imposed bands on the catechumens, and four times on the penitents and divers others, as, Saith he, you may see in Albaspinaeus’s Observant. P. 31-32.

2. We find that kneeling in prayer, and lifting up of hands, were often omitted; so we find that sometimes the Holy Ghost is given before baptism or imposition of Hands, Acts 10. And we find not that the Apostles used it at all, viz. for confirmation; though I confess the negative arguing is infirm; yet it seems not probable that this was always done.

3. It was somewhat suspicious to find in Justin Martyr’s Description of the Christian Churches practices, no mention of this, nor any sacrament but Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, nor any of the Roman ceremonies; and Irenaeus and some others also are silent in it too.

4. God maketh no ceremonies under the Gospel so necessary, except the two Sacraments; nor layeth so great a stress on them as under the law; and therefore we are not to interpret the Gospel as laying men’s Salvation, or the peace of the Church on any ceremonies unless we find it clearly expressed.

5. For all that I said from Scripture for Imposition of Hands in confirmation (though the lawfulness of it is proved past doubt) yet the proof of the duty of using it, is libel to so many objections, as that I must needs to confess that the Gospel-tenderness, and the sense of our mutual infirmities, and our care of tender consciences, and of the Churches peace, should restrain all the Sons of piety and peace from making it a matter of flat necessity, and forcing them that scruple to submit to it.

THE SCRIPTURE GROUND UPON WHICH THE BAPTISTS HAVE FOUNDED IT:
We come in the next place to consider the Scripture Grounds upon which the Baptists have asserted this Rite, and founded this practice of imposing hands upon all Baptized Believers; and so eventually necessary to Church Communion, and which, as before, you find to be specially held forth from Heb. 6:12. Though affirmed not with that sobriety and modestly as the other form probability, but rather infallibility; and therefore impose it accordingly, denying Fellowship to any that do not so receive it; and as some have in print asserted, as neither being babes in Christ, nor having communion with God; as Mr. Griffith in his book hath it, called God’s Oracle; P. 87. And the reason of this their great confidence from this text, is, as you have heard, twofold; first, because laying on of hands is reckoned amongst the beginning-teachings. And secondly, because they find it, as they say, practiced accordingly, Acts 8:17; Acts 19:6.

To the Trial and examination thereof, we shall therefore apply ourselves, and see whether these have discovered a better basis to found this practice upon, than those that have gone before.

And in order thereto, we shall in the first place lay down these two following principles, so fully owned by themselves, as a line to carry us through the work, viz.

1. That is every ordinance of Christ there must be some plain positive word of Institution to confirm it. And neither humane traditions, nor farfetched consequences and inferences, such as the many volumes that have been written from circumcision and federal holiness to assert infants-baptism to be an ordinance of Christ, which no ordinary capacity can reach, and only men of parts and abilities can trace and follow in their meanders.

2. That to practice anything in the worship of God for an ordinance of his, without an institution, is will-Worship and superstition. But how their assertions will comport with these honest Protestant principles, we shall presently see.

The treat text urged for the institution of this ordinance, is, Heb. 6:1-2. Therefore leaving the principles of the Doctrine of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of Repentance from dead works and of Faith towards God, of the Doctrine of Baptism, and of laying on of hands, and of Resurrection of the dead, and of Eternal Judgment.

This is the text which is affirmed to be the great charter of the Church for this point of Faith and Practice; but how to find the least warranty for the same therein, we see not. If it was indeed said, let all baptized believers have hands laid upon them; with as much plainness, as let all believers be baptized, Matt 28:19; Acts 10:48; or, let all baptized believers eat the Lord’s Supper, 1 Cor. 11:24; Acts 2:41-42. It was something to the purpose.

OBJECTION #1
But is it not reckoned among the Principles, Foundation, Doctrine, and Oracles of God?

ANSWER
It is very true, the Doctrine of laying on of hands is here reckoned amongst the principles of the Doctrine of Christ [or his beginning-teachings]; but then it must be supposed to be such laying on of hands as was somewhere taught and practiced. But such laying on of hands upon all Baptized believers, we find nowhere taught or practiced. Jesus Christ our great example (as the Waldenses so well observe) had no hands laid upon him by John the Baptist after he baptized him; neither did he lay hands upon all his Disciples before they broke Bread; neither did he give one word of it in his commission upon his ascension; nor do we read that this church of the Hebrews practiced any such thing; for there is no mention that the 120 had hands so laid upon them; nor the 3000 in chapter two or 5000 in Chapter four after their baptism, before they broke bread: Neither do we find the least of it in any other of the Churches in the New Testament; neither in Samaria, by Philip, after he baptized them nor Corinth, Philippi, Colosse, Thessalonica, Rome, the Churches of Galatia, Churches in Asia, Smyrna, Thyatira, Pergamos, Sardis, Philadelphia; no, nor in Ephesus: It is true, Paul laid hands upon twelve of their number, upon another occasion, as Peter and John did in Samaria; whereof you haven account hereafter; nor in the Churches in Syria, Antioch, Lystra, Derbe, &c.

OBJECTION #2
But why should laying on of hands be reckoned amongst the beginning Principles, and called the Doctrine of Laying on of hands, if it was not to be practiced by all? For none doubts but laying on of hands was a practice, and this practice was to be taught to all Baptized Believers; yea, the babes in Christ; and therefore must it needs be practiced by all.

ANSWER
This, it is true, has gone for the institution and great ground upon which it hath been urged and imposed; but how much of fallacy and falsehood is in this argument, you will easily discern, as though no act done upon, or practice done by others, might be a matter of doctrine or teaching to us, without being engaged in our own persons to do the same: were not all the miracles that Christ and his Apostles die, a matter of Doctrine, and much Edification and instruction from them, and yet not for our imitation and practice?

OBJECTION #3
But this in the text respects some of Christ’s beginning teachings; his first words, that is, milk for Babes, and can you tell us of any but such as is proper for all baptized Babes, or new-Baptized Believers?

ANSWER
Yes no doubt; for what say you to those words of Christ in the Commission itself, which you cannot deny to be beginning words? Mark 16. Where it is expressly said, that the Baptized shall in his, name cast out devils, speak with new tongues, take up serpents, drink poison, and not hurt them; and also shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. And so did the baptized believers accordingly in those days, going out and preaching, the Lord working with them, and confirming the Word with Signs following: But is this the standing Ordinance to all baptized believers to the world’s end? This was indeed that laying on of hands properly called confirmation; whereas afterward a laying on of hands of another nature, was so called, and introduced; so that here you have then laying on of hands amongst Christ'’ first teachings for Tongues, Healing and Miracles necessary and profitable to be taught to all, even the meanest Babes, for Confirmation; as Heb. 2:3-4; 1 Cor. 14:22; Acts 8:8; Mark 16:20. Which yet I presume none will say that every believer ought to practice.

ANSWER #2
Secondly, If every one of these principles in Heb. 6; are so absolutely to be taken in by Babes, and without which, we are not to esteem them communicable; what do you say to the Doctrine of Baptisms in the text, one of the principles and foundations of the Gospel? It is not said the Doctrine of Baptism. Must all be baptized with the Baptism of the Spirit and of suffering also, or not to be received into communion?

ANSWER #3
And Thirdly, as to the laying on of hands mentioned amongst these principles in the text, as it may respect the Laying on of hands upon the Ministry, for their solemn investiture into their office, whether Deacons, acts 6; Elders, 1 Tim. 1:14 or Messengers, Acts 14; (whereby they are set apart to transact in the whole order, and in all the ordinances of God’s House; and wherein every particular member comes to be concerned, not only respecting the administrations performed by them, but the reciprocal Duty incumbent upon each of them towards those their overseers so set over them.) It becomes necessary therefore to be taught, known, and understood by all, and that in the beginning-Teachings, though all and every member are not concerned in the personal practice thereof; for all are not Prophets, Apostles, Teachers. And it is most remarkable, that the Doctrine or Teaching of laying on of hands, is all that is mentioned in this Scripture; all baptized believers must be taught it, that’s plain; but that they are obliged therefore to practice it, is not here or elsewhere to be found.

OBJECTION #4
But what do you say to Acts 8:17 and 19:6. Are there, not two express presidents for such a laying on of Hands immediately after Baptism, as we infer from hence, concluding that these two texts aforesaid, give sufficient warranty so to determine?

ANSWER
It is true, this hath been so received and urged by those that so practice; but how warrantable, we shall further examine. We read indeed of laying on of hands for the giving of the Spirit in three places; one whereof Acts 9:17; was before Baptism; and these two mentioned, after so that there is no practice conclusion to be fetched from the presidents, whether before or later; ad it was in the matter of healing, which was given sometimes by laying on of hands, sometimes by words of Faith spoken to the Sick, sometimes by prayer, sometimes by sending handkerchiefs, sometimes by their very Shadows; so also was the Spirit given sometimes laying on of hands, sometimes Prayer, sometimes by preaching or prophesying, Sometimes before, sometimes after Baptism.

But concerning these two Scriptures so much insisted upon, and imposed to be the president and pattern for all Churches, and for every member in the Church, let us put them to trial.

As to that of Samaria, it is said, that several being converted in that city, and baptized by Philip, who wrought many Miracles, and continued some time with them, as verse 13; yet did they not impose hands upon any of them that we read of. The Church of Jerusalem hearing that Samaria had received the Word of God, and that the Spirit was fallen upon none of them (viz. in a visible manner which was the proper phrase attributed to those extraordinary measures of the Spirit so frequently given to the Saints in those days; as, Acts 10:44; 11:15-17. Which sometimes did fall upon them before Baptism, as Acts 10; and sometimes after, as Acts 2:1,4,31: without laying on of hands) did therefore send Peter and John, who it seems, were extraordinarily gifted by God; so that on whomsoever they prayed and laid hands, the Spirit was visibly, extraordinarily and immediately given; as verse 18. As healing to the sick, by those that had that gift also given by God, (from whom every good gift came) and who accordingly, ‘tis said, laid their hands upon them, but how many of them ‘tis not said; surely not upon all; for Simon by his profane offer, discovered he had neither received the wisdom nor grace thereof and had neither lot or part therein, though baptized; and so ‘tis said they received the Spirit in such a manner that it was visible to the Spectators.

And so that of Ephesus, Acts 19:6; Paul it seems, finding some of the church there, that had not received the Spirit after they had believed and were baptized, viz. in that visible manner so usually given in those days, lays his hands upon twelve men of their number; (it is not said all the Church) who thereupon, did immediately receive the Spirit, in such a degree, that it was demonstrated by speaking with tongues and Prophesying.

So that in neither of these two places (so much urged for the explanation of Heb 6:2; and to be president and Rule for us, to the end of the world) can we find that there was a laying on of hands immediately after baptism, nor with any certainty upon all and every member of the Church, nor to such an end as can be attainable in after times.

And as to that of 2 Tim. 1:6: Wherein Paul exhorts Timothy to stir up the Gift that was in him by putting on of his hands, asserted to be a laying on of hands of this kind, as urged, not Ordination; is,

First, a begging, in proving the Question.

Secondly, It is manifest that Timothy had the hands of the Presbytery laid on him, which none doubts to be Ordination; and that Paul and Barnabas were the presbyters that did ordain those churches of Asia, is very manifest, Acts 14:23. Wherein by God’s blessings upon his ordinance; there was a gift received, and to be stirred up; and therefore in saying, stir up the gift that was in him by putting on of his hands, and neglect not the gift that was in him, which was given by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery, whereof Paul was one, seems to mean on and the same thing, and not two things, as urged; and to be no other than those ordinary ministerial Attainments, which by giving attendance to Reading, Meditation, Prayer, Exhortation, and Doctrine, was to be increased and stirred up.

Therefore since not the least syllable of the institution, neither precept no president can be found out for such a practice, may we not fully conclude in the words of our agreement, that for any to practice anything in the Word of God without an institution from the Word of God, is will-worship and superstition.

OBJECTION #5
But if this were not the laying on of hands intended in the text, what is it? If we have missed the sense and scope of the Apostle, pray you to give us a better, or let ours stand.

ANSWER
Suppose we are not able to tell you, not to be positive or peremptory in the case, many things being hard and difficult to be understood, which some that are ignorant wrest &c. would our ignorance warrant you, to set up your inferences and conclusions, as Oracles and Ordinances, without any evidence or authority from the Word, and be thereby confirmed in your confident assertions? It may be enough to have evinced to you, that yours is not, cannot be that ordinance of Chris; that principle and foundation-Doctrine, so confidently asserted by you. Yet not to leave you in the dark, take here my apprehension of this text, and wherein I am persuaded I have the mind of Christ, Viz.

HEBREWS 6:12 OPENED
The Apostle, the better to gain their attention to the great doctrine of the High Priesthood, tells them in the foregoing chapter, by way of reproof, how dull of hearing they had been in times past, how little they had improved time or talent, what little progress they had made in Christianity, and what Babes they yet were therein, and who, instead of bearing strong meat in the doctrine he was delivering to them, they stood in more need of Milk, and to be taught again those beginning words of God, wherein in their first planting they had been instructed; which not with standing for the present he would forbear to press upon them, but go forward in his design.

Not laying again the foundation of repentance and Faith; the doctrine of Baptisms, Laying on of Hands, Resurrection, and Judgment, which are all the principle that are here enumerated; which some call five, some six, and some seven; though as to the number, if they must be taken for all the beginning principles, I conceive we must either suppose them very comprehensive, or else many must be left out, as the Ten Commandments, and several of the institutions, such as the Lord’s Supper, which I presume will be for a beginning-teaching as well as Baptism.

Therefore we much suppose that Repentance and Faith must comprehend all, both the negative and positive parts of Holiness, those of Baptisms and Laying on of Hands, the institutions, privileges, and order in the Church of God, Resurrection, and judgment, the whole of our Hope and Happiness for the time to come; and particularly that Doctrine of laying on of hands, to contain not only those laying on of hands by which the miraculous healing and Spiritual Gifts were attained for confirmation of the Gospel, but those laying on of hands for the investiture of the Church Officers, who were to transact the whole order of God’s House, for the edification of each member, and therefore necessary to be taught to everyone. And this is that, which amongst the rest they had need to be taught, and might have been teachers of themselves; viz. what was the end, use, blessing and benefit of such a rite in the several ministrations thereof; but no ground in the least to confirm it to one particular, much less to such a one of which no syllable either here, or in the whole book of God.

OBJECTION #6
But why would you infer, that we by the Doctrine of laying on of hands, may take in all the Laying on of hands spoken of? When as it is said laying on of hands in singular, and not layings on of hands in the plural number; therefore must respect only one sort of laying on of hands.

ANSWER
Which is a mere Criticism, and has nothing of truth in it, the Doctrine of laying on of hands is as much plural and may respect the teaching of all sorts, of laying on of hands, as the Doctrine of Baptisms respects all sorts of baptisms.

OBJECTION #7
But why should any be offended that we pray for a blessing upon our brethren or sisters after their Baptism, or upon their admission into the Church, whereby the whole may also take the better notice for whom we pray?

ANSWER
To which I answer, that we are not offended at a practice of that kind, be it lifting up or laying on of hands, provided it be not urged as a thing of absolute necessity; while the Bishops of old used many ceremonies, people were not so much concerned; but when they would impose them as necessary, and institutions of Christ, that broke the peace, and occasioned much mischief; so to all such laying on of hands, a beginning-Doctrine, or Oracle of God, a Foundation of Christian religion, to which every member and disciple of Christ ought to submit, upon penalty of Non Communion for the neglecting or rejecting a Foundation-Principle, though no one word of institution, command, precept or example for the same; and that under pretence of receiving more of that Spirit of Christ thereby, which is a Spirit of Love, Meekness, Humility, Tenderness, Peace, Edification, there appears to be more of that other Spirit of uncharitable judging, rending, tearing and dividing the body of Christ; and for asserting for doctrine and practice the customs, commandments and traditions of men; it is for these things our offence lies, as so well founded upon Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Rev. 22:18 Prov. 30:6.

There are two Objections more that I have lately met with, that I think very necessary to give some answer to: the one is this, viz.

OBJECTION #8
That is to point of antiquity, though (‘tis granted) the Ancients and their followers ever since, have so much erred, not only in the subject, but divers circumstances about this rite of imposition of hands; yet inasmuch as there hath been all along such a witness born to the thing itself, it makes much for its Apostolicalness, and confirms our practice therein.

ANSWER #1
To which, I say, that it doth not appear that such a witness hath been born all along thereto; for as Mr. Baxter so ingenuously acknowledgeth, that Justin Martyr, Ireneus, and others in those times are as silent about it as the Scripture is that any of the apostles did ever so practice it in the first times; those authorities that are pretended to assert the same in the first centuries, having been proved to be so Spurious and Supposititious.

ANSWER #2
But secondly, if the practice of it should be granted to be as ancient as the keeping of Easter and Lent, Diocesan Bishops, and Patriarchs, and many other things that have been so generally received and practiced, it no more proves it, therefore, to be Apostolic than each of them; for a pretense to Ancient prescription, without a Word of God to warrant it, can never justify the Divine Authority of any practice.

OBJECTION #9
The other is this, viz. That as to positive Scripture-Institution, so much called for to justify our practice of laying on of hands upon all the baptized, from precept or example, it is not only unreasonable but dangerous, as to many Truths, to be demanded (as hath in express words been lately told me) for where is the plain word either for Women’s receiving the Lord’s Supper or to lay on hands upon Officers?

ANSWER
Whereto, I must need to say I am much grieved and astonished at such prevarication; and than which, what can more betray the truth and justice of your cause? For do not your own answers to such like instances, so usually brought by the pedobaptist, sufficiently confute you? And do you not know that if we had not plain and positive Scripture to both, we would not practice either? For is not 1 Cor. 11:28, compared with 1 Tim. 2:4-5 and Gal. 3:28, a sufficient precept for women receiving? And Acts 1:14, with Chapter 2:42,44; substantial evidence for the practice thereof? And as for laying on of hands upon Officers; is no 1 Tim. 5:22 A FULL PRECEPT? And Acts 6:6 and 13:3 and 14:23; 1 Tim 4:14; as clear presidents for the same? And may we not warrantable say, let there be but as good Scripture-Authority produced for laying on of hands upon all baptized believers before they are permitted to partake of the Lord’s Supper, and it shall suffice? But to set up a practice in God’s worship, without a warranty from his Word by some plain positive rule and direction the thing pleaded for by you is no less (in my judgment) than to give countenance to all the anti-Christian innovations, to let go at once the strongest hold of Protestantism, reproach the wisdom of Christ, and slight the authority of the Holy Scriptures, as though we had not a sufficient direction therein in all parts of God’s worship.

And therefore to all those worthy sayings to this purpose, of those eminent men mentioned in the treatise of Baptist. P. 93. I shall add that most remarkable expression of Dr. Owen, which you will find in his communion with God, p. 171. Viz. This then they who hold communion with Christ, are careful of, they will admit of nothing, practically nothing in the worship of God, private or public, but what they have his warrant for; for unless it comes in his name, with thus saith the Lord Jesus, they will not hear an angel from heaven; they know the Apostles themselves were to teach the Saints only what Christ commanded them, Matt 28:20.

By which sound and wholesome Rule well observed, we are delivered from all humane inventions and traditions; and by which confirmation, infants-baptism, Lent, Easter, &c. and a hundred more of like import, are turned out of doors, as accusing Christ of unfaithfulness, and the Scripture of insufficiency.

And to which purpose, T. G. Himself hath so very well urged lately to Dr. Stillingfleet, about infant-baptism, from Dr. Fulk out of Irenaus; viz. When the heretics are reproved out of Scripture, they fall to accusing the Scriptures, as if all is not well in them, and that the Truth cannot be found out of them that know not tradition: And therefore that Tertullian saith, take away these things from the heretics, (which they hold with the Euthenics) that they may stay their questions upon the Scripture only.

THE CONCLUSION:
Thus you have had a candied account of the rise, growth, and progress of this rite of confirmation or laying on of hands, from the beginning to this day (amongst all persuasions that have owned it) with the authorities upon which it hath been founded and imposed; together with a genuine examination of the grounds and reasons each party has given to justify the same. And may we not upon the whole, fairly come to the following conclusions? Viz.

1. That there doth not appear to be the least Scripture, Precept or Practice for any such ordinance or confirmation, or an imposing of hands upon all the Baptized before they break Bread; or are admitted into Church Communion.
2. That the instances produced to prove it an Apostolic Tradition, are impious lies and forgeries.
3. That the Authorities by which it hath been heretofore enjoined, were nothing but Antichristian canons and decrees.
4. That the most eminent witnesses and confessors that opposed the Antichristian usurpations and innovations, have all along witnessed against and impugned this of confirmation, viz. the Novations, Donatists, Waldenses, Greek Churches, Wickliffians, &c.

All which are worthy of the serious consideration of all sober and Judicious Christians; and are especially recommended to them, who had rejected infants, and embraced Believers Baptism, do yet cleave to this practice, with these following observation, viz.

1. That it is most manifest that those Popes, Councils, and Fathers, that have enjoined and imposed infants sprinkling for a sacrament, or on Ordinance of Christ, have enjoined this also as such.
2. That the principal arguments that have been pretended for the one, have been urged and pleaded for the other also; viz. Apostolic tradition, and pretended inferences and consequences from the Scripture.
3. That the famous Churches and confessors that have opposed infants-sprinkling, as superstitious, Popish, and Antichristian, have upon the same account, opposed this also.
4. That it doth not appear that any Baptized Church or People did ever, in any age or country, own such a principle of practice to this day, except some in this nation in these late times.

But then it may well be Enquirer, if this were so novel a thing amongst the Baptists, how came those in this Courtney so to receive and practice it, as before asserted?

To which I give the following account, as I have received it under the hand of one that affirms to have had a perfect knowledge thereof, as being an eye and ear witness of the same, and who certifies to the purpose, viz.

HOW, WHEN, AND WHY, LAYING ON OF HANDS WAS PRACTICED BY THE BAPTISTS IN THIS NATION.
That about the year 1646, some 27 years since, one Mr. Cronwell, heretofore a public preacher, then a member and minister of a baptized congregation in Kent, was a great asserter of this principle and Practice; who coming about The time into that baptized congregation, then meeting in the Spittle Bishopshate-Street, London did from Heb. 5:12-13 and 6:1-2; preach the necessity of laying on of hands; inferring from thence, those that were not under laying on of hands, were not Babes in Christ; had not God, nor communion with God. Whereupon, several of the said congregation were persuaded to come under that practice; and notwithstanding; the Church in Tenderness indulged to them, upon their promise of a peaceable demeanor in the church. Notwithstanding which their said promise, they did afterward not only press their said persuasion uncharitably, or they had been taught by their aforesaid teacher; viz. That none were Babes in Christ nor had communion with God without it; therefore not to be communicated with in church ordinances (and as after was published in print, by a leading brother amongst them, in a book called God’s Oracles, and Christ’s Doctrine) but made rent and separation for the same; and from that very schism propagated the same principle and practice among many others in the Nation ever since, who have kept that distance from their brethren (not owing the same) as not esteeming or communicating with them as the true Church of God, because defective in one of the beginning principles or foundations of the Christian religion.

Now this being true narrative as to matter of fact: doth it not naturally follow?
First, that such a principle so sucked in, and received, is founded in gross ignorance and error? For what can more favor of darkness and error, than to make our adoption and communion with God to depend upon some external act done? As though Christ himself was utterly mistaken, when he tells us, that as many as receive him, have the privilege to become the children of God, even as many as do believe in his name, John 1:12-13. And the Apostle also in confirmation thereof, That we are all the Children of God by Faith in Christ Jesus, Gal. 3:26. And, that of his own will we are begotten by the word of Truth, Jam. 1:16. But this Doctrine asserts our New-Birth in another way, by the laying on of Hands after Baptism (and as though persons might be baptized that were not Children of God; but afterward to be made so by this new way;) thereby confirming the superstition of the papists, in t their idolizing this rite above all other ordinances, as before.

And secondly, the Principle (upon this account) appears not more erroneous, that the practice upon it, corrupt and vicious; viz. to make a separation from the Church upon it, so contrary not only to known order, discipline and duty, but their declared promise; and therefore must not all those Churches of that constitution, necessarily be supposed to be founded sin and schism, as well as in great error and ignorance? And concerning which unnatural and undue separation, I hear some of the eminency amongst them, have lately so had their convictions, as to plead reformation therein with their brethren, and who I doubt not, from the true sense of the bitter fruit (even the gall and wormwood that hath been brought forth thereupon) will naturally be led to consider the root from whence it hath sprung, viz. the mistaken principle, as here discovered; for as our Saviour tells us, Mat. 7:17-18. That it is the corrupt tree that brings forth the evil fruit and that as the good tree cannot bear evil fruit, so the corrupt tree cannot bear good fruit. All which is recommend to the serious consideration of the impartial and judicious; not doubting but the day is hastening, when not only all Antichrist ---- and darkness, but all mists of error and ignorance, shall be dispelled; and that the God of Truth will so send out his Light and Truth and cause it so to spring up out of the Earth that knowledge shall fill the earth as the water cover the Sea; when discord and division shall so cease amongst his people, that they shall not with their Babylonish language vex one another anymore, but with one lip and shoulder shall serve the Lord with on consent. And for the Speedy accomplishing and fulfillment of such amiable and acceptable promises, let all the upright say Amen, Amen.

FINISH