Acts xix. when he found certain disciples baptised only with the baptism of John, he baptised them again in the name of Christ, because they had not received the Spirit; and this baptism into the name of Christ, was not the repeating of any water, but merely the gift of the Spirit; for Paul preached to them largely the doctrine of faith in Christ (for the text relates but the abstract of the thing) and laid his hands on them, and through his ministry the Holy Spirit came upon them; and this was Christ's baptism indeed, and no renewing of water at all as the Anabaptist would fain enforce from this place.

By these things it is evident, that Christ's baptism and John's are distinct; and therefore, as what God hath joined, no man ought to put asunder, so what God hath put asunder, no man ought to join; as if the baptism of Christ were insufficient and incomplete, except we should add to it the baptism of John; which is exceedingly to eclipse the brightness of the Son of God, and to draw a veil over the greatest glory of the New Testament, which is the baptism of the Spirit.

Object. If the ordinary objection shall be offered against this, to wit, "That John's doctrine was the same with Christ's, and therefore his baptism also was the same with his."

I answer, It is most true, that John did preach Christ clearly, both in regard of his person and offices; but this was not his proper work, as he was the Baptist, but insomuch as he preached Christ in the Spirit, he belonged to the kingdom

of Christ, which is spiritual, as also Abraham, Moses, David, Isaiah, and all the prophets, did in the same sense; but so far forth as he preached the doctrine, and administered the baptism of repentance, and both these not really and spiritually, but only in the letter and sign, so far he belonged to the Old Testament, rather than to the New: here was John in his proper office. I say, so far as John preached Christ spiritually, he did not that as John the Baptist, but as John a believer; and so the same John in regard of his Baptist's office, belonged to the Old Testament; but according to the revelation which he had from the Father touching Christ, and his faith in him, and confession of him, he belonged to the New. And except we learn thus to distinguish of John's doctrine, to wit, what he preached as Baptist, and in his proper office, and what as a believer who had the revelation of the Father, we shall never understand his baptism aright: for John's baptism was the seal of this Old Testament doctrine, and not of his New; or of his own immediate ministry, and not of Christ's; at the highest, John's ministry and baptism pointed out Christ, but neither of them were the same with Christ's.

And thus having cleared from the word, that John's baptism is distinct from Christ's, I shall proceed to speak of each of these baptisms apart by themselves, and to hold forth to others what myself have learned touching them from the same word.

And first I begin with John's baptism, as being the first in order of time.

Now the baptism of John was brought in, besides the rite and manner of the law, and so was a sign of a great change to follow the Jews indeed had their baptisms in the law, for they washed their members, garments, vessels, &c. and by this they were cleansed from legal pollutions, but not from any sin or stain that did cleave to their consciences: but Jahn was the author or first minister of a new and unwonted baptism, calling all men to repentance from sin, and to flee from the wrath to come, and awakening them to confession of sin and amendment of life and also pointing out one to come, and now at hand, who should do all these things for them indeed, which neither he nor his baptism could do.

Now, touching John's baptism, I shall shew, First, The honorableness of it in itself.

Secondly, The weakness and imperfectness of it, in reference to Christ.

Thirdly, The continuance and duration of it. 1. For the honorableness of it in itself, it appears in several passages.

First, That though the baptism of John in itself was more legal than evangelical, yet in this it did excel all the former legal baptisms, that it pointed out Christ's baptism near at hand: for as John himself was greater than all the former prophets, because he pointed out with his finger Christ the true and great prophet of the church; so his baptism was more excellent than all the former baptisms, because it pointed out Christ's great and glorious baptism now at hand, as he saith, "I baptise you with water, but he

that comes after me, shall baptise you with the Spirit.

up

Secondly, John's baptism was from heaven, and not from men; it had its institution from God, and was not an ordinance he took of his own head. Luke iii. 2. It is said, that at the beginning of John's setting forth to his baptism and ministry, "That the word of God came to him in the wilderness; that is, he was inspired, instructed and taught by a word from God himself, touching his ministry-baptism, and the discovery of Christ's he was to make; and John 1. 6. "There was a man sent from God, whose name was John ;" and ver. 33. "He that sent me to baptise with water, said unto me:" he went not of his own accord, but God sent him to baptise; so that as God was the author of those inferior baptisms of Moses, so of this more high and excellent baptism of John's and hereupon the publicans, that received John's baptism, are said to justify God; and the Pharisees and lawyers that refused it, to reject against themselves, that is, to their own harm, the counsel of God, Luke vii. 29, 30.

Thirdly, Christ himself, who was born under the law, and subject to the law, submitted himself also to the baptism of John, as the last and liveliest ceremony; Matt. iii. 13. "Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptised of him; and so Christ, who had submitted himself to the circumcision of Moses, submitted himself also to the baptism of John, and as he submitted himself to all the ceremonies of Moses, not for his own sake but for ours;

so also to the baptism of John. For seeing Christ was free from sin, he stood in no need of repentance, and so not of that baptism, which was the baptism of repentance for the remission of sin but there the head, who was free from sin, was baptised for the body, which was full of sin, that he might fulfil all righteousness in his own person. And this was a great honor to the baptism of John, that Christ (though in reference to our flesh more than his own) submitted himself to it..

Thus it appears, that the baptism of John was very honorable and of high account in its time, so that the very disciples of Christ took it up, and Christ himself suffered them, because John's baptism was the sign and forerunner of his, and because the time of his own baptism was not yet come; but Christ himself used it not, as John witnesses, chap. iv. 2. saying, “Jesus himself baptised not, but his disciples," to wit, with John's baptism, which was water baptism. For it became not the Son of God to baptise with a creature; nor the Lord of all, to use the baptism of a servant.

And thus having shewed, how honorable John's baptism was in itself (wherein I conceive I have not done him, though a servant, the least prejudice, but have fully attributed to his office, whatever the word, or he himself, a messenger from God, attributes to it) I shall now proceed to shew, that the baptism of John, how honorable and excellent soever, is yet far beneath and below Christ's; yea, and most weak and imperfect in comparison of his.

For first, John's baptism was with a creature,