breasts Psal 22.9 Esay saith in like sort The Lord hath called me from the wombe Esa 45.1 and the Lord saith the same of Ieremy I sanctified thee before thou camest forth of the wombe Ier. 1.5 Yea little children are so farre forth capable of receiving the holy Ghost or which is all one the kingdom of God for by his Spirit he setteth up his kingdom in us that our Saviour expresseth it generally that whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child to wit as a little child receiveth it for so the syntax carryeth it he shall not enter therein Mar. 10.15 What though it bee said that faith commeth by hearing so it is also said the Spirit commeth by the hearing of faith Gal. 3.2 And yet you see as some have received the Spirit that never heard of faith so the same hâ—ve received faith that never heard the word As for Iob the place which you quote Iob 31.18 argueth the like of him that hath been said of the former that Iob from his mothers wombe was indued with an indoles or inbred disposition and affection to pity and succour the fatherlesse and widow which dâ—ubtlesse was wrought in him by the holy Ghost as all other good gifts be And all other infants as well as he are capable of the same and the like gifts if the spirit of the Lord be pleased to work them Silvester I am not against any that have faith but am absolutely for all that believe whether infants or others so that their faith appeare by such effects as the word of God approveth of But whereas some say that infants are capable of the Spirit of God and of the grace of the Covenant though not wrought in the same way and by the same meanes yet the same things and by same Spirit so farre as is necessary to union with Christ and justification of life thereby else children were not elected nor should be raised up in their bodies to life I wish it may be minded that touching union with Christ three things are essentiall to the same 1. Gods revealing and tendering of Christ as the al-sufficient and onely way to life 2. An heart fitly disposed by faith to apprehend and receive Christ so tendered 3. The spirit of grace uniting and knitting the heart and Christ together And this I understand to be that effectuall and substantiall union with Christ to the justification of life which the word of God approveth of For justification to life ever presupposeth the parties knowledge of the thing beleeved Rom. 10.14 Heb. 11.6 Now let this be well examined by the rule of truth and then see how capable infants are of union with Christ and justification to life thereby As for some evill consequences which some to darken and obscure the truth doe say would follow thereupon that then infants were not erected nor should then their bodies be raised again to life c. I would first enquire of such whether infants with reference to their nonage were the subjects of Gods election Secondly if infants so considered are capable subjects of glory And if not as I suppose none will affirme then why are they any more capable of grace then of glory The word of God sheweth that he hath elected persons to the meanes as well as to the end the meanes being the way unto the end and that was the adoption of sonnes to bee called and justified by believing on Jesus Christ Ephes 1.4 5. Rom. 8.29 30. 1 Pet. 1.2 2 Thes 2.13 14. c. And to return free obedience unto him again as Rom. 9.23 24. Ephes 1.6 12. And for the raising of infants it is the power of God that raiseth the dead and not union with Christ 1 Thess 4.16 And when any of Gods electcan by the Scriptures be shewed to dye in their infancy then it will be granted their bodies are raised to life eternall When you say you are not against any that have faith Silvanus whether infants or others so that their faith appeare by such effects as the Word approveth I demand what if their faith appeare not by the effects is it not enough if it appeare by divine testimony Christ hath said that of such is the kingdom And that all that receive his kingdom must receive it as little children doe as hath been shown above and is not his testimony of their faith as good an evidence of their faith as the effects of their faith can be As for the 3 things which you would have to bee minded as essentiall to union with Christ The first of them the revealing and tendering of Christ as the al-sufficient and only way of life if you meane the revealing and tendering of him by the Ministery of the gospel you know the Ministery of the gospel is but an outward instrumentall cause of faith and no outward instrumentall cause is essentiall to the effect whether we speake of naturall or supernaturall effects certaine it is that the spirit of God who is the principall cause of faith though he be wonted to work it by the Ministery of the Word yet he can also work it without the Ministery or else how came the Wisemen from the East to seeke after Christ and to worship him by the sight of a starre If you say that was extraordinary but you speake of ordinary meanes that will not serve for that which is essentiall to a thing the thing cannot be without it neither ordinarily nor extraordinarily a thing cannot be and be without his essence or that which is essentiall to it Besides Christ speaketh of it as no extraordinary thing for infants to receive the kingdom of God and they cannot receive it without Christ nor without faith in Christ and yet they never received either Christ or faith by their own immediate hearing of the Woâ—d And for the second thing which you make essentiall to union with Christ an heart fitly disposed by faith to apprehend and apply Christ Be not unwilling to understand that which is the truth The heart is fitly disposed by faith to apprehend or apply Christ when faith is begotten in the heart for by this gift of faith begotten in us Christ apprehendeth us and by the same gift of faith the heart is fitly disposed to apprehend Christ even in infants for when faith is wrought in infants the heart is quickned with spirituall life and made a sanctified vessell fit to receive Christ which reception of Christ though it be passive as Dr. Ames calleth it in Châ—p 26. de Vocatione lib. 1. Medullae Theologiae yet it is all one with regeneration wherein not infants onely but all men are passive which gave the Lord Jesus occasion to say That whosoever receiveth not the kingdom of God as a little child hee can in no wise enter into it Luk. 18.17 It is true in men of years the Spirit as you speake worketh faith by the hearing of the Word and by revealing and tendering Christ
And then what difference is there betweene promise and Covenant in this case 2. It is false which you say that Christ came onely to the Jewes by promise For though he came to the Jewes to the Jewes first and to them by promise yet God gave a more antient promise of the comming of the Messiah to our first parents Gen. 3.15 And they were then the common stock and roote both of Jewes and Gentlies If Job had not a promise of Christ his comming to be his Redeemer how doth he challenge him to be his Redeemer I know saith he that my Redeemer liveth Job 19.25 Againe It is a very truth which you falsly deny to wit an absolute conclusion as you call it of any persons to be in the Covenant whether they have faith or not For what think you of Isaac and Iacob and all other elect infants borne of faithfull parents may not a man say that all such are absolutely under the Covenant even before they beleive yea their very beleiving which in Gods appointed time is given to them is it not the effect of the grace of the Covenant and not the cause of it It is also another falshood to say That the concluding it of persons meaning of Infants who may want faith to be in the Covenant of grace and life doth keepe the wicked from leaving his way by promising him life For wee doe not promise life to any by the Covenant unlesse they be elect And though they be elect yet because it is unknown to them and to us too till they doe repent and beleive we tell them they cannot partake in any saving benefit of the Covenant till they be regenerate and quickned by the Spirit as Christ told Nicodemus And it is yet another falshood to say That God did not conclude absolutely any in Covenant of grace when he first made it nor that the Apostle did so apply it at the last For when God first made the Covenant he did absolutely conclude Isaac and in him all the Elect seede under the Covenant For it is a branch of the meaning of that promise of God when he first made the Covenant My Covenant saith he will I establish with Isaac Gen. 17.21 And yet it doth not appeare that Isaac had any faith much lesse visible And for the Apostle his applying of the Covenant or the promise call it whether you will all is one to me certain it is the Apostle doth not suspend the childrens being in Covenant upon their owne faith but upon the faith and repentance of their Fathers Repent saith he speaking to the fathers and so let every one of you be baptized c. For the promise is made to you and to your children Whence the scope of the Apostles exhortation fitly ariseth into this argument and concludeth after this manner as hath been shown above To whom the promise is made they ought to be baptized every one of them But to you repenting and to your children the promise is made Therefore you and your children ought to be baptized every one of you And besides the Apostle in his next Sermon so expoundeth the Covenant as given not onely to them that are converted and so brought on to believe but to them who yet want faith and conversion And therefore he saith Acts 3.25 26. Ye are the children of the Covenant unto whom God having raised up his Son Jesus hath sent him to blesse you in converting or turning away every one of you from his iniquities Their being in Covenant who were the children of the faithfull was not the fruit of their own turning to God but their turning to God is held forth by him as a blessing and fruit of their being in Covenant 3. This is fraudulent that you hold forth the comming of Christ in the gospel to be for this end to call upon men to repent and believe and submit themselves to his State and government Which though it be very true yet it is like the fraudulent practice of Ananias and Saphira to pay part of the price that they might more cunningly conceale the rest So you in like manner hold forth this end which is indeed part of Christs comming in the gospel the more closely to conceale another part of it which is to give faith and salvation to the children of beleevers and accordingly to call their parents to submit their children and housholds as well as themselves to the state and government of the Lord Jesus For why should Christ encourage children to come to him Marke 10.14 if it were no end of Christs comming to come to save them 4. These things are very confused in your answer that you put it for all one Christ to come to save men from their sins and to call men to believe For though these follow one another yet they require a farre different state of the subject unto whom this different grace is tendered For if you speake of saving from sin or justifying Christ justifieth or saveth none from sin but believers or such at least as have faith But when he calleth men to believe or to repent he commeth to them not as having faith or repentance but as wanting both And yet when he commeth to call them unto faith and repentance he doth it out of respect of his Covenant with their Fathers whose children they were yea and in this call of them hee commeth to give them repentance and forgivenesse of sinnes Acts 5.31 And in giving it to their Fathers he promiseth also to give the same unto their children Acts 16.31 Lastly there is one thing alledged out of the context which may seeme pertinent to the purpose if it were fitly applyed You truly alledge that in Acts 2.41 It is said As many as gladly received his word or as you call it glad tydings they were baptized or as you say the same was sealed and confirmed unto them by baptisme But this will not prove that which you alledge it for that therefore it is manifest that by the promise Acts 2.39 is meant the sending of the Messias For the text will every way as fitly and more fitly carry it to be meant of the promise of remission of sins and of receiving the gift of the holy Ghost so the words run directly Repent ye saith he and bee baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost for the promise is to you and to your children What promise Here is no promise mentioned before but the remission of sins and gift of the Holy Ghost And the gift of the Holy Ghost is called a promise verse 33. Acts 1.4 5. But it is not materiall to the purpose whether by the promise you understand the comming of Christ or the gift of the Holy Ghost or remission of sinnes purchased by the one and sealed by the other For all these promises are given by one and the same
onely to such as believe but also for their sakes to their children and housholds In the Old Testament God prospered Ismael for Abrahams sake Gen. 21.13 17 18 19 20. In the New Testament God visited with grace and salvation the Families of Zacheus and of the Jaylor for the housholders sake Luke 19.9 Acts 16.31 Silvester The holy Covenant consisteth of three essentialls for entrance thereinto First the word of God to reveale the same Secondly Christ to open the way and to enright the party therein Thirdly faith without which none can enter thereinto for as none can come unto God or into Covenant with him but by Christ so none can come unto Christ but by faith Job 14.6 with John 6.44 45. Heb. 11.6 Let all this be well considered and then see how infants can be discovered to be in the Covenant and what way of entrance hath God by his word appointed for them to come in and denyed the same unto other I will not straine at your word Essentialls Silvanus though all things that are necessary to the entrance or being of a thing are not straightway essentiall to it Gods providence is necessary to the being and entrance of sin but it is not essentiall to it But I willingly admit of your three necessary Ingredients for entrance into the Covenant and finde none of them wanting to enstate and interest the Infants of believing Parents into the Covenant First the Word of God revealeth such a Covenant of grace wherein God giveth himselfe to be a God to the faithfull Parent and to his seed So hee gave himselfe to faithfull Abraham and to his seed Gen. 17.7 This Covenant of Abraham the Scripture revealeth to be come upon the believing Gentiles and their seed as hath been shewed above Secondly Christ himselfe hath opened the way to enright the children of believing Parents into the Covenant by redeeming us Gentiles as well as Jews from the curse of the Law that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles Gal. 3.13 14. And the blessing of Abraham is to a believer and his seed Gal. 3.16 And this hath been further cleared above Thirdly faith is not wanting to enstate the seed of believing Parents into the Covenant seeing God hath promised upon the faith of the Parent salvation to his houshold Acts 10.31 Luke 19.9 It is a vaine exception to say that if infants bee entred into the Covenant by the faith of their Parents that then they who bee not naturally begotten and born in the Covenant are denyed the same way of entrance into the Covenant which is granted to infants For first wee doe not say that any man is naturally begotten and born in the Covenant For the children of believing parents are naturally the children of wrath as well as others Ephes 2.3 But yet neverthelesse though naturally they bee the children of wrath yet by vertue and grace of the Covenant they are holy 1 Cor. 7.14 Secondly though they who are not begotten and borne of faithfull Parents cannot plead right in the Covenant by the faith of their Parents yet they may claime it by their owne faith if God grant it to them If not it is no marvaile to a Christian heart that the faith of believing Parents conveyeth a greater blessing to their children then unbelieving Parents can expect to themselves or theirs Doth not obedience to the Law convey a farre greater blessing unto a godly man and his seed even to a thousand generations then a wicked carnall parent can expect to him and his Exod. 20.5 6. And if so then doubtlesse the obedience of faith may expect a far greater blessing to a beleever and his seed then an infidell or unbeliever can hope for in his naturall and carnall estate and course to himself or his Silvester If infants be in the Covenant of grace by vertue of their birth from believing parents then such infants are borne in a saving state of grace and were never out of the same Which doctrine maketh void many heavenly and divine truths which speake to the contrary which lay all under sinne and curse till Christ by his blood redeeme them and by his heavenly voice call them and by his Spirit beget them unto a lively hope who are therefore said to bee borne againe from above For none can be under grace and under wrath and curse at one and the same time in the outward dispensation of the same Silvanus It doth not follow that if infants be in the Covenant of grace by vertue of their birth from believing parents then such infants are borne in a saving state of grace For the Covenant of grace doth not give saving grace to all that are in the Covenant but onely to the elect Nor doth it give saving grace to them alwayes in their birth but in the season wherein the Lord in his purpose of election had fore-appointed to give it to the children whom God hath not elected The Covenant of grace doth not give them saving grace at all but onely offereth it and sealeth what it offereth Neither doth this make void any heavenly and divine truth at all For though all bee under sinne and wrath and curse til Christ by his blood redeem them and by his heavenly voice call them by his Spirit beget them yet Christ was a Lambe slaine in respect of the vertue and efficacy of his death from the beginning of the world And though elect vessels may bee under the curse till they bee called and regenerated from above yet are they at one and the same time under grace but in divers respects Under the curse and wrath by nature under grace by the election of God and the Covenant of their fathers At one and the same time Apiathar was a man of death by desert and yet by the Kings favour a man of life 1 Kings 2 26. The Israelites at one and the same time were enemies for our sakes and yet beloved for their fathers sake Rom. 11.28 And in very truth if the elect children of God were not under grace before Christ call them by his heavenly voyce or before hee regenerate them by his Spirit how is it possible they should be effectually called or regenerate at all For in the feare of God consider is not effectuall calling a regeneration a worke of Gods grace in Jesus Christ is it not a fruit of Gods electing and redeeming grace in Christ The one wrought for us before the world was made the other before wee were borne And can the sin of our nature which followed after extinguish or make voyd the rich grace of Christ which was before all causes in us If effectuall calling and regeneration bee the worke of Gods grace then it is the effect of Gods grace and if it be the effect of Gods grace then the grace of Christ is the efficient cause of our effectuall calling and regeneration and the efficient cause is alwayes in nature and ordinarily in
of them For when hee saith the unbeleeving yoak-fellow is sanctified hee doth not leave it so without a limitation or restriction but saith hee or shee is sanctified in the beleever or to the beleever and that limiteth the sense to the beleevers use But when hee speaketh of children hee doth not speake with such limitation they are holy to the beleever but positively they are holy Now the difference is manifest and great betwene these two to bee sanctified to a beleever and to bee holy for example It may truely bee said all afflictions and Persecution it selfe are sanctified to a beleever but it cannot therefore bee said that affliction yea persecution is holy yea wee may bee bold to say that even the falls of Gods children are sanctified unto them I meane their falls into sinne yet wee may not say that their falls into sinne are holy No scripture language alloweth any thing to bee called holy but that which is holy either by imputation from Christ or regeneration from the Spirit or separation unto God from uncleannesse to his holy worship Search the Scripture you will not finde it otherwise neither is it otherwise in this place For else the Apostle might as well have said thus The children by the unbeleeving wife are sanctified in the beleeving husband and the children by the unbeleeving husband are sanctified in the beleeving wife else were your unbeleeving yoak-fellows uncleane but now they are holy But do you thinke the holy Spirit of God would ever call infidells Idolaters holy But suppose as some of your books would have it that the Apostle did acknowledge unbeleeving yoak-fellowes to bee holy is there not then a two-fold holinesse mentioned in the Text the one not in the thing it self but to anothers use the other of the thing in it selfe Is it not then sinne to confound these two for all one which God hath distinguished I deny not but this is true in a part Silvester that there is twofold holinesse here spoken of For the holinesse of the children is not onely such a relative holinesse as to one anothers use as the unbeleever to the beleevers use and no more but the holinesse of children resteth in themselves as the subjects thereof by nature being begotten and borne in that lawfull honorable way of marriage by Gods appointment and so holy cleane in opposition to such as are begotten and brought forth in a way of uncleannesse as adultery fornication and the like This kinde of holinesse which you speake of Silvanus resting in the children by being begotten and borne in that lawfull and honourable way of marriage hath beene refuted above The Scripture acknowledgeth no such holinesse as proceedeth from lawfull and honourable marriage If there were such an holnesse the children of married infidels were holy as well as the children of Christians But the Apostle here speaketh of such an holinesse as would not bee found in children unlesse one of the Parents at least were a beleever to speake of holinesse since the fall in children whereof they are subjects by nature is strange language in Christian eares you might as well speak of prophanenes of grace as of holinesse by nature The holy Ghost is the proper subject of holinesse and the proper cause of all holinesse in the creature so that nothing ought to bee called holy but what hee either maketh or calleth holy But it will never bee found that the holy Ghost ever imparted either the nature or name of holinesse to any because they were begotten in lawfull marriage and not in whoredome Besides if this were the meaning of the Apostle to prove that beleevers might lawfully keepe their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes because the children which they had by them were begotten in lawfull marriage the Apostle had not thereby cleared nor removed the scruple of the Corinthians but rather aggravated it For they might as justly doubt of their lawfull cohabitation with their children as with their infidell wives The same grounds which puts them to scruple the one did as justly move them to scruple the other so that to expound the Apostle this way doth not cleare the scruple but rather double is It seemeth to mee otherwise to expound the Apostle this way Silvester is the onely way for the clearing of the scruple of the Corinthians which befell them by reason of an Epistle which the Apostle wrote to them before in 1 Cor. 5.9 where he so pressed them from having any Communion or fellowship with any uncleane person in the worship of God that they understood him to condemne also civill commerce with the world upon which they questioned the lawfull retaining of their unbeleeving husbands and wives and to have communion with them in Society And so much the more as having an example of the like nature in the law Ezsa 10.7 About which thing that neare relation of husband and wife in their civil commerce they wrote to the Apostle for information 1 Cor. 7.1 And questioned not their children Whereby it appeareth they held it lawfull to retaine their children To which the Apostle answereth from a double ground thus 1. In that all things are said to be sanctified to such as beleeve as Tit. 1.15 and so the unbeleeving wife to the beleeving husband you may lawfully therefore live together in that comfortable estate and society of marriage which God hath ordained for man and wife to abide in 2. If you judge your selves to live in such a way of uncleannesse upon which you must now part then your children so begotten are uncleane and to be put away also But in that you hold it lawfull to retaine your children and not to put them away though you beleeve and they doe not then much more the unbeleeving parents as aforesaid who bare them For if the effect bee holy then must the cause also be holy which produceth the same which is Gods holy Ordinance of marriage and not the holy Covenant of grace Silvanus Whether the scruple of the Corinthians about cohabitation with their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes did arise from the Apostles former letter or not it is not plainly expressed in the Text But of the two it may be gathered from the Text rather not then yes For if their scruple had risen from the Apostles former advice not to keepe company with Fornicators whether bodily or spirituall hee had fully answered that scruple before in the fifth Chapter For there hee expoundeth himselfe not to speake of the fornicators of the world but of the Church v. 10.11 and for the fornicators of the Church hee doth forbid Communion with them not onely in the worship of God as you would have him understood but even in familiar civill converse With such a one as is a brother and a fornicator or the like I have written to you no not to eat with him v. 11. where not to eat is not meant not to eat the Lords Supper for that is the highest
degree of the highest and holiest communion in the Church but not to eat common bread at one anothers table for hee speaketh of the least degree of familiar society with such a one saying With such a one no not to eat but that by the way to cleare your mistake in that point But for the point in hand the Apostle had sufficiently cleared both his owne meaning and the Corinthians scruple touching their civill society with their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes in expounding himselfe not to forbid them Communion with the fornicators or Idolaters of this world but of the Church whence it clearly appeard that their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes being not of the Church but of the world it was no part of the Apostles meaning in his former or latter letter to forbid them communion with their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes So that if the scruple of the Corinthiane had sprung from the mistake of the Apostles former letter the Apostle had there fully cleared his owne meaning and withall removed their scruple there needed no more words of it againe here It seemeth therefore much more probable that their scruple arose from that other place which you mention Ezra 10. where the people of God are charged to separate themselves from the people of the land and from their strange wives which charge they obeyed also and fulfilled But if their scruple sprung from that place then the Corinthians had as just occasion to scruple the keeping of their children which they had by these wives as the keeping of their wives For the people of God in that Chapter of Ezra made an holy Covenant with God to put away not onely their strange wives but their children also which were borne of them v. 3. Now then let us come to consider of the Apostles answer to these scruples as you expound him The Apostle say you answereth from a double ground 1. In that all things are sanctified to such as beleeve Tit. 1.15 therefore beleevers may have a lawfull use of their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes This conclusion is true and intended by the Apostle but this ground of it the Apostle doth not here give but you fetch it from another Epistle It is true the marriage of the Corinthians with their unbeleeving yoak-fellows when they were both infidels being lawfull by Gods institution before now when one of them came to be converted to the faith the faith of the beleever did not make his former marriage which was lawfull before now unlawfull but rather gave him a pure and sanctified use both of his marriage and of his yoak-fellow But the Apostle doth not here give for a ground thereof the purity of all things to a beleever though hee might have given it for a just ground thereof but the onely ground which in this Text hee giveth of it is taken from the holinesse of their children Else saith hee were your children unclean but now they are holy which argueth that there is now in the dayes of the New Testament such an holinesse acknowledged by God to belong to the children from either parent beleeving as is sufficient alone though there were no other ground of it to ratify to the beleeving parent a sanctified use of his unbeleeving yoak-fellow which holinesse can bee no other but the holinesse which springeth from the Covenant of grace wherein God promiseth to bee a God to the beleever and his seed Whereas on the contrary if this holines of the children did onely arise from the lawfulnesse of the marriage of their Parents by the same ground upon which the Corinthians scrupled the lawfulnesse of their marriage with their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes by the same they might justly scruple the lawfulnesse of their children which they had by them for in that place of Ezra whence you conceive their scruple either sprung or grew as the marriage of the Iews with strangers was uncleane and therefore strange wives to bee put away so their children also were uncleane and to bee put away also according to the counsell of God and the example of the people in that place Let us then proceed to examine your second ground which you say the Apostle giveth to satisfie the scruple of the Corinthians about the retaining of their unbeleeving yoak-fellowes 2. If you Corinthians judge your selves to live in such a way of uncleannesse upon which you must now part then your children so begotten are uncleane also and to be put away But in that you hold it lawfull to retaine your children and not to put them away though you beleeve and they beleeve not then much more the unbeleeving Parents that beare them For if the effect bee holy then must the cause be also holy that produceth the same which is Gods holy Ordinance of marriage and not the holy Covenant of grace This ground hath no ground at all neither in the Apostles words nor meaning not in his words for the Apostle doth not say your children are holy in your judgement or as you hold but the Apostle delivereth his owne Iudgement your children are holy Neither will it stand with the Apostles meaning nor with the divine wisedom power of an Apostolick spirit to prove an holy use of the parents mariage from the conceited holines which the Parents imagine to bee in their children For though in Disputation against an adversary it may bee of use to convince him out of his owne conceits yet in dealing with a scrupulous conscience it giveth no satisfaction to give him for grounds of lawfull Practise his owne conceits Neither hath it any ground at all from the Apostles words or meaning to gather as you doe from the holinesse of children an argument from the lesse to the greater That if the children bee holy and so lawfull to bee retained then much more the unbeleeving Parents that bare them because if the effect bee holy then must the cause also bee holy for the unbeleeving Parents are no cause at all of the holinesse of their children neither are they holy themselves by the holy Ordinance of marriage For though marriage it selfe bee holy in respect of the holy institution of it yet not in respect of the holy efficacy in it to make all them holy that enter into marriage estate yea as to beleevers all things are pure so to the unbeleever nothing is pure no not his marriage nor his yoak-fellow nor his children Though the unbeleeving yoak-fellow Paul saith bee sanctified to the beleever yet Paul never said that the beleever is sanctified to the unbeleeving yoak-fellow Unbeleevers are neither holy themselves nor is any thing else sanctified to them much lesse can they bee the cause of producing sanctification and holinesse in others And therefore Paul doth inferre the holinesse of children not from the holy Ordinance of marriage but from the holy Covenant of grace It had bin in vaine for the Apostle to have gon about to prove the lawfull retaining of the unbeleeving yoak-fellow from the holinesse of their children being in