growne part yet the Infant part were in that account of an holy people c. and as much may bee conceived of 1 Pet. 2. 9. SECT VI. AGainst what is usually brought from 1 Cor. 7. 14. That is objected that children of parents not sanctified by faith in their matrimoniall fellowship as Pharez and Zarah of Judah and Thamar Jepthah of Gilead and many others were within the Covenant both of saving grace and Church-priviledge Therefore faith sanctifying of the use of the marriage bed is not such a cause of sanctifying of the children Federally and Ecclesiastically so as that unlesse that bee the children are uncleane in that respect Ans This objection may seeme to make a faire flourish against such as give the Apostles meaning as onely such But mee it hurts not who make the maine spring of the holinesse of the children not to be the sanctifying of the unbeleeving yoke-fellow to the beleeving but the grace of the Covenant to the beleever and his seed even the sanctification of the beleeving yoke-fellow springeth from the grace of the Covenant sanctifying beleevers seed by vertue whereof the infidelitie of the yoke-fellow becomes no overpowering let thereunto and so in part by vertue of that Covenant as well as faith in it such a yoke-fellow is sanctified so farre forth nor is the Apostles influence from the cause to the effect of that communion but rather from a like effect of the Covenant and faith in another relation of a beleever as a parent to children unto that in that relation of an yoke-fellow that if the influence of the Covenant and faith bee wholly denyed in the one it may well bee wholly denyed in the other and that hee makes account was an absurditie in the sight of all Concerning the assertion that Bastards were Interested in the Covenant of saving grace I will not now dispute it but reason ex suppositis That Covenant interest of those bastard-Infants it was not from the parents faith sanctifying of that communion Whence was it It could not be from any actuall faith of the babes they had it not it was surely from the force of Abrahams Covenant at least as invested with Church-Covenant from which the parents being not cut off by Gods hand nor cast out by the Churches power their Covenant relation still stood so far in force that is they were interessed externally therein and so their seed with them and thus in foro Ecclesiae the force of the Covenant took off even that impediment according to that position of the objectors and how much more doth the same force of the Covenant take off any impediment of a Pagan parents infidelitie in the Texts case of lawfull conjugall followship so that such children of a Gentile Corinthian Church-members have an interest at least externall in the saving Covenant of Grace and Church-priviledge Obj. Whether the parents beleeve or not the children may bee in the Covenant and regenerate therefore that 's no cause thereof Ans Wee speake not of the inherent holinesse of the child as regenerate that is immediatly from God but of holinesse Federall and Ecclesiasticall which may bee applyable to persons unregenerate as Psal 50. 5. 16. 17. Of which more afterwards The parents visibly beleeving and Inchurched are instrumentall causes of that holinesse of their children yea whether beleevers in veritie or onely visibilitie It sufficeth thereunto nor are little ones thus in Covenant with God and his Church without either the visibilitie of faith in the parents past or present personall holinesse consisteth not with living in knowne sinnes but Federall holinesse may Ezek. 16. Obj. The Text is a reason of the question which was not about Federall holinesse but living together Ans The former part of the Text is a reason of that and none pleades for the Infidell spouses Federall holinesse but the latter part is a confirmation of that reason from another ground And Mr. B. knoweth in proofe of conclusions we take divers mediums Obj. Yea but if the child bee Federally holy then the Infidell wife is holy with covenant sanctification Ans It followeth not The word sanctified in and to another and being holy differ and signifie different things as before said Obj. If Federally holy then Abrahams seed and then they have faith Gal. 3. Ans Wee shall in due place I hope prove that they are Abrahams seed without actuall personall faith of their owne and so as Abrahams seed federally holy Obj. The Apostle speakes of an outward holinesse common to reprobates also Heb. 9. 15. and not of holinesse knowne to the Church for which persons ought to bee baptized and it 's either inward holinesse which the Church deales not with or outward of which Baptisme is not a signe Ans Outward holinesse scil that which is visible to the Church is seal'd in Baptisme The Church deales not with inward holinesse therefore with outward unlesse there is an holinesse which is neither invisible nor visible Hebr. 9. is of Ceremoniall holinesse This of Federall and Church-holinesse knowne to the Church and holinesse visible or knowne to the Church is common to Reprobates unlesse any will say the Churches judgement erres not and confound visibilitie and infallibilitie CHAP. II. Sect. I. Touching the Explication of Act. 1. 38 39. ANother Scripture confirming the Doctrine of Federall holinesse of children of In-churched parents as approved and held forth by the Apostles is that Act. 2. 38 39 where Peter directing his speech chiefly to the Jewes vers 22. and 36. saith the promise is to you and to your children not was to you c. as intending any legall blessing but a promise then in force after Christs ascension to effect some chiefe promised blessing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used to signifie the free promise or Covenant of Grace to which they had visible right SECT II. THe promise here I. S. conceiveth to bee meant onely of the Messiah which was the promise to be sent and by children to be meant allegoricall children which others inlarging expresse these two wayes 1. That the promise made unto Abraham was then fulfilled Act. 2. in sending Christ to them and to their children and to all that are afarre off namely those of the dispersion as many as the Lord our God shall call that they may bee turned from their iniquitie and bee baptized into his name for the remission of their sinnes Secondly supposing the promise to bee of a saving grace of Christ sent of the outward ordinance of baptisme of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost c. It is none of these wayes true but with that limitation scil If they repent For neither God promised saving grace nor outward ordinances nor extraordinary gifts nor sent Christ to them their children or all that were afarre off without calling them and every of them Hen. Den speaketh to like purpose as this second particular hath first the promise is to you upon calling to them that are afarre of
bee called then is that promise to persons as yet uncalled and their calling is an effect following their interest in that promise as a cause and not preceding their interest in the promise as a condition As touching this whether the sole condition of this being of the promise to them c. we shall examine that anon God willing SECT IV. AS for Hen. Dens exposition of children here not to be those after the flesh but spirit even beleevers I cannot see how it 's pertinent to the cause propounded touching the children mentioned Act 2. hee doth not intend it thus your children i. e. Abrahams children for Abraham is considered rather by him as a pattern having the precedentiall copy of the Covenant mentioned And it had been incongruous to have said It is to your children that is to Abrahams children Abrahams children were not all their children nor were their children alone all the children which Abraham had and besides Hen. Den confesseth it is to comfort them concerning their owne children against whom they had wished that curse Matth. 27. 25. now taking it then of their children how will Hen. Den. make these Jewes whom hee cannot but eye at this present when these words Act. 2. 39. were applyed to them to bee such spirituall fathers to any children of theirs or sustaine the relation of such fathers at that instant unto such children themselves not being yet such relates as beleeving fathers nor having such correlata as children after the spirit nor was Abrahams charter lesse then what here avowed by the Apostle scil that the promise even of remission of sinnes did belong to the Jewes and to their children in respect of externall right and administration and no more is pleaded for and so much is to Gentile beleevers in their generations of which more elsewhere Nor will C. B's exposition of children hold as if here taken for men because in some other Scriptures so used he saith that to the farther scruple of the Jewes about their wish of Christs blood on their children Peter answereth The promise is to you and to your children What were their children growne to bee men in two moneths space since they made that cursed wish Or had they no children but such as were men growne or if they had did they intend that curse of blood to bee on their growne children and not as well on their babes on their children indefinitely To like purpose is A. R's conceit that by children are meant their grown children according to that in Joel your sonnes and your daughters but as hath been intimated this plaister is too narrow for their wounds rising from the guilt of blood wished upon all their children including and not excluding their babes Nor will the conceit of I. S. and some others hold that by children are meant allegorically such as imitate and walke in their footsteps of faith and repentance c. for which end Scriptures are urged where fathers are taken for such as are patternes to others and children for such as imitate them But 1. Is it the use of Scriptures to propound comforts to such kind of persons by allegories 2. If it bee supposed that the naturall children are excluded and onely allegoricall children understood there needed no such circumlocution But it might have been plainly thus The promise is to you and to your children even to such as are afarre off as many as God shall call whereas hee speaketh distinctly of all three it is to you and to your children and to such as are afarre off as many as God shall call 3. These convinced Jewes at present could not bee such fatherly precedents to others that should bee called to follow their instant faith and repentance which as yet they acted not nor doth Peter say the promise is or belongs to you for you have repented and consequently beleeved for that is rather mentioned as exerted after many words besides ver 40 41. But repent and bee baptized de futuro for the promise in praesenti is to you scil in respect of externall right 4. It would rather have discouraged then incouraged stumbled then satisfied them for Peter thus to bid them to their losse All the Jewes as visibly in Covenant with God were in some sence fathers to the Gentile Church-members 1 Cor. 10. 1 2 3 4. All our fathers scil of you of this Church of Corinth and of mee Paul and yet withall these were fathers too from Abrahams time downward to conveigh Abrahams covenant and its priviledges to their owne naturall seed Rom. 9. 1 2 3 4 5. Deut. 29. 1. 14 15. 29. and 30. 6. SECT V. NOr will C. B's apprehension of the phrase the promise is to you c. i. e. not the promise but the proffer of the promise hold consonant to himselfe or to the truth for hee grants that promise to bee to those that were prickt in heart but no more then to them afar off c. as many as God shall call nor know I what Scripture hee builds upon for such an exposition of the phrase the promise is to you when it is offered to you Albeit others speake as much in effect when they say the promise made to Abraham of sending Christ and now fulfilled is to them But deale ingenuously is that all which in Act. 3. 25. 26. is understood by that yee are the children of the Covenant made with the fathers c. i. e. God hath fulfilled the promise made to the fathers concerning Christs comming whom now hee offereth to you Why are the Jewes onely such children and not the Gentiles all kindreds as well albeit Christ was first sent to them For vers 25. all kindreds of the earth are mentioned as those that should bee blessed in Abrahams seed Yea doe not such as so speak affirme before that this promise of sending Christ was to them their children and those afarre off which notion Paul Ephes 2. 11 12. applies to the Gentiles They are the children of the Prophets Act. 3. and hee doth not say thus and of the fathers with whom the Covenant is made as if it were meant in respect of bare naturall relation but and of the Covenant made with the fathers to shew that it 's meant of Church and federall interest in them as Covenant fathers and dispensers yea to shew that the Covenant was as seed by vertue whereof they considered as federally and ecclesiastically priviledged did spring I had thought that these parallel phrases that children of the Covenant of grace mentioned Act. 3. 25. and children of the promise Gal. 4. 28. was not meerely applyed to either Jewes or Galatians because Christ according to the promise of God to Abraham c. came into the world that blessing might bee offered to them through him the promised seed But because they had a visible interest in the promise of blessing by him and therefore both Jewes and Galatians were so stiled sure I am Pauls phrase of the Jewes Rom.
to purge away and mortifie heart sinnes and sheweth it was a very Gospel promise like that Heb. 8. 10 11 12. of writing the Law of grace in the heart now this was made to the seed or children of these Church-members assembled as Chap. 29. 14 15. here is not any evasion as is usuall in mentioning Abrahams seed to say hee meant their Allegoricall and their spirituall seede c. this people to whom this was made being not so spirituall themselves Nor was it some bare tender but it was in way of speciall Covenant and oath on Gods part as Deut. 29. 14 15. sheweth nay it was of a soveraigne nature to bring about what God in his secret counsell intended hence called a commandement Deut. 30. 11. like that Psal 105. 8. the covenant and the commanded word were one and lest any doubt should arise how this should bee ratified and made good Moses prophetically setteth out Christ as dead and risen in whom this covenant was virtually ratified vers 12 13. all which the Apostle further explaineth when to set forth the way of Gods free Covenant grace in Christ without workes Rom. 10. 6 7 8. calling it the righteousnesse of faith or Covenant of grace in Christ which justifying faith is to improve the righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise say not who shall c. where was this spoken but in Deut. 30. 11 12 13 14. That commandement or covenant was not farre off that any should say who c. but it was nigh them c. and that commandement which was not farre off vers 11. that any need speake as verse 12 13. who shall ascend c. was the same word which was nigh them in their mouth and heart vers 14. this the Apostle expounds to bee the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. 6. and word of faith verse 8. or covenant and promise of grace in Christ descending into the grave noting his humiliation ascending into heaven noting his exaltation verse 6 7. which faith was to beleeve and that very doctrine of faith was that which the Apostles preached as Paul saith this is the word of faith which wee preach this then albeit called in Deut. 30. a commandement yet was it a covenant and that not of workes nor a bare subservient covenant but the very Gospell covenant ratified in Christ the very object of faith and that which the Apostle preached now what this commandement or Covenant was that circumstance noteth Deut. 30. 11. this commandement or covenant which I have commanded this day for Moses had that day propounded it in a Church-way and as a mutuall covenant betwixt them and God as well as God and them the parents stipulating therein in behalfe of themselves and children and so in reference to them also a conditionall covenant made that day in the plaines of Moab Deut. 29. 1. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15. 29. and 30. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14. so that the places compared evidently prove 1. That the covenant interest of inchurched stipulating parents children is Gospel And secondly that the Apostles preached this doctrine Thirdly that beleevers are to eye the Covenant in such a latitude as to their children with them by faith Fourthly that the essentials of the Covenant of grace in the latitude of the extent thereof to covenant parents with their children held forth in the old Testament was delivered and held forth as valid to the faith of the Saints in the new and after Christs incarnation This second and fourth particular here mentioned might bee further confirmed both by rule in that it being proved to bee Gospel by the places now compared it must needs bee that the Apostles preached the same being injoyned to preach the Gospel Marke 16. unlesse they either disobeyed Christs charge or hid some part of Gods Evangelicall mind from his people contrary to Rom. 10. 15. 18. and Acts 20. 27. 2 In that also Peter being to call upon his hearers to repent and consequently to beleeve hee propounds the word of their faith in such a Latitude as with reference to their children Acts 2. 38 39. The like doctrine doth Paul hold forth to the Saints at Rome and inchurched beleevers there touching such children Rom. 5. 14 15. even touching the abounding of the graces of Christ to them And the like virtually also is held forth by him Rom. 11. 16 17 18 19. as elsewhere is proved and so 1 Cor. 7. 14. First then that which beleevers as such have doe and ought to beleeve as a branch of the covenant of grace that is Gospel but this is of that nature ergo The major needs no proofe the former Texts also clearing the same the minor de jure it 's evident they ought to beleeve the whole Covenant made with them as is evident faith must bee as large as it's object the Covenant is the word of faith A beleever in the exercise of faith should as well have respect to the whole covenant as in the exercise of the obedience of faith respect the whole word of commandement hee doth not else beleeve rightly which doth not desire and indeavour this this therefore being one branch of Gods Covenant to beleevers as beleeving and inchurched as these Scriptures compared shew they ought to beleeve this which respecteth their seed as well as that which respecting themselves if they beleeve aright God in making a covenant in a Church reference especially as was that with Abraham Gen. 17. 7. hee taketh in their seed or children as joynt covenanters Hence the phrase of seed in their generations taking in parents generating and children begotten as those in and by whom Churches are likely to bee continued whence God when to speake in reference to the Church seed as well as to the choyce elect seed of Isaccs line in which the visible and not meerly the invisible Church was to bee continued hee saith hee will establish his covenant with Isaac not with Ishmael Ishmael was Abrahams seed too and therefore externally in the covenant and therefore sealed but God knowing that Ishmael would reject this hee warneth Abraham of it a little before that it might not trouble him afterwards It is not to bee with him in his generations for that cause Gen. 17. 18. compared with Gen. 21. 9 10 11 12 13. but with Isaac in his generations God not opposing therein Isaac to his Church-seed but to Ishmael who by rejecting the covenant will and did come hee and his to bee cast out hence when God speaketh in reference to our times after Christs incarnation when a woman compast a man Jer. 31. 22. hee saith hee will bee a God not to the families in Judah or Israel meerly but to those throughout the earth It 's the old phrase in Abrahams covenant expounded and enlarged I will be a God to thee and to thy seed in their generations Hee saith not barely to thee and to thy seed in regeneration but in their generations Now
beleeving seed with their children so it 's but the same now thou beleever and thy seed after thee are the same parties as Abraham and his seed yea thou Abraham and thy seed after thee scil in their generations wherein fathers and children begetting and begotten are comprehended And so now Abrahams spirituall seed in their generations are Abraham and his seed thus farre it 's the same yea but what must Abraham and this his seed doe and therefore doe because in covenant they must keepe the covenant But some are Infants there intended in the seed after thee and seed in their generations how can they keepe covenant Yes verily in the sense intended they may scil receive such a covenant and Church initiatory seale as he shall appoint to them according to their outward capacitie else to imagine any other externall way of their keeping of covenant it were vaine Abraham and his adult beleeving seed which so farre forth hee as communis persona did therein represent they may keepe Gods covenant many other wayes but the Infant seed of Abraham and of his beleeving children then or now cannot externally and actually keepe the covenant and externall condition thereof otherwise And let it bee attended that the wise gratious covenanter and Law giver of his Church hee distinctly layeth downe first this generall rule and principle with the ground of it before hee instance in or pitch upon any particular way or branch thereof Wherefore this generall being with greatest wisedome thus laid downe it must have its distinct consideration and weight by and in it selfe absolutè as well as any particular branch thereof may and doth admit of the like or as even this generall may have its consideration also comparatè in reference to any such particular Hee that were to preach of this Text Gen. 17. 9. might and would so handle it and raise distinct observations from it if one were to deale with an adult person a seeker which denyeth all visible Church ordinances c. and onely pleads interest in the promise in Christ and the Spirit and Father spirituall illuminations and consolations and quicknings promised this Scripture ground amongst others might now bee urged Thou shalt therefore even because of the promise and covenant keepe my covenant saith the Lord. Yea suppose it were some Jew that should bee converted and not deny the ordinances of Baptisme but like as many in former times as Constantine Theodosius and divers others did upon unwarrantable grounds hee should deferre his baptisme too long and nelect it too much pleading the fulnesse of the covenant and that all in all ordinances is their and in the branches of it the promises as in the well-springs Esay 12. 3. this Gen. 17. 9. might bee very pertinently urged to him Thou shalt therefore keepe my covenant either then hee must deny this Sacrament to bee any externall condition of the covenant on our parts as well as a visible seale thereof on Gods part which were ridiculous or if it bee yeelded to bee a dutie on mans part externally in covenant then it is manifest indignitie to God yea a breach of covenant to neglect it as receiving the initiatory Sacrament is a speciall branch of keeping Gods covenant so neglect or contempt thereof must bee acknowledged to bee a speciall breach of it and as much might bee urged in respect of neglect or contempt of the initiatory sealing of their seed or children both are equally made Gods covenant to bee kept or the covenant condition and dutie which most immediatly and necessarily and properly doth follow thence Hence this is firstly and principally here included as the keeping of Gods covenant by the persons interested therein according to their outward capacitie of it This royall generall covenant Law was not ceremoniall nor was the ground work of it ceremonial that covenant I will be a God to thee and thy seed was not ceremoniall vanishing but an everlasting if everlasting then an immutable covenant even the same to the worlds end that inference of this covenant duty laying upon such as were externally interested in it as propounded with Church reference Thou shalt therefore keepe my covenant and thy seed after thee this was not ceremoniall That covenant dutie in the generall and the keeping of it I meane an initiatory visible seale of the covenant and the receiving of it was not in the nature of it ceremoniall for then every species of this subalterne genus an initiatory covenant seale had been abolished by Christs comming and so not circumcision onely in the symboll and circumstance of it but in the genericall nature of it as an initiatory seale and sense of the righteousnesse of faith interest in the covenant c. and so baptisme too had never been instituted because it had been then to revive abolished ceremonies c. this generall Law was never repealed or abolished Say then that particular way of initiation first pitched upon on this ground worke namely cutting away of the foreskin of the flesh and that of males of eight dayes old c. were ceremoniall yet this generall covenant Law must not run parallel with it too I conclude then that particular way also of initiation unto covenant and Church fellowship by Baptisme of confederate parents and their seed as it is a covenant duty of which more anon so it depends upon externall covenant interest nor let any here interrupt the proceeding hereof with the old cavill touching covenant females it hath been said their naturall incapacity of that former way of initiation exempted them then and yet not now Nor yet doth that any way invalidate the conclusion propounded no more doth the objecting of Job It 's likely hee had a family Church which was not to abide and was a peculiarity of those times and no ordinary visible politicall Church in reference whereunto wee speake So to what some object about any beleevers in Rome or India c. we say such pearles are not ordinarily looked for in such dunghils nor would any seeke such living ones amongst those dead persons they are not a formed matter of a politicall visible Church but they are as materia informis They are quoad homines actually without and not within any politicall visible Church The covenant of grace nakedly considered giveth a person which is actually in it a remote right to the initiatory seale but it doth not give an immediate right thereto for so the covenant of grace as invested with Church covenant onely giveth this proximate right to that seale God being the God of order will have that his Church seale to bee attained in a way of order as of old strangers might not bee circumcised but with some submission to that Church order explicitly or implicitly and so now the orderly and ordinary dispensation of the seale is committed to the visible Church Matth. 28. 19 20. so that what ever right any have to the seale which are not of any particular visible
upon calling and so to their children upon calling and no otherwise of which hee gave a reason before that by the promise to the children was not meant the seed after the flesh the Copie of beleevers being not larger then that of Abraham was in respect of the eternall Covenant which belonged not to his seed after the flesh but after the spirit which hee expounds to bee such as Mark 3. 32. and Mark 16. 16. scil that obey the words of Christ that beleeve and are baptized To like purpose A. R. in his second part hath the same scil that the promise is equally made to them and to their children and to them that are afarre off But those that are afarre off are not in the Covenant by the promise untill they beleeve therefore neither those children which hee further confirmeth that if then they were in Covenant thou had they been also of the Church of the Gospel But that they were not of For it 's said afterwards vers 41. that they were added to the Church as many as beleeved and therefore were not of it before C. B. hath divers sences of it Expounding children to bee men by Mark. 10. 44. John 8. 39. Gal. 4. 19. But the meaning hee makes to be no other promise then of remission of sinnes as the onely salve of guiltie consciences hee maketh it not as others to bee the promise of the Messiah nor as A. R c. in his booke expoundeth the promise it selfe to be meant of that promise cited by Peter as then fulfilled which is mentioned Joel 2. scil of the gifts of the holy Ghost But C. B. maketh it not a promise but a proffer of a promise to persons not actually converted vers 37 38 39 40. And if there were any promise yet being of remission of sinnes it was not to their children since many godly persons children prove wicked and so God must either fall from his promise or they from Grace And that this promise was no more to them that were pricked in their hearts then to those afarre off whether from them as Gentiles or from the promise as unregenerate persons even as many as the Lord our God shall call And in this particular Mr. B. jumpeth with some others mentioned as hee did in that that this was spoken to comfort guiltie consciences cast down Matth. 27. 25. as well in regard of that bloody wish against their children as in respect of other bloody acts against Christ In these different apprehensions it 's hard to reconcile persons either to others of their judgement or else to themselves SECT III. COme wee then to the first opinion touching the words First the promise is to you that is it is fulfilled to you accordingly as made to Abraham for sending of Christ c. here wants Scripture proofe to make this sense of the promise is to you i. e. is fulfilled to you nor yet doth that in Act. 3. 25 26. yee are the children of the promise c. prove this sense Secondly it is sending of Christ or of Christ sent But let it bee considered 1. That the Apostle doth not say the pâ—omise was to you as in reference to the time of making it to the fathers with respect unto them or in reference to Christ who was not now to come but already come as the Apostle proveth from ver 3. to 37. nor is it the use of the Scripture when mentioning promises as fulfilled to expresse it thus in the present tense the promise is to you or to such and such but rather to annex some expression that way which evinceth the same for which let Rom. 15. 8. 1 Joh. 2. 25. Eph. 3. 6. Nehe. 9. 8. 23. 2 Chron. 6. 15. 1 King 8. 56. Act. 2. 16 17. 33. and 13. 32 33. Josh 21. 45. and 23. 14. Matth. 1. 22 23. and 21. 4. Luk. 1. 54 55. 68 69. and Psal 111. 9. Rom. 11. 26 27. be considered 2. They knew already to their cost that Christ indeed was sent amongst them and to bee that Jesus or Saviour of his people from their sinnes Act. 22. 36 37. compared with Matth. 1. 21. And this was cold comfort to them to tell them of that which wounded them unlesse there bee withall some promise annexed and supposed in his being come The promise meerely of Christs comming could not comfort them unlesse also in and by Christ come in the flesh there bee some promise made to them touching the removall of those burdens of guilt which lay upon them 3. The blessing principally propounded to them for their reviving healing succour and support it was not Christs sending nor his being sent but remission of sinnes vers 38. wherefore unlesse the Apostle argue impertinently this may not be excluded but must bee one principall thing intended 4. It is that promise to which Baptisme the seale is annexed now the seale is ever to the Covenant which is not barely to Christs being sent in the flesh but to the benefits contained in promises by his comming The third thing they say it is to those of the dispersion those of the ten Tribes as others have expressed it and why not also of the Gentiles as well since spoken indefinitely of all that were afarre of which the Scripture expresly applyeth to the Gentiles Ephes 2. 11 12. Suppose those other Jewes were as the Gentiles not a people actually in Covenant with God so much as externally as being long divorced from God and his Covenant and Church-liberties yet the Gentiles in the maine of their outlawry condition were as one with them Yea but the conversion of the Gentiles was not yet revealed till Act. 10. in that vision What had not Christ before this Sermon of Peters declared his mind to all his Apostles touching the discipling and In-churching of the Gentiles onely they knew not whether it might be by joyning them first by way of addition as proselytes to the Jewes rather then by gathering them into other distinct Churches 4. It 's affirmed that this promised sending of Christ was to them their children and those afarre off as many as our God should call that they may bee turned from their iniquitie and bee baptized for remission of sinnes and yet also that the promise what ever it bee supposed to bee was to them all with that limitation that they repent or that they be called What is it to as many as the Lord shall call or convert or cause to repent and yet is it that they may bee turned from their iniquitie is it to persons called and yet also to uncalled persons is it to them that they may bee called yet the persons to whom the promise is are as many as are supposed to bee called how can these two bee right yea it 's said it is to them all upon condition that they be called and yet also that it is to them that they may be called Why if it be to them that by Christ they may
loynes to be hee alone which by his blood should come actually as well as virtually to ratifie the Covenant of grace visibly made with them as they did in receiving the seale of Circumcision but that they owne the Lord Jesus who was crucified by and among them as he which a lone did thus which amongst other testimonies Baptisme witneseth therefore more was now required of the adult-Jewes then formerly which yet was not required of their unripe Children even as when wee are to receive members of other visible Churches into compleat fellowship of all Church priviledges and ordinances with us wee require some satisfaction of the growne persons to testifie their repentance of their former Church-sinnes and personall scandalls therein committed and their willing subjection unto the government and worship and doctrine of Christ as administred amongst us not because wee question the truth of their Church-estate elsewhere but because those Churches albeit true yet very corrupt and themselves then scandalous and withall being desirous not to bee with us barely as transient members by vertue of Communion of Churches but being to be of us as fixed members wee rest not in their former Church ingagements but require of such some new ingagements in reference to us and yet we require not this of their children which are not sui juris nor capable of giving personall satisfaction but admit them to the initiatory seale of baptisme with us so was it with them Acts the second being to bee incorporated into a purer company exhibiting the Ordinances of Christ in a more perfect evangelicall way Nor must that needs follow which A. K. saith that because it 's said they were added to the Church that therefore they were not of the Church before but after Peter spake those words Vers 39. the promise is to you c. for this is as well spoken after that expression that they were baptized as after that mentioned of their receiving the word gladly and yet will our opposites conclude that therefore they were not of the Church nor in the Covenant before they were baptized but came into that estate by baptisme if Baptisme were the forme of the Church or that which they so much urge wholly failed that a person must bee first discipled and so in Covenant and Church-estate before he be baptized Nor is that cogent which is urged against the Childrens right in the promise and unto Baptisme that they should bee so priviledged when they came to be effectually called and to bee turned from their sinnes as if this were quoad homines their onely rule of judging of persons visible interest in the Covenant of grace or visible right to the initiatory seale thereof or at least the onely way of having such a visible interest in the visible Churches Court For besides that it was not so of old in applying of circumcision as Gods appointed seale of the parties visible Covenant estate and right even with us also it is not the rule in Foro Ecclesiae for then none are by the Church to bee by rule admitted to baptisme but such as are effectually called and then John which knew that the most of them which hee baptized would bee as chaffe in the floore hee kept not rule in baptizing of them Or if calling bee taken for externall inviting in the word preached and offer of Christ that I suppose will not be pleaded for then every hearer should be forthwith baptized albeit an Indian or Black a more but calling as taken in reference to baptizing unto remission of sinnes seemeth to bee rather calling into visible Covenant and Church-estate unto which some whose was the promise intentionally yet were afar off from that estate actually at present but when called to it they were then to bee baptized And yet further to evince that the little ones of these Jewes not then capable of actuall repenting were not in defect of that repentance excluded from the promise mentioned Act. 2. 38 39. Consider 1. Such a supposed exclusion of their babes as here intended or implyed by that speech of the Apostle to as many as God shall call had been to lay an occasion and addition of more cumbers and trouble to the darkned disquieted spirits of his hearers then to cleare and ease them supposing as is undeniably evident that their wish against their poore children pressed them sore as well as other guilt It was all along thitherto a received truth that God was a God to their seed externally by vertue of Abrahams Covenant they were his adopted Children Ezek. 16. 21. and the Churches children which shee bare to the Lord vers 20. See Deut. 29. 29. and it was evident by Gods owne appointment of Circumcision to bee the initiatory seale not to a blank but to his Covenant of being a God to them whilst babes and before circumcised in heart so as actually to repent Deut. 30. 6. this their babes had externall right unto whilst these their parents were unconvinced or unwrought upon remaining uncut off by censures from the Church as of old Ezek. 16. 20 21. is mentioned of those Idolaters Now if not so when their Parents are wrought upon by Peters Sermon as the parents were thus farre losers by Christ and his Gospel and the efficacy thereof losing that pretious parentall priviledge which they had before this of their childrens federall interest and priviledge of Abrahams Covenant so also their children are losers too by their parents comming so far on to Christ comming now thus to be excluded their former Covenant right and neither Parents nor children to have any Covenant right and priviledge in lieu thereof How such doctrine might well stumble and trouble such Parents let any sober and judicious mind judge to bee sure they have laid a load of guilt and given a deadly wound unto their poore babes by that curse of theirs now if they are as Pagan strangers from the Covenant then is there no hope in reference to ordinary and revealed grounds and wayes of hope and life Ephes 2. 11 12 13. Yea but they might repent True if they lived to yeares but they may more likely die in Infancy and what then why Christ was according to promise unto Abraham sent c. True but what is that to our babes if not interested in his Covenant or testament in regard whereof alone he is a mediator to any Heb. 9. or what ordinary meanes of sanctifying and justifying our babes or saving efficacy upon them if not by and through the word of Covenant Ephes 5. 25 26. Rom. 9. 6. Yea but the promise is to them in Christ True but you tell us it is with this onely limitation that they be effectually called and turned from their sinnes of which our Infants in ordinary course are not capable Guilt there is in an ordinary and revealed way conveyed to our babes but no revealed and ordinary way is left by this doctrine visibly to confirme us that it may bee taken off
the children also So of all collectively is that spoken not onely that God that day avouched them to bee his people Deut. 26. 18. both parents and children as also Deut. 30. 16. and 29. but thou hast avouched the Lord to bee thy God Vers 17. thou collective Israel yet it was acted but by the growne part in their own in their childrens stead Abrahams seed is either taken for the head and principall as was Christ and so rather intended Gen. 12. 3. and 22. 18. or for the head and body together even Christ mysticall so Gen. 22. 15. Thy seed shall possesse the gates of thine enemies and so Gal. 3. 16. Jew and Gentile but one seed with Christ the head of the Church Again Abrahams seed is either taken collectively or distributively collectively either his seed by propagation or proportion In the former sense the Jewes in their generations were the seed mentioned Gen. 17. 7. that is parents and children for they are seed in their generations seed by proportion were the Proselytes of old in their generations and visible inchurched beleevers in their generations scil parents and children together And both againe are considered specifically or individually specifically so some of that sort of parents and growne persons and some of that sort of children are as well internally and savingly in the covenant as externally albeit many individuall persons of both sorts are onely externally thus Deut. 29. 14. with him that is here and with him that is not here him not them as noting a collection yea a certaine species or sort of persons growne or babes and of babes borne or unborne according to a different respect of Gods making his covenant with them So in Gen. 17. to thy seed indefinitely God absolutely covenanting thus as Vers 7. with them in their species and sorts conditionally in respect of the individuall persons of each sort Or more briefly the seed of Abraham are either his choyce seed in speciall or his Church seed indefinitely wee consider herein the later and not so much the former SECT II. 1. COnclusion that Covenant Gen. 17. 7. was a Covenant of grace and the same in nature with that Covenant of grace now held forth to us Neither of the branches of this conclusion I think are denyed by the more judicious of our opposites albebeit both have been by some of the more vulgar sort making that covenant in Gen. 17. to bee a Covenant of workes c. that it was a Covenant of grace may appeare by the qualitie of the persons betwixt whom the covenant is made scil not God as a Creator men as innocent as in that covenant of works made with Adam but God as gratious justifying ungodly persons in the sense of the Law or such as cannot become legally godly perfect in themselves or workers covenanting with such like non-workers Rom. 4. 1 2 3 4 5. sâ—il God and Abraham yea God and Isaac yea God and the spirituall seed of Abraham to whom with him the promises indefinitely were made and so this also Gal. 3. 16. 2 By the matter promised on Gods part scil I will bee a God to thee and to thy seed holding forth more then any legall covenant as 1. to tender and give to them his ordinances according as they should bee capable of them as their peculiar priviledge by right of Covenant hence these two coupled Lev. 26. 11 12. Rev. 21. 3. I will bee a God to them I will set my tabernacle amongst them hence any without these or any externall right to them are according to men said to bee without God in the world Eph. 2. 11 12 13. 2 That hee will dwell amongst them and manifest his speciall presence with and in his Ordinances and providences among them hence being a God to any and Gods dwelling with them are coupled together Exod. 29. 45. Lev. 26. 11 12 Rev. 21. 3. 3 That hee will tender them deliverances as their federall right and bee really forward to give such deliverances from all sorts of miseries and from the causes of the same yea actually to worke such deliverances so far as is meet and sutable to their present conditions hence God his being a God to any and his removing sad mournfull thoughts from any are joyned Revel 21. 4. see Levit. 26. 41. 42. 45. Deliverances from common providences are common to all even Pagans but not such as spring from the vertue of the Covenant Zach. 9. 11. 4 so as to give to such an externall covenant right at least as to temporall blessings hence giving Canaan and his being a God to them joyned Gen. 17. 5. 7. 8. see Psal 111. 5. so to spirituall mercies as justification Jer. 31. 33. 51. Adoption 2 Cor. 6. 16. 18. also owning after death Exod. 3. 6. compared with Luke 20. 37 38. and glory after all hence as to the former so to this is joyned God his being a God to any Heb. 11. 6. All this is included as by vertue of Gods covenant offered to such as hee is a God to yea and as that which according to men and as men are in charitie to judge is with all the visible right of such Albeit the former two senses suffice to the visible administration of the covenant as their right in that God doth hold forth that hee is a God to such in covenant to whom hee giveth his ordinances and with whom hee vouchsafeth his presence therein as their externall covenant right 3. By the condition propounded and promised to adult Abraham with whom God was now in this solemne wise to enter into this Covenant not with him alone but with his scil the exercise of faith and Evangelicall uprightnesse or perfection Walke before mee and bee upright or perfect Vers 2. And I will make my Covenant between mee and thee Vers 4. as for mee behold my covenant is with thee c. this is my part of the covenant that was thine and Vers 7. I will establish my covenant betweene mee and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations c. Now that the same covenant is to us since Christs ascension appeares by the former in that it being the covenant of grace it is an everlasting covenant hence Gen. 17. 3. and Heb. 13. 20. hence too when God would expresse the matter of his Covenant since Christs incarnation hee useth and annexeth the old phrase and forme of promise I will be a God to such or such 2 Corin. 6. 18. Heb. 8. 10. Jer. 31. 1. spoken in reference to our times So when speaking of the Jewes and their children which hereafter are to come into Church estate actually he useth the same phrase Ezek. 37. 25. 27. compared Hence the same language in mentioning new Jerusalems condition priviledge I will be a God to them I will set my tabernacle among them Revel 21. 3. The Covenant then of the Gospell hath outward priviledges of Gods tabernacle annexed as well as Abrahams Covenant
If this therfore bee not the rule of Church administration of the Initiatory injoyned seale of the Covenant then the other of visibility of interest is that which wee must goe by therein Which may suffice for answer to what A. R. suggested to the contrary And I say visibility of the parties interest in the Covenant I say not meere visibilitie of faith or repentance The Initiatory seale is not primarily and properly the seale of mans faith or repentance or obedience but of Gods Covenant rather the seale is to the covenant even Abrahams Circumcision was not primarily a seale to his faith of righteousnesse but to the righteousnesse of faith exhibited and offered in the covenant yea to the Covenant it selfe or promise which hee had beleeved unto righteousnesse hence the covenant of grace is called the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. 6 7 8. The righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise verse 8. and it 's called the word of faith hence albeit Abraham must walke before God who is now about to enlarge the Covenant to his as well as to make it to him in a Church reference Gen. 17. 1. c. yet the Initiatory seale in his as well as in their flesh is Gods Covenant verse 13. or a Sacramentall signe firstly and expresly of Gods Covenant Verse 11. and 7. compared albeit it implicitly oblige him and them to other duties formerly mentioned Hence Act. 2. 38 39. the seale of baptisme is put to the promise as the choyse matter and foundation in view and as that was a ground of repentance it selfe Repent and bee baptized for the promise is to you Not for you have repented as if that were the thing to bee firstly sealed by baptisme but the promise rather and when wee speake of visibilitie of Covenant right as such a rule to goe by wee exclude not the lowest and least degree of visibilitie since degrees doe not vary the species of any thing if we propound a higher degree where shall wee stay and pitch Why not a higher degree as well as that wee must looke to it that not the least of Gods Covenant little ones bee left out unfolded in the Church visible Wee were better seeme to bee remisse in respect of Church care of 99. which are but seemingly just ones then neglect any and leave out any which possibly is savingly as well as seemingly of the flock of the covenant Church the least of Gods visible family or Church must have their portion as of the family if Ministers bee faithful in their office the least visible measure of grace must occasion our judgement of charitie to judge them gratious so the least degree of visibilitie of covenant right may challenge the like charitie not in word and in tongue but in deed and act of expression Wee put a difference betwixt those in Heb. 6. 4. and Infants in degrees of visibilitie of this right but in the nature of the visibilitie wee say they are all one all are visibly in covenant albeit that visibilitie in point of degree bee not in all equall God putteth a difference in point of degree of faith in justifyed persons but in his act of justifying of persons hee puts no difference the least sparke in Flax is enough that way For if it were more it would flame as well as make a smoake and yet if but so much it 's not sleighted by the Lord. I might apply the same in point of degrees of visibilitie of Covenant right in reference to the Churches act of approbation It 's a higher degree indeed of visibility of interest in the Covenant to make personall profession and confession of faith in the Covenant as it is in Adultis then to have onely the visible testimony of God in his word of Covenant expressing his mind of grace touching the seed of Abraham to bee a God to them And to adde theâ—…â—…sible testimony of his providence that these children are of thâ—… race and parentage to which also Abraham and other inchurched parents by visible owning of the covenant in the Latitude upon the termes of it and as now Christian Parents doe make profession of their parentall faith in the Covenant as made to them and their children and this profession of theirs may not bee possibly sincere yet it 's visibly a federall confession and such an avouching of God to bee their Covenant God as taketh in their children as that did Deut. 26. 17. and that Deut. 29. 10 11 12 c. And this is to the Church a degree of their childrens visibilitie of covenant right and Church right albeit not so high as the former and not varying the species of visibilitie it sufficeth not to vary the species of Church admission to fellowship of the initiatory Church-seale Judgement of charitie reacheth further then to judge of persons estates by their own personall words or workes Charitie beleeveth all things in way of testimony if they give any testimony as that of God who testifyeth more absolutely for that species of beleevers children that they are such as hee doth covenant to bee a God to them And the parents testifie alsâ— for them in the profession of their faith in that covenant of God for their seed The Churches also owne them as visibly such leaving secrets to God which particular Infant is not the elect seed principally intended here charitie as it beleeveth all things witnessed so it hopeth all things of the particular persons which are themselves dumbe but are included in the testimony of others mouths opened for them nothing being of counter-force to the contrary touching this point of visibilitie of their covenant and Church interest And I the more wonder that any which confesse that it 's not to be denyed that God would have Infants of beleevers in some sense to bee accounted his to belong to his Church and family and not to the devills as true in facie ecclesiâ—… visibilis c. yet doe oppose us in this particular now in question SECT VI. Conclus 5. THat Christ is in Scripture considered as head of the visible Church in which are many members of Christ the head in that respect which prove unsound as well as in other respects hee is considered as head of the visible Church wherein are none but elect ones And when Gal. 3. 16. it 's said to Abraham and to his seed which is Christ were the promises made it 's not meant of Christ personall as if the promises as that of pardon of sinne c. were made to Christ personally considered or the promises were first made to Abraham and unto Christ personall as the Text hath it Promises were made to Abraham and to his seed Christ Nay Christ personally considered is rather Abrahams seed not to but in which the promises are confirmed Gal. 3. 17. with 16. But rather of Christ with his body the Church whether of Gentiles or Jewes Gal. 3. 14. which though many personally yet make but one seed and
not many seeds being all one in Christ the head of the Church Verse 16. 28. compared like as Gen. 3. 15. the seed of Eve is Christ with his members in and with him So 1 Cor. 12. 12 13. the name of Christ is not ascribed to the head the Lord Jesus without his body the Church or to the Church of Jewes and Gentiles without him the head but collectively considered Quaeritur whether this in Gal. 3. and 1 Cor. 12. be spoken of the visible or invisible Church I answer to me it seemes that the places admit of the consideration of the Church as visible First in that the Apostle speaketh of all the Galatian Church-members as well as others as one in Christ Gal. 3. 28. Now were all those members elected will any say I suppose not yet all are one in Christ their head Secondly in that hee speakes of them all as Sacramentally one with Christ in baptisme Gal. 3. 27 28. compared so 1 Cor. 12. 12 13. Now albeit the spirit bee the cause of the internall and saving union with Christ in all which are united As Ecclesiastically all the Corinthian members were judged to bee yet indeed and in truth there were many of them not approved to God 1 Cor. 11. 18 19. compared But in both places the Apostle considering them as a baptized Caecus intimateth the consideration thereof as a visible and not as an invisible Church Baptisme being the seale committed to the visible Church by her officers to bee dispensed and not to the invisible Church which hath no Officers in it as such And baptisme being by the Church administred to persons as visible and not as invisible members of the Church Thirdly in that Christ hath head-like influences into the officers and members many whereof are not savingly joyned to him Fourthly in that it is the Church wherein hee hath set diversitie of Church-officers which are not set in the invisible but visible Church that Church being not invisible but visible where Church-officers are set and chosen and act From this consideration it followeth that albeit a mans owne personall faith uniteth him to Christ in respect of saving and invisible union yet the profession and confession of faith before and in a visible Church in reference to visible communion therewith this doth unite a person to Christ as head of the visible Church whether the party bee sincere or no. Hence also a Parent making profession of faith in the covenant of grace as invested with Church-covenant in reference to his children it doth unite them also to Christ as head of the visible Church so farre as to give right to solemne imitation of them into the fellowship of the Church in circumcision as of old or baptisme as now Parents acts in this case being in the face of the viâ—…ble Church their childrens acts as the places quoted Deut. 26. 17 18. and 29. 10 11 12 13 14 and 16 16 17 declared Whence contrariwise the parents neglect of ciâ—cumcision of a babe not capable of personall neglect was câ—unted the childs neglect the uncircumcised manchild whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised that soule shall bee cut off â—rom his people Hee hath broken my covenant And as in other cases the Lord Christ who required personall faith in growne ones to their cure yet in case of children is contented that their parents beleeve on their behalfe John 4. Marke 9. from verse 12. to 18. so Matth. 15. 22. to 29. so is it in the case of this externall Church benefit Albeit the just onely live an effectuall life of grace and attaine the vertue of the seale by their owne faith yet that hindreth not but a child may attaine as it were a Church-life and pertake of the visible interest and use of that initiating Church-seale by his parents covenant and Church faith or that faith which is such to the Church Nor yet doe wee hereby establish as some say a meriting faith no more then we make visibilitie of personall faith to merit personall right to baptisme c. But rather the parents professing to apply the covenant as made to him and his there doth result a parentall as well as a personall right Such weight there is in the covenant applyed as by vertue of the covenant of grace invested with Church-covenant thus professedly applyed there doth arise such a union as of the parent so of the child quoad homines unto Christ as head of the visible Church And looke as the covenant laid hold upon by the lively faith of gracious parents as made with respect to their children hath mighty force to effect very gratious things in the elect seed yea albeit dying young as sundry of those elect ones of Abrahams race did Rom. 9. 6. yea so as to make their outward washings to become effectuall in Christ to an inward clensing Ephes 5. 25 26. yea so as to bring in and bring home many of such covenant children Whence those revolters beloved for their covenant fathers sake as such Rom. 11. 28. and hence made as a ground of their returne verse 15 16. So is there such validitie in the covenant invested with Church-covenant albeit but unworthily oft-times held forth by the parents which doth beget upon the children an externall filiall relation unto God and to his spouse the visible Church whence that respect of children of God and his Church by vertue of that Espousall covenant Ezek. 16. 8. Even in the children of Idolatrous members verse 20 21. 23. Great is the force of this way of the covenant so clothed Albeit many unworthy members are girt up in it to hold them and theirs in externall Church-communion Jer. 13. 11. untill either that Church bee divorced from God or the particular members disfranchised by some Church censure of such a Church-covenant priviledge This consideration with the former mentioned in that first conclusion may also satisfie M. B. that our doctrine touching Infants covenant and Church-right to baptisme doth not necessarily produce either that absurdity of a state of grace and remission of sinnes before calling or of birth grace as J. I. hath it conveyed from parent to child understanding it of grace absolute and grace in them and not of grace upon them or relative grace And if of grace upon them yet if understanding what hee saith as meant of justification and saving adoption and not of externall adoption and covenant administration the former they convey not as neither doth a free Denison his personall gifts of wisedome c. the later hee may not as a man barely but with this reduplication considered as a parent in covenant and Church and spirituall citie estate for so by vertue of the covenant hee is in together with the professed parentall application and challenge of it as to him and his hee may convey such an externall right formerly mentioned Nor is that absurditie ours that wee make such visible members of Christs church before calling for if hee
Christs owne c. even the worst of them John 1. 12. Deut. 32. 19 20. Isa 1. 2. and 43. 6. Ezek. 16. 20 21. 23. Matth. 15. 26. Christs chickens Matth. 23. end not Gods children meerely by creation as neither were that church-Church-seed of old called the sons of God for that Gen. 6. 1 2. in opposition to the daughters of men or of those without the Church For so all were of God Mal. 2. 10. Heb. 12. 9. nor yet by regeneration and saving adoption such but by externall filiation and adoption The argument then is a dicto secundum quid They are not children of the promise or of God savingly and in respect of the effect of the promise and of their covenant and Church estate to salvation therefore not at all children of God or of his promise which followeth not 2 Object They were children onely after the flesh and of the Sinai-covenant John 8. Gal. 4. now Abrahams spirituall seed onely are in the covenant of grace Rom. 9. Answ If children after the flesh be taken properly so even Isaac and Jacob were such They had Abraham to their father as well as the Jewes If taken exclusively as if no more but children of the flesh wee have already proved in what sense they were children of God and of his free covenant If children of the flesh allegorically so I deny that the Apostles intent Gal. 4. is to compare the state of the Jewes from Abrahams time downward to Ishmaels of Hagar as neither were they as Ishmael of Hagar the bondwoman but of Sarah the freewoman even as Isaac was Esa 51. 1 2. Hebr. 11. 11 12. Esa 10. 22. 23. So neither doth the Apostle consider them in reference to their first covenant estate in Abraham but to their degenerate estate into a legall frame and way scil as adhering to the morall Law delivered in mount Sinai not as a rule of holy life as there it was propounded and intended but as the substance of the covenant of workes so as to looke for life by it in which way God never intended it to his covenant people And likewise considering them as abusing the ceremoniall law not as given of God at Sinai to represent the Messiah before his comming in the flesh as one in whose blood virtually they might and ought to have looked for life and grace and by it to bee led to him when come in the flesh as hee in whom all those shadowes were fulfilled and so to cease but they abusing both morall and ceremoniall Law so as to seeke to bee justified after Christs comming thereby and not by Christ and persecuting such as held forth the contrary in this allegoricall sense not Hierusalem or the Church of old but Jerusalem which then was when Paul wrote this long after Christs time As might be shewed by comparing Gal. 1. 17. 18. and 2. 1. with other Scriptures This Hierusalem which then was and her children Hierusalem which now is and her children and verse 29. and so it is now not so was it of old verse 29. Those which did as Rom. 9. 31 32 33. and 11. 20. which were enemies to the Gospel-church v. 21. 1 Thes 2. 14 15 16. These which would bee under the Law in that sense not under Christ Gal. 4. 21. to 26. These were the persons here intended Yea it 's evident that hee considereth not the Jew-Church of old as in covenant with God but that Allegoricall Hierusalem in that hee applyeth this to all Legalists whether Jewes or Gentiles Those of Galatian Churches which are and will bee of that straine they were such children also Gal. 4. 21. Tell mee saith Paul to them yee that desire to bee under the Law c. where hee applyeth that further verse 2 3 4 c. whence also that Gal. 5. 2 3 4 c. In a word it 's one thing to bee under the morall or ceremoniall Law as a tutor another thing to bee under it as a parent both the Church-seed of Abraham and his choyce elect seed were all in common under the Law in the former sense and so to the outward face of reason and comparatively they were as servants Gal. 4. 1 2 3 4. scil not so free from vayles and manifold ceremonious burdens and services They were a royall nation under a Princely covenant and estate Exod. 19. 5 6. They were then children yea and heires as to Canaan so to greater things also in respect of externall right Gal. 4. 1 2 3. But yet as Princes children at schoole or as great mens sonnes at a kind of service Thus they were under the Law as a Tutor ibid. but under it as a parent and mother v. 23 24 c. scil such as were only of the Sinai covenant in the legall part of it and were to inherit by vertue thereof or no way Thus those Jewes as of Abraham Isaac Jacob considered as covenant-fathers they were of other manner of seed scil such like as Gen. 17. 7 and Deut. 36 c. and were externally instated to another manner of inheritance 3 Object They were under the old and first covenant which was formerly c. and not under the new or in the covenant of grace Answ Even that Sinai covenant could not disanuall that covenant formerly made with them in Abraham as being much later then it Gal. 4. 16 17. That was upon their comming out of Egypt Jer. 31. 32. This above 400. yeeres before it The covenant of Abraham Isaac and Jacob in reference to their Church seed was in the essentialls of it the same with that dispensed to us now and as to them before Abraham an everlasting covenant and Gospel Heb. 13. 20. Rev. 14. 6. The Lord as others which are wise and not variable made but one testament or covenant or will of grace yet he caused it to be writ in divers characters some more legible and perspicuous The royall charter and grant was and is the same but renewed so that the phrases new and old import not new in nature and substance but in accidents and qualities or new that is renewed As the same grace in nature it is said to be new or renewed every morning Lam. 3. 22 23. so the commandement of love the same in nature both old from the beginning yet also new â— John 2. 7 8. so the new way Heb. 10. 20. yet the old way too Heb. 13. 8. 20. Christ is not two wayes but one way John 14. 6. so new heavens and earth scil refined new churches yet the same essentially with those of old as wee sometimes call garments new which are but old ones new trimmed When the covenant is said to be new and old it is not divisio generis in species but subjecti in adjuncta So the phrases first and second Heb. 9. note that two testaments specifically different but numerically as the first and second person in the Trinitie are called first and second yet are not two Gods
it was ratified and fulfilled but her Church seed whom the same promise also did comprehend togegether with Eve in whose hearing God uttered these things to the Serpent And hence Eve by faith did thus interpret the scope of that promise as made in refernce to her Infant Church seed as was Seth as before wee proved Gen. 4. 25 26. And the opposition sheweth what kind of seed the promise reached scil Infant as well as adult seed the Serpents seed being as well the least Snake c. as the most venemous and overgrowne and the antipathie being naturall and forcible betweene even little children and any sort of Serpents as is evident this then was held out as Gospel even in the beginning of the visible Church and world hence also in the beginning of the renewed world as I may call it after the flood the same doctrine is implicitely held forth Gen. 9. in the opposition of the servill condition of Canaan or 25 26. to the future Church estate of Japhet vers 27. the one accursed parent and child to servitude so that Chams babes as soone as borne were to bee slaves but Japhet parent and child are prophetically devoted to Church estate in Sems Tents so that inchurched Japhets babes are actually within Sems tents so soone as borne As God would accurse collective Canaan Noah prophesieth that God would inlarge or cause collective Japhet to turne into the Tents of Sem which interpreters expound of the joyning of the Gentiles unto the visible Church Now visible Church estate supposeth visible covenant estate as is evident The like opposition was allegorically made in the primitive times after Christs ascension Gal. 4. 23 24. betweene collective naturall Ishmael of the bond-woman in type and collective legall Ishmael in antitype And collective naturall Isaac in type and collective Evangelicall Isaac in antitype In the types the opposition is undeniably verified that Ishmael with his children are expunged and cast out from a civill family priviledge and portion in Abrahams house and onely Isaac and his children are to have that civill and naturall priviledge of inheritance therein The sonne of the bondwoman shall not bee heire with my son Isaac Gen. 21. 10. And in the antitype even persons formerly in Gods family the Church if rejecting Christ and the covenant in him and imbracing and adhering obstinately to any thing in a way inconsistent with him such are cast out and dischurched they and theirs as was verified in that legall Ierusalem and her children even the body of the Jewes adult and Infant Thus far à typo ad veritatem the argument is undeniable and what reason then to make the other branch of the allegory dissonant onely that there à typo ad veritatem the argument holdeth not that all inchurched persons which are gospelled hold forth the free covenant in reference to Gospel Church estate are as Isaac and his posteritie visibly priviledged and instated in the Church heritage of the Lords family the visible politicall Gospell Church As in Isaac Abrahams seed naturall is called in point of civill heritage all of them and as in the same Isaac not Ishmael Abrahams Church seed was called and so all of them called to the externall fellowship of covenant and Church and as in a restrained sense Abrahams elect seed were called not in Ishmael but Isaac Rom. 9. 7. so in the Ecclesiasticall Isaac as I may say in these dayes the Church seed are counted and not in pagans without the Church and according to ordinary dispensation and in mans count in the same line are Gods elect seed counted all the individuall children in the former that species of Church children and none other in the sense mentioned are of the latter account But to hasten to the latter branch that the same doctrine is held forth as Gospell to bee dispensed and fulfilled in the purer times of the Gospell towards the latter end of the world that Esay 56. 20. is a promise referring to the purer times of the Gospel Church and probably to the times of the comming in of the Jewes vers 17 18 19. when albeit there may bee some accursed ones yet the Churches children though Infants of dayes not allegoricall Infants in humilitie or by imitation of beleevers c. that sort of persons too dying in Infancie yet God promiseth they shall die in a holy maturitie of covenant grace and blisse as if elder by many yeeres When elder ones some die ripened for the cause of God the like singular account doth the Lord expresly make as of parents in his Church so of their off-spring vers 13. see Esay 61. 9. God promiseth not onely that the growne persons should bee had in account but their seed and off-spring not meaning it of allegoricall seed amongst the Gentiles for it 's not said they shall bee knowne to convert Gentiles c. but their seed shall bee knowne among the Gentiles yet not meaning pagan Gentiles but rather inchurched Gospelled Gentiles the Hebrew word for knowing being used to signifie speciall owning of persons either by God Jer. 24. 5. or by men Psal 142. 5. Ruth 2. 10. 19. Deut. 21. 17. and 1. 17. Prov. 24. 23. now none will say the worser part of the Gentiles would thus owne the members of the Church or their children with such choyce respect but the better part rather of the Gentiles they are then the persons acknowledging the seed not the allegoricall seed acknowledged so Ezek. 37. 20 21. 27. when all the scattered of the Tribes of Israel and Judah shall become as the two sticks joyned in one in Ecclesiasticall respects at least under the discipline of Christ God in reference to that time reâ—… the old Charter of Abrahams covenant to bee a God to thâ—… 〈◊〉 which promise hee includeth their children they being aâ—… their parents scattered among the heathen vers 21. and to bee gathered to their Land and parts of the nations and kingdomes as of old to bee then joyned yea vers 25. expresly their children and childrens children are by covenant put under Christ as their Prince with them is the covenant of peace made and that of no temporall but of an everlasting nature and all this in reference to Church estate and administration whence that branch of the old Charter now actually renewed of setting his Tabernacle and Sanctuary in the midst of them vers 26 27. and that in a very glorious and perspicuous manner as persons thereto ex confesso to the very heathen sanctified and sequestred by the Lord vers 28. the very same they which shall dwell in the Land are children with their parents their Prince will David or Christ bee with them is that everlasting covenant of peace vers 26. amongst them will Gods Sanctuary and Tabernacle by vertue of covenant be placed vers 26 27. their God will God bee and they shall bee his people or hee their covenant God and they his covenant people vers 27. and all this
in reference to Church administrations of Sanctuary and Tabernacle ordinances as they are capable thereof by which they shall become a visible Church or sanctified and sequestred people in the very view of the heathen which cannot nor doe not attend to gratious efficacies but externall administrations and dispensations and priviledges and the like see vers 28. other places to like purpose might bee quoted but I forbeare 3. Argument if the Infants and little ones of visibly beleeving parents in church estate before they can make any personall confession or profession of faith in the Covenant yet then are Abrahams Church seed then is it Gospell that the promises belong to them but the former is true Ergo the latter The major is in substance the Apostles Gal. 3. 16. to Abraham and his seed are the promises made the minor is proved 1. In those of Abrahams loynes in the elect seed I should thinke it should not bee questioned but yet it hath by some that Infants while Infants and till beleevers are not in the covenant c. and by such other speeches of our adversaries in this point the covenant right not only of the individuall Infants of beleevers but the covenant estates of that species and sort of persons is wholly denied and so since it 's evident and acknowledged that some are elected of that sort yet it 's denied that they have part in the word of Gods Covenant so that if they die in Infancie as many of the choyce seed of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob did c. yet that ordinary meanes of saving efficacie in all the saved elect is denyed them contrary to that principle Rom. 9. 6. but more hereof anon but Rom. 9. 7 8 9 10 11. is so cleare for it I wonder any deny it Isaac and Jacob are made precedentiall instances of interest not onely of election but of Gods calling unto the fellowship of his free covenant without respect either to their desire or indeavour of it personally vers 16. It was that God might shew not barely in the act of his choosing of them in his secret counsell but in the act of his covenanting grace likewise that it was not of their workes but of him that called them unto that covenant estate in the example of Jacob most fully when God would shew the rise of that his covenant grace to him the younger that hee should have the preheminence vers 12. hee vers 11. instanceth in the time when that was revealed with so personall a reference to Jacob even whilst in the wombe and expresseth the forenamed cause as the reason why and so God expresly mentioneth his covenant as to bee established with Isaac in Infancy or with Isaac to bee borne the next yeare of Sarah Gen. 17. 21. And hence when Isaac was growen and was actually a beleever hee hath indeed then more actuall benefit of his owne improvement of the covenant by faith but hee did not then first enter into covenant but hee had interest in the covenant before made to his father with reference to him that being to be minded in covenant expressions uttered the persons spoken unto and understanding what is spoken are not the onely covenanters ingaged but aswell the persons spoken of with covenant reference in the declaring of the covenant so in Gen. 17. 7. 21. and 21. 12. and 26. 3 4. and 20. 13 14. and Deut. 29. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 c. Now that Isaac had such a former covenant interest appeareth in that Gen. 26. 3. when God spake so expresly to him touching his covenant hee saith not I now make a covenant with thee or sweare to do such and such things for thee but I will performe the oath which I sware to Abraham thy father hee referreth him to a former grant and ingagement of grace to him see verse 4 5. hee doth not retract any thing but confirmeth in solemne wise the validitie of the former bond and the like might bee said of all the rest of the elect seed if all the elect seed were not involved in that covenant Gen. 7. 7. then the Apostles reasoning should bee undermined Rom. 9. 6 7 8. who is so farre from denying the elect seed to bee these choyce children of the promise Gen. 17. 7. and 21. 12. that he maketh that choyce company of the children of the promise to bee the onely elect seed now if all the elect seed bee included in that Gen. 17. 7. and 21. 12. then since some of Abrahams and Isaacs seed died in Infancie either none of those were elect and saved which none dare avow or if some bee supposed to bee saved and elect then were they in Infancie and as Infants of Abraham and Isaac children of the promise Sith the promise and covenant runs to them as Abrahams seed not as elect also supposing they were circumcised before they died that was no seale to a blanke albeit they being Infants had no actuall faith c. but rather a seale of the covenant of grace or promise of which they most properly were children Yea to all the rest which were in an Ecclesiasticall respect children of the covenant that injoyned circumcision was to be that his covenant or the visible Sacramentall signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith or the covenant of God holding the same forth Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13. Rom. 4. 11. and 10. 6 7 8. and Deut. 29. and 30. 6. 11. 12 13 14. compared And what is true of them of Abrahams and Isaacs loynes as Infants of Abraham and Isaac considered as beleeving and inchurched is true of the Infants of others as beleevers and in church estate the formalis natio of the interest of the Infants of the former as such is as valid in those of the latter the formalis natio being the same in both as also the covenant of grace in the essentialls thereof is the same and therefore Abram had then first his name changed to Abraham and then first was called a father of nations in reference to this covenant of grace to bee made with him and his in this politicall Church way and latitude of Church interest and dispensation thereof as Gen. 17. 4 5 6 7 c. compared and then first propounded as a father and exemplar to other beleevers of other nations Rom. 4. And albeit it were a name given him before hee was actually circumcised yet it was not to intimate that there was no need of a visible seale to his children and seed whether of his loynes or otherwise for hee was a father aswell of those of the circumcision Rom. 4. 11 12. But to shew that hee was not a father to those which were bound to bee circumcised onely but withall a father to the Gentiles albeit neither circumcised by actuall taking away of the flesh of their foreskinne nor yet bound thereto vers 12. It was not then spoken to evacuate the force of reasoning from right to the
promise as invested or Church promise or covenant unto right to the seale or to shew that albeit Gentile beleevers did not partake of the initiatory seale of the covenant yet having the promise they therefore have the seale in Abraham their father albeit they never are nor may bee sealed in their persons the Apostles discourse cleareth it to bee otherwise his scope being not to infringe any Gospel right to the Gospell seale but to take off any reasoning in point of justification from any work of the Law considered apart from Christ as the five first verses evince and because that of circumcision was chiefely gloried in by the Jewes hee taketh off any reasoning that way in opposition to faith which is all in all rather in point of justification whether of Jewes or Gentiles for which end Abrahams example in the way and manner of his justification is propounded as verse 9 10 11 12 13. declare as for the sealing of Abrahams beleevers children the Gentiles in Abrahams sealing if that were intended as much might have been affirmed of the beleevers Jewish children of Abraham as they were such and so the circumcising of such Jewes at least had been more then needed so farre forth Yea but the Jewes were commanded to be circumcised true and so were the Gentiles to be baptized yea but they were to be circumcised when Infants yea and when adult too in case as Joshua 5. and in that case at least many of them being actuall beleevers Joshua 5. and 6. compared with Heb. 11. 30. might have pleaded exemption as being quatenus beleever circumcised in the circumcision of their father Abraham It was not then spoken at all to weaken the bond to an initiatory sealing of Gentiles but to that initiatory sealing up of the covenant to them by circumcision of the foreskin of their flesh thus much by the way in answer to what some thus object But to returne to the proofe of that propounded let us shew that even in the dayes since the time of the fathers before Christs time such children mentioned were are and will be eyed by divine approbation as covenant and church-Church-seed of Abraham God hath promised to blesse the inchurched nations in Abrahams seed Christ behold Christ by an outward Symbole testifying that the little ones of inchurched visible beleevers are in Church account such witnesse that act of his and his offence that any such should bee hindred from any approach to him in the use of any meanes to attaine at least externally that blessing of him the promised seed Luke 18. 15 16. 7. with Marke 10. 16. hence in the purer dayes of the Gospel It was of old prophesied that such children should bee accounted the seed which the Lord hath blessed aswell as their parents should come under that account by the Gospelled Gentiles Esay 61. 9. yea God himselfe expresseth his account as of such parents so of their children to be such Church and covenant seed both are under one account so far forth Esay 65. 23. besides that if such parents suppose Jewes or Gentiles be Abrahams spirituall seed Anabaptists will grant then are their children also the parents being not meerely abstractively considered the covenant seed Gen. 17. 7. but as in reference to their children with them for the seed of Abraham to whom the covenant Gen. 17. 7. is made is the seed in their generations which necessarily imply and suppose as the parents generating so the children begotten of them the parents make not the generation alone nor the children alone but joyntly considered together Here Anabaptists sever the subject parties taken into the covenant consideration they agree it 's Abraham and his spirituall seed but leave out that notation of the seed scil seed in their generations the proselyte gentiles in Abrahams house they were not his carnall seed why are they then sealed but as they were rather Abrahams spirituall and Church seed Yea but their babes also have the visible seale of Abrahams covenant yet are they not his fleshly seed nor yet are they his actuall beleeving seed and yet have they the feale of Abrahams seed surely then in and with their parents they are Abrahams Church and spirituall seed You will say God commanded them to be sealed and therefore sealed Answ Suppose it so yet God commanded their circumcision to be on them also his covenant or the Sacramentall signe of that his covenant sealed to Abraham to his seed in their generation Gen. 17. 7. 9 10 11 12 13. either then they which in one sense were not of his seed or loynes v. 12. yet were of his covenant and Church seed vers 7. or else God solemnly enjoyned a seale to a blanke or a seale to no covenant of his no other covenant being then in mention to bee sealed by circumcision which was enjoyned to bee his covenant or the Sacramentall signe of his covenant vers 11 12 13. Yea but they partaked not of the covenant many of them at least in their Infancy Answ If yee speake of saving actuall efficacy upon them then neither did many others no not of the elect seed which lived to maturitie of yeares so partake of the covenant in their Infancy nor doth that hinder but that circumcision in the nature of it and in the institution of it was a visible seale of the covenant of grace that which Moses phraseth touching circumcision that it was a signe of the covenant Paul explaineth that it was a seale of the righteousnesse of faith scil not so much subjective as objective Rom. 4. The baptisme of Simon Magus was in the nature of it and in Gods institution a visible seale of the most spirituall part of the covenant and yet did not Iscariot and Magus partake of the spirituall part of the Covenant It is peculiar to the elect to bee in the covenant in respect of participation of the saving efficacy of it Rom. 9. 6 7 8. But it is common to Iscariot and reprobates adult or Infants to bee externally in the covenant in the face of the Church as verse 4. of which before But as for the visible seale it selfe whether to elect or reprobate to such as partake of the spirituall good of the covenant or not this varieth not nor multiplyeth nor nullifieth the nature of the seale The nature of it depends on God the author not upon the sealed persons worthinesse or unworthinesse sex or age Circumcision was not covenants but one and the same covenant ex natura rei nor was it a part but the covenant even the whole covenant Sacramentally to elect or reprobate Infant or adult circumcised The commandement of God did not put or cause any difference but injoyned it all equally to all sorts The covenant sealed was but one not two covenants albeit God did hold forth varietie of covenant blessings as doth the Gospell some more common to all and some more peculiar to a few and so the seale it selfe was to Infant and adult
any promise neither in respect of internall and saving no nor so much as in respect of externall right therein I conclude then that such children are Abrahams spirituall seed and that therefore the promises belong to them at least externally And so much for proofe of this seventh conclusion wherein I have been the longer in that it is the very hinge of the controversie It is not then the Gospell of any mortall man deriving its rise from Zwinglius or any such sinfull sonne of man albeit pretious in the sight of God and his Saints nor is it any other Gospel which may bee anathematized I should feare to bee anathematized of God if I said so It 's Gospel that beleevers are Abrahams seed Gal. 3. 6 7 8 9 c. true but that is not all and onely the Gospell this part of the Gospell their childrens covenant estate at least ecclesiastically this is Gospell too Rom. 10. 6 7 8 compared with Deut. 29. and 30. as before yea the rather is this Gospell because the other is one dependeth and followeth upon the other as hath beene shewed SECT XI 1 Object BY what hath been now said answer is ready to what I. S. objecteth That if Infants be visibly in the covenant of grace then at one and the same time one may be visibly under grace and yet as Ephes 2. under wrath by nature and so by nature bee under two contrary covenants of workes and of grace Mr. B. also hath a like objection I answer they are not under two such contrary estates by nature taken in the same sense but by nature taken in a diverse sense they may take nature for corrupt sinfull nature and so Paul a Jew and all other Jewes or Gentiles Wee saith Paul are by nature children of wrath But take nature for a birth estate of covenant-Ancestors and so Paul and others of Abraham Isaac and Jacob were not sinners or strangers from the covenant of grace as were those of the Gentiles but they were Jewes by nature inchurched persons And in their confessing parents confessors and professors as the word Jew is used Rom. 2. 9. 28. and Est 8. 17. Rev. 3. 7. they became Jewes that is joyned in a Church estate c. sinners they were in that sense they had by sinfull nature sinne in them but sinners in opposition to a Jew or Church and covenant estate at least externally they were not not Jewes barely scil persons of that nation without further Ecclesiasticall respect to the administration of the covenant for then the notion of sinners of the Gentiles had been unsuitably added It had sufficed to have said wee that are Jewes by nature and not Gentiles but Jewes by nature rather as above the elect seed of Abraham of which yet many died in infancy they were the choyce children of that promise Gen. 17. 7. with Rom. 9. 7 8 9. yet they were also by nature children of wrath Isaac was visibly the child of the promise in Infancy borne by promise interested in the promise expresly made with reference to him as soone as borne actually as before intentionally yet also by nature as a sonne of Adam a child of wrath but as a sonne of covenant Abraham a child of promise The like may be said of David in the former sense conceived in sinne Psal 51. in the latter a child of promise So of the other Infants of their loynes whence injoyned whilst Infants to bee sealed with the seale of Abrahams covenant Yea some of our opposites grant yea urge it as a reason against the exposition of 1 Cor. 7. 14. which some give thereof that children of parents whereof one was not matrimonially sanctified to the other but came together unchastly as Pharez and Zara of Judah and Thamar Jephtah of Gilead and many others were within the covenant of saving grace and Church priviledges Now the author intended not this thus that they came into the covenant of grace when they were growne and came actually to beleeve for then there were no colour of argument against Paedobaptists reasoning from 1 Cor. 7. touching such Infants covenant estate and that annexed that they were in the covenant of saving grace and Church priviledges sheweth that to bee his meaning since all confesse that the Jewes children did whilst Infants partake of the initiatory Church seale of circumcision which the author elsewhere counteth their priviledge saying that they had that priviledge to bee reckones in the outward administrations as branches of the Olive by their birth by vertue of God his appointment c. albeit the author I suppose forgate himselfe speaking of branches by nature saith that it seemeth to him to import not that the Jewes were in the covenant of grace by nature but that they had this priviledge to bee reckoned in the outward administration as branches of the Olive by their birth c. when yet even those illegitimately born of Jewes mentioned are confessed to bee in the covenant of saving grace as well as Church priviledges which as was said must bee spoken of them as Infants borne of such parents or else it is not any argument against them which plead for birth federall holinesse from 1 Cor. 7. 14. So then here are persons by nature children of wrath but by priviledged nature and birth in the covenant of saving grace 2 Object If Infants saith I. S. be in the covenant of grace and borne so then such Infants were borne in the covenant and never out And besides Gods covenant of saving grace being absolute and undertaking to give saving grace to such as are in covenant with him all such must bee saved unlesse God faile of his truth Answ 1. That covenant of grace as I. S. acknowledgeth it to bee mentioned Deut. 29. it was made with little ones then unborne intentionally vers 14 15. as well as with those then present actually So that when they were borne they were born in that covenant and never out as much may bee said of the Infant elect seed or children of the promise dying Infants they were borne so and never out of that estate after they were actually existent yea the rest were all girded in the covenant Jer. 13. 2. Gods covenant did not barely offer or promise to covenant but made a covenant a covenant and an oath with them that day Deut. 29. 12 13 14 15. and amongst other promises ingaged himselfe to circumcise their heart Chap. 36. 6. yet were not all in heart circumcised and yet the promise of God failed not being in the generall propounded to them conditionally and not as it is said here absolutely at least as it had reference to them all in common The word of promise tooke not effect in as many of the Jewes to whom the covenant promises externally belonged yet it followed not that therefore it took no effect at all and that God was unfaithfull for it tooke effect in others Rom. 3. 3. and 9. 6 7 8. so here 3.
This argument supposeth that one cannot bee within the covenant of saving grace externally but they must bee in a saving estate the contrary whereto appeareth Conclus 3. And it 's said of sundry illegitimate Jewish children that they were within the covenant of saving grace namely externally for the author cannot meane other And yet of all such who will say they were all in a saving estate even Esaus birthright was more then right to Isaacs temporall estate as borne of Isaac why else doth the Apostle apply Esaus example of selling his birthright in such sort as Heb. 12. 15 16 17. hee propoundeth his example to deterre the Hebrewes which were in Church estate Heb. 10. 25. and 12. 17 18. from the mischiefe of falling short of the grace of God not of meere temporall blessings nay expresly the thing hee fell short of as his birth heritage as Isaacs first borne is said to bee the blessing indefinitely even Abrahams blessing to his seed the same blessing whereof hee rejecting his externall right Jacob his younger brother came to possesse which was a Church blessing as well as naturall and civill Gen. 28. 3 4. as for temporall blessings he had store of them notwithstanding nor was Isaacs trembling when hee saw how strangely God had ordered the blessing of the first borne to Jacob the younger sonne Gen. 27. occasioned from a bare disappointing him of the externall right to temporalls but withall to spiritualls and ecclesiasticall good also whence the Apostle calleth him for his contempt a prophane person Heb. 12. 3 Object But saith I. S. the covenant of grace being a covenant there must be mutuall agreement betwixt the covenanters and so knowledge and consideration of the termes thereof and restipulation as in mens covenants Hen. Den a little differently maketh a necessitie of the persons entring into covenant with God scil by faith unto covenant right and not meerely Gods entring into covenant with the creature for so hee entred into covenant with the beasts c. Gen. 9. 10. Answ To which I answer the covenant of grace is as well a testament 1 Cor. 11. Heb. 9. Now a testament may bee and useth to bee made in reference to little ones without knowledge nor doe any use to deny a childs right in the testators will because it was taken in amongst other legacies in the bequeathed legacies before it understood the same nor will it bee denyed in the case of the elect seed the choyce parties in Gods covenant Gen. 17. that they many of them dying Infants without actuall knowledge were not therefore children of the promises or that that solemne covenant Deut. 29. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15. and 30. 6 7 8 9 10 c. with that people wherein conditions also were propounded on their parts that therefore the covenant was not made betwixt the little ones there present because they neither understood nor could actually subscribe to the conditions the contrary being there expressed no rather it sufficed that the childrens covenant estate being the parents priviledge whence the incouragement to Abraham to walke with God Gen. 17. 1 c. From that amongst other incouragements that God would become his seeds God also c. vers 7. and so Deut. 29. and 30. amongst other incouragements to the parents that is one vers 6. that God will doe thus for their seed also yea the children being reckoned as in their parents as Levi payd tithes in Abraham c. yea the externall avouching in a covenant way of God being owned as the childrens Deut. 26. 16 17. yea the childrens circumcision being as well the covenant dutie Whence called the covenant or the covenant parties covenant part or dutie as well as the token of Gods covenant Gen. 9. 7. 9 10 11. they restipulate in their parents knowing acceptance of the covenant and professed owning of it upon the covenant termes as well on their childrens part as their owne and they restipulate in a passive reception of the covenant condition and bond to after imitation of their father Abrahams faith and obedience to which purpose I. S. confessed circumcision was annexed to the covenant Yea the bastard children of Iudah and Gilead and others are acknowledged to bee in the covenant of saving grace which yet could not personally restipulate in a way of actuall knowledge or faith or the like 4 Obj. Your doctrine would make God the author of sin partly in causing persons to beleeve untruths partly in promising life to the wicked and so keeping of him from returning I.S. C.B. I.S.C.B. C.B. Besides it will make every beleever an Abraham and make Christs body to consist of dead members and even confound the world and the Church as if one Answ To the first wee require the parents in reference to the Church and covenant estate of their children to make confession of their faith in the covenant of God as made with them and their seed indefinitely according as the termes of the covenant are and being the termes of the covenant it 's no untruth or sinne to beleeve it in foro dei or confesse that faith in foro Ecclesiae which of the beleevers children is elect or saved or not it 's to us a secret and our doctrine requireth them to beleeve revealed things as are those indefinite words of the covenant leaving secrets to the Lord and no other was Moses doctrine having propounded the covenant of God as with parents and children and being yet further to inlarge hee joyneth the former and latter part of his speech with that item that secret things belong to God but things revealed scil touching this his mind of grace indefinitely these are for us and for our children And for further taking off of this cavill together with the second I answer when some say that even bastard children were in the covenant of saving grace and even I. S. which objecteth the same confesseth that God promiseth to bee a God or to fulfill his promises even such as Luke 1. 74 75 c. and gave them circumcision to confirme the same on both seeds requiring them to walke in the footsteps of Abrahams faith c. I demand were the carnall seed saved I. S. will not say so yet God promised and gave circumcision as a seale to that end that hee would bee their God requiring them to beleeve c. did not then God faile in his promise or in requiring them to beleeve an untruth surely no so when they were on that ground according to I. S. to walke in the footsteps of Abrahams obedience and circumcision of heart was required of them did not this rather further then hinder their repentance is it not the Apostles argument to the Jewes to prevaile with them to repent Repent for the promise is to you c. Act. 2. 38 39. Nay doth not our doctrine holding forth the interest at least externall of such in covenant thereby hold forth as well an externall interest in that
which is in its self a most effectuall meanes to further their saving good and to bee as a seed of regeneration and faith c. unto them 1 Pet. 1. to the end Ephes 5. 25 26. Rom. 9. 6. and doe not our opposites rather block up so farre the ordinary way and debarre beleevers children from the ordinary meanes of their chiefe good by denying them interest in the word of promise the which is such a meanes Nor doe wee by our doctrine make every beleever an Abraham wee confesse many things in Abrahams covenant Gen. 17. to bee more personall and some more peculiar to those times yet this no way infringeth the covenant right of Abrahams spirituall seed on the samenesse of that covenant with us in the essentialls of it then there was such a particular land promised to him and his the Gospel holdeth forth temporall mercies to us as well as spirituall 1 Tim. 4. 8. 1 Cor. 3. end 2 Cor. 1. 20. 1 Pet. 3. 10 11 12. albeit not such a particular land so the multiplying of Abraham c. was of such a peculiar consideration yet that hinders not onenesse of the covenant now that the promise made with Abraham long before the Law should not be to his spirituall seed our opposites themselves being Judges the like may bee said of the promise of blessing all nations in his seed c. Gal. 3. 8. yet vers 16 17. the promises are to the whole seed so God saith to Abraham I will make thee a father of many nations Gen. 17. 4 5. hee never said so to Isaac or Jacob c. what were not they therefore children of the promise and heires of the covenant of Abraham that God will become a God as to them so to their seed none will say so or in that they were fathers of the covenant to their posteritie Rom. 11. 16. 28. that therefore they were Abrahams or that those Jewes assembled Deut. 29. to whom God maketh that promise of circumcising their seed Deut. 30. 6. as one part of his covenant Deut. 29. 14. so Ezek. 37. 25 26 27 28. God will bee a God to those mentioned parents and children so is Jesse a covenant root to David Esay 11. 1. yet are not these therefore made Abrahams no more are inchurched beleevers by any doctrine of ours Nor doe wee by our doctrine make Christs body such a body or make such confusion of world and Church thereby no more then did God of old which yet ordained the Jewes children to bee his and his Church covenant children Ezek. 16. 20 21 23. and how wee distinguish Church and world let our practise judge and our doctrine which holds forth the covenant of grace as invested with Church covenant if not explicit yet implicit to distinguish the politicall Church and its members from all others 5 Object Some in a more Familisticall way object against our proofes as most what in the old Testament which they make account are not valid unlesse the same things were come over in the new Answ 1. Wee have aswell brought grounds of these conclusions touching Gen. 17. from the new Testament Secondly Christ came not to evacuate the morall Law in the old Testament no not in a title of it but to fulfill it and by expounding it in the very spirit of it to establish it Matth. 5. 17. to the end and the Law it selfe is established through faith Rom. 3. 31. and it 's spirituall not carnall Rom. 7. 14. and what then is the Gospel of which this point in question is part as was shewed or would Christ make void a title of the Gospel in the old Testament as if in and of it selfe not valid unlesse come over againe in the new of what force then would many pretious promises bee in the old Testament expressed but never againe expressed in the new as Esay 12. 3. Ezek. 36. 26. and such like Thirdly if such proofes are not valid why keepe wee a weekely Sabbath as the Lords day is called Matth. 24. 20 why keepe wee solemne thanksgiving dayes c why doe the Apostles referre us for proofe even of the new covenant Heb. 8. 8 9 10 11 12 c. to what God saith scil in the old Testament as in Jerem. 31. or why doth Christ fetch his usuall proofes of the maine matters of faith thence John 5. 46 47. Luke 24. 44 45 46 see more in such way of proofes Acts 10. 43. and 28. 23. Rom. 1. 16 17. Rom. 4. 6 7 8. and 10. 14. and 16. 16. besides many other like which the Apostles urge this way Fourthly if such proofes bee invalid wee must blot out such charges and testimonies touching their perfection and validitie as Psal 19. 7 8 9 10 11 12. spoken before the new Testament was and yet so perfect was it and so efficacious and pretious so John 5. 39. 46 47. and Rom. 10 6 7 8. and Luke 16. 29. 31. 2 Tim. 3. 15 16. Paul makes account the Scriptures scil of the old Testament little else being then written were of sufficiencie to all uses whereof a Minister stood in need to make of the word as Cartwright on the place expounds it and 2 Pet. 1. 1. 19 20 21. speaking of Scripture by men inspired of old those of the old Testament Peter maketh them more valid then extraordinary voyces from heaven touching Christ c. and chargeth them to be in perpetuall request with the Saints see Ames and others in locum If Hen. Den. within his first part of Antichrist unmasked had kept to his testimony which hee brings from 2 Pet. 1. 19 20 21. against the argument used by Dr. Featly taken from the harmony of confessions bee had never so miscarried as in his second part page 25. as to say this is the Prophets to declare repentance as a meanes of remission Ezek. 18. 21. 22. but this is not the Gospell c. And the Law and the Prophets teach is to repent for remission but the Gospel repent unto remission c. to let passe his abuse of the testimonies he alludeth to this I observe that Prophets with him of the old Testament are set in opposition to Gospell as if inconsistent with it the absurditie of which is apparent enough in the very naming it Fifthly if they bee invalid unlesse come over in the new Testament then must all the Saints question their faith and comfort which was occasioned more immediatly from grounds in the old Testament not eying at that present nor possibly afterwards this or that like passage in the new touching the discovery of their good estate or otherwise of their spirituall support contrary to Rom. 15. 4. which Scriptures then mentioned were of the old Testament Sixtly if so how did John Baptist and the Apostles convince the Jewes before yet the new Testament was existing of such and such things touching their peace and touching Christs kingdome and government yea what ordinary meanes is left to convince the Jewes
when they are to come in they denying the new Testament to bee valid see Acts 18. 26. Seventhly the primitive converts and disciples thought not so touching such was of old testament Scripture proofe Acts 17. 11. by Scriptures meaning those of the old Tastament as those places John 5. 39. and 10. 35. and 7. 38. and 2. 22. Gal. 3. 8. 22. and 4. 30. Rom. 9. 17. and 10 11. and 11. 2. and here let mee not forget what A. R. in his second part of Vanitie of childish baptisme bringeth crosse to what wee have said hee saith that no beleevers are fathers scil in such covenant and Church respects to their children which wee have mentioned but Abraham onely and hee maketh Abraham rather a patterne father in other respects to beleevers quoting Scriptures to that end But doth A. R. indeed thinke that no others were covenant and Church-fathers but Abraham onely the Apostle calleth all those inchurched Jewes of old our fathers fathers to him and to the Gentiles Corinthian members 1 Cor. 10. 1 c. Yea will hee say that Isaac and Jacob c. were not such fathers to their seed also as was Abraham in covenant and Church respects because that was neither said to Isaac or to Jacob I have made thee a father of nations how then are the Jewes said to be beloved for their fathers sakes surely it was not for their sakes as men and naturall fathers but as spirituall and covenant fathers Rom. 11. 16. 28. compared of which more hereafter yea the covenant is expresly made in those termes to Isaac and to his seed to Jacob and to his seed Gen. 26. 3 4 5. and 28. 13. 14. In respect therefore to their seed they are covenant fathers yet in respect to Abraham they themselves were Abrahams covenant and Church seed to whom together with their father the covenant was made even with a Church reference Gen. 17. and so are gentiles inchurched beleevers fathers as such to their children yet seed also in reference to Abraham nor is it more contradiction to say thus that the same persons may bee Abrahams seed and yet fathers in divers respects then to say the same man may bee a sonne and yet a father in divers respects a sonne in respect of his father and a father in relation to his child Nor can I perceive otherwise but that A. R. himselfe layeth in the same place a groundworke crosse to his owne assertion this way the covenant saith he was not made with Abraham and with his seed meerely for his being a faithfull man but for his being such a faithfull man whom the Lord pleased to choose to make a patterne to all beleevers hence to me it seemeth that Abraham is considered in a threefold respect First as a faithfull man having seed Secondly as a faithfull man having the covenant made with him and his seed Thirdly as one with whom and with his seed the covenant is made not meerely as a faithfull man but as a patterne to all beleevers which to me undeniably seemeth to bee an unwilling grant that as Abrahams seed in covenant with him admit a distinct consideration from all actuall beleevers as such whether Jewes or Gentiles So that Abraham in that consideration of such a faithfull man with whom the covenant was made and with his seed so distinguished from all beleevers whether of Jewes or Gentiles was therein a patterne to all beleevers actually whether of Jews or Gentiles yea that he was especially in such sort a patterne to them all and had the covenant so made with him and with that his seed that hee might bee or because hee should bee therein a patterne to all beleevers whether Jewes or Gentiles and this is the very truth which wee affirme that Abraham in the essentialls of the covenant was a patterne of interest of beleevers and their children in the covenant of grace at least externally and ecclesiastically but this is crosse to A. R. elsewhere yea in the same place as followeth Object All beleevers and onely beleevers are Abrahams seed in that as Rom. 4. 16. it is affirmed that the promise is sure to all the seed and so all the seed are saved Answ But suppose that Abrahams seed intended in the promise were all saved and so no others but they the seed yet will it not follow from what the Apostle saith that the promise is sure to all the seed that therefore all actuall beleevers and onely such are saved wee have before proved from Rom. 9. 6 7 8. that all in whom the force of the covenant tooke so as that they were saved were the choyce intended children of the promise or all elect Israel which came of Abraham Isaac and Jacobs loynes yet did not all those live to become actuall beleevers many such elect ones dying in Infancie But to come to A. R's assertion it selfe I demand whether the members of the visible Church of which A R. is officer or member be all and each of them Abrahams seed for if not I urge his owne plea against us what right have they to the seale of the covenant made to Abrahams seed if they be all Abrahams seed then by A. R's ground they must needs be all each of them saved it is not possible there should bee any reprobates and hypocrites in a particular visible Church which to affirme is ridiculous but let him quit himselfe thereof from his owne principle if hee can the Apostle saith of the Galatian Churches and members thereof to whom hee wrote Gal. 1. 1 2. that they were children of the promise and of the free woman and that Jerusalem above was the mother of him and them all Gal. 4. 26. 28. 31. and that they were Abrahams seed Gal. 3. 29. now then I demand whether wee must not conclude of them all that they were in a sure estate and infallibly saved according to A. R's ground comparing Rom. 4. 16. and Heb. 6. 16 17. with Gal. 3. 29. Yea but why then doth Paul feare and question so much the estate of persons so sure and infallible if so it were because called all Abrahams seed for hee feareth lest hee had bestowed his labour in vaine Gal. 4. 11. and that any saving worke in many of them at least was not so much as yet begun that hee must bee faine to travaile againe with them in birth till Christ bee formed in them vers 19. yea why doth he suppose any possibilitie of their suffering in vaine of their ending in the flesh Gal. 3. 3 4 5. of Christs becomming of none effect to them Chap. 5. 4. many of them being of such spirits and way whom he there intended as appeares by Gal. 1. 6 7 8. and 3. 1. and 23. 4 5. and 4. 21 How will A. R. salve it not by saying hee spake thus in a collective sense onely understanding the former of the elect part and the latter of others Yea but why then doth hee mention their being baptized
into such an estate Gal. 3. 27 28 29 were none but true beleevers and elect ones in that Church baptized for all that were baptized are said to bee one in Christ as having put on Christ and if Christ then Abrahams seed either then there were none but elect ones true beleevers in those Churches which were absurd and crosse to the Scriptures before named or if there were any hypocrites or reprobates in that Church they were left unbaptized which were as absurd to avow it for how knew they so exactly to distinguish of such divine secrets in so infallible a way were they Gods to know the secret guile of hearts Now if not unbaptized then they also in baptisme putting on Christ and putting on Christ being one with Christ and so Christs and being Christs were Abrahams seed now A. R. must conte with us to say that when 't is said that all baptized persons put on Christ Gal. 3. 27. it was verified in generall of them all Sacramentally and Ecclesiastically and so when said to bee all one in Christ and to bee Christs and Abrahams seed and all children of the promise and of Jerusalem which is above c. hee must distinguish of persons being such in foro dei and of persons which are such in foro facie ecclesiae visibilis In the former sense onely the elect amongst them were such in the latter sense all in common sound and unsound members of the Church they were such and that the Apostle speakes such things of them in common not by a meere infallible Apostolicall dictate and sentence as concluding them to bee all such savingly but ministerially to hold forth what such as members of Christ as head of the visible Church were Ecclesiastically Object But will it not bee said that whereas Gen. 17. 7. maketh but two subjects of the covenant God made scil Abraham and his seed which Paul expounds to bee beleevers wee by our doctrine doe make three subjects and parties Abraham and beleevers and the Infant seed of both Answ To which I answer that wee doe not make three such distinct subjects now any more then of old there was made before Christ was incarnated then Abraham and his beleevers growne children and the Infant seed of both made but Abraham and his seed and so is it with us Secondly that the covenant being made with Abraham and his seed Abraham sustaining the person of all beleevers Jewes and Gentiles which in a sense also were his seed in that covenant hence therefore the covenant still is onely between Abraham and his seed CHAP. IIII. Sect. I. Touching the Explication of Luke 18. 15 16 17. ANother Scripture holding forth the Federall and Ecclesiasticall right and holinesse of inchurched visible beleevers little ones is Luke 18. 15 16 17. where the Lord affirmeth of the children offered to him by those pious minded parents that of such is the kingdome of God as Matthew hath it Chap. 19. of such is the kingdome of heaven which is here taken for the visible Church so Matth. 8. 11. 12. and 13. 24. and it seemeth evident from Luke 18. that hee mentioneth the kingdome of God three wayes First a kingdome of which such Infants and such like persons are namely as subjects Secondly a kingdome which such actuall subjects of that kingdome doe receive Thirdly a kingdome unto which in an ordinary way and meanes they come to enter The first is meant of the visible not of the invisible Church and of them as members of the former and not so properly of the latter touching which let it bee remembred that this was not a bare temporary and present charge in reference barely to those very children and onely to that very present approach to Christ but did respect after approches of such like persons unto Christ hee saith not suffer these little children to come at this time to mee for of these is the Kingdome of God but indefinitely rather suffer little ones scil of this sort such as these are to come to mee nor would A. R. and others which apply it to such like persons for humilitie c. restraine it to the occasionall act at that time but inlarge it in reference to any such persons at any time in a like case that they should not bee hindred from Christ Now as for the members of the invisible Church as such they are invisible and fall not under the proper cognizance of the sons of men to know which or where they are and to suppose an injunction of not hindring their approach to Christ unlesse they came under a visible respect of members of the visible Church that they might bee discerned and it might bee knowne how and when and in whom this rule of suffering such to come to Christ were kept or broken it were very incongruous and it 's a very improbable conjecture that Christ spake thus of these very Infants by an act of divine knowledge of them to bee the elect of God as if a company of children should bee by an unwonted providence singled out to bee brought to him which were every one of them elected to eternall life and not any of them in a contrary estate And by the latitude of the extent of Christs speech as before wee shewed in reference to after and other times and examples of like nature as to the present case it appeares hee neither spake thus as God or as a meere extraordinary inspired Prophet but delivered as in ordinary administration of the mind of God as at other times an ordinary rule of ordinary practise and use afterwards in reference not barely to those very little ones then brought but to others like them wherefore such evasions of C. B. in his fourth answer to this place are frivolous And why should there bee such startling at this place as if it were uncouth doctrine that children of inchurched members should be counted subjects of Gods kingdom or members of his visible Church the Jews children as well as parents which were cast out together Matth. 8. 11 12. were surely in that kingdome together out of which they came to bee cast afterwards the uncircumcised man child was of the people or Church of God in visible account else not cut off from his people in that case of neglect Gen. 17. 14. and in the purer dayes of the Gospell yet expected the children are put under David or Christ their Prince as King and head and Lord of his visible Church as well as the parents as before wee shewed from Ezek. 37. 25 26 27. and God accounted them even in very corrupt time children of his covenant spouse or visible Church Thy children which thou barest to mee Ezekiel 16. 8. 20 21. 23. witnesse the setting to of the initiatory Church seale of circumcision to those children of Abraham Isaac and Jacobs loynes and no wonder in that they were all interested in the covenant of grace as invested with Church-covenant which is even the very
they were intended to bee invalid in any such way now and yet God never expressed his minde for repeale of such substantiall branches of his minde of Grace towards his people and Churches there are so far stumbling blocks laid before them to occasion mistakes For who will not take the same for granted which considers the same advisedly as indeed the Churches of old have done before And when was it a fitter time to make exceptions of Infants then when the inchurching of the Gentiles is mentioned Matth. 28. 19 Why should even then the old phrase of nations bee used if no intent at least of the specificall parts of the nations to be inchurched what though circumcision bee left out yet the species of the persons circumcised are plainely included If all nations bee to bee blessed in Christ that sort of persons in the nations scil little ones as well as that of adult persons are included how else come any of either sort to bee blessed in Christ or saved by him so in this case Matth. 28. 19. SECT IX 8. THat the childrens federall interest and right it is firstly the confederating parents priviledge Hence given as an incouragement to Abraham to walke in faith and truth with God Gen. 17. 1. In that God also would bee a God to his seed vers 7. and the like was spoken in way of incouragement also unto those Israelites and proselytes Deut. 30. 6 7 8 9 10 11 c. And the like course is taken by the Apostles after Christs ascension Act. 2. 38 39. Hence the covenant blessing of Jacob pronounced in a propheticall as well as parentall way upon the sonnes of Joseph Ephraim and Manasseh and their children after them scil that the name of Abraham Isaac and Jacob as covenant and Church fathers must bee called on them albeit they had other personall names as of Ephraim c. Now this is yet called Jacobs blessing of Joseph their father Gen. 48. 15. hee blessed Joseph scil in his childrens covenant blessing vers 16. SECT X. 9. THat visibly beleeving and covenanting parents they are injoyned the use of the initiatory covenant and Church seale in reference to their childrens initiatory sealing together with them according as they are outwardly capable thereof As it is their priviledge to have it so so is it their charge and dutie to take wise faithfull and seasonable care that it be so done Abraham alone is not to bee circumcised but his seed also which are naturally capable thereof are to be so initiated sealed unto covenant and Church fellowship It was onely Abraham to whom God then appeared and declared his covenant and mind of grace touching his and his seeds sealing yet Abraham is not spoken to in the one or other respect as to a meere particular man but as to a common and representative person also imbracing and owning a gratious covenant and the generall condition at least of it As on his owne particular behalfe so on the behalfe both of the choyce seed of his loynes in their generations together with the rest of his Church seed by Isaac in their generations as also with generall reference in the essentialls of both covenant and condition of it unto his spirituall seed in their generations after Christs ascension which were to bee of the Gentiles and of the Jewes both before their rejection and upon their re-ingraffing into visible Church estate Hence in mentioning that particular way of initiation by circumcision first pitcht upon plurall phrases are used when Abraham onely is in presence The covenant which yee shall keepe And each manchild amongst you And my covenant shall bee in your flesh And it shall bee a token of the covenant betwixt mee and you vers 10 11 12 13. Abraham must see all this performed and hee did so so farre as it could bee done at present vers 23. Abraham enters into this holy bond and thereby the obligation became of force upon his children which were not then present Hence the parents act of neglect is temporally at least corrected in the little child even as the parents bond was the childs obligation Gen. 7. 14. Hence too that God might further evince it to bee mainly the parents duty even godly Moses the parent is indangered for the neglect of the sealing of his child Exod. 4. 2. 4 5 6. where by the way let it bee noted that albeit upon some ceremoniall grounds the mind of God being that way made knowne their marriages of old with heathens became so farre unlawfull that even their children also were discarded yet was it not morally and of it selfe of that nature even amongst the members of that Church that the children of such Church members begotten upon heathen wives not of the Church were uncleane and not to bee sealed by that initiatory Church seale For God himselfe is angry with Moses here because his sonne by that Aegyptian wife was not circumcised And long after it was counted offensive if the sonne of a Jewish wife even by a Grecian husband were not that way initiated Acts 16. 1 2 3 which is the very controverted case occasionally mentioned 1 Cor. 7. 14. But to returne to the proposition before laid downe From the same ground mentioned it was that when Peter moved his hearers to bee baptized hee groundeth that motion not barely upon their owne interest in the promise but withall upon their childrens joynt interest with them Acts 2. 38 39. Bee baptized for the promise is to you and to your children why putteth hee that groundworke so largely but to shew that the visible initiatory seale of the promise must bee as large as the promise Their childrens baptisme is virtually called upon too as well as their owne The parents are to take care of their baptisme as well as their owne the children being capable of externall baptisme that new way of initiation into covenant fellowship as well as themselves As they were also to carry home as it were the same charge upon the same ground touching repentance urging that upon their children as they should bee capable of it from the same covenant ground as themselves had been urged thereto Noah alone must not bee baptized in that extraordinary and typicall baptisme but his children with him must in like sort bee baptized Gen. 7. 1. with 1 Pet. 1. 3. 21. God will have all these fathers some whereof at that time mentioned were babes yet in respect to after ages were fathers to bee baptized in that extraordinary baptisme in the sea and in the cloud 1 Cor. 10. 1 2. Exod. 12. 44. If a stranger-servant bee circumcised himselfe hee may eate the passeover for hee was not so bound as the Jewes by command to either circumcision or the passeover but hee is to circumcise his males with that reason annexed For no uncircumcised person shall eate thereof What is the meaning hereof Is it thus else none of those his males or male children for they are most
properly his and in the case of stranger which was an houshold servant reason will tell us such a one had no servants of their owne none of these being uncircumcised should eate the passeover No verily For 1. That was not the case mentioned of such a strangers desiring that his males should eate of the Passeover but that himselfe might doe it if hee not if they will eate of the Passeover and the Text is cleare otherwise let his males bee circumcised and then let him not let them come neare and eate the Passeover 2. The rule touching one that eateth the Passeover is there laid downe Let him eate the Passeover to the Lord scil with holy actuall obedience to the Lords mind and aimes at his ends c. which Infants are not capable of performing which by the way note against such as tell us the Jewish Infants did eate the Passeover when as the law herein is expresly said to bee the same to Israelites as to strangers and what that Law was wee have now seene verse 48 49. compared But who then is the uncircumcised person which may not in this case eate the passeover if not the male children Verily the stranger parent mentioned which albeit hee bee circumcised himselfe as is supposed in verse 44. yet if it bee the case of one circumcised himselfe which hath male children to bee circumcised albeit as personally circumcised he might eate vers 43 44 yet in this case of desiring the Passeover but refusing or slighting the mention of circumcising his males hee is as if himselfe were uncircumcised in that respâ—ct his contempt and disregard of Gods covenant mercy to bee sealed upon his children maketh his circumcision to bee uncircumcision and the covenant of grace by which himselfe especially came to have any right to the initiatory seale That is not wholly sealed if hee neglect the sealing of his children joyntly interested in an externall way together with him In which respects hee is as one uncircumcised hee may not eate the passeover Hence when the Lord was to expresse his covenant in reference to the initiatory sealing of it as on Abraham so on his Church seed in their generations he then and never before that I finde delivered the Evangelicall covenant in that form I wil be a God to thee to thy seed after thee in their generations Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10 11. And Abraham now hath that propounded as a groundwork of initiatory sealing thou shalt therefore keep my covenant thou and thy seed after thee And then and not before is his name changed to Abraham and he hath then not till then the name of father of many nations As if herein God made him as a common person as before I said as well in reference to us inchurched Gentiles as to the inchurched Jewes and proselytes in point of covenant interest and ingagement from covenant interest unto the receiving of Gods initiatory seale by parents and children And the reason is consequentiall If parents and children bee considered as one covenant partie on the one side admitted to covenant grace externally at least with God the principall covenanter or covenant maker on the other part Then if the parents onely bee signed with the initiatory covenant seale and the children which are capable of that seale are neglected as opportunitie is offered to bee likewise sealed the whole covenant of grace is not sealed unto them so farre not compleatly as I may say sealed on themselves The circumcision of Abraham his a lone was not that covenant or the signe of it but with respect to the circumcision of his seed also The circumcision of his seed also was that covenant of God Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10 11. In Abrahams initiatony sealing unto the covenant that covenant I will bee a God to thy seed as well as to thee was sealed and so his childrens right with his owne is thereby sealed in part but not compleatly and fully without their sealing also as capable of it So in the childrens being circumcised not onely their owne right in that I will bee a God to thy seed was externally sealed but Abrahams covenant right in that I will bee a God to thee was also sealed So sweetly were they both knit up in one common girdle and that marked with one and the same marke of God Jer. 13. 11. As the covenant was one not two covenants sealed on both Gen. 17. 11. So their sealing was one collective and joynt condition of the covenant v. 8. And what I say of Abraham and that his seed the same was true in Abrahams spiritual seed in their generations those proselyted houshold servants for such proselytes they were as hath been shewed with their children and such families de jure at least the rest were to be afterwards according to that pâ—tterne family of Abrahams Some in way of reply to the answer given by some famous Ministers of Christ to the objection about women being not circumcised yeeld that if a virtuall sealing or baptizing were all that they would prove Wee may grant that say they wee may say Infants are virtually baptized in their parents yet it may bee unlawfull to baptize them actually notwithstanding But why virtually and not as well actually since their interest in the covenant and generall condition of receiving such an initiatory seale as God shall appoint and they bee capable of upon that covenant ground doth joyntly concerne both as hath been proved yea doe not such in their exposition which they rightly give of having a thing virtually grâ—…t as much that if they have baptisme virtually in their parents they have a right as well to receive baptisme actually themselves For hee is said saith one learned antagonist virtually to have a thing by another as by a proxey or Atturney that might receive it by himselfe Yet quoad effectum juris anothers receiving is as if hee had received it It 's granted that an Infant may bee sealed or baptized virtually in his parent that is as is expounded hee hath the thing Baptisme by another as by a proxey scil by or in his parent which might receive the same thing scil Baptisme by himselfe Surely all will grant that any mans Atturney receiving in his absence such a conveyance or such a summe of money or the like the man himselfe doth indeed virtually receive this by his Atturney but yet if hee himselfe were personally present hee might very regularly and lawfully receive the said conveyance or summe actually himselfe so in the case mentioned SECT XI 10. THe Churches or Church officers in admission of beleevers children to the initiatory seale of Baptisme one way of solemne comming into the fellowship and family of the Trinitie Matth. 28. 19. they are not to expect a convincing ground that this or that child to be baptized is internally savingly interested in the covenant but it sufficeth that that sort or species of Infants scil such like Infants are in
Apostles time but some of the branches were broken off vers 17. And blindnesse did happen to collective Israel but not wholly but in part vers 25. In both which that which is proper to the parts is applyed to the whole of which they are parts by a synecdoche To come then to argument it is true that the Jewes collectively taken for the whole nation containing the choicer part intended they are federally holy scil in respect of that choyce part and yet it followes not that the Jewes distributively taken for those Jewes living at this day supposed to bee a refuse part of that whole should bee properly said to bee federally holy and so neither to have right to Church priviledges so that the instance crosseth not us who speake of persons federally holy as well distributively and not meerely collectively considered There is therefore a fallacy a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter Rep. Suppose we take this of the whole in respect of the choycer part of the Jewish nation this choyce part then at least is federally holy yet they have not right to Church priviledges as being not yet ingraffed into the olive nor possibly in actuall being in the world Therefore persons may bee federally holy which yet have not right to Church priviledges Answ Wee againe distinguish persons may bee said to be federally holy either seminally preparatively or actually in the former sense persons not yet existing may bee said to bee in covenant with God or such as God makes a covenant with and consequently to bee federally holy Deut. 29. 14 15. neither with you onely doe I make this covenant but with him that standeth here with us before the Lord our God and also with him that is not with us this day Marke it God saith not I will make this covenant in the future but in the present tense I doe make this covenant with him that is not here this day that is with persons unborne these being expresly taken into covenant with God and their covenant right laid up and included therein in such sort as that which in its season should actually bee exerted these persons albeit unborne and not actually existing yet in this seminall and preparatory respect of the covenant they have thus far a covenant right and so farre also a Church right together with it so here in these unborne Jewes as they are federally holy in that seminall respect Hence the Olive or Church here is called their owne Olive Rom. 11. 24. How is the Church now their owne but in respect of this seminall Church right Federall holinesse actually taken is that which is actually subjected and exerted in a person existing whether parent or child in which sense God made his covenant with those Jewes and with their children that were before him that day Deut. 29. 14 15. And in this sense the Apostle speaking of the federall holinesse especially of children actually borne of covenant in-churched parents saith they are holy scil actually 1 Cor. 7. 14. Now therefore to apply the Argument it is defective in the consequence of it thus Persons not in being which are federally holy onely seminally and intentionally they have not actuall Church right nor can actually bee baptized therefore persons existing and living which are federally holy actually they may not bee baptized this followeth not one may as well reason thus Those with whom God made a covenant Deut. 29. 14 15. who were not borne not there that day had not actuall right to circumcision could not be uncircumcised Therefore those children which were there that day with whom also God made his covenant Ibid. they had not actuall right to circumcision might not could not bee circumcised this every rationall man will say is a non sequitur Object 2. This Rom. 11. 16. is spoken of the naturall branches which have an hereditary covenant right as naturall branches of that roote Abraham Isaac and Jacob. And therefore not pertinent to the Gentiles and their children which are not branches of that root Answ Albeit the beleeving Gentiles and their children are not of that root by nature and propagation yet they are in that root by grace and by proportion The Jew-branches were broken off that the Christian collective Gentile might by grace be graffed in scil in their stead Rom. 11. 19. Looke then what covenant and Church right the Jewish parents had for their children in an hereditary way the same hath the inchurched Gentile for his children through grace Repl. This were to make way for all children of Christian Gentile nations to have right to Church priviledges Answ It sufficeth that thus farre it holds that as all and onely Church-members children were ecclesiastically priviledged among the Jewes so all and onely Church-members children are ecclesiastically priviledged among the Gentiles Object 3. The Gentiles are said to bee ingraffed not by a naturall way as being of such parents but by a way contrary to nature and therefore what is this to the federall estate of Gentile Infants as comming of beleeving parents and so in a way of nature Answ It is most true if applied to the first parties amongst any Gentile people which in the Apostles time or since enter into Church estate living formerly in a Pagan estate and not having any of their ancestors other then Pagans or such as were cut out of the wilde Olive tree scil Ancestors pagan or outlawry from all covenant and Church estate Rom. 11. 24. Ephes 2. 12. But if it bee applyed to other which come of such persons so transplanted from that wilde Olive to this good Olive estate as branches or sprigs of such Olive boughs or gratious ancestors then is it not fully verified that these are onely in a way contrary to nature partakers of the fatnesse of the Olive As they are considered together with their gratious ancestors as all of them of other pagan ancestors so they are all ingraffed in a way contrary to nature even meerely by divine Grace but as they and their gratious fathers are considered apart their fathers as nextly descended of pagan ancestors these their children as nextly springing from fathers visibly beleeving and inchurched so their covenant and Church estate comes to them principally by a way of divine grace and instrumentall by birth descent from inchurched ancestors and in this latter respect therefore such children may bee said to bee inserted by a way of nature for looke as the Israelites of old before their cutting off were and others of them hereafter will bee by virtue of their holy root or covenant fathers holy branches as naturall branches scil branches springing naturally from them or borne of them Rom. 11. 16. 24. compared or as those Israelites were not sinners or outlawries from covenant or Church as were those of the Pagan Gentiles but Jewes or ecclesiastically priviledged even by nature or naturall descent of such ancestors inchurched Gal. 2. 15. so must the proportion hold in the
their children as well Else therein had they not beene so compleat as those formerly which had a covenant made with and externally sealed both to them and theirs yea the sealing of the covenant as wee have shewed by baptizing of such as have children is not so compleat in ordinary dispensations unlesse as occasion is offered the same bee sealed initiatorily on their children according to their outward capacitie of the externall signe The whole covenant is as well sealed on Abrahams seed as on himselfe and not wholly sealed on either without other as not wholly made with the parent but with respect to the other It were else to cut off a great part of Abrahams Church seed so make Church parents more imperfect but especially unto the false teachers argument the answer was not else so full Be it that Christ is the Antitype of circumcision now So hee was to the faith of them of old Bee it that Gentiles are inwardly circumcised so were they of old yea bee it that inchurched parents are externally circumcised in their externall baptisme actually and so circumcision is so far uselesse to that sort of growne persons yet what is this to the other sort of persons which used yea they mostly to bee circumcised and it was their parents dutie to indeavour their circumcision as well as their owne If now there bee no such persons to bee externally circumcised also in baptisme and that their parents are under no tie in that respect then at least circumcision in respect of them may bee usefull and necessary there being no initiatory signe appointed for them To say they have the internall circumcision our opposites will deny and if they have had sundry elect Infants of Abrahams seed of old To say they are antitypically circumcised in Christ our opposites will not affirme of all the Churches chilches children and if onely of some as much was virtually in Christ to come for the elect Jewish babes yea for those parents and children belonging to grace before ever circumcision was of use to say they are externally circumcised in their parents baptisme as much might have been said that way if rightly said of the Jewish children in their parents circumcision yet they were actually circumsed also The Apostle argueth of a compleatnesse in Christ with reference to baptisme which is therefore here named as an outward meane whereby inchurched Gentiles especially come ordinarily to have communion with Christ and to bee compleat in him yea and as an outward way of holding forth manifesting and proving the uselesnesse of circumcision to them for it is an answer to circumcision teachers as Mr. Blackwood rightly hath it unlesse therefore our opposites will exclude them all Church interest contrary to what wee have proved or that they would have beleevers children denied of one initiatory outward meane of communion with Christ whence that of baptizing into his name or covenant followship unlesse also they would have us want one Apostolicall way of arguing to prove the uselesnesse of circumcision to all sorts of persons which used personally to bee circumcised of old or unlesse they will deny that baptisme is of the same spirituall use as circumcision was scil to bee a Sacramentall signe or seale of the covenant and the visible interest of persons in it which Hen. Den denyeth but others doe not and if they doe wee have formerly proved the contrary I see not how the force of Gal. 2. 10 11 12. will bee avoided in this point of Paedobaptisme SECT XI VVHereas therefore divers things are brought to invalidate any binding reference to circumcision if it bee intended of any type to the substantialls of it and in it or any forcible analogy in divers materiall things deduced thence wee deny the cogency of such arguments as when Mr. B. tells us of a many differences betweene baptisme and circumcision and so I. S. the like and Hen. Den the like it will not thence follow ergo in nothing alike still that one as the other is a seale of the covenant that one as the other distinguisheth the visible members of the Church from Pagans and this followeth not and wee assay not to make the proportion runne of foure feet as the proverbe is nor to prove proportion in sundry circumstantialls peculiar to that ordinance It sufficeth us that they agree in their common author Sacramentall nature and end They are both institutions of God Sacramentall initiatory signes in their natures to bee applied to persons of all sorts as they are outwardly capable thereof which are visibly interested in covenant c. albeit in their particular manner of administration and the circumstances of time place sex nation member of the body c. they differ successors are not successors if every way the same if no way different yet I would not create differences as some do which never were As first that the circumcised Babes did eate the Passeover when yet the Law to all that came thither strangers or Israelites was one scil to keepe it to the Lord with spirituall respects to Gods ends and rules as Exod. 12. 48 49. to bee in heart prepared as well as to bee ceremonially cleane 2 Chron. 30. 18 19 20. the children in that family celebration of it asked not what meane wee by this service as if they actually partooke thereof but what meane yee by it Exod. 12. 26. or if such children capable of instruction were admitted as some authors have thought yet not Babes which could not goe up to the Temple Deut. 6. 16 17. Nor doth the mention of the house or congregation which some who will not allow us that latitude of like plea urge as keeping it evince it but is an usuall Synecdoche such rost parched meate and soure hearbes c. Exod. 12. were too harsh to goe downe with such Babes Numb 9. 3. they in the Wildernesse kept the passeover according to all the rites of it yet none will say the uncircumcised males therein for circumcision was not used in the Wildernesse Josh 5. did eate contrary to expresse rule no uncircumcised person shall eate Secondly that circumcision sealed Canaan as if that were all Gods covenant mentioned Gen. 17. 7 8. 11. 13. but of this formerly Or thirdly that reprobates as well as elect were then sealed as if none but elect are now sealed as for Esau and Ishmael in what sense they by extraordinary revelation to this or that person being discovered and yet after sealed how it might bee and was as was that of Judas to Christ administring the Supper and sop a knowne devill yet admitted c. and no crossing of ordinary rule we formerly spake to it Fourthly circumcision bound say some to the law What not I hope in the rigour of it and as the substance of the covenant of workes made with Adam was Abraham and Isaac c. bound thus thereby and not rather to it as to an holy rule of life and so are wee yea by our
of the 4 reasons against such putting away mentioned in the former part of the 14 vers meet it was to strengthen that reason in especiall which so directly met with the bottome scruple as it was in this very clause Else c. but now c. And to imagine this to bee the Apostles inference If you put away husbands or wives you must put away children too c. supposeth an Apostle to reason impertinently and unsoundly since in the case of divorce of spouses it doth not necessarily follow that the children begotten of them bee also put away For 1. even in lawfull divorces for adultery no word of the enjoyning childrens being put away Matth. 19. Chap. 5. nor was it so practiced the husband need not own his wives bastard indeed as his other children but must own those begotten of his own wife before her divorce Deut. 21. 15 16 17. compared with Chap. 24. 1. 2. The children lawfully begot partaking of the believing parent as well as Pagan Reason will plead as strongly with nature and more strongly with grace in the divorcing party putting away the other when desirous to abide verse 12 13. that the children are rather to be detained by the beleeving party as suppose the father c. for higher and holyer ends then by putting them away to hazard their owne childrens soules welfare 3. If there had been any weight in their feare of pollution by retaining the infidell yoke-fellow yet no colour of pretence of pollution of conscience by retaining their little ones whom they might better season with their owne Christianisme then feare being leavened by their paganisme or the like There needed not therefore any such supposed remedy of pollution by removing their children also As for that parallelling of that Ezra 10 44. with this case it is very unsuitable That was a case of persons inchurched having an expresse prohibition to the contrary not to joyne with such as persons betwixt whom and themselves there was a partition wall yet doing it This is a case of persons all of one sort Pagan when first married and under no such prohibition onely after they were married one partie embraceth the faith now to make the intervening of grace as a sole occasion of such breakings of families in pieces were sad and scandalous yet to suppose Pagans to be under such a prohibition as the Jewes to match with Pagans had been to make them wholly prohibited marriage at all 2. Others expound it onely of legitimacy or illegitimacy of the children in reference to the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of the spouses some as I. S. consider the beleeving spouse as such in both effects of the spouse being sanctified unto them and the childrens being holy or lawfull producing Tit. 1. 15. To the pure all things are pure or lawfull use as hee expounds it Others of whom Beza speaketh in his notes upon 1 Cor. 7. extend it to the children of both parents Infidell that they are not spurious but legitimate which he refuteth from the supposition of the Apostle For wherefore saith Beza should hee discourse of bastards or of both spouses Infidell which makes me the more wonder at Beza as quoted by some for matrimoniall sanctitie as here understood if taken of civill sanctitie or lawfulnesse Beza professedly disclaimes it for saith hee the Apostle discourseth not of civill policy but touching conscience And I grant saith he that the marriage of Infidels is civilly lawfull It 's not fornication before God But what is this to Pauls scope discoursing touching conscience and Beza professedly argueth against any supposall that because the beleeving party is not mentioned Vers 14. yet that therefore not understood in the present case as such as some expound this place which yeeld that he speaketh of persons one a beleever the other infidell but say that in this case hee considers not the person as a beleever but as any other lawfull man or wife This Beza by Argument refuteth C. B. hee seemeth to propend to this later exposition that the Apostle considers them not here as one a beleever the other not but meerly as husband and wife As for the conjecture of I. S. it hath already appeared that Tit. 1. 15. intends more then a bare lawfull use common to all Infidels as the opposition sheweth But to the unbeleeving is nothing pure when yet many things are lawfull And so here when the Apostle speakes of persons as such one whereof is a beleever in and to whom the other is sanctified hee intends more then a bare lawfull husband or wife to them and for their children also more then civilly legitimate And it were too absurd in an Apostle to lay that for a cause of legitimacy which is not But Gods ordinance rather not faith Pagans marriages being as lawfull as Christians And it were absurd to reason That unlesse one bee a beleever the children are bastards when the children of each man and wife Pagan or Christian are as Adam and Eve which herein were radically considered in reference to all such like couples such whose children are a seed of God or of his institution in generall approbation as Mal. 2. 15. truly proveth This was unheard of doctrin Heb. 13. 14. and tended rather to destruction in all families where such doctrine should come then to peace And if there had been any ground of scruple in these cases of the Corinthians considered onely as man and wife what need they trouble Apostles with such civill cases or what hath Christ and his Disciples as such to doe in civill matters Luk. 12. 2 Tim. 2. The Apostles would not bee cumbred with Table-service Act. 6. 4. much lesse with the civill law intricacies And whereas Mal. 2. 15. is urged as a proofe by some it proveth that which was not questioned scil legitimacy of children of any lawfull man and wife but disproveth such a Tenet that unlesse the couples bee one or both Inchurched beleevers as were these 1 Cor. 7. 14. their children are not a seed of God a legitimate seed In that God eyed all the sonnes and daughters of Adam and Eve as conjugally united in the same common reference as of duties in common of love care c. in the husband and subjection in the wife and fidelitie in both so in this fruit of such lawfull conjugall fellowship legitimacy of children wherein both parties as lawfull man and wife have equall share without any such peculiar beleeving Covenant and Church respect as any Instrumentall cause thereof whereas the Apostle speaketh of a case of holinesse of children arising from some peculiar consideration of some one parent and not the other or if of both yet not of both in that common way of meere civill lawfulnesse of matrimony but with peculiar reference to an instrumentall cause of an higher nature And so wee come to the other opinion to which answer is made in the sixth and seventh considerations before mentioned as the Apostle speakes of
therein which you in a Church-way professe have so much influence upon your yokefellowes as to sanctifie them in and to your conjugall use But that there be invaliditie and privation of influence thereof in that your conjugall relation then must you be as well to seeke of any validitie thereof in another relation also scil in your parentall relation to your children even there also shall the covenant and faith have no influence unto such an effect of holinesse of your children If they produce not such an effect in the former by which yet the Infidell partie have no personall priviledge how will they produce the later by which children have according to you an unquestioned personall priviledge that they are holy hee that will question or cast off the force of such instruments influences in one thing hee by the same distemper will cast the same off in another Yea if it be groundedly and really for that the Covenant of Grace which beleevers lay hold of together with their faith therein have no efficacy in one condition or relation it is as well true in another only reserving the diversitie of influences as diversly elicited or expressed If they are not effectuall to produce something peculiar to beleevers in a conjugall relation differing from all Pagan spouses they will neither produce any thing peculiar to them in a parentall relation to their children But as your spouses shall bee to you as all other pagan spouses in common to each other meerely lawfull to use so your children with and to you shall be in your parentall relation but as pagan children are uncleane or profane which to all were absurd But now rather they are holy namely Federally and not as other Pagans children profane Now when I mention in this exposition the Covenant as in part having some influence in both relations as well as faith I doe it as not daring to sever faith from the word of faith which even giveth strength to faith it selfe And besides God having made a Covenant with Abraham and with his spirituall seed in their Generations as well as with the Jewes And that in such sort also as with respect to Church estate and as invested with Church-Covenant hence it is that the meere Infidelitie of a Pagan spouse abiding Pagan when the other comes to the faith shall not hinder the course and force of Gods Covenant to In-Churched beleevers seed witnesse the example both of the son of Moses Exod. 4. 24. c. and of Eunice Act. 16. 1 2 3. even many personall sinnes of the Saints hinder it not much lesse doe other personall sinnes evacuate the same Hence so long as this Covenant-Interest holdeth in force that either it be not rejected by the parents as it was by those Jewes Rom. 11. 20. or that they be not justly for covenant breaches dispoyled of Church benefit by it by some Church-censure so long the covenant is Ecclesiastically of force to the childrens federall Church-estate So in the case of those Idolatrous Church-members being not discovenanted and discharged by Gods hand or by Ecclesiasticall authoritie their children were federall and church-Church-seed the Churches children borne by her unto God Ezek. 16. 8. 20 21 23. compared That holy Covenant produceth that respect of holy persons Dan. 8. 24. compared with 11. 28. 30. 32. Hence the Covenant and Church-estate of Covenant and In-churched parents is firstly the parents priviledge and so to bee considered Hence also I conclude then that the little ones of visible beleeving and In-churched parents such as these mentioned in the Text were 1 Cor. 1. 1 2. with 1. and 14. they are Federally and Ecclesiastically holy In this sense the word holy is frequently used yea of many persons which were neither inherently holy nor imputatively holy in a strict sense no nor so much outwardly holy in point of lively expressions of personall holinesse yet are called holy scil Ecclesiastically and in externall respect to the Covenant and that not a Covenant of workes for that calleth no sinners holy nor by any meere ceremoniall holinesse but by vertue of Abrahams Covenant Gen. 17. 7. with Ezra 9. 2. They are called the holy seed and the same phrase in the same Covenant and Church respect is in Scripture frequently used with respect to such Infants the holy people destroyed by Antiochus Dan. 8. 24. were the Jewish children as well as growne persons The children were a part and a speciall part of that chosen beloved and people redeemed from Egypt which were called holy Hence both Deut. 14. 2. and 26. 18 19. and 28. 2. 9. speaking of the whole people as holy it is in the phrases thou thee loved and established Thee that thou mayst bee an holy people c. Adoption belongeth to the little ones as did the promises as well as to the rest of Pauls kindred Rom. 9. 4. They were children of the Church and borne to God as husband to the Covenant Church Ezek. 16. 8. 20 21. 23. compared with Jer. 2. 2. 3. 1. and Esa 54. 4 5. nor was this as I intimated a ceremoniall matter no more then either Abrahams Covenant was with some which oppose us confesse did belong in speciall sort to the Jewes and that Covenant was the very Covenant of Grace and therefore that did by this grant in speciall wise belong to them nor was it more ceremoniall then was that Deut. 30. 6. 11 12 13 14. which the Apostle maketh the very doctrine of faith which they preached as by comparing that with Rom. 10. 6 7 8. wee shall God willing declare This was not as the ceremonies against them but for the good of them and theirs and avowed by the Apostles after Christs ascension Act. 2. 38 39. of which afterwards And as 1 Pet. 2. 9. which Interpreters agree relateth to Exod. 19. 6. spoken of them not as an invisible Church but visible such as had officers over them which the invisible Church as such hath not For supposing a company with Church-officers they are now not an invisible but visible Câ—…us see 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. and 4. 10 11. hee calleth them elected such they were to the judgement of charitie and in respect of visibilitie so that visible Church of Babylon hee calleth it elected 1 Pet. 5. 13. yet were there in that visible Church as in others some tares and vessels of dishonour Some things mentioned in Peter of their obedience exercise of faith c. are not actually appliable to Infants yet that hinders not but that Infants are intended in that Inchurched part of the 10. Tribes as Calvin and Ames thinke in reference to James 1. 1. and Hos 1. 10. or in that In-churched part of the Gentiles as Oecumenius Aretius c. thinke since in Exod. 19. 6. to which this place is to bee referred this condition of that Covenant-priviledge scil Actually and personally to keepe Gods Covenant and to obey his voyce indeed Exod. 19. 5. was applyable onely to the
that which by circumcision was visibly sealed unto them and their children by Gods owne appointment Circumcision being in the Sacramentall nature of it a visible seale of the righteousnesse of faith it selfe and not meerely in a personall respect to Abraham as applyed by his faith to his justification And albeit beleevers came with Abraham to have the saving experience of it Rom. 4. 7 8. 11 12. yet to the rest Circumcision was a Covenant or a Sacramentall signe or seale of Gods Covenant Act. 7. Gen. 17. even of that his Covenant mentioned vers 7. I will bee a God to thee and thy seed which containeth that promise of justification Jer. 31. 33 34. Nor will it suffice to say that Covenant was a mixt Covenant It held forth temporall things indeed but by vertue of a Covenant of Grace Psal 111. 5. as doth the promise now 1 Tim. 4. 8. but it holds forth also spirituall things in the externall right and administration thereof as to all albeit in the internall operation as to some The promises are to them all Rom. 9. 4. sci in the former sense and yet ver 8. some onely are the children of the promise and the choyce seed in that generall Covenant scil in respect of the saving efficacy of the Covenant upon them vers 6. And the same distinction is now held out in such sort amongst persons in Church-estate unlesse any will say that there are none in the Covenant as well as in Christ the Vine John 15. 2. externally onely which I suppose will not bee affirmed And in this sense Peter speaking to these Jewes before they had actually repented or beleeved vers 38. with 40 41. saith the promise of remission of sinnes is or belongeth to you scil in the externall right and administration of it the Apostle calls upon them to repent and be baptized not because then the promise should be theirs but because the promise was theirs already in the sense mentioned repent and bee baptized for the promise is to you or belongs to you as Rom. 9. 4. hath it Both baptizing and repenting are joyned as duties unto which upon this Covenant ground they are called and not as conditions of their comming by externall right in the promise none will say of the one branch that bee baptized was a condition propounded by Peter to them of their comming to right in the promise since baptisme as a Covenant Seale presupposeth a Covenant right yet is the dutie of being baptized as well as of repenting alike urged on the same ground upon the Jewes Yea but Peter having exhorted them to repent c. would not have baptized them unlesse they had repented therefore it was not their Covenant-right which hee looked at Admit he would not yet that doth not make voyd either their Covenant or Church-right thereto because being adultmembers under offence and admonished thereof by Peter they might for their obstinacy against such an admonition notwithstanding Church or Covenant-right have been debarred that seale If one of our members be under offence and the Elders admonish him to repent thereof and hee doth not hee is debarred the seale of the Lords Supper and his children of Baptisme the while not that hee is not a Church-member and so hath Church-right as well as covenant-right thereto but in that this intervening obstinacy doth suspend his jus in re albeit otherwise considered hee had jus ad rem so in the case of these offensive members of that Jewish Church which was a true visible Church and not yet dischurched and divorced by the Lord which maketh way for answer to A. K. that if they were then in Covenant they were then in the Church of the Gospel if hee meane it of being internally in the Covenant it is not that we plead for it of being externally or quoad homines we have proved they were so in Covenant and Church estate also as being yet in the Olive and kingdome of God and not cast out untill their unbeleefe or totall and finall rejection of the Covenant as ratified in Jesus of Nazareth as that promised Messiah Rom. 11. 20. to which the Jewes had not as yet come and this Church was a Gospel Church visibly interested in the Covenant of Grace the subject of the Gospell and the same essentially with that Gospel or Christian Church unlesse whilst the Jewish Church stood any will say there was no Evangelicall visible Church in the world but a legall Church for there was no other visible Church then that of the Jewes that then something further was required by Peter of the Adult-Jewes to actuall participation of baptisme and it was not because their Church of which they were members was no true visible Evangelicall Church since it was Gods onely visible Church in the time of Christs incarnation of which hee lived and dyed a member and none will say hee was no member of any Evangelicall Church but of a legall nor was it because the seale of Baptisme was not administrable in or by or to that Church of the Jewes for it 's evident that the Commission of Baptisme was first given by God to John Baptist in reference to that Church of the Jewes as a seale of their membership therein the same God that told him who should Baptize with the holy Ghost hee sent him to Baptize John 1. 33. the Pharisees themselves could not deny Johns baptisme to bee from heavens authoritie Matth. 21. 25 26. and Baptisme being a Church-Ordinance to bee in ordinary dispensation or administred onely in and by a Church of Christ that baptisme was at that time the Jewish Church-Ordinance so farre forth there was no other floore wherein all sorts which John baptized whether they proved chaffy hypocrites or solid graine upright ones were in his and Christs time interessed Matth. 3. 11. 12. this was then the onely floore or visible Church of Christ for in the visible Church is no chaffe his floore hee shall purge his floore Into this Church fellowship also did Christs owne Disciples by that new way of initiation visibly seale persons which were the reformed part of that Jewish Church continuing still their relation to those officers of the Jewish Church and their fellowship in the Church-Ordinances then dispensed and not separating from the same Matth. 10. 6 7. and 16. 24. Iohn 10. 16. either gathering into distinct Churches or calling to them other ordinary Church-officers which yet were not actually given by Christ untill upon his ascension Ephes 4. 8. 11 12 c. but the reason rather was partly because as was said they were under such offence and partly because albeit their Church were a true Evangelicall Church yet it was not so pure and perfect but had many grosse mixtures both of meere ceremoniall administrations which were now to bee laid aside and of most palpably and openly corrupt and rotten members and partly because it was now requisite not onely to acknowledge the promised Messiah of Abrahams
so that their bleeding wound is unstanched 2. The Apostles which as yet preached not for the abolishing even of Mosaicall rites would much lesse at that time so publiquely hold forth implicitely at least the exclusion of the Jewes babes from Abrahams Covenant Gen. 17. 7. And verily the Apostles which so long after were so tender of the better and more pliable part of the Jewes that they would have Paul to take off that aspersion as if hee should as yet lay a necessitie upon the Jewes not to circumcise their children Acts 21. 20. 22 23 24. would much lesse give such manifest and just offence to them as to hold forth an exclusion of their babes from right in that Covenant of Abraham it selfe whereof Circumcision was a visible seale as the places quoted in Gen. 17. 11. 13. and Acts 7. 8. declare 3. If Peter should intend by that clause such an exclusion at present of the Jewes babes from that externall interest in the Covenant of grace it were to bee crosse to Pauls doctrine Rom. 15. 8. who makes it Christs end not to evacuate undermine or abolish by his comming the promises indefinitely made to the fathers whether in Gen. 17. 7. or Deut. 30 6. or the like as respecting parents or children but to confirme the same Ibid. But some will yeeld the case as verified in those Jewish children as being never before denied to bee visibly in Abrahams Covenant but what is this to our childrens federall interest in the dayes of the Gospel An. Yes it 's very much 1 It proveth that by the Apostles since Christs ascension this tenent of the children of visible members of the Church are visibly interested in the Covenant of grace is of divine authoritie and is no humane invention 2. These Jewes are eyed by the Apostles as persons to partake of priviledges of a Church of Christians as was baptisme and therefore what extent of federal right priviledge is granted by the Apostles to them and theirs in that way is equally belonging to Gentiles in a like way 3. To suppose God by Apostolical ratification to allow to children of Jewish parents comming on to Christ c. a larger priviledge then to Gentile parents as came on to Christ c. is to make God a respecter of persons 4. The force of the words seeme to carry it that the same promise which was to those Jewes actually in Church and Covenant estate was intentionally to those afarre off which were strangers actually from a like estate whether those of the ten tribes or rather those of the Gentiles and should be actually to them when they came to bee called actually into the fellowship of that Covenant and Church estate Now what promise was that Verily a promise which carried with it a partiall reference unto their children The promise is to you and to your children And the same is unto them afar off whom God shall call scil in reference to their children also CHAP. III. Sect. I. The Explication of Gen. 17. 7 c. ANother Scripture holding forth the former doctrine of the Federall holinesse of such children is Gen. 17. 7. a place that in these later dayes hath been through mens distempers like Isaacs well an Esek for contention about the waters in it Touching which and so the whole doctrine of Federall holinesse propounded let us make use of a few distinctions and then set downe some few conclusions and withall take off what is brought to the contrary The Covenant of grace is considered either nakedly or as invested with a visible politicall Church-covenant if not explicite yet implicit Wee are to consider this place Gen. 17. not so much in the former as in the later sense God making of it with reference to the Church which was to remaine in the posteritie of Isaac vers 18 19 20 21. albeit at present it bee to bee contained in Abrahams owne family whence also hee ordaineth an initiatory seale and way of restipulation to which they submitting together as one selected body collectively and as members thereof distributively they did implicitly make confession and promise to God and bind themselves in a nearer religious tie one unto another Hence often renued Deut. 29. 2 Chro. 15. and 30. and 34. Nehem. 10. Ezek. 16. 8. Againe that Covenant of grace is considered either in it selfe or in its administration to which purpose circumcision is called the Covenant partly because it was the signe and seale of the Covenant of grace Gen. 17. 11 12 13. Partly too because it was the Covenant of grace in the administration of it Jer. 13. 11. and Esay 24. 5. and Zach. 11. 10. hath reference to the Covenant of grace both as invested with Church-covenant and in respect of Church-administration thereof Concerning persons being in covenant some are said to bee in the covenant intentionally so children of the Church which are yet unborne Deut. 29. 15. so those afarre off the promise was to them at that time Acts 2. 39. so the Jewes also which yet were to come in were in Pauls time holy Federally Rom. 11. 15 16. or actually so were the Jewes holy which were not cut off in Pauls time Ibid. so Deut. 29. 14. we attend rather to the later then the former in this discourse Persons actually in covenant are either internally and savingly in covenant as are all true beleevers and their children which belong to Gods election and as were many of those included in that phrase Rom. 11. 16. and as were Isaac and Jacob which were not onely children of the promise intentionally before they were borne Rom. 9. 9 10 11. but actually as soone as borne God revealing his mind of covenant-grace in such sort as never reversing the same after they were actually borne hence that Gal. 4. 23. 28. compared albeit many of the Galatians were but such in point of visibilitie as appeareth Or they are such as are onely externally in the covenant thus even Ishmael was for circumcision was even to him also Gods covenant or visible seale thereof This distinction is the Apostles Rom. 9. 4. hee speakes of some to whom the promises belonged scil onely externally and of others to whom they belonged in respect of the saving efficacy thereof Vers 6 7 8. Such as are externally in covenant are either such as are so upon their owne personall right meerely as many proselytes Exod. 12. 44 45. Deut. 29. 10 11. even those Gibeonites so were the soules in Abrahams house which hee gained to his religion according to Ainsworth Gen. 12. 5. such as hee had commanded to feare God Gen. 19. 19. as appeares by their free submission to that ridiculous painefull ordinance to flesh and blood Genesis 17. 27. Or such as withall are externally in Covenant so considered as invested with Church-covenant in their parents right as the Jewes and Proselytes Children Deut. 29. 10 11. God accepting the actuall owning of his Covenant by the grown part and parents instead of
of grace albeit invested with Church-covenant as appeares in that vers 60. that God for that his covenant sake considered as his will deale so gratiously with them after all their provocations as vers 62 63. Albeit hee did not thus properly for the sake of that investure of his covenant annexed scil Thy covenant the Churches covenant abstractively considered vers 61. see more Ezek. 36. from vers 17. to the Chapters end There is an externall being in the covenant of grace as there is an externall being in Christ John 15. 2. and partaking of Christ hence that of Heb. 13. 14. An externall belonging to Christ hence those Jewish refusers to beleeve in Christ yet called his owne John 1. 11. As there is an externall being called Matth. 22. 14. an externall being sanctified by the blood of the Covenant Heb. 10. 29. an externall being purged from sinne 2 Pet. 1. 9. an externall being purchased by Christ 2 Pet. 2. 1. an externall Saintship Deut. 33. 3. And therefore both are joyned being Saints and making a Covenant with God Psal 50. 5. and such as had Gods covenant made with them to glory of verse 16. yet what persons many of them were that Psalme doth declare There are those invisible Churches which are as Isaac was children of the promise Gal. 3. 28. children of the Gospel Church verse 31. and 26. this must bee verified in all the members of the Galatian Churches unto whom Paul wrote that Epistle Gal. 1. 2. for hee spake this of them all Jerusalem which is the mother of us all verse 26 27 28. compared They then were all such either effectually and savingly And then there were some particular visible Churches in which were no hypocrites Contrary to the very scope of the parable of the Tares and Net and Virgins and Wedding and varietie of vessels in the Church visible as an house of God 1 Tim. 3. 15. compared with 2 Tim. 2. 20. Yea then there should bee a possibilitie that such as are savingly interessed in the covenant of grace should end in the flesh Gal. 3. 3. suffer many things in vaine verse 4. have Apostolicall labour bestowed on them in vaine Gal. 4. 11. fall from grace and have no profit to salvation by Christ Gal. 5. 2. 4. for if there were not a possibilitie of some such members and cases to bee found in the Galatian Churches why doth the Apostle speake such things as there are mentioned but there is no possibilitie of fatall seducing the elect one savingly interested in the covenant and Church 2 Tim. 2. 16. 19 20. 1 John 2. 19. Matth. 24. 24. So then it must needs follow that according to God some were such indeed but externally and according to men all were children of the promise In which sense the promise of grace and glory may bee to one as ones legacy or portion externally and according to men of the saving good whereof it is possible one may fall short Heb. 4. 1. 4. When Antipaedobaptists admit any to the seales of Church and covenant fellowship is it not possible that some false brethren may creepe in unawares Jude 4. some wolves enter in and of their owne selves some turne seducers Act. 20. 29 30. can it be otherwise but that in visible Churches with us or them there will bee some unapproved ones to God 1 Cor. 11. 18 19. yet you admit them to the fellowship of covenant but without ground unlesse to them they are in covenant Will you ordinarily put seales to blankes and the seale must follow the covenant Gen. 17. 7. 9 10 11. 13. Acts 2. 38 39. 1 Cor. 11. 25. You will surely say they appeared to us to bee in the covenant of grace wee judged them to bee in it else wee had not admitted them So then according to your selves persons may bee externally and quoad homines in the Covenant of grace which are not savingly so I plead for no more wee are then thus farre agreed I yeeld no more advantage to Arminius nor undermine perseverance in grace nor the Polemicall doctrine of our choyse Divines more then you doe nor then Amesius Chamier Luther Calvin Beza and then your owne Tertullian as you count him doth who in his booke De Anima Chap. 21 22. urgeth that Text 1 Cor. 7. 14. for a peculiar cleannesse of beleevers children by priviledge of seed as the rest which I have named to whom Pareus Peter Martyr Bucer Melancton Mr. Philpot besides many others might bee added who pleading for Infants baptisme urge it from their interest in the Covenant As many of the ancients Cyprian Gregory Nazianzen Jerome Austine and others which plead for Paedobaptisme from the argument of circumcision must need implicitly if not expresly maintaine Infants Covenant estate to which the baptisme of the one as the circumcision of the other was ex natura rei a sacramentall signe Gen. 17. 11. And yet they held not that all such were infallibly saved and therefore must maintaine with mee an externall inbeing of some in covenant which possibly may never be saved But leaving humane authorities to returne to Scripture proofe of this third conclusion let our opposites consider of Gods breaking that gratious Covenant which hee had made with his people of old which was as his staffe of beautie Zach. 11 10 whether it can be verified of a legall covenant of workes and not rather of his covenant of grace in respect at least of the externall administration thereof amongst them as verse 9. and their externall right in that his covenant And whence else is there any supposall of some interested in that same covenant of God wherein the upright are faithfull stable and perminent but others are false treacherous and apostatising Psal 44. 17. Dan. 11. 30 31 32 33. If they were never in this holy covenant how came they to forsake it to deale falsely in it or was this Covenant wherein they together with those true beleevers were interested in communion other then the covenant of grace If it were not that from Sion was it that from mount Sinai which are the Apostles membra dividentia of the covenant Gal. 4. 24. If so then beleevers which as beleevers must necessarily be in the free covenant of life and grace yet also at the same time are under a contrary covenant of bondage and death and curse if this covenant in which they were with true beleevers were a covenant of grace as is evident then were hypocrites externally in it for internally and efficaciously they were not and whence else were they charged with breaking the everlasting covenant catâ—exochen if they were never in that bond And if in it it was but externally else had they never so fatally broken this covenant which is thus plainely described by the old periphrasis of Abrahams covenant Gen. 17. 7. 13. and whence also are some charged with not beleeving the faith or ingaged truth the covenant of God Rom. 7. 3. if it were not plighted with
them which notwithstanding tooke saving effect onely in the elect and in the beleeving Nor will any say that it was other then the covenant of grace which tooke such effect Rom. 9. 6. And what need that preoccupation of the Apostle when speaking before of the promise indefinitely as belonging even to those refuse Jews he saith not that the word of God tooke none effect scil in the persons to whom it belonged As if his meaning were thus to prevent all objection I yeeld that many to whom the word of Gods gratious covenant did externally belong never got any saving good by it as appeareth by their sad case at present verse 1 2 3. but yet this will not follow that Gods covenant had none effect at all namely in others which were savingly interested therein And the reason hee giveth is added for they are not all Israel which are of Israel as if hee would say they are indeed Israelites or of called covenant in-churched Israel verse 4. and 6. compared but they are not all elected Israel so then that the word of covenant taketh not savingly in such like persons it is neither in that they were not in that covenant externally for the promise belonged to them verse 4. nor that the word of Gods covenant is not per se efficacious since it doth take effect in as many as are the choyse seed principally intended in that Covenant but here rather is the secret ground of it They are not nor never were elected of God and such as in his secret counsell hee intended and ordained to extend eternall mercy to for had they been of that number they could never according to the objection included have so fallen as to reject and cast off so irrecoverably the revealed grace and mercy of Gods covenant as ratified in Christ Rom. 15. 8. Acts 4. 45 46 47 48. and Rom. 11. 20. and 9. 31 32 33. 1 Pet. 2. 7 8. compared This here said may serve for answer to Mr. B. his distinction of the Covenant of grace and an outward Covenant c. they are not two distinct covenants but the covenant of grace made with the elect in respect of their saving interest in that I will bee a God to them the same is made with others in respect both of visible interest and the visible administration of it nor is Gen. 17. 10. a proofe of an outward covenant distinct from the covenant of grace verse 7. but it is the covenant or conditionall part and dutie of the same covenant on their parts As God had before told Abraham what was his part of the covenant both more personally respecting Abraham verse 4 5 6. As for me or my part behold my Covenant is with thee and more parentally and radically in respect to him considered with his seed verse 7 8. So verse 9. hee telleth Abraham what is his and his seeds part of the covenant thou shalt keepe my covenant and thy seed c. If Abraham demand What is that his and his seeds part It is answered verse 10. c. From the same principle may sundry objections of I. S. against the truth in question bee answered as that there is but one way of entring into covenant scil by a true and lively faith The contrary whereof here appeares in that persons may bee said to bee in covenant with God in respect of externall right which never came to beleeve actually nor savingly Of like nature is that the promise being yea and amen in Christ 2 Cor. 1. 20. such as have not true faith in him as Infants c. have not they cannot bee interested in the covenant to which purpose also Gal. 3. 9. 27. 29. is brought now taking that of saving faith wee see others may bee called the children of God Ezek. 16. 20 21. 23. Rom. 9. 4. yea children of the promise Acts 3. 25. Gal. 4. 28. then such as doe attaine to saving faith as before was cleared Of the like nature is that that wee by our doctrine doe set up another way of salvation then by regeneration which is a meere non sequitur since unregenerate persons may bee in covenant with God on whom the word never taketh effect Rom. 9. 4. and 6. compared and no other is our doctrine we disclaime that conclusion that all that are externally in covenant attaine salvation nor doth that sequell of universall redemption follow from our doctrine of Federall holinesse since wee maintaine no other but that whatever such are quoad homines counted redeemed of the Lord and sometimes so stiled as that visible Church of Ephesus is said to bee purchased by the blood of Christ Acts 20. 28 c. yet in that and other visible Churches many prove otherwise even rent-members verse 29 30. so 2 Pet. 2. 1. If these had not been externally in Covenant they had not been in the Churches And albeit they were so yet the effect proved they were not internally of the number of redeemed ones Hitherto that Dilemma being reduced may receive answer That according to our doctrine beleevers children being in the covenant of grace that covenant is made with them either conditionally or absolutely if conditionally then either on condition of faith or workes Not of workes none will affirme that then of faith and that is nugatory to say this Covenant is to beleevers seed if beleevers to which branch wee answer the Covenant is theirs externally and quoad homines considered as invested with Church-covenant and in reference to Covenant Ordinances whereof they are capable as of old they were of Circumcision and are now of baptisme Thus it 's theirs at present in respect of the visible faith and interest of the parent or parents in the Covenant and for the future it 's theirs in the further grace of the Covenant upon condition of their beleeving if they live to yeeres of discretion If absolutely then God either keepes it and so all the seed of beleevers should bee saved which is false or hee doth not keepe what hee absolutely covenanted which to affirme were blasphemy Wee answer God may bee said absolutely to covenant with beleevers seed collectively and specifically considered and yet all the Individuall children not saved It is absolutely made and made good that that sort of persons shall bee and are saved by vertue of Gods Covenant for some of them are infallibly saved The Covenant is to the indefinite collective seed or children in respect of the internall saving interest else none of them dying Infants should bee saved Supposing they are the Israel of God a part of the elect seed yet the meanes of saving effect in and upon them is the word of Covenant Rom. 9. 6. It 's thorough the effectuall word and ingaged truth of God that that part of the Church are savingly purged Ephes 5. 25 26. The Covenant is to the individuall seede all and each of them in respect of externall interest and yet many of them not saved nor yet is
Gods faithfulnesse impeached or impaired nor need the faith of beleevers bee shaken if this or that child should prove live and die wicked the force of the Covenant is not to bee measured by the fatall miscarrying of many of Abrahams Church seed To bee sure it taketh in some of his Church-seed as the Apostle reasoneth Rom. 9. 4. 6. compared Whether our doctrine herein or the adversaries which deny any interest at all to any beleevers Infants in the Covenant bee more uncomfortable let the world judge And therefore to affirme with Paul if taken in the strict of elect ones and of sincere beleevers that they onely are Abrahams choyce seed yet it 's no other then Gospell to affirme as much as wee have done of others ye they also are Abrahams Church seed SEâ—T V. 4. A Fourth Conclusion is that the Church in dispensing an enjoyned Initiatory seale of the Covenant of grace looketh unto visibilitie of interest in the Covenant to guide her in the application thereof Nor is it the saving interest of the persons in view which is her rule by which shee is therein to proceed The matter to bee dispenced is not an Initiatory seale of the Covenant before it bee commanded as before Circumcision or baptisme bee commanded but supposing that de facto they are commanded the rule of judging of the jus of persons propounded to the Church with desire of her admission by her officers to the fellowship of the initiatory seale of the Covenant it is not the internall and saving state of the partie or parties but the visibility of covenant right and estate saving right consisting in Gods electing act which is a very secret in saving interest in Christ and his death in saving influences and operations of his spirit and the like all which incurre not to outward discerning nor can be infallibly known by man being things per se invisible to others John 3. 8. John Baptist did and might lawfully baptize those multitudes albeit in the generall hee knew that many yea most of them would prove false and frothy Matth. 3. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12. It sufficeth that albeit hee were perswaded in the generall that many were unworthy members of that floore and Church of Christ amongst them all yet they having appearances of a better estate and hee not being able to say in the particular persons presented to baptisme which of them notwithstanding would prove chaffie and vile hee baptized them Albeit wee may think in the generall that to bee sure in all visible Churches there will bee some vessells of dishonour sometimes and yet Ministers which are the Churches as well as Christs servants they are not therefore to refuse to dispense Church-Ordinances since they are in the face of the Church such utensils as the Lord may have and hath need of Hence the Apostles which as extraordinary persons knew the guile of persons secret from the Church witnesse that act against Ananias and Saphira Act. 5. 1 2 3 4 5. to 11. Yet in administring the Church-seale of Baptisme they refused not Ananias and Saphira no nor Simon Magus Act. 8. nor thousands of others of the Jewes amongst whom how many proved false let Acts 2. 41. and 4. 1 2 3 4. compared 21. 20 21 22 23 24. 28. 30 31. 36. and 22. 20. 22. and 23. 12 13. witnesse Nor could the Apostles imagine otherwise in the generall but many of them would prove such Yea Christ himselfe who by his divine knowledge knew Judas to bee a devill John 6. 70 71. and 13. 18. yet hee ministred to him that Supper whether the Pascall Lambe or the Lords Supper Verse 1. 2. 26. and 21. compared with Luke 22. 19 20 21. I determine not one of them it appeares it was Austin and others thinke Judas was admitted to the Lords Supper and that he did partake of the bread of the Lord albeit not of the Lord that spirituall bread so thinkes Mr. Cartwright from that connexion Luke 23. 19 20 21. but if admitted by Christ to the Passeover which Christ administred to him formerly and at that time it sufficeth to our purpose Christ ministring as man dealeth with Judas in his ministration of the Sacrament as man and as Judas was according to man and to the rest of that family to which hee then in speciall sort ministred Ishmael God discovered by a divine revelation to Abraham Esau to Rebeckah not to bee Gods elect seed of the Covenant yet Abraham and Isaac as Prophets and Priests at that time to the Church in their families circumcise them extraordinary cases brake not ordinary rules If Peter kill bodily any persons or Phinehas or Elias It 's not a warrant for Ministers to bee executioners or orderers of civill justice It 's the Magistrate is to do that by ordinary rule Rom. 13. If Ananias a private Disciple by extraordinary call in a vision baptize Paul yet it 's no crosse to that ordinary rule of ministring baptisme onely by preaching ministers Matth. 28. 19 20. So here in extraordinary cases persons to bee admitted to the seales of the old or new Testament may bee discovered to bee false hearted as was Ishmael Esau and Judas yet that hinders not but being in facie Ecclesiae visibly interested in the Covenant the seales are to bee administred unto them The Church in Abraham and Isaacs house had not that revealed to them touching Ishmael and Esau as neither the family of Christ knew that of Judas therefore as to them they had visible right to those seales so were they administred to them A Minister may see much good or evill in persons which are to partake of the seales yet if this bee not as well visible to the Church as to himselfe hee cannot of himselfe admit or reject them regularly hee is not the Church but acteth in admission rejections to or from the fellowship of Church-Ordinances such as the seales are by and with their consent A person Ecclesiastically holy is admittable and hee may not refuse them upon his owne private surmises It were to breed confusions in Churches and lay foundations of enthusiasmes The ordinary Elders of that visible Church of Ephesus must feede the Church in the dispensation of the word or seales occasionally Albeit many admitted to that fellowship many among themselves will prove Apostates Acts 20. 28 29 30. If particular persons saving interest in Gods promise and Covenant of grace were the rule it were either to necessitate ministers to come under guilt of sinne or Anomie breach of rule or for avoiding of that which they must needs doe with such breach of rule never to administer any Church-ordinances since they sometimes shall breake that rule in administring the same to hypocrites and albeit they doe sometimes administer them to elect ones yet not being able to know that secret infallibly they observe not that rule in faith but doubtingly and so can have little comfort of any such of their administrations
meane it of effectuall calling he if invisible Church fellowship will come under that absurditie too unlesse hee could wholly exclude hypocrites from visible Churches or suppose such a Church where neither are nor can come any false brethren If hee intendeth it of externall calling so visible beleevers and in churched parents Infants are with and in their parents call to the externall fellowship of Church-covenant implicitely called with them As before they were a farre off together from covenant and Church so now are they made nigh together thâ—s farre Of the like nature is that imaginary absurditie of entailing grace to generation not to regeneration or of upholding a nationall Church hee knowes wee in New-England which hold the one yet doe not maintaine the other in the usuall sense of a nationall Church And this which hath been here said also may answer that of I. S. that Infants have not union with Christ as not having faith and therefore may not have any communion in Church-ordinances if hee intend it of saving faith his sequele is weake since many which doe not savingly beleeve are in respect of their in-being in the visible Church to which also Christ is head in Christ as the head of that body in which they are visible members whence also that John 15. 2. But to speake to the proposition it selfe I say Infants without actuall faith are of Christs body the Church of which more afterwards and so in Christ as the head of the visible Church Their parents professed application of the covenant with reference to them as well as to themselves they are together with themselves Ecclesiastically one with Christ as the head of the visible Church SECT VII Conclus 6. THat the body of the Jewish Church to old was under the covenant of grace as invested with Church covenant in respect of externall interest therein It was not as some say that they onely had a covenant of grace among them which was made to some choyce ones among them but that which was made with and dispensed to the body of the Jewes was a covenant of works and not of grace for the contrary appeareth 1. In that the covenant was made with Abraham Isaac and Iacob in reference to their whole seed at least in respect of externall and ecclesiasticall right as before wee proved And hence God appointed them all to receive the visible seale thereof see Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13. and 26. 3 4 5. and 28. 12 13 14. either then these covenant fathers receiving the covenant in reference to their children had a contrary covenant of life and death grace and works made with them and so at one and the same time were externally under the blessing and curse of God and so were not one root to their seed nor first fruits of one sort but as their branches and lumpe in the body of them are supposed to have the covenant of workes dispensed to them so are they to them as a legall root and first-fruits of that sort yet sundry of the branches being elect ones to them they are an Evangelicall roote and first-fruits of another sort contrary to that letter of the Text Rom. 11. 16. or if not both then either receiving a covenant of workes alone in reference to them all elected or not or it must be granted that they received the covenant of grace with Ecclesiasticall respect to them all 2. The very substance of the covenant made and enjoyned to be sealed upon all the children of those fathers Acts 7. 8. with Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10. was as hath been proved not a Legall but an Evangelicall covenant It was not Doe this and live or else bee accursed Gal. 3. 10 11 12. but I will bee a God to thy seed not to Isaac of Abraham alone nor to Jacob of Isaac alone in that Church-right and way but to thy seede in their generations It was their covenant-right to have the Tabernacle of God or Ordinances as their priviledge yea and his presence therein Hence that Exod. 40. 34 35. 38. and Num. 6. 6. 9. and Levit. 9. 14. hence that filling of their Temple with smoak with the glory of God 1 King 8. 10 11. so Isa 6. 1 2 3 4. hence that same testifying of the presence of God in the Churches after Christs ascension in a way of mercy to his people and for their sakes in a way of justicâ— against his and their enemies Revel 15. 8. Hence the frequent answers made to them and for them by Oracle from Gods mercy-seate Exod. 23. 21 22. see Deut. 4. 7. Christ himselfe went with them whither soever they went 1 Cor. 10. 4. whence they are said to tempt him verse 9. see Exod. 33. 15 16. besides those extraordinary Sacraments in which they shared as spirituall things 1 Cor. 1 2 3 4. onely those fathers so partaking of them which to Egyptians and beasts were not of that nature It was their covenant-right to have such deliverances flowing thence as that from Egypt Exod. 6. 7. albeit afterward too God continued in other respects as well as that their covenant God Exod. 29. 45 46. Levit. 26. 11 12. so in and after that Babylonish deliverance Ier. 24. 7. which deliverances of theirs were not of any common nature to other people but by vertue of Christ the Anointing the Mediator virtually of that coveâ—… Isa 10. 27. see Ier. 24. 7. and 15. 17 18 19 20. see more Deut. 29. with 30. 6. Acts 2. 38 39. hence that Rom. 3. 29 30. see Heb. 4. 1 2. Acts 3. 25. Rom. 9. 4. not meaning the Law or two Tables of it but distinguishing those promises from the other nor was Canaan all which God promised them as some have said For First it was promised them as an everlasting possession when yet many even the best of them never enjoyed it constantly if at all Heb. 11. 9 10. Num. 20. 12. the promise of Canaan was ratified in Christ as are other temporall blessings to us now 1 Cor. 3. 21 22. hence Christ's said to drive out their enemies thence from them Exod. 23. 20 21. hence called Immanuels land Esay 8. 8. hence sundry of them excluded thence for that Gospel sin of unbeliefe Heb. 3. last compared with Chap. 42. Hence God promised to bee a God to them and as one branch thereof instanceth in giving them Canaan Gen. 17. 7. 8. yet to shew that was not all hee promised hee againe addeth after that And I will be a God to them Hence those expectations of faith beyond the same Heb. 11. 9 10. Ps 142. 5. Secondly the Proselyted strangers were to have Abrahams covenant sealed to them and theirs by Circumcision Gen. 17. 7 8 9 â—0 11 12 13. yet they might not have lots there nor keepe them â—…t returne them at the Jubilee Iosh 13. 6. Numb 36. 2. and â—… 53 Thirdly Christ was the mediator of that covenant of Abraham made with them and so held out to
them all witnesse their sacrifices expiatory and propitiatory injoyned the whole congregation in case of sinne Levit. 4. 13. unto 22. witnesse the two Goates one for a sinne offering for the whole congregation and the other the scape goate over which all the sinnes of the children of Israel were confessed by the Priests and then it was in a typicall way to carry away all their sinnes into a place farre remote Levit. 16. 15 21 22 c. what this did externally signifie none is ignorant which knowes the Scriptures And albeit all made not effectuall use of it by saving faith yet God herein testified what a covenant they were under even that of grace confirmed in Christ and to what they had according to men externall right Hence the high Priest in type of Christ bare the names of the 12. Tribes and made intercession and atonement for them upon the like ground Adam with whom that covenant of workes was made had no such sacrifices Gal. 3. 16 17. the Apostle speaking of the promises to Abraham not excluding this Gen. 17. albeit more especially relating to Gen. 12. 2. 31. saith not they were to bee confirmed in Christ as if not at all ratified in Christ to them of old but saith the covenant was confirmed long before the Law in Christ so as that could not disanull the validitie of it and Acts 3. 25. they are said to bee children of the Gospell promise Gen. 12. 3 hence Luke 1. 54 55. 67 68. unto the 76 Verse and Christ as a Minister not of circumcising for he neither circumcised nor baptized personally Iohn 4. 1. but of the circumcision that is the Jewish Church and people Gal. 2. 7. hee came actually and personally to confirme those promises made to the fathers as Gen. 17 7 8. which hee had before virtually confirmed Gal. 3. 16 17. And which is observable the Apostle Rom. 15. 9 10 11 12. brings in foure reasons to prove the receiving in of the Gentiles to the fellowship of the covenant and Gospel as that which was opposed much but to confirme that of the Jewish covenant estate verse 8. hee brings no further reason then that taken from one end of Christs comming in the flesh as if to deny the former were to question the later And how can it bee imagined that such an Evangelicall covenant as that Gen. 17. 7. made with reference to them should bee made without respect to Christ in whom salvation was really exhibited to the elect among them Acts 4. 10. 1 Pet. 23 24 with Isa 40. 8. Psal 115 8. to 16. and 111. 3 4 44. 17 18. 22 with Rom. 8. 36 Heb. 11. per totum Johns converts were but turned to the wisedome or faith of their righteous fathers Luk. 1. 17 and to the rest externally ministred in the visible seales and types thereof to shew it was their visible covenant and Church-right also if they had hearts to improve it and that they should answer dearely for rejecting their owne mercy if despisers c. as they afterwards did Rom. 11. 20. hitherto was their injunction of the brazen Serpent and their looking upon it Numb 21. 7 8 9 10. with Iohn 3. 14 15. Fourthly the covenant of workes holds out no pardon or mercy to transgressors as did this covenant made and dispensed to the Jewes Gen. 17. 7. as before wee shewed so Acts 2. 38 39. Fiftly the covenant of works required not either faith in Christ or repentance those Gospel duties Mac. 1. but perfect personall obedience much lesse did it offer grace inabling to repent but this their covenant did both require and offer the same Deut. Chap. 30. Verse 6. as I. S. confesseth see more Acts Chap. 3. Verse 25 26. Sixtly No salvation at all to any by acceptance of the termes of the covenant of workes nor possibilitie of it Gal. 3. 10. but hâ—re was rest and salvation in the word to them dispensed if they had hearts to have improved it else none had ever been saved by it contrary to Heb. 11. yea chap. 12. 1 2. they are madâ— our patternes and leaders that way that was Gospel even glad tidings of salvation by Christ to come which was dispensed to them albeit it were not Gospel strictly taken for the revelation of Christ as actually incarnates and personally ratifying the same Rom. 1. 16 17. Revel 14. 6. Heb. 4. 2. compared with 2 Tim. 1. 10. and 1 Pet. 1. 10. Seventhly all the Jewes best and worst had the same dispensers of the covenant as their Ministers in whom they were all interested and by whom they were ministerially urged with their covenant-right in common Exod. 19. 5 6. and 24. 7 8. with Heb. 9. 15 16 17. 20. Psal 50. 5. 16. and 44. 17. Isa 24. 1. Ier. 31. 37. and 33. 25 26. Ezek. 16. 8. 59. 60. 62. Zach. 9. 11. Eighthly the covenant of works was made with all men without distinction in Adam but this covenant was a peculiar covenant made with the seed of Abraham Isaac and Jacob as before was shewed Nâ—…thly the cause of the Jewes not profiting by the Gospell so ministred to them as their priviledge was not their not doing which is the defect of the condition of the legall covenant but their not beleeving or want of the condition of the Evangelicall covenant Hâ—b 4. 2 And lest any should say yea true the Gospel was preached to them as it is or may be to Indians with us which have not so much as externall right in it I say they were cast off from their Evangelicall covenant priviledges not for not doing but for not beleeving hence cut out of their root and cast off from the priviledge of their first fruits Abraham Isaac and Jacob not as begetting and naturall fathers for they are still their children thus even the worst of them John 8. 37. but from them as covenant spirituall fathers Rom. 11. 20. And observe that hee speaketh that if the worst part of the Jewes as if they accepted interest in the proper object of faith scil the covenant not of workes but of grace out of which they are broken by their Gospel sinne of unbeleefe Tenthly the refuse Jewes thus cut and cast off I demand from what they are cast and into what estate they are now put to the former none will say they are cut out and cast off from a visible right or estate of a covenant of workes and the dispensation thereof that were well for them if so So then their former priviledged estate for their covenant fathers from which they were cast by reason of unbeleefe was not barely a ceremoniall yoake the which our opposites urge as grievous to them all and a priviledge rather to bend thereof Nor the bare subservient covenant at Mount Sinai as Cameron calleth it For first the branch priviledge which they had in reference to those covenant fathers as such was long before Moses or his fathers were borne and that is that to
which Rom. 11. 15 16. 28. speakes to as even our opposites will confesse Secondly according to Camerons grounds de Triplici faedere Thes 68. many things are in that subservient covenant which was 430. yeeres after the promise to Abraham Gen. 12 c. which are not applyable to that covenant Gen. 17. 7. as that that convinced of sinne and cleared divine justice but that covenant of grace tendred pardon c. And so did that covenant I will bee a God to thy seed as before that sheweth dutie but not grace to performe as doth the covenant of grace yea and as did that Gen. 17. 7. as before yea and as did that covenant made with all Israel After and besides that covenant in Horeb Deut. 29. 1 2. with 30. 6. that had the stipulation of Doe and live not so in the covenant of grace Gen. 17. no nor in that Deut. 30. 6. see Gen. 12. 3. with Gal. 3. 8. That was a carnall Symboll of the Jewish Church comparatively but that in Gen. 17. and Deut. 30. 6. more spirituall that shewed sinne and misery but this happinesse in remission of sinnes as well as misery without it Rom. 4. 6 7 8. 11. 13. of that was Moses of this was Christ Mediator Gal. 3. 16 17. Rom. 15. 8. Hence those of the first borne of that Hebrew Church of old Heb. 12. 23. priviledged in the blood and Mediator verse 14. That Covenant was imbondaging not so that in Gen. 17. 7. we now inheriting the same by faith in him not bondage in or by it nor sorrow but comfort see 2 Sam. 23. 4 5. that sheweth the way of worship but this grace to act it as before so Gen. 17. so Deut. 30. 6. that was against us yea but this was for us Gen. 17. 7. as is evident and so was for them whence the same subjects in that Deut. 30. 6. Even parents and children That held out Temporalls yea but this Eternalls Gen. 17. 7. with Heb. 11. 16. Matth. 22. 31. hence Abrahams bosome is heaven opposed to hell Luke 16. 22 23. Hence heavens glory is sitting downe with Abraham Isaac and Jacob in Gods kingdome Luke 13. 25. 16. 27. Yea all our opposites contend for the rigour and burdensomnesse of Sinai's covenant no such sore punishment of Jewish unbeleefe to bee rid of that nay they count it their glory at this day to retaine it and bee zealous for it but as was said they were discarded a former right and priviledge and cast into a contrary estate I enlarge here to cleare mistakes 11. The better part of the Jewes which abode in their covenant estate from which they were not broken off Rom. 11. 7. 17. 20. they changed not their estate in the substantialls of it but abode therein unbroken off Now I demand was this their priviledge estate in which they abode an estate of a covenant of workes or at best was it an estate of a subservient Sinai covenant as Cameron phraseth it the condition whereof was no other according to him then do and live or else die which if so was in effect as the covenant of workes strictly taken I suppose none will affirme that verily then what ever ceremoniall vailes were super-addded in Moses dayes yet that could not invalidate Abrahams covenant in which they with the rest of their fellow-members then cast out were interested in common albeit these had a more peculiar benefit thereby which the other fell short of by that unbeleefe 12. The Gospelled Gentiles stood in that very condition by faith and came into the very same kingdome estate for the nature or essentialls of it out of which the worser part of the Jewes were broken and cast they were gaffed in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place or roome of those broken branches as Beza hath it Rom. 11. 17. see vers 19 20. Matth. 8. 11 12. and 21. 43. but such Gentiles are not in such a preternaturall way Rom. 11. 24. brought under a bare covenant of workes or at most under Sinai covenant considered in the legall part of it but into a state of the covenant of grace and the externall right and priviledge thereof Therefore in the essentialls of that covenant estate the same Lastly God remembred the worst of them for good when in the worst estate by sinne and made it as I may say frequently a motive to himselfe to shew them this and that especiall favour even the respect to his covenant with them and with their fathers in their stead If this covenant made with them had beene as Adams or Sinai's covenant in the legall part of it a covenant of meere doing and living by it or else perishing c. that being minded by God would have called for justice against them in their just destruction and have urged God even for respect to his justice to have then cut off all such Idolatrous Apostates But verily in that it was a covenant prevayling for mercy and grace rather to bee freely extended to them albeit so unworthy what was it other then that free covenant of Gods grace which when they failed of their part of the covenant in all Ecclesiasticall respects Ezek. 16. 8. 59. 6 c. yet God will out of respect to his owne part of the covenant made with them shew them favour vers 60. 62 63. so Ezek. 36. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26. and 31 c. And marke what the phrase is speaking to that church-body of which Ezek. 16. 67. 8 9 c. he saith I will remember my covenant made with thee not with this or that particular Jew but with them all in an Ecclesiasticall way and in respect of externall right albeit some onely had the saving benefit thereof as being the select covenanters mainely intended So Esay 48. 1 2 3 4 c. God considers that people as Iron sinewed and refusing to heare c. Yet for his owne name or covenanted grace and truth and honours sake he saith hee will extend such and such patience and mercy to them verse 9 10 11. Against this are objected SECT 8. Objections against the Iewes covenant-state removed 1. Object They were the children of the flesh not of God and of his promise Rom. 9. 7 8. Answ If wee take children of God for such as were savingly regenerate and adopted or children of the promise for such as were of the elect seed in whom the promise tooke saving effect So it 's true onely of some of the Jewes John 1. 12 13. Rom. 9. 6 7 8. c. But if you take it of the Church-seed of the promise and such as were externally adopted of God and instated in the covenant of grace as invested also with Church-covenant so they were children even of that free covenant of blessing in Christ Acts 3. 25 26. and had the promises indefinitely as Deut. 30. 6. Jer. 31. 37. Gen. 17. 7 c. belonging to them Rom. 9. 4. and were children of God
them and therefore pleaded there for that end vers 18 19. that covenant which God made in Bethel Gen. 35. 9. to 16. hee spake it not barely to but with them or covenanted it with them in Hoseahs time which were of the posteritie of Jacob Hos 12. 4. God found him in Bethel and there hee spake with us As much might be said of that 2 Sam. 23. 4 5. the covenant was made with David the father yet in reference to his house or children whence it was that his faith as a beleeving father of his family was the evidence of things not seene Hee beleeveth that whatever his house bee at present yet it shall excell in grace both of Gods feare and justice Vers 3. as in the glory of government c. nor was this other then a covenant of grace here mentioned since it had not else been to him as all his desire and salvation whence it was that in saddest times this covenant was pleaded by the Prophets in behalfe of Davids posteritie Psal 89. vers 38 39. 49. 50. see more vers 20. 28. and so on if the parents and the children both may thus act forth and must in the covenant so made it 's a signe parents and children were joyntly interested therein And so I come to instance as well in such as de facto have done so as to shew de jure they should doe it to let passe Davids example here the instance of our grandmother Eve is past exception her sonne Cain being discovenanted and discharged hee and his and Abel slaine shee beleeved the promise of God Gen. 3. 15. at first made to her and when infant Seth was borne shee beleeved that God had for his covenant sake lookt on her in that covenant babe and therefore as soone as borne she calls his name Seth for saith shee God hath appointed mee another seed in stead of Abel whom Cain slew Gen. 4. 25. shee spake not thus in reference to him as a meere naturall babe borne of her as a sinfull woman but as of a Covenant and Church seed therefore comparing him to Abel not to Cain and calls him by such a name as signified her faith touching the Covenant estate of this babe even whilst a very babe nor did shee faile in her faith therein as appeares by the sequell vers 26. whence the Church seed continued in his loynes externally at least albeit much degenerating as that distinction of sonnes of God and daughters of men doth shew Gen. 6. 1 2. And as Eve beleeved this way so did Lamech Gen. 5. 28 29. as soone as Noah was borne hee from saith in that promise of God Gen. 3. 15. * See Geneva Bible notes on the place gave the babe that name of Noah beleeved that that child should bee a root as it were to the Church albeit that corrupt world were to bee destroyed Another example of the Saints faith touching their childrens federall estate see in Psal 102. 25 26 27. with Heb. 1. 10 11 12. which referred unto Christ as in whom they pleaded and expected this touching their children And it 's evident that those Saints did expresse their faith in Christ touching their children and seeds being established before him nor did they exercise their faith touching the vanishing temporall good of their children barely vers 25 26. but in reference to induring mercies of Christ to them lasting when heaven and earth should dissolve Now did they take the rise of this their faith from possibilities of election or redemption without foothold from the covenant verily no they ought not to ground their faith on any thing but God his revealed will touching themselves or theirs Deut. 29. 29. the Covenant and promise is that which faith in its acts of beleeving doth build and rest upon and faith albeit it must goe as farre yet no further that way then the word of faith Rom. 10. 8. secrets of possibilities of election and redemption of the children would not might not have caused in them such a conclusive apprehension of faith but the revealed covenant and testament and will of Gods grace in Christ election and redemption though things which faith beleeveth yet not grounds in themselves considered without reference to the covenant revealed of any mans faith touching himselfe or others as being secrets It 's not the election of faith but the word of faith nor beleefe of election as such for as such it 's a secreâ— act of God hid within himselfe but the beleefe of the truth or revealed promise Another argument of the federall interest of beleevers Infants to bee Gospell and therefore of perpetuall validitie now as well as at any time may be in that it was held forth as Gospel in the beginning of the world and so will bee in the purer times of the Gospell towards the very end of the world and therefore it 's Gospell to us now The consequence is evident both from the everlastingnesse of the Gospell and covenant of grace of which this was and will bee made a branch which covenant of grace is Gospell Heb. 13. 20. Revel 14. 6. and from the essentiall samenesse and onenesse of the covenant of grace from the beginning of the world to the end for so farre forth as any thing partaketh of everlastingnesse it partaketh so farre of immutabilitie Now the covenant is not in nature the same if the covenant the confederate persons are not specifically the same the covenant in the nature of it supposing God as one partie and such or such a sort of persons as other parties betwixt whom that covenant is drawn and made if it were supposable that there were not the same God covenanting with man or not the same sorts of persons specifically accepted of by God into termes of covenant grace with him the covenant were not in nature the same Albeit it bee not shut up in families as of old in Adams Seths Enoshes Kenans Mahaleels Jareds Enochs Methuselahs Lamechs Noahs c. or in the posteritie of Abraham Isaac Jacob in respect of Church interest in and administration of it but inlarged to all the families of Gospeld persons yet if the persons admitted to covenant bee not specifically the same even that sort of inadult as well as adult persons whether male or female bond or free then is not the covenant in nature the same Now to prove the proposition in both its branches and first that it was held forth as Gospell that the species of the Infants of beleevers in Church-estate were taken into the verge of the covenant of grace Gen. 3. 15. sheweth Adam and Eve were eyed by God as a seminall visible Church by whom as well the Church as the world was to bee built up and God that he might especially glorifie his grace even in the weakest mentioneth Eve as one touching whom hee first expressed his revealed minde of grace to her and her seed not intending meerely the principall seed Christ in and by whom
forme of the Church giving Church being to persons therein interested nor is it likely that these children were other then such being either proselytes children joyned to the Jewish Church or children of Jewes either of them formerly circumcised and in facie ecclesiae of the Church the Apostles which used to bee questioning any thing obscure which they understood not or seemed to them strange would in likelihood have inquired after satisfaction therein of Christ as their manner was if it had not been very cleare convincing approved received doctrine which Christ urged as his reason of reproofe of their act in hindring the little ones approach to him hee which himselfe forbad them Matth. 10. to goe into the way of the Gentiles no not into Samaria and when himselfe tooke up the Gentile Canaanite in such sort at first albeit she a beleever Matth. 15. 22. if these had beene other then visible beleeving inchurched persons yea though Gentiles yet inchurched proselytes which brought these children hee would not have so roundly and sharpely taken up his Disciples for assaying to hinder them from him when the Apostle 1 Cor. 7. 14. speaketh thus to the Church and not to the citie as such which writ to him and to whom hee writ this back againe hee saith else their children as appropriating externall adoption as well as formerly to others of that sort Rom. 9. 1 2 3 4. they were the children of that Spouse of Christ 2 Cor. 11. 2. 3. as those were formerly of that Church Ezek. 16. 20 21. she brought forth other children by the ministry Psal 87. 5. albeit not so many as now and hereafter Esa 54. 5. but that way also did the Church beare children to the Lord. And are purer Gentiles Churches wombes in that respect shut up or doth the Lord lesse affect communion with his Church in that expression of his love now then hee did to the Church of old surely no the Corinthian members as a Church body had their Church children and seed also the Apostle taketh order with the women 1 Cor. 14. Let your women keepe silence in the Churches but why your what because they were the members wives onely no verily since some such were Pagans and without the Church and hee protesteth against any Church dealing with such 1 Cor. 5. end what have wee to doe with them from any Church care or respect but rather your women as being of the Church and so here not your children holy scil barely of your members in a common naturall way but yours in a Church relation rather And let the Apostles division bee further attended 1 Cor. 5. placing all persons as either within or without the visible Church For if his division be regular as who will say otherwise of the wisest dictates of the holy Ghost then these membra dividentia take up the whole division and there is no middle or neutrall estate actually of persons And albeit the persons chiefly intended bee adult persons yet it must hold as well of others or else it is not a compleat division So then the little ones which are borne of inchurched persons they are either actually within the Church or actually without at present onely some possibilities as some suppose of their being actuall members afterward at most but at present their actuall estate must bee the one or the other if actually within the Church I have what I seeke if onely potentially such as may come in but yet actually without 1. then the children of the Church in primitive times were such as the Apostles as extraordinary and now Elders as ordinary officers in the Church were not nor are to take any speciall Church care of since the tie of that Church care as such dependeth upon covenant and Church relation either extraordinary as that of the Apostles to all the Churches or ordinary as that of the officers of this or that Church 2. Then Churches and their officers are not to deale with any such children more then with pagans in any Church way of instruction or admonition when growne up 3. Then are such so farre forth to bee left as persons without actually to the more immediate judgement of God what have wee to doe with such God judgeth them and the phrase of Gods judging them how sad a case it noteth see Heb. 3. 4. and 10. 29 30 31. 4. Then such children being actually without they are actually and at present amongst the number of such persons of whom is little hope as Marke 4. 11 12. to them without if hardned persons in parables so Revel 22. without are dogs The persons left out of Church fellowship by the new Jerusalem are of the worst sort â—…vel 22. 15. 5. Then the Jewish Church is supposed to have a larger share in the charitie of God and his people so that their children in relation to Church estate are called and counted God and his Churches children purer Gentile Churches have no such charitie allowed towards the members children which absurdities if any will swallow let them enjoy their conceipts SECT II. ANd thus farre of the dispensing kingdome of God as it seemes to bee included and intended in the first expression Of such is the kingdome of God which may serve to answer the scruples of some as if such an assertion of children of beleevers to bee of Gods kingdome should crosse the course of providence many proving wicked For this hinders not but they belong to the visible Church no more then Christs assertion of all the Jewes to be the children of the kingdome of heaven into which the Gentiles from all parts should come after the rejection of the Jews Matth. 8. 11 12. nor is this any more crosse to Rom. 9. 6 7 8. then that is yea suppose the Kingdome of heaven bee taken for that of glory yet in that covenant and Church estate is theirs so far also is glory theirs scil in foro ecclesiae And wee have before proved that Christ spake this as man not meerely as God as hee said before of the Jewes Matth. 8. 11 12. and after this spake to like purpose Matth. 21. 43. they were as externally adopted Rom. 9. 4. externally inrighted to that promise of glory the promises indefinitely being thus far theirs that promised heritage being thus far theirs If they had not Gods kingdome in respect of this estating of theirs in it and right to it how came they to have it taken from them was not that in respect of any externall Church right actually theirs unto or to the dispensation of the covenant holding the same forth they were all heires albeit under tutors Gal. 4. 1 2 3. but to mee the former sense is rather most unquestionable that of such is the kingdome of God or of heaven scil the visible Church as before was proved and this may also satisfie that which is objected that hee might speake this in reference to the future that is that they were elect ones and should
ones 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of persons beleeving or of beleevers in mee scil of parents beleeving in Christ which little ones are not to be slighted but received in Christs name vers 5. scil unto Church communion as well as others as that phrase implyeth Rom. 15. 7. This is undeniable that the occasion of that speech in Matth. 18. and of this in Matth. 19. Marke 10. Luke 18. was different and at divers times uttered as the Texts compared shew nor saith Christ in Matth. 18. as here hee that receiveth not the kingdome of God as a little child but thus unlesse yee bee as children scil in humilitie c. vers 3 4. compared and that likewise in Matth. 18. doth not conclude ergo the interest of such children more then unto Doves or sheepe unto whom subjects of Gods kingdome are like but here as hee saith of such like is Gods kingdome for withall hee saith that others must receive Gods kingdome as they doe making them patternes as well of receiving of as interest in Gods kingdome which was never affirmed of sheepe or doves are harmelesse if patternes of it Actuall guile malice and envie are removed from Infants they act not such sinnes if they are patternes to others therein 1 Pet. 2. 1 2 3. compared they are low and little in their owne eyes not minding great things c. if patternes of it Matth. 18. Psal 131. 1 2. so here they are interested in Gods kingdome doe receive it externally at least both those here mentioned and such like Infants if they were made patternes thereof unto others else the sense of Luke 18. 17. would bee thus Unlesse any receive Christs kingdome as a child doth scil in a bare resemblance of reception thereof without any realitie therein so much as supposed he shall not enter into it Thirdly Christ bringeth this as a reason why his Disciples should not hinder little ones as prophane from him but rather further the approach of those babes because of such-like Infants like them in covenant and Church interest in God his kingdome Now if this had beene Christs onely reason thereof as is imagined because not of these out of such like little ones by resemblance in humilitie and harmelesnesse c. is Gods kingdome therefore further and doe not hinder their comming to mee then one might upon the same ground argue that since oft persons like good seed and good fish for usefulnesse and fruitfulnesse c. is Gods kingdome Matth. 13. 24. 38. 47. 49. and since of persons like Eagles for renovation sight and seed c. Gods kingdome doth consist therefore further and doe not hinder the bringing of such seed fish and Eagles unto Christ this were ridiculous Yea suppose any other thing short of what I have formerly mentioned touching these babes wherein some of these creatures are not all out fully resembling the Saints yet if not interested more then those creatures in the kingdome mentioned it 's not the degrees of more or lesse like which will alter the force of that formall reason of not hindering these creatures therefore from Christ scil because bare resemblances of the Saints as our opposites interpret this Fourthly as Christ taking them up in his armes as the word is translated sheweth they were little ones indeed of whom hee spake and not metaphoricall little ones even growne persons like them so other acts shew that hee expressed as much in effect touching those babes in his acts about them as in his words hee spake touching them the expressions of Christs love toward those persons whether he tooke them up in his armes or imbraced them it was no complement in Christ but a most significant expression of his love his blessing of them do declare that they had some more peculiar interest in some respects at least in an Ecclesiasticall and Federall way in him the King and in that his kingdome mentioned then to be bare semblances of others which had Fiftly the Greeke article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in reference to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luke 18. 15 16 17. the little ones and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in reference to the parents as Beza noteth on the place seemeth to shew that he intended not such allegoricall little ones as the bringers of them but the little ones brought in that assertion mentioned Object Yea but Piscator maketh that an argument in that hee called the little ones vers 16. that ergo they were not babes and beside the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies a child capable of teaching as 2 Tim. 3. 15. from a child thou hast learned the Scriptures c. and so your purpose faileth to apply this against Anabaptists denying the covenant and Church right of babes of inchurched beleevers Answ 1. It 's said hee called them scil in calling their parents which brought them albeit they might not bee all capable of understanding that invitation it 's usuall in Scripture because of parents nearest interest in their children to ascribe things to their children which are rather to bee understood of the parents as when it is said Levi paid tithes in Abraham Heb. 7 c. Secondly albeit that phrase be used in Tim. thou hast knowne the Scriptures from a child yet it followes not that therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not in the very naturall proper and constant use of it signifie a babe more then the like phrases used in Scripture should not have their proper signification because something there mentioned is not in strict acceptation applyable thereunto as when it 's said thou madest me hope upon my mothers breasts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or when I was upon my mothers breasts so Psal 58. 3. the wicked are estranged from the wombe they goe astray as soone as they are borne speaking lies in these places will it bee hence argued that the Hebrew words rightly translated and so constantly used as translated signifie other then from mothers breasts and wombe c. in that a very sucking or new borne child is not capable of actuall hoping in God or going astray actually from him but rather persons growne up more in yeares here all will say these species are hyperbolicall shewing that these things were acted thus by them very early and very soone so what though a little one which is not a suckling but can speake and understand is capable of knowing the Scriptures yet it followeth not that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth any other then a babe but it sheweth that Timothy was so trained up very early hee doth not say thou even a child 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 didst know but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from a child that is very soone and early in thy age Thirdly the Apostles did not use to hinder little ones which could goe and speake from comming to Christ but further them rather whether the parents were Jewes of Gentiles yea and those not proselytes witnesse that act Mark. 9. Matth. 15. this therefore
Ephesians c. surely had the Lords Supper administred among them so the Thessalonians the seven Asian Churches had baptisme administred to and among them yet this must bee drawne by consequence or no way according to that true rule all this is regular scil Scripture is not the letter alone but the minde and intent thereof drawne by consequence according to the Analogy of faith and by this rule wee are to hold forth the doctrine of faith and rule of manners and worship c. Rom. 12. 6. Else as well many absurdities would follow Must wee actually sell all taking up a Gibbet daily lend freely looking for nothing againe turne the other cheeke to him which smiteth one plucke out our eyes cut off right hands c Analogy of faith must helpe here Hence Evangelicall duties are not alwayes grounded upon expresse commandements either in old or new Testament but from consequences drawne from either such as are praying morning and evening in the family and also in the closet alone constant daily and set meditation daily reading of the Scriptures in the family holy vowing setting a part solemne dayes in private or publique for thanksgiving c. much lesse are many of these come over againe as some phrase it in the new Testament with mention of the persons thereunto oblieged thereby receiving their binding virtue nor is that therefore sound that in point of worship that is excluded which is not expressed doe not such even grant consequences SECT IIII. 3. THat Federall ordinances such as are the seales are as well priviledges as precepts hence circumcision is reckoned as the fathers priviledge Acts 7. 2. 8. hence Rom. 3. 1 2 3 4. see more Acts 2. 38 39. this some which oppose us acknowledge when such speeches as these are used that it is certaine the Jewes had by Gods appointment the priviledge of circumcision and the covenant made with Abraham did belong to them in speciall manner and that children of parents not matrimonially sanctified as Zara and Pharez were in the covenant of saving grace and Church-priviledges surely then circumcision was one which these babes did partake of And the Jewes had this priviledge to bee reckoned in the outward administration as branches of the Olive and one of the wayes of that administration was circumcision was it not And the priviledges in respect of the administration of the covenant are now many wayes inlarged and made more honorable and a little before the promises of the covenant of grace being of the substance not of the administrations are priviledges and the same now to beleevers and as large and honorable as then These speeches indeed seeme not so consonant to some passages before and some after that it is no priviledge to us to have any thing in lieu of that administration but Christ already come who is in stead of all But let mee reason of these things a little the covenant of Abraham in speciall wise belonged to the Jewes and that was a covenant of grace scil to bee a God to them and theirs as I have proved was this no priviledge to them or was that Deut. 29. 14. with 30. 6. no priviledge was it no priviledge for this name-sake of God to have such ingagements not meerely for temporalls but spiritualls even when they had provoked him Ezek. 36. from the 17. to the end Were they with theirs so peculiar a people in these respects and yet were these no priviledges Deut. 14. 2. see more Chap. 7. 6 7 8. it 's reckoned as a choyce fruit of his love And were even sundry Infants of theirs base borne in the covenant of saving grace and Church priviledges and was this no priviledge to them if so since the promises of the covenant of grace are priviledges and the same now to beleevers and as large and honorable as then either these promises to their children mentioned Deut. 30. 6 c. were not of the substance of the covenant of grace and then how could even base borne children bee in the covenant of saving grace or they are no priviledge neither of which I suppose will bee affirmed if these promises to Church children bee not barely of the administration of the covenant for so are the Church priviledges rather which are before made distinct from their inbeing in the covenant of grace but of the substance Then why not now the same and larger rather Why are beleevers children then excluded the covenant And are the priviledges in respect of administration of the covenant now inlarged c. Then either that administration of the covenant initiatory seale as such to their children was no priviledge or there must be such a like priviledge and not straitned at least not wholly excluded as that of a like I say not the same but a like administration of the initiatory covenant seale to inchurched beleevers children now And suppose it bee no priviledge to have any thing in lieu of circumcision of Infants but Christ yet is it no priviledge to have any other thing then Christ to beleevers themselves Circumcision is confessed to bee an appointed seale of initiation to them that entered into covenant with God before Christs incarnation and baptisme such a seale since and that it signified sanctification by the Spirit justification and salvation by Christ and faith in him but as to come and baptisme as come c. and is this no priviledge to beleevers that now they have not that manner of initiation by circumcision yea but in a better way they have scil by baptisme Christ indeed was then to the Saints and so hee is now all in all ordinances and priviledges the Chieftaine that first or principall one Esay 41. Cant. 5. Psal 73. 25. but it was not therefore no priviledge nor is now the like to have together with Christ many pretious ordinances dispensed to them and us and verily the Scripture in old and new Testament accounteth it no small priviledge to have Gods Tabernacle and Sanctuary Church and Church ordinances with us and persons to bee in and under the same hence promised as a reward and a fruit yea part of the ratification of his covenant with them Levit. 26. 9. 11. and therefore in the choyse times of the Gospel it 's so reckoned Revel 21. 3. yea and as of old the childrens Church estate and priviledge was therein included as of that nature so in reference to the other times mentioned was the same of the same account as wee have shewed from Ezek. 37. 25 26 27. SECT V. 4. THat Baptisme is now the onely initiatory visible seale of the covenant which being once administred there needs no more renewing of it First it is a seale of the covenant no bare badge of Christianitie as some have said albeit the more judicious of our opposites yeeld this that the covenant of grace is said properly to bee sealed in Baptisme and that Baptisme since Christs incarnation is the appointed seale of God to such as
enter into covenant with him And it appeares so 1. In that it agreeth in the essentialls with circumcision as an initiatory seale Col. 2. 11 12. whence baptized Gentiles are said to be of the circumcision Phil. 3. and Jewes said to bee baptized 1 Cor. 12. hence first instituted for a seale to the circumcised Jewes to shew it was in the essentialls of sealing Abrahams covenant to them but the same with circumcision in a manner onely as that sealed it to them visibly in Christ as to come this did it in like sort in reference to Christ as come that was the seale of the righteousnesse of Abrahams faith or that whereon his faith acted to righteousnes of justification Rom. 4. 11. even the promise of grace in Christ Rom. 10. 6 7. with Deut. 30. 14. hence when Christ is called the Minister of circumcicision it is thus explained by the end of the signe administred scil to confirme the promises made unto the fathers Rom. 15. 8. Acts 7. 8. Gen. 17. 11. hence the promise premised and then baptisme annexed as the seale Acts 2. 38. hence that washing annexed to the word Ephes 5. 25 26. 2. It 's a Baptizing in the name or covenant fellowship of God the Father Sonne and Spirit hee having exalted his word above all his name Psal 138. 2. 3. It 's a seale of remission of sinnes and therefore of the promise tendering the same hence joyned Acts 2. 38 39. Acts 22. 4. The nature of it sheweth the same it being a Gospell Sacrament and that is a visible seale and the seale is to the covenant hence called by the name Acts 7. 8. 1 Cor. 11. 25. Secondly it is an initiatory seale as first annexed to the Gospell dispensed with reference to covenant fellowship with God in Trinitie not first Disciple them and then let them come to my Table but baptizing them scil so soone as ever brought into covenant and Church estate and seale them up thereby unto covenant fellowship with the Father Sonne and Spirit Hence repent and bee baptized for the promise is to you not repent and come to the Lords Table for the promise is to you Hence that order observed of communion in breaking of bread after they were baptized vers 41 42 43 44. there John began in any sealing way Matth. 3. Marke 1. As of old circumcision long before the Passeover hence called the washing of regeneration metonymically attributing the thing sealed to the visible seale Tit. 3. 5. the new birth is the first fruits of the spirit of promise nor is this ascribed to the other Sacrament as that which is its proper Sacramentall worke initiatorily to seale albeit after it bee thus initiatorily sealed by baptisme the other doth also virtually confirme it Thirdly this being once administred needs never bee renewed as if two initiations or beginnings or regenerations or first enterances into covenant or first ingraffings into Christ c. as there was not Iterations of circumcision It were but to take the name of God in vaine and a wilworship indeed if ever before dispensed in the truth of the essentialls of the ordinance and it were unsafe to say wee may renew that one baptisme as wee may renue that one faith of ours unlesse as many times in a day and as in variety of occurrents changes services sufferings temptations ordinances businesses c. wee are to renue our faith so wee should renue our baptisme nor will the 19. of the Acts beare out any such practise Luke mentions Pauls discourse touching the manner of Johns baptisme scil to hold forth the duty which God required in reference to the Lord Jesus and accordingly they were by John baptized into the name of Jesus whom John held forth as vers 4 5. compared shewes and as the annexing of Pauls name 1. to this declaration vers 4 5. and then 2. to his act which hee then did vers 6. â—…inceth It 's not said then Paul baptized them but then Paul laid his hands upon them It 's said of the other seale As oft as yee doe this 1 Cor. 11. But not a whisper that way touching being oft baptized The Apostle in mentioning of one spirit body hope of our calling metonymically put for the thing hoped for even glory which is but one essentially as one faith which I suppose is taken as oft in Scripture for the doctrine of faith which is but one Gal. 1. 6. 7 8. Jude 3. and so one Lord and one God hee mentions one baptisme and why doth hee not as well say one Lords Supper too which albeit oft renewed to the same persons yet it 's but one institution and the same ordinance still if no further matter bee in that onenesse of baptisme but to signifie that it 's one and the same baptisme indeed but yet so as that it hinders not but it may often bee renued upon one and the same person warrantably though it were before orderly administred to him Fourthly that baptisme is the onely initiatory seale I never heard this yet so much as questioned by any which deny it not to bee a seale therefore I need not speake any further in confirmation thereof SECT VI. 5. THat the Application of such an initiatory seale of the covenant of grace made in reference to an ordinary politicall visible Church which God shall appoint and whereof the severall parties in that covenant are capable this is an externall condition of that covenant and to bee so farre forth kept by all that are externally interested in the same and that for that very reason and ground because they are in such sort interested in that covenant Ere wee confirme this let us premise that that covenant Gen. 17. was a covenant of grace and it was made with reference to an ordinary politicall visible Church as we have before shewed And albeit that Church quà such a politicall Church nationall c. differ from congregationall Churches yet quâ visibilâ—… ecclesia politica ordinaria so it was essentially the same with ours hence then needs no scrupling or startling As for their externall interest also in the covenant of saving grace it hath been likewise cleared that also need not breed contention upon the point of disparity This being premised the proposition may more easily proceed Gen. 17. 7. God propoundeth his gratious covenant vers 9. hee informeth of one externall condition to bee observed by persons taken into that gratious covenant and inferreth the condition upon the premised covenant thou Abraham and thy seed after thee and when Isaac with whom this covenant is established vers 19. as in whose race the Church and Church seed is to bee continued hath seed then it is thou and thy seed and when Jacob hath his seed it is still the same thou and thy seed in such covenant language what hee speaketh to one father hee speaketh to others all are but Abraham and his seed still yea and as then the same to Abrahams
Church yet they must come by the use of their right in a way of order Object Yea but the Catechumens were in covenant and visible Church estate yet were not presently baptized Answ If they were in covenant and Church estate they had then and thereby right so farre forth to the seale but there might bee some other actuall causes why such adult new commers on from Paganisme might bee suspended a while the use and actuall benefit of their right yet that hinders not but that in covenant Infants in whom there are no such actuall impediments that they should be suspended much lesse wholly denied as by Anabaptists they are either any right or use of their right to Baptisme SECT VII 6. ANd because in this particular some stresse of the maine case is put 1. I shall indeavour yet further to confirme it that covenant interest carryeth a maine stroake in point of application of that seale to persons interested therein and not uncapable thereof in any bodily respect First then it is the ground worke given to the generall Law about an initiatory covenant duty scil application of some injoyned initiatory seale and therefore must bee of like force in the particular branches and wayes of such initiatory sealing as circumcising then and baptizing Secondly the covenant in such sort invested with Church covenant now it is the forme of a politicall visible Church body giving therefore both a Church being as I may say as naturall formes doe a naturall being and withall the priviledge of a member of such a Church body suitable to its memberly estate as is this of the Church initiatory seale even to the least member thereof although they are not yet so perfect in all actuall energy of compleat members and so neither in all actuall priviledges of such compleat members I suppose what ever others deny this way yet our opposites doe not deny that Church covenant explicit or implicit is the forme of a visible politicall Church as such so that till that be they are not so incorporated as to be fit for Church dispensations or acts of peculiar Church power over each other more then over others over whom they can have no power unlesse they had given explicit or implicit consent thereto as reason will evince Thirdly even in doubtfull cases where the extent of the command is questionable yet interest in the covenant casts the scoales As for instance in strangers which proved religious albeit not of their family servants and so under the Law Gen. 17. 12 13. they might bee circumcised if they desired other Church ordinances c. yet were they else free unlesse in such a case of their owne desire that way Exod. 12. end Hence Cornelius a godly Gentile living neare the Jewes yet not circumcised as Acts 10. 1 2 3 4. compared with Chap. 11. 3. 14 15. 18. Yea but if the command bound them why were they at such libertie and if no binding command for their circumcision why were they circumcised suppose Exod. 12. gave some libertie to the Church guides that way for such strangers as more usually dwelt amongst them yet such as 1 Kings 8 41 42 43. which came from farre in a meere transient way for some temporary religious worship at the Temple as that proselyted Eunuch Acts 8. 27. those were surely circumcised else how admitted to temple worship since that was counted an abomination for any other so much as to come there Acts 21 28. and if circumcised at any time by any of the godly Church guides consent what gave them right to it not the commandement Gen. 17. 12 13 14. no nor that Exod. 12. what was that to an Eunuchs case and others which never sojourned with them for any space were they then unlawfully circumcised no verily no whisper of that in Scripture God allowed of that passage in Solomons prayer touching the strangers temple service 1 Kings 8. and 9. explained It was then their externall interest in Gods gratious covenant which gave rise to that application of the seale and not the commandment contrary to what some say that not the covenant but the commandment of God onely was the ground of circumcision Fourthly it appeares from the nature of an initiatory seale of the covenant which must bee as large as the covenant and so reach all the parties comprehended actually by vertue of covenant according as such children are as before declared especially since it is the seale of Gods people and visible Church as before shewed given first for the Church in giving of pastors and teachers onely to the Church which alone can administer the seales in ordinary dispensations Matth. 28. end and giving them withall to the Church as from her to bee dispensed by her officers to such as desire the same Now Gods people are knowne either by actuall personall profession and confession of their owne as adults are or by Gods promise and by parents avouching God as theirs in covenant and their childrens Gen. 17. 9 10. thou shalt doe thus and thus and thy seed also to which he submitteth afterwards and so his also with him and after him besides the maine in the initiatory seale to bee firstly and properly attended as it is a covenant and Church seale is covenant and Church interest Hence called by the name of covenant when yet it is but a Sacramentall signe and seale of it Gen. 17. 13. Acts 7 8. that is first held out and sealed as the convoy of all other desired good 2 Pet. 1. 4. But especially in that initiatory seale the signatum of the covenant is of more considerable weight then the externall Symboll ceremony and circumstance either of cutting or washing absolutely or relatively considered If washing of a person in the name of the Trinitie bee a clearer and easier Symboll then that of cutting the flesh yet not of such weight as is the covenant sealed both by the one and by the other And to shew that the covenant is the maine thing considerable therein hence it is that the covenant is first propounded as the groundworke of the commandement it selfe as of circumcision so of Baptisme and much more of the application of either to any in covenant Gen. 17. 9 10 11. Therefore scil because I have said I will bee your God I command you to doe thus and thus not because I have commanded you that I therefore promise to doe this for you or doe you thus and thus at my command and then on therefore I will doe so and so for you So the Gospell prophesie and promise is prefaced and put in the preamble to that injunction of their Baptisme by John Luke 3. 3 4 5 6 c. Hence the Gospell and so the covenant of grace hâ—ld out as grounding Baptisme Acts 2. 38 39. And childrens covenant right was held out as one branch of that Gospell as wee proved and from the same principle that they were also to bee sealed by Baptisme yea albeit the
Apostles urged repentance yet the seale is propounded as to the promise Peter said Bee baptized for the promise is to you and this was no meere morall motive but a Scripturall groundworke inforcing it as it was a Scripture groundwork virtually injoyning and requiring them to repent for the promise is to you so Act. 10. Peter saith there is no let to their baptisme and thereof he maketh the visibilitie of that covenant grace although common to reprobates also in those first times his groundworke gathering thereby that they were not now as formerly prophane uncleane and outlaries from the covenant as Ephes 2. 11 12. but cleane and nigh as they themselves were Washing of regeneration is not grounded on any thing in us or without us so much as on Gods grace and so covenant favour Tit. 3. 5. Hence also by Baptisme persons are not sealed into any thing in them so much as into the name of the Father Sonne and Spirit even into the covenant name of grace whereby he is knowne and into covenant fellowship with the blessed Trinitie to which every baptized person prove hee elect or reprobate yet is thus externally sealed That fellowship with Christ as head of the visible Church by the Spirit in the judgement of veritie or charitie such it is all but covenant grace and blessing Of old the consequent cause of the seale was grace in them and theirs but the antecedent cause was Gods covenant grace to them and on them Gen. 17. 7 8 9. and Deut. 30. 6. and so now that part of Abrahams covenant was not then appliable to Infants scil Walke before mee c. but yet that was then appliable I will bee their God I will circumcise their hearts and that sufficed them as Deut. 30. the Analogy holds now in a word the seale is a seale not of nor to the commandement but covenant this therefore is the maine and principall in the application of it It is the covenant which hath the maine instrumentall force in the fruit of the initiatory seale and the application of it Ephes 5. 25 26. and why shall not the externall interest in the covenant have chiefe influence into the externall interest as well of the application of the initiatory seale by externall interest in the covenant persons so interested come to have externall interest at least to the finall causes of Baptisme as covenant mercy and blessing the Spirit Christs resurrection c. Tit. 3. 8. 1 Cor. 12. 12 13. 1 Pet. 3. 21. and therefore as well so farre inrighted in the initiatory seale of it whether they are adult or Infants CHAP. VIII 7. THat the covenant priviledges of grace are even to bee expounded in the favour of the principall or lesse principall counter-parties unlesse any exception bee made of persons or priviledges by him which was the covenant maker It 's so in all other royall patents and grants of princely grace and bounty and so here in this which is of that nature unlesse any will say it was no priviledge of divine grace to have so peculiar and distinguishing covenant to bee made with first reference unto that people of Abraham Isaac and Jacobs race that it was no priviledge to have the same visibly confirmed upon them and theirs after them the contrary whereof hath beene granted by some which oppose us and hath been before cleared What though they many of them made no good use thereof yet the priviledge was peculiar and precious Hence Exod. 19. 16. Deut. 7. 6 7 8. Amos 3. 2. hence such peculiar judgements brought on them and theirs for grosse contempts and rejectings thereof Dan. 9. 12 13. Rom. 11. 20. Matth. 21. 43 44. and 23. 37 38 39. Acts 13. 40 41 42. 45 46 47. 1 Thes 2. 15 16. fulfilling that prophesie Zach. 11. from 6. verse to the end Hence that of such peculiar use fruit and efficacy in many others of them Rom. 3. 1 2 3 4. and 2. 25. and 9 4 5 6. Royall grants patents crownes immunities and heritages may bee basely used and forfeited and lost yet are they peculiar priviledges so here but of this before As touching exceptions wee see if God will except Ishmael and his race for being such a Church seed as with whom the covenant priviledge shall abide hee is so excepted and it was accounted a sore punishment to him and his as if the contrary were a choyse priviledge Gen. 21. 9 10 11 12 13. with Gal. 4. 22 23 24 c. by allusion before that hee was ecclesiastically discovered the covenant is sealed upon him personally but before ever hee have children hee is discovenanted and dischurched for his wickednesse by Gods hand c. Gen. 21. 9 10 11 12 13 c. and that was his punishment that hee is a discovenanted and externally dischurched and open excommunicate person when hee came to have children and so they have no benefit Caines externall discovenanting and dischurching in a parentall as well as personall way was his sore punishment Gen. 4. 12 13 14. with 6. 1 2. his posteritie have the common name of children of men and not as those of Seth children of God such exceptions did God use some way or other to expresse where hee intended not this covenant priviledge Verily so long as Gods gracious covenant made with Church reference to inchurched confederate parents and their generations to Abraham and his spirituall seed in their generations for an everlasting covenant his mind of grace touching an externall initiatory sealing establishing and ratifying the same to them abideth nor may any change or repeale the same or infringe or curtaile the latitude of it unlesse himselfe doe it as it is in all other royall grants and lawes standing in force untill repealed by them by whom granted and made hence that signe is called by the name of the covenant as virtually in it and annexed ordinarily to it extraordinary times as those before infringe not the ordinary course as before shewed hence even that sealing said to be for an everlasting covenant partly in that it was a seale of that covenant so induring and partly because presidentially and in the genericall nature of it to abide the Church and covenant people of God combined being never after to want an externall initiatory seale of the covenant Hence also among other causes God instituteth baptisme first for the Jewish Church and so continued the use of it to and amongst Gentile Churches there was no interstitium nor was it ever accounted a branch of the exhibition of New testament grace and a priviledge of covenant inchurched parents to have their children want and bee deprived of any externall covenant and Church interest but rather that initiatory sealing of inchurched parents little ones have ever been accounted by all true visible Churches to bee an externall way of exhibition of the grace of God and Christ Surely there being so many passages mentioned formerly touching this part of Gods minde of grace once if
deed and in truth of Christs kingdome For when Christ would give a reason why those Infants offered to him to blesse them should come to him hee giveth this for of such or such like even in respect of saving interest also is the kingdome of God Luke 18. so when the Lord prefaceth that covenâ—nt ground unto the Application of circumcision to Infants hee saith not hee will bee a God to this or that child of Abrahams loynes in the internall and saving interest and efficacy thereof but to some of that sort included in that indefinite promise I will bee a God to thy seed it is sufficient that all such have assuredly an externall right in that covenant and so to this seale of the fellowship of it wherefore wee may not exclude any of them lest any of the children of the Kingdome which bee the peculiar heires thereby bee indammaged or indangered Better 99. who happily have not so peculiar a title thereto bee folded up in the Church then that one of such Lambes bee left out in the wide Wildernesse the proportion of that case Matthew 18. holds in this CHAP. II. Sect. I. The Explication of Rom. 11. 16 17 c. LEt us now goe on to some proofs of that generall truth propounded removing objections intervening and then come to the particular of baptisme Let us then a little more fully cleare that place Rom. 11. 16 17. so farre as it concerneth the matter in hand Our opposites in this point would have the place onely to bee applyable to the personall estate of this or that beleever Jew or Gentile and of the personall way of their inserting by true faith But wee affirme that as the Chapter in other parts of it hath reference to the Jewes or Gentiles in the fruition or deprivation of covenant priviledges it is in a collective and not meerely a distributive way so are those Verses mentioned taken in the like collective reference And first as the discourse hath relation to the Jewes either in their admission or exclusion from Church priviledge it is in a collective not bare personall respect as appeareth by these reasons 1. In that those are intended whose fall was the occasion of the Gentiles salvation and their casting away was the life of the world verse 11. 15. and on whom God shewed such severitie verse 22. now none will restraine these to this or that particular persons casting away but must understand it of the people whether parents or children 2. In that those are intended of whom it may bee verified that they are in such sort and so long cast away as is from the first comming in of the Gentiles to their fulnesse which is the space of many ages Now none will say that this can bee affirmed of one and the same person or persons but must apply it to the people parents and children successively hence expressed by that collective name of Israel verse 25. 3. In that those are intended of whom it may bee verified they are cast away and yet to bee reconciled verse 15. cut off and yet to bee re-ingraffed verse 20. 24. enemies yet beloved verse 28. which cannot bee verified of this or that person but must bee taken of that people 4. In that they are intended whose receiving in scil to actuall fruition of covenant and Church priviledges from which they are now de facto excluded v. 24. will be to the inchurched world as life from the dead vers 15. which must be taken collectively of that people not distributively of such a person or persons amongst them 5. It is intended of those whom God from the first chose unto himselfe which yet all the space from the comming in of the Gentiles till their fulnesse abode enemies vers 25. 28. compared Now none will restraine this to such or such elected persons to whom blindnesse could not happen so long yet afterwards bee removed as the phrase untill sheweth but must bee applyed to Gods act of election of that people as some judiciously observe upon the place many thousand persons of this people lived and died and â—…ill doe live and die in this while The space being yet not accomplished in their sinnes Then it seemes some that are subjects of election may live and die in their sinnes Yea verily this absurditie must follow if you take election vers 28. strictly in reference to such and such persons among them and not largely in reference to that people There is a twofold act of divine election the one more generall whereof the body of such or such people is the adequate subject by this act God subjecteth such a people from all other peoples to himselfe and yet sundry particular persons amongst such a people may perish Thus the people of the Jews were collectively considered enemies to the Gospel yet as touching election beloved for their covenant fathers sake vers 28. of this electing act of God see Deut. 7. 6. The other more particular and speciall whereby God maketh as I may say a second draught and out of such or such selected people culleth such or such particular persons to bee saved by Christ Now such as are the subjects of election in this sense can never perish and in this sense the election among the Jewes attained it and the rest were blinded see Rom. 12. 5 6 7. see John 10. 3. 11. 14. 27 28 29. Apoc. 13. 8. 6. In that it was intended of those to whom the Gentiles are opposed and in whose stead they are inserted and against whom the Gentiles must not boast vers 11 12 13 14 15. 17 18. But it were improper to oppose in such sort such a world as they are called verse 14 15. compared to such or such particular Jewes As the Jewes are thus collectively considered so the Gentiles comming into their Olive estate are taken in a collective sense therefore called the world vers 15. the Gentiles vers 12. notions not to bee restrained to the growne sort of them but necessarily including the species of Infants among them Hence also the collective notion of Thou and Thee often used vers 17 18 19 20 21 22. 24. And that this singular is not distributively taken of some one or other Gentile but of the people of the Gentiles hee therefore in other verses speaking to the same people mentions them plurally Gentiles vers 11 12 13. 25. Hence the phrase Yee and Your applied to them vers 28. 30 31. Besides they are still set in opposition to the Jewes which fell vers 11. 12. which were cast away vers 15. and broken off vers 20. 24. 28. Now none will say that those refuse Jewes are taken distributively but collectively as was proved and much lesse that the Jewish parents onely excluding their children were understood so then if the opposition bee sutable and direct the opposite parties must bee collectively taken also and Gentiles children received in with their parents as opposed to Jewish children excluded with their parents
parents right also and not being then of yeares to reject Christ how come they at present to bee cut out surely not for their parents unbeleefe for they receive Christ not for others rejecting Christ for what 's that to them not for their owne actuall rejecting of Christ for they were not then of yeares to doe so 5. Looke how the Jew shall againe bee graffed in in such sort were the Gentiles at first graffed in but they parents and children with them shall be graffed in therefore so were the Gentile parents and children graffed in or inchurched The major is evident by vers 17. 19. 23 24 25 26. compared The minor is as evident by the same verses compared For as they were broken off by unbeleefe so are they re-inserted by faith now the former was by the parents unbeleefe that young and old were cast off as was proved therefore by faith in the parents young and old are re-inserted else as was said parents and children lost this which was a speciall and comfortable blessing by parentall unbeleefe which they never recover through the like parentall faith Besides it hath been proved that the Apostles discourse both of the Jewes casting off and of their receiving in is still of them in a collective sense and not barely personall and so their children cannot bee excluded but must be included Little ones are not indeed named in their re-ingraffing no more then in their cutting off yet as in the one they are necessarily understood so in the other Besides wee have before proved that the Jewes children are interested in these promises of grace yet to bee fulfilled Esay 61. 9. and 65. 20. and 23. Their off-spring are the seed of the blessed of the Lord with them or as well as themselves So Ezek. 37. 20. to the end and Jer. 13. 19 20. Their children shall bee as aforetime how in a common wealth and civill way meerely nay rather in a Church way as aforetime now aforetime who dare deny but their children were eyed as in covenant Acts 2. 38 39. And as parts and members of the Church Ezek. 16. 20 21. 36. and therefore were they sealed with that seale of the covenant Gen. 17. Hence some godly learned Divines in their Commentaries upon the Canticles expounding that Cant. 6. 11. 13. and Chap. 7. and 8. of the Jewish Church yet to come they expound that Cant. 7. 2. mentioned of the Churches navell that wants not liquor to be understood of Baptisme as that heape of Wheate to bee meant of the Lords Supper to bee administred amongst them Now â—s the navell is of speciall need and use to such as cannot receive nourishment as growne ones doe at the mouth to convey secretly corporall furtherance to the Babes bodily life and welfare so this Church navell not wanting such an inlivening supply it will bee amongst them accounted and improved as of need and use to bee a divine meanes as well as seale of conveying secretly gratious influences tending to the Churches Babes spirituall welfare 6. Looke of what Olive fatnesse in the substantialls thereof and in what sort those branches did partake of the same and in the same sort doe the branches taken out of the wilde Olive partake But those branches did partake of the fruit causing fatnesse of Olive and Church ordinances and priviledges not as shut up or residing in the greater boughes parents but thorow them and by them passing to their lesser sprigs or children springing from them Therefore of such fatnesse doe and must Gentiles partake And this way was their fall an inriching of the Gentile in-churched world Rom. 11. 12. scil as this was to bee conveyed as a covenant heritage from beleeving parents to children Else were it poore and sad with beleevers As with other parents in other heritages if what they have in such sort they cannot leave with or instrumentally convey unto their children as godly Joseph is a fruitfull bough in reference to his flourishing branches not in a meere civill and naturall but in a covenant and Church respect Gen. 49. 22 23. so is it with other such parents as hee It 's contrary to natures Law that any communicable sappe should be ingrossed to or shut up within the greater boughes and not to bee withall conveyed instrumentally to those sprigs that are upon them so is it here in respect of this communicable sappe of federall and Church right in Church Olive boughes It is contrary to the Law of the tenure of the covenant of grace made to parents with respect to their children in and with them that this Church fatnesse should not bee conveyed to them So farre as the greater boughes are ingraffed into this visible Olive Church estate their sprigs also which are on and in them are set in with them by the same Church act of ingraffing If Olive roots as such should not convey instrumentally their sap and fatnesse to the Olive boughes as such and those boughes in like sort to their sprigs Olive trees would faile in an ordinary way so in an ordinary way must Churches faile if this ecclesiasticall conveyance instrumentally of Church and covenant sap from parent to child be denied SECT V. Object 1. THe Jewes being federally holy as Rom. 11. 16. sheweth and yet not having right to Church priviledges baptisme c. as is evident in these refuse Jewes at this day it shaketh your foundation that persons because federally holy must have a right to Church priviledges Answ Federall holinesse is ascribed to persons two wayes either as they are collectively or distributively taken Collectively and so it is here ascribed to the body of the Jewes as one whole nation which if considered distributively of all the parts and of each person in that nation so it is not intended of them That we may a little illustrate this from what is here said in this Chapter they bee said to bee broken off scil from the rest vers 20. cast away and so uncleane prophane and not holy vers 15. yet are they said to be holy by vertue of the roote in and of which they bee branches so are they said to bee cast away and yet such as shall bee received in vers 15. they are said to bee enemies concerning the Gospell and yet beloved of God vers 28. What are the selfe same persons said to bee holy and not holy rejected yet to be received enemies and yet beloved no verily But when they are said to bee holy and beloved of God c. it is true of the whole body of the Jewes collectively taken in respect of the choycer part which is federally holy properly so called and beloved of God by vertue of the covenant made with their fathers as on the other side when it is said of the whole body that they are cut off cast away and that they are enemies it is meant of the whole collectively in respect of the refuse part for not all wholly were cut off in the
concluded it is in the order of things acted as uttered that repentance goeth before faith and that a man actually may repent before hee actually beleeveth the Gospel and so Rom. 10. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth is placed before the other if thou shalt beleeve with thine heart Ergo a man may make a saving confession of Christ before hee savingly beleeve with the heart yea if the place it selfe in Marke must bee so closely stuck to without comparing it with the Scriptures of the old Testament which were then when Marke writ the onely Scriptures besides Matthews Gospel existing it would follow in the reason of persons then living that the Gospel must bee preached to Dogs and Cats Fowles and Fishes c. since it 's expresly said Preach to every creature Thirdly I demand of Mr. B. whether it bee absurd to say the Gospel is preached to little ones which understand not what is said if so then what thinkes hee of that speech of Christ in the presence of the little ones which hee uttered concerning them Of such is the kingdome of God and hee that receiveth not the kingdome of God as a little child c. was this Gospel or not surely yes to Mr. B. it is so which holdeth that Christ spake it of their interest in glory it selfe here was then Gospel preached to little ones to Infants yet not absurdly Hee dares not say that was not Gospel which Moses on Gods behalfe uttered Deut. 30. 6. as hath been shewed yet spoken to little ones then present Deut. 27. 14. and that was such Act. 2. 38 39. to so many as might bee present as well as touching so many as were absent Zacharies speech spoken as to his babe Luke 1. And thou child shalt bee called the Prophet of the most high c. it was Gospel preached to a babe But to come to the core of the objection as if absurd to bee baptized unto one knoweth not what or as others when one understands not the mysteries of such an Evangelicall act and ordinance I answer Isaacs circumcision was an Evangelicall ordinance as a signe of Gods covenant of grace with him and to confirme the promise of God to bee a God to him scil to fulfill such promises as Luke 1. 73 74 75. and hee to walk in his father Abrahams footsteps c. as some acknowledge it did signifie sanctification of the spirit justification by Christs blood and faith in him as to come c. and so of an Evangelicall nature if to any to him who was the child of promise yet did not hee then understand these things did God then in injoyning his circumcision so young injoyne an absurditie surely no. Christs act in blessing those Infants Marke 10. and Luke 18. as that also of his imposing hands on them and imbracing them or taking them into his armes these were no legall nor ceremoniall but truely gracious and Evangelicall acts of Christ and very mysterious yet not absurd because they knew not nor understood what hee did for them in blessing of them Peter understood not at present that Evangelicall act of Christ in washing of his feet yet must it bee done or it had beene worse for him John 13. 7. 9. 12. will Mr. B. challenge this act also upon the former grounds to bee absurd As for that whim of I. S. I say wee lay not foundations of building faith upon humane testimony more then they of old in holding out the Doctrine of circumcision Infants circumcised knew not more that they were circumcised in way of an ordinance then children now doe of their baptisme when they come to bee growne up both sorts know it as it is testified to them by others Yea but there was a visible mark to bee seene which is not in baptisme grant it so yet how knew they that it was not given them in ludibrium by enemies or unto some false God and worship by some Idolatrous Priests amongst whom they might bee as captives and they could not know that it was administred to them in a Church way and according to Gods rules but by hear-say by friends or parents And therefore in the maine of knowing both as ordinances administred upon them they are one Fourthly Disciples onely that is beleevers are to bee baptized according to Marke 16. 16. the affirmative including the negative therefore not Infants Let us examine this principle and principall ground worke of our opposites 1. Then it seemes Scripture Disciples of Christ are onely such beleevers as Marke 16. 16. speaketh of and such beleevers onely as that verse mentions are to be baptized which I deny First the beleever mentioned Marke 16. 16. is one that shall surely bee saved and not condemned as the opposition sheweth but neither is every one which is called a Disciple such a one witnesse that John 6. 66. and Act. 20. 30. no true beleevers can so fatally bee rent away as members cruelly torne from the body as the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth they were but externally in the body of Christ not efficaciously Mr. B. saith a Disciple is in English a Scholler yea but all that are Schollers at schoole come not to good nor do they effectually learne what they are taught Secondly if Marke 16. 16. bee the rule of baptizing then none are by rule to bee baptized but such as savingly beleeve for of such a one hee speaketh in opposition to such a one as is damned And then the Apostles which baptized so many John 4. 1 2. whereof sundry Chap. 6. 66. proved apostates and came no more at Christ breake rule as also did John in baptizing sundry of the multitude amongst whom hee knew were many chaffy hypocrites Matth. 3. 9 10 11 12. but of that more else where And whereas Mr. B. challengeth us to shew an Example of one baptized without faith It 's evident many a one was baptized besides such a one as beleeving and being baptized should bee saved as Marke hath it many a baptized person being never saved as sundry of them John 4. and 6. compared yea if hee meane it of some speciall personall confessing of faith in Christ it was propounded to them as a future thing which afterwards rather they were to attend Act. 19. 4. John said to them that they should beleeve in him which was to come after him and of those scribes and no mention of so much as their confessing of sinnes before their baptisme John sharply reproved them c. and minded them what they should doe afterward bring forth fruits of repentance c. Matth. 3. 7. 8 9 10. and yet hee expresly saith hee doth baptize them c. I indeed saith he baptize you c. but as Mr. B. urgeth us in that matter of shewing any baptized without faith the Scripture saith hee is silent so say I here the Scripture is silent touching these Scribes confession of faith and in Act. 16. 15 16. the Scripture which
capable to attend hence the baptisme of John is the doctrine thereof hence the doctrine of baptisme Heb. 6. 1 2. but specially holding forth what they may expect from God so Deut. 10. 16. and Jer. 4. circumcision called upon them for heart circumcision as capable of improving it and incourageth them what to expect especially that way from God Deut. 30. 6. Ezek. 36. 25 26 27 28 c. As for what C. B. addeth touching the rule of baptizing from Act. 2. 38 39. albeit the place hath had its distinct consideration yet I shall here adde a word of answer to this which is C. B. his third argument that if this bee a rule then none are to bee baptized but such as truely repent For to no seeming and visible repentance did Peter then exhort them but to true and saving repentance all will grant and then unlesse wee know mens hearts and principles their confession of sinnes cannot satisfie us when wee are to baptize them as being doubtfull and not certaine that the rule is fulfilled in that our act and wee must either doe things doubtfully and adventure to transgresse rule yea oft breake rule as by this argument John did Matth. 3. 11 12. and Philip Acts 8. Yea but they professed it suppose they did that was not that which Peter saith make confession of or professe your repentance and bee baptized but repent and be baptized therefore if that be laid downe as the rule by which men must or else must not be baptized hee that is baptized otherwise hee was never regularly baptized as possibly it 's the case of many in your churches That which John Spilsbury hath this way I find not in the rest hee maketh use of John 3. 5. as a repeale of the Law of circumcising of Infants and as the new law of admission c. but if that washing of water bee meant of baptisme it will then bee of as absolute necessitie to bee externally baptized as to bee regenerate both if spoken of two severall things being made as one in point of necessitie nor let any say that ordinarily it is so that none else are saved For Christs serious speaking yea protesting shewes hee intends more yea more then a supposed neglect or contempt of baptisme but simply thus verily verily unlesse c. according to vers 3. he had to like effect spoken and taking the kingdome here for a particular visible Church not that of glory which hath no ordinances 1 Cor. 15. 24. and 13. 8 9 10. how stands this with his principles that a man first bee discipled and inchurched ere baptized when as rather hee must bee from this ground first washed with water or baptized ere hee can bee in yea so much as see a visible Church and so baptisme is rather the forme of the Church then the covenant of grace as I. B. elsewhere affirmeth and reason suggesteth a Church first to bee ere Church seales to bee administred to or by it nor need this bee urged in this sense upon Nicodemus as the way of his entrance into Gods kingdome of a true visible Church For of such a Church was hee already a member even of the Jewes Church yea if thus meant then not onely unregenerate persons should not bee of visible Churches but it is not possible that they can get into them for Christ saith verily and unlesse c. hee cannot no hee should not or ordinarily hee doth not enter into the kingdome of God As for what was said of preaching the Gospel to goe before baptisme wee hold it wee preach it the doctrine of the covenant is first opened and then sealed wee hold forth to parents that Gospel covenant of Abraham as to them and their children and the Apostles did as much Acts 2. 38 39. Rom. 10. 6 7 8. they preaching the Gospel wherein all sorts of nationall creatures were concerned they held forth that of Gods mind of grace to that species of Infants of Gospelled Gentiles and so by the Gospel they as well as the other sort of adult Gentiles came to partake of the promise in the initiatory seale at least Ephes 3. 6. and what Gospel they held out in the audible word preached that they sealed by the visible word of baptisme Fiftly to that straine touching the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as not in reference to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of the masculine gender and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the neuter if C. B. A. L. and Hen. Den had searched Scriptures they would have found this enallage or change of gender very frequent Rev. 2. 26 27. and 19. 15. it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 see Acts 15. 17. and 26. 17. see more of the like Acts 21. 25. Ephes 2. 11. and 4. 17. masculines joyned with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and I would aske A. R. and the rest whether when it 's said in the neuter gender before him shall bee gathered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all nations with the masculine annexed and hee shall separate them one from another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reference to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if not then it seemes some nations shall bee gathered at the last day which shall not bee separated one from the other if it have reference to it then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 them in the masculine here in Matth. 28. may very well have reference to the nations albeit in the neuter gender Sixtly to that argument raised hence from what is added teaching them that is presently teaching them c. so not Infants it is not cogent As much is said in effect of Abraham presently after hee had circumcised the males in his house and before Isaac was borne and circumcised that hee would command his children and his houshold after him and they shall keepe the way of the Lord yet none will conclude that therefore no children of his houshold servants were already circumcised and that Isaac and others should not bee circumcised in that Abraham will take this course with all of his family Are the baptized Gentiles to bee taught the commands of God that they may doe them so are the proselyted persons circumcised and others also circumcised to bee also taught Yea Infants circumcised notwithstanding that part of Gods counsell touching such teaching yea but Infants circumcised were not capable of teaching true nor are ours which are baptized yet both to bee taught and so are and were according as capable thereof and the Text in Matth. 28. 19. evinceth that it is not a present teaching them that are there mentioned simply but secundum quid scil according as the baptized persons were capable of being taught otherwise it must bee concluded that they were presently to bee all and each of them taught the whole mind of Christ and then it will follow that that could presently be done by the dispensers of the word which is impossible and likewise
of his Law it is all applyed to all indefinitely yet sense and reason tells us that sundry of the children were neither capable then of such observing of all Gods words no nor so much as hearing the words read at that time in such sort as thereby at present to bee stirred up to feare or obey the Lord but some things onely are appliable to the whole assembly wholly other things now mentioned to the whole at present onely in respect of the growne part and to the others no other thâ—n as involved in any such acts of their parents at most so Joel â— 14. â— solemne assembly of all the inhabitants of the land is to 〈◊〉 convented for fasting so chap. 2. 1. againe repeated and ver 15 16 17. instance is given in the sucklings as to bee a part of that assembly for that end and the maine dutie vers 13 14 is laid forth as required of them all which are called to this solemne fast scil not meerely to abstaine from food or to expresse sorrow by rending their garments but to rend their hearts by godly compunction and sorrow c. all will yeeld that such things are not properly applyable to sucklings but to some of the assembly nor yet will any in reason exclude Infants from being of that Church assembly for such Church use according as they were capable of any thing mentioned albeit not capable of all mentioned Jer. 43. 4. 6 7 disobedience to Gods voyce is applied to all the people yet not properly verified in all the children which were of that people and company Deut. 29. 1. All Israel is said to have seene those wonders in Egypt and yet many of them that were then growne it being 40. yeares after their comming out thence vers 5. never saw the same much lesse did the little ones which were a part of that assembly vers 14. yet who will conclude because little ones were not Israel seeing theâ—e wonders that therefore they were not Israel entring into Covenant vers 11 12. and marke the phrase applied to the little ones that they also entred into covenant with God ibid. as well as God is said to make his covenant with them vers 14 15. this was a covenant of grace as hath been proved so that Hen. Dens notion holds not concerning God being in a sense in covenant with Infants but they may not bee said to enter into covenant with him that by the way To returne to that in hand nations baptized Matth. 28. are to bee taught to observe Christs commandements but non sequitur that Infants are no part of the Churches in the nation to bee baptized so here Infants beleeve not actually c. non sequitur ergo not to bee added to the Church in a solemne way of initiation to Church estate inchoatively by externall baptisme Both may stand together and have their truth of the whole in some things wholly wherein they are capable as of Church estate and baptisme in others true of the whole in respect of some part thereof as actuall beleeving To like purpose C. B. argueth weakely in his sixth argument that the whole citie was baptized men and women mentioned not their children too as if therefore excluded I may as well argue from Gen. 14. 11 12. That those Kings tooke all the goods of Sodome and Lot ergo they tooke no people besides contrary to vers 16. or if they did take people and women yet not children too And if Lot were first taken and then redeemed by Abraham with others yet not ergo his children or daughters or if then under the notion of women yet not a word of children wherefore either they were left behind in the Citie without their Parents when they were taken or if taken with the Cities and persons yet not brought backe againe which would bee absurd to affirme Secondly suppose the beleeving Jewes children were not just at that time baptized when their Parents were thus solemnly admitted to that Church of Christians yet non sequitur that they were not baptized afterwards When members are solemnly admitted to compleat and fixed membership in our Churches wee baptize not oft times their little ones the first day of that their admittance yet doe it afterwards as occasion is offered and their desire thereof signified SECT VIII YEa but neither then nor in any other Text in the Acts is it ever mentioned that any children of any beleeving Jewes were baptized A. Non sequitur that therefore they were never baptized Many things of great weight were done by Christ and so by his Apostles which were not recorded yet not therefore never acted by them John 20. 30 31. of which see more before touching consequences of Scripture But doe our opposites indeed conclude that none of the beleeving Jewes children were ever baptized by Apostolicall approbation Is it imaginable that among so many thousand beleeving Jewes at least ecclesiastically such which are so moved and touched in the case of their childrens being not circumcised and sealed that way to the covenant that it would not much more startle them to suppose such a tenet or practise as to deny them to bee sealed any way by initiatory sealing at all as neither by circumcision so not by baptisme Are they so ready to move contentions in that point Acts 22. 21. and upon but a supposed deniall of it and are they no way moved so much as to put the case state the question to be satisfied from the old Testament for no other Scripture was then extant why their Infants which were ever used to bee reckoned in Abrahams covenants so sealed thereto by the seale then only in use but now they are either wholly excluded any Church interest and any covenant interest actually or if owned yet as such yet why denied of that which is now the initiatory seale of such interest in the covenant Yea doth Peter expresly mind them of the interest of their children as well as themselves in the promise wishing them therefore to be baptized and this occasioned no stirring of questions and cases why on the same ground their children must not be also baptized other contentions about other things are mentioned and other differences in points controvertible in those times as Acts 11. 2 3. and 15. 1. 2. c. and 21. 11. and 6. 1 2. and 15. 38 39. and Gal. 2. 11. Surely then either the beleeving Jewes which when worse men had that priviledge of their childrens covenant and Church estate and right to the initiatory seale the case is so soone altered with them that they thinke it no matter of scruple to call the deniall and omission of it into question or to assay to desire satisfaction in it for matter of judgement and practise in the case or if starting it why is not so great a controversie mentioned as started by some at least that could not so wholly forget their childrens good when solicitous about their owne and when so
unmarried persons to bee delayed in whom the tentation is prepared c. the Treatise urgeth this testimony to prove that de facto children before they were instructed were not baptized Mr. B. seemes to urge that de jure they ought not As for the first it 's rather a strong proofe that Paedobaptisme was in use in the Church in Tertullians time for supposing Tertullian against Paedobaptisme his testimony is the more valid enemies will not flatter us if they were not baptized why doth hee mention their susceptors or sureties which ran hazzards by being their susceptors Tertullian was not so sottish to oppose an Imaginary abusive practise if no such thing were in rerum natura in his time why doth hee affright persons from being susceptors by the hazzards they runne in their childrens liablenesse to death and to distempers and by the latter their outbreakings into sinne to deceive their susceptors expectations if no such thing it had been dangerous to start such a novellisme if never before practised And indeed Origen contemporary with Tertullian according to Osi inder and Funccius account hee saith in the place quoted in his 14th Hom. on Luke that little ones were in his time baptized All the question is then de Jure how farre the testimony is valid to prove that Infants should not bee baptized some make account that Tertullian was not simply against baptisme of Infants scil if of beleevers but of baptizing Infidell Infants then offered to baptisme as it might be supposed of unmarried persons if Infidels to delay Baptisme others thinke hee intends to deny the absolute necessitie of Baptisme in case children are like to die then to baptize them out of an opinion of such necessitie of it albeit afterwards that hazzard of mortalitie being over they might bee baptized and it 's probable enough out of their doubling of the word necesse si tamen necesse fit c. and truely if Tertullian was against it in his judgement it was one of the dotages of his age as was Montanisme denying second marriages witnesse his booke de Monogamia and hee forgot himselfe if that was his intention to deny childrens right to baptisme since that in his booke de anima cap. 21. speaking before that every soule hath an evill spirit in it he addeth so that the nativitie of none almost is cleane at least if borne of Pagans for here it is that the Apostle saith that one borne of either sex being sanctified hee is holy as well by the prerogative of the seed as by the discipline of instruction but saith hee else they were borne uncleane but now notwithstanding hee would have it to bee understood that the children of the faithfull are devoted to holinesse and consequently to salvation that in respect of these pledges of hope hee might patronise marriages which hee had judged to bee retained otherwise scil if that had not been his meaning hee would have mentioned that definition of the Lord unlesse any one bee borne againe of water and of the Spirit hee shall not enter into the kingdome of God that is shall not bee holy and then addeth immediatly cap. 22. as his conclusion so that every soule is so long reckoned to bee in Adam till they be recounted to bee in Christ and so long unclean untill recounted scil in Christ And in his booke against Marcion lib. 4. p. 92. but behold how God loveth little children sc of the Church in that he teacheth that those which would bee for ever great must bee such as they are and brings that as another argument of it that God was so gratious to the Aegyptian Midwives for sparing of the Jewes children so that hee speakes not this of all children but of those of the Church as also that which hee saith de anima hee speaketh it not of all sorts but of the children of the faithfull as is evident And hence I will make bold after Master Blackwoods example to make some observations 1 That Tertullian accounted not all children alike in point of birth cleannesse but some cleane others uncleane 2 That hee accounted that holinesse of children mentioned 1 Cor. 7. to bee no civill holinesse of legitimacy or creature holinesse of holinesse to use but a holinesse of a higher nature such as implyeth right at least externall of entring in Gods kingdome making this of being holy to be one with that or to include it scil according to men and to include as much as to bee accounted in Christ cap. 22. the beginning 3 That children of beleevers come to bee holy in this sense mentioned not by instruction of discipline meerely of which they are capable when they come to yeers but by being borne of either parents sanctified or the faithfull or persons laying hold on Gods covenant c. for hee maketh being borne of either parents sanctified and children of the faithfull c. one they are holy as well by prerogative of seed saith hee of which they are partakers as soone as they are borne as by institution of discipline 4 That he maketh this the force of the Apostles argument to perswade to retaine marriages in question in regard of such pledges of hope children thus holy springing from married persons whereof one at least is a beleever c. 5 That therefore Zwinglius was not the first author as some say of that interpretation that by the sanctifying of either Sex by that other being faithfull children come to bee holy with holinesse of priviledge hence that of being holy by prerogative of seed scil quat covenant seed And from the other place it appeares that Tertullian judged the children of the Jewes to bee not in a bare carnall covenant or beloved with a meere common respect of God as others but in the judgement of his charitie hee accounts them beloved with a speciall love of God so as to become patternes to such as are alwayes great in Gods favour as well as otherwise Now how these things will stand with Tertullians denying them baptisme I leave to all judicious and sober minds to determine hee may forsake his owne principles in this as in other things hee did but if hee hold to the same hee must bee ours and not yours But let us suppose Tertullians judgement against paedobaptisme hee is not the first that gave erroneous counsell and held erroneous tenents though he bee the first that ever advised so farre as I finde in authors that infants baptisme should bee delayed and his judgement may not carry it but the grounds of his judgement if they are Scripture proofe and first he acknowledgeth the argument taken from Mat. 19. Suffer little children to come unto me to enforce baptisme of these there intended albeit hee expounds that of their comming to Christ by baptisme to bee understood of their comming when they are growne up when they know Christ when they aske it when they understand the right of Baptisme and can pray and fast But Mr. B. which cleaveth
consisting onely of Infants of beleevers For a number of visible members make a visible Church Answ This followeth not since the maine force of such denomination lyeth in the growne Citizens of God which use in all Citie acts publike to carry it personally and not from the children which yet are free Deuisons As for a Church of onely Infants it 's not supposable their Church right depending upon inchurched parents nor are the Infants such perfect members of the Church as others nor do a number of beleevers regularly make a visible politicall Church but in such a way of actuall combining together either explicitly or implicitely as in all other bodies politique Whence a more peculiar relation one to another and a peculiar ground of memberly care for power one over another in a brotherly way to watch over or seasonably to admonish each other and the like SECT III. TO conclude let such as oppose us in this doctrine of the faederall and Church holinesse of inchurched beleevers little ones consider of the absurdities which their opposite Doctrine exposeth them unto As first the deniall of any ordinary way or meanes of the salvation of beleevers Infants as being neither actually in the visible Church out of which ordinarily there is no salvation nor being actually any of them in the covenant of grace so much as externally and so excluded from any ordinary meanes or way or estate of salvation as before in part wee shewed The promises being made to the Church and the covenant being the Spirits instrument by which to convey good unto such as ordinarily partake of it Even before the world was God ordered all good to bee conveyed to us in a way and by virtue of his covenant therefore also called the everlasting covenant and Gospel Heb. 13. 20. Revel 14. 6. hence God was said to bee in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe 2 Cor. 5. 19. hence eternall life said to bee promised before the world was Tit. 1. 2. Hence that Ephes 3. 8 9. even Christ himselfe is his people 's no otherwise then in way of covenant Esay 42. 6. and 49. 6 7 8. his blood is the blood of the everlasting covenant no interest in it nor in himselfe but by way of covenant with it seales as that wherein and whereby salvation is ingaged Heb. 13. 20. mans salvation is onely in his name Act. 4. 12. and reconciliation in his blood Colos 1. 19 20 21. and that blood is the blood of the covenant as before see Zach. 9. 11. hee is a mediator of the new covenant and Testament Heb. 9. 15. Heb. 12. 24. if beleevers Infants have not interest in that covenant no interest in him as Mediator for hee is no other Mediator but of such a covenant his businesse as Mediator is to confirme a covenant to such to whom hee is a Mediator Deut. 9. 24. Rom. 15. 8. none can partake of the Spirit nor any influence of it but by the promises 2 Pet. 1. 4. nor of a glorious resurrection but by virtue of I am their God Luke 20. 36 37. nor of glory but by virtue of the same Heb. 11. 16. see of both Act. 26. 6 7. if therefore that species or sort of persons covenant inchurched parents Infants are excluded from right in the covenant unlesse they come actually and personally to beleeve therein actum est de salute eorum they are given for lost irrecoverably and all the individuall Infants of such persons are left in as bad a case Secondly that sort of growne gentiles being supposed onely to bee made nigh by the blood of Christ in covenant and Church respects actually it will argue that that sort onely were actually strangers before not their children with them not only individually but specifically considered since the same sorts at least of Gentiles formerly strangers are made nigh Eph. 21. 11 22 13. compared Thirdly then is it supposed that Christ tooke downe the partition wall which stood betweene growne Jewes and adult Gentiles but as for the beleeving Gentiles Infants either there was no such partition wall betwixt them and their parallels the Jewish Infants inchurched or if there were it so farre remaines untaken downe as concerning that sort of Infants Fourthly then Divine justice is supposed to have a larger latitude in involving the little ones of such as respect the Covenant under the expressions and visible dispensations of divine displeasure as in Caines Ishmaels Esau's the Jewes rejection together with their little ones then divine grace hath in the expressions and dispensations thereof unto the little ones of such as tooke hold thereof contrary to all former examples how long did God continue externall adoption and son-ship in Seths line Gen. 6. 1. how long in Abrahams Isaacs and Jacobs Rom. 9. 4. and not rejecting them till rebelling universally and fatally Fiftly then it 's supposed that there are two covenants of grace one with them of old another with us now essentially different which is absurd as before was shewed and may bee further evinced in that baptisme that new way of initiatory sealing of the covenant when first instituted it was instituted precisely with sole respects to the Jewes John 1. 33. Matth. 3. 1 2 3 4 5. John 4. 1. compared with Matth. 10. 5 6. to shew that there was no other covenant to be sealed by baptisme then that which was made with the Jewes in the substance of it Luke 24. 44 45 46 47. Act. 2. 38 39. the same promise first sealed by baptisme to them before was to them afarre off and no other to them afarre off to bee sealed by baptisme then that promise which was to them and to their children now if one covenant essentially then either the Jewes children were not in covenant no not so much as externally contrary to what wee shewed before from Acts 2. and in the conclusions laid downe or if they were it was meerely ceremonious now supposing ceremony in the way of sealing by circumcising of the flesh of their foreskin yet what ceremony was in the principall part of the covenant it selfe I will bee a God to thee and to thy seed after thee in their generations or if it were one part of the covenant then but is now abolished by Christ then it seemes Christ by his comming hath abolished one materiall part of the covenant of grace without any other thing equivalent to parents as covenant parents in stead thereof Sixtly then God is made a respector of persons looking at Jewes with theirs in covenant respects but not so eying covenant inchurched Gentiles Yea hee is made to speake things at large to bee a God to all the families of the earth Jer. 31. 1. yet when it commeth to bee Analysed he is not a covenant God to any more then perticular persons actually beleeving onely no covenant respect is had so much as externally no not so much as to the choycest part and prop of the families scil children Seventhly then
is all former distinction ever used to bee so carefully observed and held forth and mentioned laid aside Seed of the woman and of the Serpent in the younglings of both are confounded no distinction of sonnes of God and of men of seed of Isaac and Ishmael in the Infant part thereof No Church distinction of children cleane or incleane Albeit that wee mentioned not to the State but Church at Corinth as a Church to whom the contrary was noted as absurd else even the children were as Pagans uncleane but now they are holy So Acts 2. To you and your children not to others as afterwards actually to others with theirs Some onely were nigh in covenant and politicall Church respects the rest farre off nay doe not C. B. Hen. Den and some others ground upon Rom. 5. 18. whereby to put beleevers children in the same estate without any difference as such from any others children Nay C. B. would know why Turkes and beleevers Infants being alike free from actuall sinne and guilt of originall that they may not partake of the same benefit of free grace and albeit in them there bee something worthy of damnation yet it appeares not from Scripture that any were damned for originall sinne onely and would know why wee should not thinke as much of Infants in generall dying infants as was said of Davids child 2 Sam. 12. 23. thought by Divines to bee saved bringing Rom. 5. 18. for a proofe of such generall redemption of dying Infants Strange charitie beyond all bounds of regular judgement to all Infants dying and none to beleevers Infants in generall so much as of their externall interest in the covenant but doth Mr. B. expound deaths reigne over Infants Rom. 5. 14. to bee onely restrained to that of the first death or might Babylons little ones bee accursed if not under wrath as such doth Mr. B. imagine that all the Infants destroyed in the flood in Sodom and Gomorrah in the last destruction of Jerusalem c. that it is so much as probable they that were saved are all by nature the children of wrath and yet all dying in that estate and under no covenant of grace so much as externally it is so much as probable that all such are saved Is there any Mediation of Christ but as a Mediator of a covenant and are Turkes Infants under the covenant when as their parents are not were all Gentiles of old yong and old being strangers from the covenants of promise and of the Church without God and Christ and hope and now the case is so altered that the chrildren of strangers from the covenant are to bee judged hopefull Doth Mr. B. startle at 1 Cor. 7. 14. that the children of beleevers yea though dying Infants yet as beleevers children they are no more but civilly cleane and in covenant respects as profane yet are Pagans children cleane in respect of Covenant mercy for else how can they bee saved as before wee proved as for Rom. 5. 18. our Divines have used to answer Arminians that all is taken for many as before vers 15. But here Mr. B. in the case of dying Infants will have it universall and if universally true of dying Infants why not so of all living Infants why not of all men simply where will there bee a restraint If all men simply in one sort of persons dying bee understood and not all men that is many whereas wee are used to bee upbraided with the absurditie of universall redemption I feare Mr. B's doctrine rather And so much of the first part of this discourse touching the covenant and Church estate and right of Church members children PART II. CHAP. I. Sect. I. Touching Childrens Baptismall right HAving discoursed of the doctrine of the Federall and Ecclesiasticall holinesse of the Children of visible beleeving and inchurched parents and cleared the same let us addresse our selves a while to consider of the externall Church right of such little ones unto the initiatory seale of such covenant Church right which followeth thence The initiatory seale followeth the covenant wee speake not of an extraordinary time of the Church when either it hath no particular expresse initiatory seale distinct from another sealing ordinance as before that solemne covenanting of God in reference to the Church in Isaacs race Gen. 17. 7 8 9 c. with 19. so there is some peculiar state of the time not appliable to the ordinary time and way of a visible politicall Church and its administrations as then also were family Churches as that in Melchisedecs and Jobs family which not being successively to continue were not so immediatly eyed in point of solemne institution and Church lawes as was this of Abraham Isaac and Jacobs race wherein the visible Church was to bee continued such extraordinary cases and times are very impertinently urged by some to infringe the force of ordinary rules and principles they know an extraordinary case of eating shewbread by such as were not Priests of plucking eares of corne on the Sabbath day of a private Disciple's baptizing upon an extraordinary and immediate call as did Ananias Acts 9. of Zipporah's circumcising and these doe not nullifie and invalidate ordinary rules and principles touching circumcision or baptisme or the sanctification of the Sabbath c. This proposition then I shall lay downe for further proofe that in ordinary times and cases respecting the politicall visible Church and its administrations such little ones as are of parents in such visible Church estate they have externall right unto the injoyned initiatory visible seale of which they are outwardly capable and ought not to bee denyed the use and benefit thereof ordinary times then and not extraordinary are here considered let none object then children of members of an ordinary politicall visible Church are here considered let none object an extraordinary case of Johs or Melchisedecks family a visible seale enjoyned not a case wherein actually any such seale is not injoyned is here also considered but either actually injoyned or at least in view at the present making of the covenant with Church reference as in the case Gen. 17. 7 8 9 c. let none object Adam and Noahs time and cases against our thesis externall right in such a Church seale is propounded let none confound this with internall and saving right which is visible to God and not to meere men the initiatory visible seale is propounded not all the seales or Church priviledges as choyse of officers and voting in other Church occasions c. A male child of eight dayes old might bee circumcised but was never intended to bee injoyned personall appearance at the solemne celebration of the passeover there to goe up and not to bee carried or to have others appeare in their stead Deut. 16. 16 17. all the males which were to bee at that feast were as well to bee at the feast of tabernacles Ibid. where such as kept that feast were to carry boughes to make
gladly accepting Peters word especially the gladding word of promise which was the joyfullest word hee spake as belonging to them and to their children yea when accepting so gladly that injoyned dutie upon the ground of baptisme surely controversies of farre lesse weight are not passed over in silence witnesse that Acts. 6. 1. and 15. 38 39. and Gal. 2. 11. and 21 22 c. mee thinkes to common reason and rationall heads and hearts as well as gracious It should bee rather concluded as a matter out of question and that no such new distance and difference was put of parents in covenant and Church estate but not now the children as formerly of parents to bee sealed by the initiatory Church and covenant seale unto Church and covenant fellowship but not now their children as formerly SECT IX A Fourth argument followeth scil In that the Infants of covenant inchurched parents which were externally interested in the covenant of grace as invested with the covenant of a politicall visible Church to whom the Seales were appointed they were sealed as they were in bodily respect capable to bee sealed in that initiatory way of circumcising therefore Infants now according to their capacitie in bodily respects of the like initiatory appointed seale are to bee sealed in the initiatory way of baptizing For clearer proceeding in the argument I shall lay downe a few propositions First that the old testament is avowed by the holy Ghost in the new to containe all things necessary for faith and practise for substance and that so fully that a minister of the Gospell ordinary or extraordinary might bee furnished thence with ground-worke and generall rules upon and according to which to proceed in holding forth any thing necessary to bee beleeved or practised Of the Scriptures of the old Testament is that full testimony 2 Tim. 3. 14 15. See Cartwright in locum see Luke 16. 29. 31. Secondly that the Apostles in all other things used to hold forth Gospel services with analogy to legall Types Rites and Sacrifices c. testimonies are plentifull for it Thirdly that it was the Apostles use to hold forth and confirme things of most weight from the old Testament Act. 2. from the 14. to 41. and 3. 22. to the end and 4. 10 11. 24. to 29. and 8. 12. 25. 35 36. compared with Esay 52. 15. and 53. 1 c. So Acts 21. 38 39. old Testament grounds yea from the promise are given them for baptisme it self in the new yea for the dispensation of all the Gospel ordinances unto the Gentiles as thereof capable Acts 13. 46 47 48 c. Either then they had no ground or if any they urged them not which is contrary to those places or if any they urged them from the old Testament then onely extant to establish their practises Fourthly that Christ himselfe gave them patterne in this way of proofe Fiftly that the people with whom they had firstly to doe were beleeving Jewes in that way and they were zealous for the old Testament in the generall Sixtly that the ancients of the primitive Churches have rarely if at all denyed the comming of baptisme in circumcisions stead Seventhly that where a commandement of God doth injoyne any one thing upon such a ground there the command doth require all things wch are of the same nature as helpefull to the same thing as the Commandement Thou shalt not kill forbids anger also as tending to the same end scil to murder and as well forbidding striking rash speaking c. on the same ground as tending to murder yea but Christ expresly forbids it Answer Christ doth not put any thing thus upon the commandement which was not virtually in it before hee urged it but not legislatively as then making a law in such particulars but declaratively as expounding that law and reducing particulars to their generall heads of commandment Yea but there was his sanction thereof in that reducing True but when explained yet so as things in the commands before onely then clearely understood to be so so here looke as God commanding Abraham circumcision in the flesh for that end and on that ground that it might be an initiatory seale or Sacramentall signe of the covenant so also in the same doth hee virtually command baptisme with water as being of the same nature scil such as fulfilleth that end scil initiatorily to seale the covenant therefore albeit circumcision cease yet the commandement thereof reacheth and partly authoriseth that baptisme in the application of it to Infants for that end as of old to those Infants for that end Baptisme is a signe I say of the covenant and therefore either naturall and then any washing uninstituted had sufficed this way but that such washing of water should bee that signe needed an institution and being instituted it is now of the old use to seale initiatorily the covenant to adult or Infant externally initiated in it Yea but Christs institution gave a rise both to the signe that baptisme should bee that and that such and such persons should be signed with it therefore not the command of circumcision gave rise so much as to the application of that signe to such or such persons Answer it followeth not that Christs institution gave warrant therein therefore not the commandment of circumcision since both consent in the maine ground of both scil that wee shall apply our selves to the use of such signes as hee shall appoint and that in both should bee the same moralls or spiritualls signified the Lord knowing that wee needed some solemne externall way of signification of his mind of grace by some signe as well as they did Eighthly as none may adde to so neither may any detract from any words of Gods grace wherein hee hath expressed himselfe unlesse hee himselfe repeale the same hee once would have his covenant of grace to bee to the whole Church and Church seed and once would have it initiatorily sealed on them hee hath repealed the way of sealing but the covenant hee hath not the extent of it to parent and child hee hath not the ordinary dispensation of it in and from and by the visible Church hee hath not the sealing use of an initiatory covenant and Church seale hee hath not the things mainely to bee sealed even covenant and Church right at least externall and the like both of inchurched covenant parents and children hee hath not as in former conclusions hath been shewed SECT X. HItherto that knowne and much controverted place Col. 2. hath reference the Colossian Church and members of it as the Apostle urgeth against the circumcision teachers are as compleat in Christ without circumcision as ever any other Church or the members of it yea as even the best of them were with circumcision that is the proposition hee layeth downe Col. 2. vers 10. if they had objected Abrahams and Isaacs and Jacobs and Davids compleatnesse in covenant respects and Church respects Gentile Churches and members are as
compleat in the substantiall and most materiall parts or branches of it had the one a covenant and Church blessing and heritage as to them so to their children so are these compleat that way too if the ratification thereof by a solemne covenant and Church initiatory seale bee the great thing they have to boast of these are compleat in Christ in that respect too Christ hath not left his Churches and the members of them without such covenant priviledges nor without a solemne way of initiatory sealing thereto and ratifying thereof whether as Churches or as members of it in particular or as such members who have children to partake thereof with them doe the false Apostles then urge against them their incompleatnesse without circumcision It 's answered in the generall v. 10. they are compleat in Christ how as fulfilling the types which were in any Jewish ceremonies onely no verily not onely so albeit firstly and principally so for Christ nailed them on his crosse and tooke them away as such by his death And what need then any Church ordinances at all wee have all in Christ might some say as 1 Cor. 1. I am for Christ I care not for Paul nor Apollos nor Cephas nor for their dispensation of the word or seale of the covenant I have enough in Christ such a spawne of our seekers there was in those times v. 12. Yea but the Lord Jesus in wisedome and faithfulfulnesse will have his Church and people to bee graced and perfect as of old they were in substantialls of the same Church ordinances and the like The beautie of the Church was perfect through that Church comelinesse which God did in this respect put upon them Ezek. 16. 14. not a comelinesse of outward possessions in a temporall land in temporall jurisdictions kingdomes cities what had the Church quà Church and as in covenant with God as his covenant Spouse to doe with them nay the heathen might vye with them for as good land as large possessions territories riches honours dominions c. yea but not for Church ordinances hee dealt not so with any nation besides Psal 147. 19 20. Christ had as mediator and as a Priest compleated all ceremonious types yea but as Prophet hee will have it held forth and cleared by that dispensation of the Gospel and as King of the Church hee will have all also exhibited in such a way and by such evangelicall meanes 2 Tim. 1. 10. the Word and the Seales they are parts of the Gospel in the dispensation of them and by them all is brought to light yea by them as by pipes is Christs fulnesse conveyed as head of his visible body the Church outwardly as it is by his spirit to his elect inwardly Zach. 4. 11 12 13 14. Col. 2. 19. hence the Church hath such officers given it whose proper work it is to exhibit and communicate such things as tend to make them every way compleat Ephe. 4. 11 12 13. wee are compleat in Christ as the signatum but yet in baptisme too as the signe Yea but regeneration and sanctification both in respect of mortifying and quickning grace c. signified by circumcision is conferred on us by Christ And so it was of old in him in whom Ezek. 36. 25 26 27. and Deut. 30. 6. was yea and amen 2 Cor. 1. 20. and by his Spirit as hee held all forth then in the ministry of the Prophets of old 1 Pet. 3. 18 19 20. so hee exhibited the same to his elect among them yet then hee had covenant and Church Symbols to confirme the same and instrumentally to convey the same and so now Ephes 5. 25 26. As by the word of covenant as the principall instrument and the Spirit maketh baptisme it selfe to become efficacious so by washing too hee sanctifyeth his Church both as that whereby hee ratifyeth it so to their faith that they have the more strength of hold and influence for that end and as that which he blesseth as one ordinary meane also in respect of the word of promise to which baptismall washing is annexed as the Seale Sanctifying and purging is the signatum and end washing with water through the word is the ordinary Seale and meane whence here in Col. 2. 10. when hee had laid downe that thesis he declareth it by two instances partly in that wee are circumcised by the circumcision of Christ which is the fulfilling of the type v. 11. partly by applying the benefits of the circumcision of Christ to them and theirs by the like or an equall ordinance to that of circumcision which the Jewes injoyed to wit of baptisme else were not the Church and Saints now as compleat as those of old which as they had virtually all fulfilled in Christ to their faith Act. 15. 11. and 26. 6 7. Heb. 13. 8. Revel 13. 8. Heb. 12. 1 2 3. So had they withall sealing ordinances applying the spirituall circumcision of Christ to them and theirs And so Aretius which maketh Christ the perfect organon of our salvation without any other equall externall cause joyned with him in that respect it was by him alone that all was fulfilled Col. 1. 19 20. and by himselfe he did that worke Heb. 1. 3. yet in point of externall application hee denieth not any thing wee say for in the same place in his notes upon Colos 2. within foure or five lines hee addeth it as an observeable thing from the place that baptisme comes in the stead of circumcision as is evident in that the Apostle calleth it the circumcision of Christ scil in a Sacramentall way under the name of the signe in whose stead baptisme is set comprehending the spirituall thing signified by a metonymy as the covenant scil the Sacramentall signe of it Gen. 17. 11. 13. Act. 7. 8. the testament scil the visible seale of it 1 Cor. 11. 25. So his body and blood ibid. the Sacramentall communion of it 1 Cor. 10. 16 17. or communion of it in a Sacramentall sense So that the Apostles answer is full to prove the uselesnesse of circumcision which the false Apostles would have intruded upon them as necessary to the Gentile Churches Gal. 1. 6 7 8 9. and 4. 21. and 5. 11. Acts 15. 24 24. 25. It was a generall false doctrine troubling all the Gentile Churches ibid. but it 's now uselesse in respect of the maine thing signified Christ to come who hath fulfilled it as ceremonious and in respect of the externall signe and meane of application of Christ scil circumcision supplied by baptisme whence Gentile Philippians as well as Paul a Jew are of the circumcision Phil. 3. 3. Abraham Isaac and Jacob were inwardly circumcised so are they at least ecclesiastically judged to bee they were externally circumcised so are they in their baptisme ergo now circumcision is wholly uselesse Yea but what is this to Infants the Apostle directs his speech to growne ones Suppose he did yet this speech is of and reacheth to