the Old Testament determined Paul speaking of the whole Pedagogie of the Law the Legall Covenant tels us It was added because of Transgressions untill the seed should come to whom the Promise was made i. e. till Christ should come who was the end of the Law But Baptisme it is a perpetuall ordinance Such is the Gospel it selfe an everlasting Gospel as it is called Rev. 14. 6. And such are all Gospel ordinances everlasting ordinances to continue in force till the second comming of Christ at the end of the world All these differences we confesse and acknowledge And we think our Adversaries cannot truly assigne any more at least not materiall Now for these differences he that looketh upon them shall see them to be but circumstantiall so as for substance these two may still remaine one and the same and so we shall find them the one in all materials answering the other That will appeare by comparing of them in the things wherein they agree And here we shall find them agreeing first in the maine and principall ends and uses for which they were instituted and ordained As 1. Each of them a Seale of the Covenant So was Circumcision It shall be a token of the Covenant between me and you And so is Baptisme a Token and Seale of the Covenant And that of the same Covenant that Circumcision was viz. the Covenant of Grace sealing up to the beleever his interest in the grace and favour of God through Christ Each a Seale of the Covenant of the same Covenant 2. Each an Initiall Seale the first Seale of the Covenant each sealing up an entrance into Covenant So did Circumcision and so doth Baptisme 3. Each a note of distinction to difference and distinguish Gods people from all other people So did Circumcision it was the distinguishing marke distinguishing betwixt Iewes by nature and sinners of the Gentiles And so doth Baptisme now to Christians distinguishing them from Pagans Turkes and Infidels 4. Each of them an Obligation binding to the same condition the condition of Obedience that Evangelicall obedience Such was the condition of the Covenant which God made with Abraham Walke before me and be thou perfect i. e. upright or sincere Hereunto was he obliged by his Circumcision And hereunto are Christians obliged by their Baptisme to the same condition Thus they agree in their maine ends and uses 2. We shall finde them agreeing in their signification Each shadowing out the same mysteries As 1. The corruption of nature This was shadowed out in Circumcision by cutting off the foreskin of the flesh And the same mysterie is shadowed out in Baptisme by the washing of the body with water 2. The mysterie of our Redemption through the shedding of the blood of Christ That was shadowed out in Circumcision by the shedding of blood And the same is shadowed out in Baptisme by the water both representing and signifying the blood of Christ 3. The mysterie of our spirituall regeneration This was shadowed out by Circumcision wherein the cutting off the foreskin of the flesh signified the mortifying of sinfull lusts And the same is signified in Baptisme where by the washing of the body with water is signified the washing of the soule from the staine and pollution of sin by the spirit of Christ Whence it is called a Laver 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The laver of Regeneration the washing of the new birth Thus each of them holdeth forth the same mysteries 3. We shall find them agreeing in the Subject Each of them being to be administred to all and only Confederates such all such only such as are within the compasse of the Covenant So was Circumcision to Abraham and all his posteritie to Infants as well as others they being also confederates And even so is it with Baptism it is to be administred to all and only such as may in the judgement of charity be reputed confederates amongst which Infants also are to be reckoned as I have already proved it at large Upon this ground were they circumcised because within the Covenant and upon this ground they may and ought to be baptized Repl. But to this the Anabaptist replieth that it was not the Covenant that made Infants capable of Circumcision What then Why an expresse Command from God Even that in the Text He that is eight dayes old shall be circumcised Here is an expresse Mandamus say they an expresse order for the Circumcision of Infants and by vertue hereof it was that they were circumcised not because they were in Covenant but because God had given an expresse command concerning it A. To this we answer It is true here is an expresse command for the Circumcision of Infants but it is with reference to the Covenant which was the ground of this Injunction and the ground of Infants circumcision This it was that made Infants capable of Circumcision not meerly this Mandamus this Command in the Text as abstracting Anabaptists would have it without reference to the Covenant but their being in Covenant They were confederates with God God had taken them into Covenant and therefore hee would have the seale of his Covenant set upon them So much may be clearly collected as from divers other passages in this Chapter so from the 10. 13. 14. verses where Circumcision is still called by the name of the Covenant My Covenant shall be in your flesh c. Clearly importing that this was the ground of their Circumcision even the Covenant not simply the Command As for the Command here in the Text it is to be noted that it only determines the time assignes the day upon which Infants were to be circumcised limiting it to the eight day But as for their Circumcision it selfe that was ordered before being comprehended in the Covenant it selfe which was the ground of their Circumcision Repl. Why but saith the Anabaptist however here is an expresse mandamus an expresse order and command for the circumcision of Infants Now say they could you shew us the like for the baptisme of Infants then the controversie were at an end But such command such injunction or direction there is none A. To this Allegation of theirs Godwilling I shall answer more fully hereafter For the present I shall only retort it upon them and demand of them to shew us a Prohibition or Inhibition where it is any wayes forbidden that children should partake of the seale of the Covenant under the New Testament as well as under the Old That they who were circumcised then should be baptized now That Baptisme succeeded and came in the roome of Circumcision we have sufficiently proved it already and I thinke our adversaries being pressed upon it they will not they cannot deny it Now if it came in the place of Circumcision then it tyeth upon our Adversaries to shew what speciall proviso what caeveat is put
in to debar children from the one who had so undoubted a right to and so long a continued possession of the other How they come to be cut off from this priviledge which was once so firmly intailed upon them Which if they cannot shew then must we still conclude it to be their right As for other alterations wherein Baptisme differs from Circumcision we can shew good warrant for them out of the Scriptures As viz. 1. Why whereas Circumcision was administred only to males Baptisme should be administred to both sexes both to male and female For this we have both the practise of the Apostles to warrant it At Philips preaching to the Samaritanes they beleeving his doctrine were baptized both men and women Act. 8. 11. and we have the Apostles reason for it Gal. 3. 28. As many of you as have beene baptized into Christ have put on Christ For in Christ Iesus there is neither male nor female c. 2. So secondly for baptizing of all Nations Whereas Circumcision was restrained peculiarly to one Nation Baptisme is to be tendred to all For this we have our Saviours owne commission and warrant Gâ—e teach all Nations baptizing them i. e. Not Iewes only but Gentiles also And we have the Apostles reason for it also in the place forenamed For in Christ Iesus there is neither Iew nor Greek c. 3. So againe for the circumstance of time That we do not tye the administration of Baptisme to any certaine day as it was in Circumcision but administer it before the eight day or after For this also we have the Apostles warrant who tells us that it is not for Christians now to observe dayes as the Jewes did reckoning up this amongst those weake and beggarly rudiments as he calls them Yee observe months and dayes and times and years Herein Christians have a liberty a liberty purchased for them by the blood of Christ and that liberty they must stand fast in Thus in what ever other changes and alterations herein we meet with we can still shew good warrant for it out of Scripture Now if our Adversaries can doe the like for this great alteration why Baptisme should not bee administred to Infants as well as Circumcision was then indeed wee will hearken to them In the meane time it is not for them to presse us for a speciall warrant an expresse and particular order and command in this case This we conceive to be altogether needlesse having such a standing order and direction touching Circumcision shewing us to whom this seale of the Covenant belongs and to whom it is to be administred viz. to all that are in Covenant Infants as well as others what needeth any new order in this particular This order for the substance of it is perpetuall of force under the New Testament as well as under the Old Further answer to this question I shall defer till hereafter conceiving this sufficient for the present One allegation is yet behinde which our Adversaries by way of reply here cast in our way I shall only touch briefly and so dismisse this second Argument with it Repl. If this bee a good Argument say they that Infants may be baptized because they were Circumcised then by a like reason they should now be admitted to the Lords Table because under the Old Testament they eat the Passeover The reason say they is a like for both So as if it hold in the one why not in the other Ans To part of this I have in part answered already give me leave now to doe it a little more fully For childrens eating of the Lords Supper whether lawfull or no it hath beene and yet is a Question Anciently it is well knowne it was allowed and practised in the Roman and African Churches Those ancient Doctors Augustine and Cyprian are Advocates in this cause pleading not only for the lawfulnesse but Expediencie of it At this day the practice is or at least lately was as Peter Martyr informes me retained amongst the Grecian Bohemian Moravian Churches How warrantable this hath been or may be is disputable P. Martyr for his part professeth that he will not be zealous in siding with either part in this quarrell As for the custome of those ancient Churches in admitting them he will not he dare not condemne it and as for the practise of other Churches in debarring them he cannot but allow it The latter not so warrantable is amongst us and most of the Churches at this day and that upon good ground as we conceive concluded to be the more safe the more warrantable For their admission Scripture will not beare it out As for that place cited and made use of by those Ancients as a ground for this practice Joh. 6. 53. Except yee eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drinke his Blood ye have no life in you it maketh nothing for it our Saviour there speaking not of a Sacramentall but a Spirituall Communion a Spirituall feeding upon him which is done by faith fetching refreshment nourishment from Christ by the application of his merits unto the soule Much in Scripture that seemeth to make against it Paul telleth us of divers Qualifications requisite in Communicants and divers actions to be performed by them in and about the supper of the Lord which Infants are not capable of as viz. besides the eating and drinking of the Elements which young Infants cannot doe the examining of themselves the discerning of the Lords body the shewing forth the Lords death the doing what they doe in remembrance of him c. All these actions are actually to be performed by worthy Communicants So as there is just reason why Infants though they be baptized yet they should not be admitted to the Supper of the Lord this being as you see an active Ordinance consisting mostly in doing Doe this as oft as you eat it c. Q. But what say we then to the Argument Infants eat the Passeover why not then the Lords Supper as well as be baptized because they were circumcised A. 1. To this we answer i. should it be granted that Infants did partake of the one yet we see good reason why they should not be admitted to the other being not subjects capable of the aforesaid Qualifications 2. But secondly how can it be proved that Infants did eat the Passeover I know it is an opinion that hath been received swallowed downe I suppose without chewing as many other of this nature have been and that by some of note but upon what ground I know not Scripture I am sure will not make it out True we finde an order that there should be a Lambe for a house and in case that one family were too little to eat it up the next family was to be joyned to it they must take it according to the number of the soules saith the Text reckoning
and all his family were circumcised In the selfe same day was Abraham circumcised and all the men of his house And the like we read of Baptisme As it came in the roâ—me of Circumcision being the initiall seal of the Covenant as Circumcision was so it was administred after the same manner to the whole family Where the head of the family believed presently we read that they and all theirs were baptized Thus we read in that 16. of the Acts first of Lydia v. 15. God having opened her heart she was baptized and her houshold Then of the Iaylour v. 33. being wrought upon by the Apostles Ministery he came and was baptized he and all his Thus be they what they will being once in Covenant they may and ought to be baptized So runs the Apostles Commission Go teach all Nations Mat. 28. 19. And will you have the ground and reason of it why the administration of this Ordinance should be so universall consider but these two things 1. The universality of mans sin and misery and secondly The universality of Gods offer of grace and mercy 1. Mans misery is universall All have sinned Rom. 3. 23. And sinning died Death passed upon all men for that all have sinned Rom. 5. 12. Such is the condition of all the sonnes of men by nature They are all concluded and shut up under sinne and death so shut up as without the free grace of God in Christ pardoning their sinnes and healing their natures they cannot possibly be saved Even Infants that never sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression viz. by committing actuall sinne yet being sinners by nature by nature children of wrath they stand in need of Christ as well as any other And consequently they stand in need of this laver of regeneration this Sacrament of initiation whereby their spirituall washing from the guilt and spot of sinne and their ingrafting into Christ may be sealed up unto them and declared unto others All sorts of persons stand in need of Christ and consequently of this Sacrament which sealeth up their interest in Christ 2. And secondly as mans misery is universall so is the tender of Gods grace and mercy held forth to all men Goe teach all Nations Mat. 28. Goe preach the Gospel to every creature Mark 16. 15. Thus Christ sent forth his Apostles and thus he now sendeth forth his Ministers with Commission to offer Christ and salvation by Christ to all that will receive him beleeve on him submit to him And reaching forth the thing signified hee also reacheth forth the signe even this Sacrament of Baptisme which is therefore to be administred alike unto all because Christ is offered alike unto all I meane all sorts of persons and is alike to all There is neither Iew nor Greeke i. e. Gentile there is neither bond nor free there is neither male nor female for ye are all one in Christ Iesus Being all alike in Christ they ought alike to be baptised into him By one spirit we are all baptised into one body whether we be Iewes or Gentiles c. Thus all that are in Covenant ought to be baptised 2. And in the second place Onely they This being a seale of the Covenant ought not to be administred unto any but unto those which are or in the judgement of charity may be thought to be within the Covenant By this rule must the Church proceed in dispencing of this Ordinance not by the judgement of Infallibility and Certainty but of Charity To know infallibly who is within the Covenant this none can doe but God and a mans owne soule The Churches rule is the rule of charity Those who by the law of charity may bee thought and are to be reputed within the Covenant of Grace they all they and only they may and ought to partake of this Ordinance Q. Here then the great Question now falls in Who they are that in the judgement of charity are to bee thought to be within the Covenant A. Hereunto we answer All that professe the faith of Christ and their children Both these the eye of charity looketh upon as Christians and being such it cannot deny them the badge of their Christianity the seale of that Covenant wherein they are presumed to be As for the former of these we shall meet with no great difference about them Persons professing the faith of Christ may and ought to be baptised For this Scripture is expresse when the Eunuch put the question to Philip See here is water what doth hinder me to be baptised Philip returnes him this answer If thou beleevest with all thine heart thou mayest Those three thousand Converts Act. 2. 41. upon the receiving of Peters word his doctrine they were baptised Thus Simon Magus and the rest of Samaria upon their beleeving i. e. making a profession of faith they were baptised both men and women Thus all that professe the faith of Christ professing it with their mouthes and not denying it in their lives they have a right unto Baptisme And why Because in judgement of charity they are to be reputed Christians and to be within the Covenant True it is if we speake of Christians in truth in reality then they only are Christians who have received Christ into their hearts by faith and love in whose hearts Christ is formed He is not a Iew saith the Apostle which is one outwardly And so may we say He is not a Christian that is one outwardly that hath only the name and profession of a Christian Yet in a large sense they which make so much as a generall profession of Christ of faith in Christ and subjection to Christ they are to be accounted Christians And by vertue therof they may and ought to be baptised Upon this profession Iohn the Baptist baptized those that came unto him And so did the Apostles those which came unto them however in some of them that profession was hypocriticall and unsound as in Simon Magus Ananias Saphira c. yet the Apostles looking upon them with an eye of charity and judging of them according to their profession they admitted them unto this Ordinance Neither doe we read of any whom they refused or yet brought to an exacter scrutiny and tryall touching the inward worke of grace in their hearts who did make such a profession and confession And thus ought all those who are come to yeares of discretion before they are baptised be admitted to it As viz. Pagans and Infidels such as are borne and brought up without the pale of the Church not descended from Christian parents Before they be admitted to this Sacrament they ought first to be instructed in the faith of Christ in the principles and rudiments of Christian Religion Being thus instructed then they are to declare and testifie their voluntary imbracing of that faith together with their repentance
heretofore fastened in the head of this Sisera by the Masters of the Assemblies The first whereof is that which I have already laid downe in the description of baptisme where I make the subject of baptisme to bee persons that are in covenant From hence we argue that if children of beleeving parents be within the Covenant then they may be baptized But they are within the Covenant Therefore they may be baptized The former of these is evident and I thinke it will not be denyed To whomsoever the covenant it selfe belongeth to them belongeth this seale of the Covenant Abrahams posterity being in Covenant they were to receive the seale of the Covenant viz. the signe of circumcision Thus Christians the spirituall seed of faithfull Abraham being in Covenant with God they are capable of baptisme this initiall seale which sealeth up unto them and testifieth unto others their entrance into Covenant The maine difference here betwixt us and the Anabaptist will lye about the second of these viz. Whether Infants of beleeving parents be in Covenant or no This they deny alleadging that the Covenant being a Covenant of Grace it doth not runne along with the blood it is not transmitted from the parent to the childe neither is it intayled upon any family any kindred No That which is borne of the flesh is flesh say they As for children they are all alike borne children of wrath neither are the children of beleeving parents herein priviledged There is no difference saith the Apostle for all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God No difference here between the children of Christians and Pagans Beleevers and Infidels the one is no more in Covenant then the other by nature Neither are men brought into Covenant by naturall generation but by spirituall Regeneration They must first be borne againe otherwise they have nothing to doe with the Covenant Thus they But with what truth it will appeare by these two or three arguments Children of beleeving parents are within the covenant What else in the first place meanes that of the Apostle St. Peter in that knowne place Act. 2. where he telleth those new Converts that The promise was to them and to their children v. 39. and thereupon inviteth them to come and be baptized as you have it in the verse foregoing The promise is unto you and to your children For the explicating of that Text and for the vindicating of it from the cavills and evasions of our Adversaries I shall open and unfold unto you these two things 1. What is there meant by the Promise and secondly what by their Children 1. For the former of these we finde the An abaptists nibling at it some of them referring it to the words immediately foregoing viz. The receiving of the Holy Ghost This is the promise say they here spoken of viz. of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit But against them the evidence is cleare The Promise here spoken of is the great Promise of the Gospel called here by way of emphasis The Promise viz. the promise of Remission of sinnes which he willeth them to seeke in by and thorough Christ This promise he here holdeth forth unto them and for the bearing up of their drooping dejected spirits he tells them that that Promise belonged to them and their children Not the promise of the Holy Ghost in those extraordinary gifts which was peculiar to that age and to some peculiar persons therein not common to all that were baptized into the name of Iesus Christ But what is here meant by their Children To this the Anabaptist answers not Children in age young Infants Who then Why either children by regeneration So Calvin tels us some of them expound the word there in a metaphoricall sense purposely to evade and elude the force of it Or else as the greatest part of them carry iâ— children by succession their posterity that should come after them being come to yeares of discretion So they alleadge the word Children to be often used in Scripture Act. 3. 25. Ye are the children of the Prophets Act. 13. 26. Men and brethren Children of the stock of Abraham Thus would they have the word here understood You and your Children i. e. say they the lineally descended sons of Abraham men and women of full age A. But to this cavill of theirs we reply The word Children there must be taken literally and properly and be understood of Infants Children in age For proofe of this I finde the scope and drift of the place brought in by some which seemeth I confesse to favour this construction But in as much as I find that variously carried according to divers apprehensions of it I shall passe it by fastening upon that which I conceive to be more demonstrative and convincing I take it from the words themselves Wherein we may take notice of three severall ranks or conditions of persons to whom the Apostle here affirmes this promise to belong 1. The Iewes themselves there present 2. Their Children 3. Those which were a far off But who were they Q. Who were those a far off The opening of that clause will conduce much to the clearing of the former Them which are a far off This I know Expositors generally both Protestant and Papist understand of the Gentiles who were then afar off at a great distance from the Iew in point of Religion For countenance of this exposition they bring in that known place of the Apostle Eph. 2. 17. where speaking of the Iews Gentiles he describeth each by a Periphrasis the one a people a far off the other neer The Gentiles before the comming of Christ they were a far off Ye who somtimes were a far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ 13. of that 2. Eph. Thus they expound Peter by Paul generally looking upon these texts in 2. Ephes as a Comment upon that in the 2. of the Acts. But herein I find Mr. Beza dissenting from them and that as I conceive not without good ground and warrant By those a far off in that place saith he cannot be understood the Gentiles Why not Take a double reason for it each convincing 1. The calling of the Gentiles was as yet in a great part a mysterie to Peter himself A secret which was not yet clearly unfolded unto him So much we may collect from that vision presented to him Act. 10. whereby taking away the difference betwixt the cleane beasts and uncleane bidding him slay and eat c. The Lord taught him not to put a difference betwixt Iew and Gentile So as it is evident Peter was not so well instructed in this mysterie before as that he should tell the Iewes so expresly that the promise belonged as well to the Gentiles as to them 2. Suppose Peter had understood this mysterie yet was this no fit time to have preached and
respect of a federall holinesse though not so holy as Moses and Aaron whom God had sanctified and set apart to speciall and peculiar services The Jewes being in Covenant they were said to be a holy people and a holy seed So you have it Ezra 9. 2. where it is said that the Holy seed had mingled themselves with the people of the land And in this sense the Apostle speaking in the knowne phrase and language of the Scripture calleth the children of beleeving parents holy viz. so holy as the children of the Iewes formerly were This was the priviledge of the Iewes they were a holy seed they and their children In that differing from Gentiles that were out of Covenant We saith the Apostle who are Iewes by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles the Gentiles being out of Covenant their children were borne sinners i. e. aliens and strangers to the Covenant But it was otherwise with the Iewes their children were holy borne such viz. in respect of a federall holinesse In this priviledge doe beleeving Gentiles now partake with them the partition wall being now broken downe they being incorporated into the same body with them being made Burgesses of the same heavenly Ierusalem with them they are also infranchized and made partakers of the same priviledges and prerogatives that they were Amongst which this is one that they and their seed are holy that is they are no longer Pagans and Heathens but Christians members of the Church in Covenant with God so to bee taken so to bee reputed Where before we passe any further take notice how injurious the Anabaptist is unto the children of beleevers whom they bereave of this spirituall priviledge this excellent Prerogative casting them out amongst the children of Heathens and Infidels peremptorily affirming That there is no difference betwixt the one and the other The one as holy as the other the one no more in Covenant then the other and consequently the one hath no more right to the seal of the Covenant then the other No difference True by nature we yeeld it there is none There is no difference saith the Apostle for all have sinned Rom. 3. 22. I and all have alike sinned all alike guilty of Adams sinne by a just imputation and all alike tainted and stained with Adams corruption by a reall communication But hath Grace made no difference Who maketh thee to differ from another saith the Apostle Not nature but grace This made the Iew to differ from the Gentile and the children of the one from the children of the other And this is that makes as beleevers themselves so their children to differ from Infidells Of whom the Apostle saith that they are holy And what Is there yet no difference Will our Adversaries say the same of the children of Infidels and Pagans that they are Holy But we shall not need to wonder at this that they equalize them with the children of Pagans and Infidels when as they doe not sticke to compare them with Dogs and Cats boldly affirming so some of that way have lately done that the one hath as much right to Baptisme as the other To which blasphemy of theirs I shall returne no other reply but that of Michael to the Devill when he strove with him The Lord rebuke thee Thus you see this first and grand Argument for the Baptisme of Infants sufficiently supported If Infants of beleeving parents be in Covenant then they have right to this Seale of the Covenant But they are in Covenant This we have made good by three subordinate Arguments 1. The Promise belongeth unto them 2. If they were in Covenant under the Old Testament then also under the New 3. They are holy To these many other might yet be added That of the Apostle to his Romans seconds that to his Corinthians If the roote be holy so are the branches Rom. 11. 16. Holy parents a holy seed The one being in Covenant so is the other Againe if they be not in Covenant they are without hope as Paul saith of unbeleeving Gentiles there being no way whereby salvation can be obtained but by the Covenant of free grace in Iesus Christ But to exclude all Infants dying in their infancie from salvation I think is greater cruelty then the Anabaptist will own Nay cleane contrary to their doctrine who by denying Originall sinne as many of them doe put all Infants dying in their infancie into a state of salvation larger charity then the Scripture will maintaine and if saved then they must first be in Covenant Q. But what then it may be said are all Infants of beleeving parents in Covenant A. I answer in the outward visible Covenant they are As for the Covenant it selfe to speake properly and strictly it depends upon Gods election Neither doth it belong to any but those who are elected But this is to us a secret Now the rule is De â—ccultis non judicat Ecclesia Secret things belong unto the Lord but things revealed to us and our children Amongst which this is one I will be thy God and the God of thy Seede And this are we to hope and believe touching all the children of believers that they are Gods children as well as theirs untill the contrary be some wayes manifested Q. But how commeth this Covenant to be transmitted from the parent to the childe what doth it run along with the blood Is it transmitted by the way of naturall generation A. Not so This what ever our Adversaries in this particular would fasten upon us both Anabaptists and Papists for in this they are agreed we renounce and disclaime Foedus non transfunditâ—r per carneâ— saith P. Martyr rightly The Covenant is not propagated and transmitted by the way of naturall generation No. That which is borne of the flesh is flesh The parent communicates his nature and the corruption of it unto his child but nothing of Grace That is the free gift of God And this it is that bringeth the childe of the believer into Covenant as well as the parent even the free and gracious promise of God made both to the parent and to the childe making over the heavenly inheritance unto both as joynt heires of the Kingdome of God To draw to a conclusion of this first Argument You see that Infants of believers are in Covenant and how they come to be so Now being in Covenant they have right to this initiall seale of the Covenant Repl. But to this the Anabaptist will yet once more reply that by the same reason they should have right to the other Sacrament as well as this to the Sacrament of the Lords Supper that being also a seale of the Covenant A. To this I answer briefly A right they have to both the seales of the Covenant both to Baptisme and the Lords Supper Though for the present they be not capable of the latter yet they have a right
unto Sanctification Being thus washen then and not before have you right to have communion with God and so may comfortably partake in the meanes of your Communion amongst which the Sacrament of the Lords supper is one being a seale of the Covenant And thus have I resolved unto you the first branch of this question Why the Hebrew Infants were not to be circumcised before the eight day Why no sooner Q. 2. The latter branch yet remaines Why no later They might not doe it before neither might they defer it beyond that day The Text is expresse for the one as well as the other He that is eight dayes old shall be circumcised i. e. upon the eight day So you have it explained Lev. 12. Not but that in cases of necessity it might be deferred So was it in the wildernesse for forty yeares together The reason whereof you have insinuated Iosh 5. Their children were uncircumcised for saith the Text they had not circumcised them by the way Being in itinere every day marching and journeying from place to place and subject to daily encounters with the Enemy they could not conveniently be circumcised In this case then the case of necessity it might be deferred otherwise it was to be administred precisely upon the eight day And why not upon the 9. 10. 20. why not the next moneth the next yeare A. For this I find divers reasons alledged one physicall or natuâ—all the other morall or mysticall 1. In a Physicall way say some this was a more convenient time then afterwards inasmuch as afterwards the body of the Infant growing more firme and solid his Circumcision would have been more painfull and grievous to him Now God is not delighted in the smart and torment of his creatures much lesse of the people that are in Covenant with him Letting that passe Other Reasons yielded are morall or mysticall Of them I find Paraeus reckoning up three 1. God would not have it any longer deferred for the consolation of the parents that they might have an early assurance of Gods grace and favour towards their Infants viz. that he had received them into Covenant and did look upon them as confederates with himselfe and with his people Appl. A speciall Priviledge and so to be accounted by all that professe the name of Christ who ought to use all means to have the Covenant sealed up as to themselves so to their Children not omitting the first opportunity that God offereth them for that purpose Were it a temporall estate an inheritance that were to be setled upon posterity and to be confirmed by some Decree in Chancery under Seale in this case a carefull and provident parent would not let slip the first sealing day No more should Christian parents willingly baulk the first opportunity for the sealing up of the Covenant of Grace and therein of the heavenly inheritance unto their children The sooner it is done the more comfortable to the parent 2. As God did this for the Parents so for the Ordinances sake viz. that that might not be sleighted might not be neglected Had there been a liberty left for parents to have deferred and put off the circumcising of their children so long as they pleased the Ordinance by this meanes would have been brought into contempt and have been reputed as unnecessary as needlesse Now God cannot endure that any ordinance of his should fall into disrespect and disrepute among his people Be it Word be it Sacrament be it Prayer c. God would have the due estimation of them all maintained Applic. And take we heed how any of us have a hand in impairing it How any of us be any occasion of laying any ordinance of God under disrepute and disesteem This is done to the Word when men come to heare iâ— as if they cared not whether they came or no Come sometimes it may be for fashions sake if they like the person of the Preacher otherwise their own house or their neighbours house is as good to them as Gods house the Publike Congregation When they doe come yet they care not how late they come when the Sermon is begun halfe done Thus is it with some who suffer every sleight occasion to detain them As we see it too ordinary in divers cases and particularly in that which I cannot but touch upon your Baptizings where civill ceremony and outward solemnity stealeth away the time from Religious service And what is this but to bring a disrepute a disrespect upon this ordinance of God as if it were not a thing of any such necessity as it is pretended to be The like I may say of Baptisme when children are detained from it week after week moneth after moneth What doth this imply but that Baptisme surely either is not proper for Infants or at least it is not of any such necessity but that they may be well enough without it And so for the Lords supper When Christians upon sleight grounds shall absent themselves laying aside that ordinance not comming to the Sacrament yeare after yeare What is this but to bring a disesteem upon that ordinance as if it were not of any such worth of any such necessity as it is pretended to be In the feare of God every of us take we heed of every of these or the like Take heed how we be any occasion of bringing an evill report upon any of the wayes of God But by all meanes be carefull to uphold the reverence and estimation that is due to his ordinances This was one end why God would not have Circumcision deferred beyond the eight day that he might preserve that ordinance from neglect and contempt 3. A third Reason alledged by my Author is This God did saith he not without a reference and respect unto Baptisme under the New Testament which was to succeed in the room and place of Circumcision Herein taking order also for the administration of the Sacrament viz. that it should be administred unto Infants though not precisely upon the eight day that was Ceremoniall and being so it is ceased as touching any obligation yet in time sâ—tting and convenient That was the substance and morality of that command and that still abides By vertue whereof Infants in their infancie both may and ought to be baptized And so I am fallen upon the later part of the Enthymeme Infants under the Old Testament were circumcised Therefore under the New Testament they may and ought to be baptized Q. But how prove you this Consequence saith the Anabaptist A. Why the ground of it is this Because Baptisme succeeds and commeth in the room and place of Circumcision answering to it Q. How prove we that A. From the Apostle himself Col. 2. 11 12. In whom also ye are circumcised c. v. 11. Buried with him in Baptisme v. 12. For the opening of which Text know we briefly what the Apostles scope and drift
there is viz. to prove against the Jewes that Circumcision is not now necessary nor usefull unto Christians under the Gospel The reason he giveth for it is because Christians have a more excellent Circumcision then that of Moses That you have v. 11. proved and made good by three Arguments 1. From the Author of their Circumcision Not Moses who was but a servant nor any other man but Christ himselfe In or by whom ye are circumcised By the circumcision of Christ 2. From the kind of it It was not an outward but an inward circumcision 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a circumcision not made with hands as that Mosaicall circumcision was but made without hands viz. the circumcision of the heart of the inward man by the spirit of Christ 3. From the fruit and effect of it which is far different from that Legall circumcision There was only the cutting off of one small part of the body the foreskin of the flesh but here is a cutting or putting off the whole body of sin In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ Why but the Iewes here might object This Reason is of no force that because Christians were spiritually circumcised therefore they should not need the outward circumcision For so was Abraham and yet he received the outward circumcision He had the inward grace and yet he received the outward signe And thus Christians though they be made partakers of this great benefit by Christ yet they may stand in need of an outward seale to assure them of their partaking herein To this the Apostle answers v. 12. shewing that Christ hath not left his people under the New Testament destitute of such an outward signe and seale For hoever Circumcision be taken away yet there is another Sacrament substituted and appointed in the room and place of it a more excellent and lively Sacrament then ever Circumcision was a Sacrament resembling it and answering to it viz. Baptisme Buried with him in Baptisme viz. Sacramentally Baptisme being a Sacrament of Regeneration signifying and sealing up both our mortification and vivification Being buried with him in or by Baptisme wherein also ye are risen with him Thus then Baptisme succeeds Circumcision and supplies the place of it Q. What then saith the Anabaptist was Circumcision a type of Baptisme That cannot be saith one of them for then one Type might type out another and so be a Type of a Type A. To this we answer that we doe not say that Circumcision properly was a type of Baptisme Both Circumcision and Baptisme are types of one and the same thing viz. the mystery of our Regeneration which is the truth of those types But this we say that the one succeeded the other Baptisme succeeded Circumcision came in the room and place of it withall answering to it and so may be called an antitype to it This we say with warrant from S. Peter who saith the same of Baptisme and the Ark wherein Noah was saved 1 Pet. 3. The like figure whereunto even Baptisme doth now save us The like figure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the antitype i. e. Typus correspondens as Beza explaineth it a Type answering to a Type That deliverance in and from the flood and our Baptisme they are two severall types both typifying and shadowing out one and the same thing viz. our deliverance by Christ but that being the former type carried with it a resemblance of this and this comming after answereth unto that Even so may we say of Circumcision and Baptisme Baptisme is to Circumcision 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an antitype though not properly typified by it yet a type comming in the place of it and answering to it Obj. Answering to it saith the Anabaptist True in some things it doth but not in all Nay in many things there is a vast difference betwixt them And therefore say they to reason from Circumcision to Baptisme can be no convincing Argument A. In way of reply to this it will be both expedient and necessary to bring the Type and the Antitype Baptisme and Circumcision as I may say face to face to compare the one with the other that so we may see both wherein they differ and wherein they agree We will begin with the former Wherein they differ That there are differences betwixt them we yield it But yet these differences we shall find for the most part circumstantiall For substance we shall still find them one and the same The differences are many 1. They differ in the outward ceremony or signe which in the one was a cutting off the foreskin of the flesh in the other the washing of the body with water 2. In some circumstances about the subject As 1. Circumcision was to be administred only to the males Baptisme to male and female 2. Circumcision was enjoyned only to Abrahams posterity to his seed according to the flesh As for others however they might come in and joyn themselves with Abraham and be confederates with him yet were they not enjoyned to be circumcised The command reached only to Abraham and his seed But Baptisme that extendeth to all both Iewes and Gentiles Goe teach all nations baptizing them i. e. not administring Baptisme to the Iewes only as Circumcision was but to all nations Iewes and Gentiles 3. In the circumstance of Time appointed for their administration Circumcision was to be administred precisely upon the eight day neither sooner nor later as I have shewed you But in Baptisme there is a liberty left no set day appointed 4. In their manner of signification Circumcision looked at Christ to come Baptisme at Christ already come The one signifying and sealing the remission of sins by and through the blood of Christ to be shed the other through that blood already shed 5. In the matter sealed Circumcision sealed up unto Abraham and his seed a temporall promise viz. touching the Land of Canaan So you have it v. 8. of this Chap. I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee the Land wherein thou art a stranger all the Land of Canaan Not that this was the only thing which Circumcision sealed up as the Anabaptists would have it or yet the main thing For in the verse foregoing God promiseth Abraham to be his God and the God of his seed This was the grand promise the main of the Covenant which Circumcision sealed up As for that temporall inheritance it was but an accessary an appendix an additament But Baptisme sealeth up only spirituall and heavenly benefits Grace and Glory 6. And lastly to name no more they differ in their duration and continuance Circumcision was but a temporary ordinance the temporary seale of an everlasting Covenant being to continue in force only till the comming of Christ in whom all the Ceremonies of
disciples repelling these Infants and rebuking those which brought them ibid. The third of our Saviours rebuking his Disciples inviting imbracing and blessing these Infants v. 14 15 16. wee shall looke upon them severally Begin with the first the act of those devout persons which brought these children wherein diverse particulars offer themselves to our consideration As 1. who brought them 2 whom they brought 3. to whom they brought them 4. to what end they brought them A word of each I. Who brought them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the text They brought who they were none of the Evangelists expressed Most probably the Parents the Mothers of these children They brought them which they did out of a tender and motherly affection which they bare unto their children desiring their good their welfare they brought them II. And whom did they bring Children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith our Evangelist pueros puerulos children young children So our translation renders it and such they were Not children growen up as some of the Anabaptists would willingly have it but Infants 1. So St Luke expresly calleth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Infants sucking children 2. So much also is implyed in the first word of the text they brought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adferebant non adduceâ—ant They brought them not led them not led them by the hand but brought them in their armes Thus they brought them 3. And after the same manner Christ received and embraced them Hee tooke them in his armes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith our Evangelist ulnis amplexus even as mothers doe their children All evidencing and clearing the condition of the persons that were brought They were Children Babes Infants III. And to whom did they bring them Vnto him unto Christ Thus others before had brought diverse aged persons unto him who had received benefit by him And thereupon these tender mothers they doe as much for their children they bring them to Christ IV. And to what end did they bring them That hee might touch them saith our Evangelist that he might put his hands upon them and pray saith St. Matthew that is that by laying his hands upon them hee might blesse them Such benedictions Parents were anciently wont to seek for their children and children for themselves Thus did Jacob and Esau each seek a blessing at the hands of their father Isack And thus did Joseph seek a blessing for his two sons Ephraim and Manasses bringing them to his father Jacob that he might lay his hands upon them and blesse them i. e. pray for them and in the name of God pronounce a blessing upon them Such a blessing it seemeth the people of God were frequently wont to seek for their children at the hands of those whom they apprehended to be indued with propheticall and extraordinarie spirits And thus these mothers looking upon Christ as a Prophet a great Prophet the great Prophet they bring their Infants unto him that they might receive a benediction from him The words being thus briefly opened we may take up a double observation from them 1. That Infants are subjects capable of benefit by Christ 2. That it is the best office that Parents can performe unto their Children to bring them unto Christ Breifly of each Infants are subjects capable of benefit by Christ So much certainely these devout persons who here brought these children to him apprehended and believed Wherefore else should they have brought them had they not apprehended them to have been subjects capable of benefit by him And surely such they are capable and that not onely of temporall but of spirituall benefit viz. of Remission of sinnes of Regeneration Justification Sanctification Glorification But how can this be saith the Anabaptist seeing that Infants doe not actually believe They cannot lay hold upon Christ by faith how then shall they receive any benefit by him To this I answer Though they cannot lay hold upon Christ yet Christ can lay hold upon them Though they cannot touch him yet hee can touch them And this is sufficient Marke the Text They brought children unto Christ that hee should touch them Not that they should touch him but that hee should touch them Christ can and often doth touch them by a veriuall contract communicating spirituall benedictions and blessings unto them who are not able to touch him I meane actually to beleive on him This is the case of Infants they are not sensible of the need they have of Christ neither can they seek a blessing for themselves they cannot by an actuall faith lay hold upon him yet is this no impediment unto them For all this Christ may and often doth communicate himselfe unto them apprehending them thongh not apprehended by them In adultis in persons come to yeares of discretion and to the use of reason both these meet together even a mutuall apprehension the one resulting from the other Believers they apprehend Christ and they are apprehended of Christ This is that which Paul desireth for himselfe Phil. 3. I follow after saith he if I may apprehend that for which I am also apprehended of Jesus Christ Paul was apprehended of Christ viz. by his free grace accepting of him and his desire is that he might more and more apprehend Gods love and favour in Christ viz. by faith and experience Thus doe Christians when they are come to yeares of discretion apprehend Christ then they touch him as that Woman in the Gospell did who came and touched the hemme of his Garment drawing vertue from him by her faith Thus indeed Infants cannot apprehend him they cannot touch him In the meane time it is enough that they are apprehended of Christ touched by him So were these Infants here in the Text. They brought Children unto Christ that he should touch them Appli Stand noâ— then to reason with flesh and bloud about the manner of Christs comming and communicating himselfe and his grace unto Infants This doth the Anabaptist and because sense and reason cannot resolve his doubt viz. How Baptisme should be made effectuall unto Infants seeing they doe not actually believe therefore he will not believe lieve that it can bee any wayes beneficiall to them what is this but to take up Thomas his Resolution Unlesse I shall see the print of the nayles and put my fingers into them c. I will not believe These Women or who ever they were that brought these Children unto Christ they were of another minde They knew not which way vertue should go out from Jesus Christ unto their Infants yet they bring them render them unto him only desiring that hee would touch them which if hee would vouchsafe to doe they doubt not but their Infants should bee the better for it Surely what ever flesh and bloud carnall sense and reason which are no competent judges in divine and spirituall mysteries may suggest The Sacrament of Baptisme is
come to be strengthned and increased To this end it was that our blessed Saviour gave such harsh intertainment to that poore Cananitish woman that came to him in the behalfe of her daughter First bidding his disciples dismisse her send her away Then himselfe shaking her off telling her hee had nothing to doe with her or for her I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel Then giving her tam and course language calling her a dog It is not meete to take the childrens bread and cast it unto dogs All this he did for her probation and tryall to try and exercise her faith These ends God hath in it 2. Satan hath other ends viz. to discourage dishearten the people of God to beate them off and make them desist and leave off their undertakings and therefore he endeavoureth to crush them in the shell and nip them in the bud Take we notice of it and make use of it that being fore-warned we may also be fore-armed against what ever discouragements wee shall meet with Not disheartned by them Alas these are no new or wonted things but such as Gods people have frequent experience of Let them not dull or rebate the edge of our endeavours but rather whet and set them Sowre sauces in the beginning of a meale they whet the appetite Even such use make wee of what ever impediments and discouragements shall encounter us in the entrance upon any pious relgious undertaking Let them be rather as whets to sett an edge upon our resolutions And in particular let it be usefull to new beginners new commers to Christ young Christians At first conversion when they doe but begin to looke towards God and Christ they oftentimes meet with such entertainment as these Infants here did They finde course usage from the world Course language it may bee or an overly carriage from friends and acquaintance mocks and checks from others And happily God himselfe or Satan by his permission may strow some Murices some Caltraps some crosses in their way But let not all discourage still hold on In the end what ever the world doth bee you assured Christ will smile upon you and embrace you as here he doth these Infants To passe on These Infants were repulsed and those which brought them checked But by whom By the Disciples of Christ His Disciples rebuked those which brought them What see we here Even good men holy and gracious men may sometimes be impedements to pious and Religious undertakings It was Peter that assayed to perswade his Master not to goe up to Jerusalem Master favour thy selfe Here was an assay to hinder the best worke that ever was done the worke of our Redemption and that by an eminent Saint an eminent Apostle Here in the Text the Apostles whose office it was to winne and bring all sorts oâ— persons unto Christ yet they prohibite these children and rebuke those which brought them Thus good men sometimes may bee back-friends to good causes This God permits this Satan incites to this holy men yeeld to See a Reason for each First God permits it to the end that our faith as the Apostle speaketh should not stand in the wisdome of men nor yet in the holines of men That we may learn not to make either the Iudgement or Practise of man our Rule our Rule to believe by our Rule to walke by Secondly Satan incites to it the rather making use of these Instruments because least suspected and consequently most prevalent Thus at the first he made use of the Woman in tempting the Man Adam could not naturally suspect his owne flesh hee could not suspect that poyson should bee reached forth to him by such a hand None so likely to perswade with him as his wife was Vpon a like ground it is that Satan maketh use of pious and godly persons in crossing and hindering some pious undertakings Thus hee made use of Peter to take off his Master So much our Saviour there expresseth Get thee behind me Satan It was Satan that spoke in and by Peter making use of him as his Instrument in suggesting and conveying that temptation And wherfore of him Why he thought if any could prevaile with Christ Peter might assoone or sooner than any 3. As God permits and Satan incites so holy men sometimes yeeld and become instruments to God and Satan in these services or rather dis-services in hindering of good and that because they know but in part It was so with the Disciples here In prohibiting these children they act according to their knowledge They did not know their Masters mind concerning them and thereupon they did what they did Thus is it with good and holy men they are sometimes Remoraes back-stayes to a worke that tends to the glory of Christ and good of his Church Whence is it not from any ill-will they beare to either but because they are not fully informed touching the minde of Christ they are not perfectly instructed in the way of the Lord wherein they walke according to their light Make use of it briefly even that which I have already given you a hint of Learne we hence not to pin our faith or obedience upon other mens sleeves not to make the Iudgement or practise of others whatever they be a Rule a Standard for us to believe or walk by A very common errour in these un-setled times How many well-meaning soules are there every where that bottome their faith upon the wisedome or upon the piety and holinesse of men Take wee heed of it Knowing that if we shall sayle by this Compasse we may bee on ground before we are aware You know who spake it Let God bee true and every man a lyar God onely is infallible and his Word an infallible Rule As for men the wisest the learnedest the holiest they are all lyars and that both actively and passively subject to deceive and bee deceived Take wee heed therefore of trying truth by this touchstone of weighing truth in this ballance by these weights To the Word to the Word That will not that cannot deceive Humane judgement humane practise may though in persons never so eminent Take heed then how wee bee prejudiced against truth because such or such assent not to it Take heed how we let in errour because such or such embrace and entertaine it Surely it is one of the prevailing Arguments of the times that hath misled and seduced many to the receiving and embracing of divers dangerous errors even the good opinion and high esteeme which they have had of some who have gone in those wayes I will instance but in one that which the Text leadeth me to viz. The errour of the Anabaptists in denying Baptisme unto children An errour which spreadeth farre and nigh in the Kingdome to the present disquietment to the future danger of the Church Many in all places carried
which we meet with Matth. 18. 3. Where our Saviour upon an other occasion taking a little childe and setting him in the midst of his disciples hee propounds him to them as a patterne for their imitation telling them Verily I say unto you except yee be converted and become as little children yee shall not enter into the Kingdome of God Behold here then a patterne for every one of us As many of us as would enter into Gods Kingdome his Kingdome of grace and glory we must become as little children Q. As little children How shall this be What must aged persons according to Nicodemus his conceite of the doctrine of Regeneration repuerascere turne children againe A. Yes This aged persons oft-times doe in a naturall way Bis pueri senes Old men are twice children And all Christians must doe it in a supernaturall and spirituall way They must be twice children As once by nature so once by grace and that by the imitation of children in some of their imitable qualities Q. But what qualities are these Wherein must Christians be like unto children A. To single out some particulars some of the chiefe 1. A first is that which the Apostle himselfe propounds to and presseth upon his Corinthians 1 Cor. 14. Where hee sheweth them both wherein they should not be like unto children and wherein they should Non mentibus sed moribus wherein not Not in understanding Herein he would have them not children but men Brethren be not children in understanding c. But in understanding bee men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Perfecti perfect Adulâ—â— of ripe age Wherein then why in malice How â—e it in malice â—e ye children Children they are free from malice and envie there is not so much as a sparke of this fire in those breasts Herein a patterne for Christians even for all that would enter into the Kingdome of God Let them in this become as children laying aside malice So St. Peter presseth it Wherefore laying aside all malice c. As new borne babes desire the sincere milk of the word New borne babes are voyd of malice So should all Christians bee Not seeking not wishing evill to any wishing and doing what good they can to all but hurt to none As children concerning malice Secondly as children concerning guile So the Apostle Peter there goeth on Laying aside malice guile Such are infants 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is no guile no fraud no deceit no hypocrisie in them They doe not pretend one thing and intend another They doe not goe about to over-reach or circumvent others but in all their actions there is a plaine-hearted simplicitie And such should Christians be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Simple as doves So our Saviour presseth it upon his Disciples I simple as children Simple concerning evill as Paul explaines it without guile and that 1. In their actions not circumventing defrauding others So the Apostle presseth it upon his Thessalonians 1 Thes 4. That no man goe beyond or defraud his brother in any matter As viz. in buying and selling and bargaining c. 2. Without guile in their words This is the character which Peter gives of his Master Who did no sinne neither was there guile found in his mouth So should it be with Christians there should be no guiles in their mouthes in their words in their promises testimonies c. So Paul chargeth it upon his Ephesians Therefore putting away lying speak the truth every man to his neighbour Truth is the Christians girdle The girdle of truth And in this sense the Proverbe holdeth true Vngirt unblest 3. Without guile in their hearts and spirits It is one branch of Davids description of a blessed man Blessed is the man in whose spirit there is no guile Such is the spirit of a childe There is no guile no hypocrisie in it It is such a one as it seemeth to be And O that it were so with all Christians That they were in this respect as children As children for sinceritie without guile Here is the second of these properties 3. A third followes As children concerning pride Children for humilitie This I take from our Saviour himselfe in the place forenamed Whosoever shall humble himselfe as this little childe c. Children we see how humble how lowly they are Their spirits are not haughtie high minded There are no proud ambitious vaine glorious aspiring thoughts in them They are as well content with their rags as with their robs with a cottage as a pallace often sitting in the dust An embleme of humilitîe A childe sitting in the dust and as well contented there as if it were a throne Such should Christians be of humble and lowly spirits Such a frame of spirit we finde in the man after Gods own heart Lord mine heart is not haughtie c. Surely I have behaved my selfe as a childe c. It is not for Christians to have haughtie hearts or lofty eyes so as to have high thoughts of themselves or seek high things for themselves And seekest thou great things for thy selfe Saith the Lord to 〈◊〉 seek them not This will not children this should not Christians doe Their spirits should lye low so as they may be willing to embrace the Dust if God shall bring them thither This carnall wicked men sometimes do by constraint So shall Babylon do Come downe and sit in the dust O Virgin daughter of Babylon Babylon a Virgin So called because then not deflowred by the enemy Even as Cities that were never sacked nor conquered but have enjoyed a long continued peace they are called Virgin Mayden-Townes as Venice in Italy Dordrecht in Holland so Babylon there in that respect is called a Virgin She shall sit in the dust saith the Prophet which is long since accomplished in typicall and ere long shall be in mysticall Babylon And this Gods own sometimes doe They which were brought up in Skarlet embrace dung-hills It is sayd of the precious sonnes of Sion the Nobles of Israel Lam. 4. and this they ought to do willingly when God calls them to it In this as I sayd like children who if their Parents set them in the dust they are willing withall Is it so that God is pleased at any time to bring any of his children from high estates to meane and low conditions to set them in the dust I suppose with Job upon the dung-hill yet should they herein submit to the will of their heavenly Father Ever having their spirits as low as their conditions Herein again should Christians be as children Children in humility putting on this as a robe being clothed with it as the Apostles both Peter and Paul presse the exhortation Fourthly to this in the fourth place let me joyn another quality not much different from the former and that is Contentation A quality very observable in young children If they have but