〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having confessed but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 confessing their sins and it is not said they were baptized because they had repented but rather on the contrary that John's Baptism was a Baptism unto Repentance v. 11. This you know is consistent enough with Infant-Baptism As for Acts 2.38 it is probable that repentance to which notwithstanding their being pricked in their hearts v. 37. the Apostle exhorts was in them only in fieri before their Baptism for immediately after this Exhortation they were baptized and there could not be time to question three thousand in one day after Sermon which consisting of many main points must needs be long and three of the twelve hours of the day being spent before it begun v. 15. so as to make strict enquiry into and to take distinct notice of the repentance of each of them Of Mat. 28.19 Acts 2.38 and Mat. 3.6 more hereafter Suppose your Texts do shew that the Samaritans §. 3. the Eunuch the Jaylor the Corinthians and others which were then adult and formerly either of the Jewish or Heathenish Religion did believe or profess faith and repentance and were baptized that is nothing to Paedobaptists who never held that a Jew or Heathen should be baptized without profession of faith But grant further That actual Believers or Professors are indeed the primary and immediate subject of Baptism and in their own right and their children are but the secundary subject and may not be baptized but by a capacity derived unto them and at that time Christian Churches were but in gathering not gathered The foundation was not to be layd in Infants not in Infants only And the sacred story relating the manner of founding Churches hath not so much occasion to speak of the Baptism of Infants the secundary subject as of actual believers the primary God created the first man and woman of a perfect age though all their posterity were born Infants At first men of age were circumcised Gen. 17.24 with 14.14 and again after some intermission of that Ordinance Josh 5.4 And if any Nation had been Proselyted their men of age must first have been taught or discipled and have made profession of faith before they should have been circumcised though in the setled condition of the Jewish Church Child-circumcision was most in use If Believers and Penitents ought to be baptized will it thence follow that none but they only are to be baptized The rule is A proprio primo modo ad proprium secundo modo non valet argumentum All Crows are black therefore none but only Crows are black is no good argument If it were granted that Infant-Baptism cannot be proved by those Texts yet it will not follow that it cannot be proved by any other Texts Womens admission to the Supper though it cannot be proved by Mat. 26. Mark 14. Luk. 22. Christ admitting only men may notwithstanding be proved by other Scriptures Your notion That none are to be baptized but such as they were whose Baptism is mentioned Acts 8.12 37. 16.34 c. is by some further improved saying All those were such Believers as had been in person Jews or Heathens and therefore such only are to be baptized and those that have Christian Parents and were educated in Christianity from their childhood are not at least not by virtue of any of those Texts to be baptized at all neither in Infancy nor when they make Profession As they in their case so also you in your case are to blame to insert into your Answer the word only which you find in none of your Texts Our Scripture-grounds for Infant-Baptism you shall hear anon Chap. 10. ANABAPT CAT. Q. hat grounds have you against Infant-Baptism A. Many but chiefly Christs Commission Mat. 28.19 where the subjects of Baptism are those that are made Disciples and this Commission is to last to the Worlds end v. 20. and reacheth to every creature that is to partake of Baptism Mark 16.15 16. MAtth. 28.19 is not the first Commission for baptizing Examinat Cap. 2. §. 1. no more then for preaching John Baptist Mat. 3. and Christs Disciples Joh. 4.1 2. did baptize before this and had commission for it Joh. 1.33 Mat. 21.25 26. which Christ confirmed by his being baptized by John Mat. 3.13 Yea we have express Examples in Jewish Records of a Baptism See Mr Selden Dr Hammond Dr Lightfoot Mr Ainsworth Mr Tombes which was a Rite of initiation into the Jewish Church a concomitant of Circumcision if not ancienter So Jacob admitting the preserved Sechemites into communion all of age being women bad them be washed or baptized or cleansed by washing Gen. 35.2 which is the reason why a Jewish Proselyte is in Arrianus called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a baptized person Hence the Jews did not question John's Baptism as a new and unusual Rite they were already well acquainted with it but his Authority to administer it Grotius on Mat. 3.6 conceives it was begun upon occasion and to preserve the memory of the purging of the World by the Deluge and that Peter 1 Pet. 3.21 signifies so much calling Baptism the Antitype and figure of it And the Infants of the Jews were thus admitted as well as the Proselyte for one Ordinance was for both Numb 15.15 And thus the Hebrew Doctors assert notwithstanding Mr T. to the contrary pretends that the Proselytes only were baptized because they were unclean That Israel as well as others entred into Covenant Males by three things viz. Circumcision Baptism and Offering Females only by the two last Now as Christ abolishing the Passover took the postcoenium or common custom used at the Passover of the Master of the Family his breaking a piece of bread and distributing it and a cup of wine amongst the company to be materials of the Lords Supper so he abolishing Circumcision and Offering advanced this ancient usual unquestionable concomitant of Circumcision and of initiation of Males Females Infants or others into the Church to be a Sacrament of the New Testament the use whereof and the persons to whom it should be administred being then ordinarily and commonly known the Scripture did not need to record the commission or warrant given to John or that the Jews had long before for their baptizing It was enough that there is not the least hint in the Word that Baptism when advanced to be a divine Sacrament of the New Testament should not be applyed to Infants as it was before Indeed when the Apostles Commission was to be enlarged to all Nations this being a new thing and rarely known or believed it was needful that it should be set down in terminis as it here is And yet this Gospel was not written till about eight years after the Ascension of Christ and other Gospels were writ some years after this the Jewish Church all this while being guided by the Old Testament and observing the Jewish lawful Rites and Customs and this of baptizing
Parents be Christian partus sequitur meliorem partem the children are not Infidels but Christian But §. 3. say you there is no command for baptizing such and you call it Will-worship forbidden Lev. 10.1 A tradition and ground-work for more traditions others call it the mark of the beast one of the strongest holds of Antichrist and what not To all which I answer 1. If Nadah and Abihu's offering strange fire fire unsanctified or not taken off the Altar Was Will-worship though the Scripture doth not call it so yet Paedobaptism suppose it be not warranted by the Word cannot be will-worship because it is not an introduction of a new Worship or Ordinance but the misapplication of an old and unquestionable Ordinance of God or if you put on it the worst name you can with any shew of reason the Profanation of an Ordinance as your self call it some of your party which have in derision and contempt of Infant-Baptism baptized Horses Cats or Dogs have been unquestionably guilty of horrible Profanation but not of will-worship 2. Infant-Baptism is grounded on and warranted by the Word of God and therefore is far enough from being a Profanation or so much as the misapplication of an Ordinance That it is so grounded and warranted needs no other proof then what hath already been produced in this Examination upon occasion of the Scriptures and Reasons brought against it 1. They that are Disciples in Scripture-sence are expressed in Christs Commission about Baptism and are to be baptized But Infants of the Church are Disciples in Scripture-sence Therefore they are to be baptized See Chap. 2. Sect. 3. 2. They that are Abrahams seed are to be baptized as you confess But such Infants are the seed of Abraham Therefore they are to the baptized See Chap. 7. 3. They that are visibly Within the Covenant of Grace are to be baptized as you acknowledg But such Infants are visibly Within the Covenant of Grace Therefore they are to be baptized See Chap. 8. 4. They that are to be judged Church-members are to be baptized But such Infants of the Church or born of members of the Church are to be judged Church members Therefore c. 5. They of Whom the Kingdom of God is are to partake of the privileges of the Kingdom of God But of Infants is the Kingdom of God Therefore c. 6. They that are Saints and holy are to be baptized But such Infants are Saints and holy Therefore 7. Christ knew that Baptism was an ancient Ceremony of initiation into the Church and applyed to the Infants of the Church as well as to adult Proselytes yet he took up that Ceremony and advanced it as he did the Postcoenium of the Passover to be a Sacrament of the New Testament without prohibition of Infants from it and therefore he did at least approve it should be administred to Infants See Cap. 2. § 1. In these alone to omit others conscientious enquirers into the mind of the Lord Jesus may find satisfactory grounds of Infant-Baptism especially when they are compared with the grounds of the contrary Opinion and Practice You cannot shew any precept at all §. 4. or president or good warrant in the Word of God that children of believing Parents should be kept from Baptism as you require them to be till they do in their own persons actually believe or make profession of Faith or that any such were baptized in riper years as you would have them now to be Yea I further say that if you can shew me in Scripture any son or daughter of believing Parents baptized I shall shew you that he or she was baptized in Infancy Surely from the time that John Baptist begin his Ministry to the writing of the Apocalyps great multitudes of Infants of Christians grew up to maturity yet amongst them all we read not of one whose Baptism was so delayed nor have we any solid ground to conceive that God at the coming of Christ took away Infants Covenant interest Church membership and Sacramental initiation and made their condition as to this as bad as the Heathen and worse then the Jewish children seeing it cannot be said that God did take these priviledges away in judgment upon occasion of Christs coming from all Infants even Elect children of Elect Parents seeing Infants in the time of the Gospel are not any way more guilty or uncapable then in former times nor can it any way appear that God did it in mercy and sure if it was done it was done either in judgment or mercy for it was a mercy to the Jewish children to have these priviledges and nothing more was conferred upon Infants which lost them then upon adult Christians which did not lose them You cannot shew a precept ' or president for your gathering Churches out of other true Christian Churches for requiring persons before they can be admitted members to give account of the truth of their graces for the Congregations judging whether they have grace or no and consequently whether they were to be admitted or no for a solemn explicite Church-Covenant for the erection of a Church without Officers for the power of such a Church consisting only of unofficed Christians to elect ordain impose hands by one or more of them on their Officers to censure or excommunicate any member yea any or all their Officers when they have them for maintenance of Ministers by Lords Day-Collections formerly urged as an Ordinance of God though of late much waved for a sentence of non-communion with Sister-Churches for Synods only consultative and not decretive for publike ordinary preaching of gifted men not so much as intending the Ministry and their receiving maintenance for their pains and yet these are asserted by men of the Congregational way in which Antipaedobaptists are generally found to be duties priviledges of the Church or Ordinances of God nor can you shew any Church consisting of unbaptized ones such as you account your selves to be your Infant-Baptism being a nullity till you be baptized upon profession und such a Church admitting members commissionating some Disciples to preach and dip nor any precept or president for admission of such which are in your opinion unbaptized to the Lords Supper not for rebaptizing such as were baptized suppose in Infancy in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost or for renouncing such Baptism nor can you shew any one Text of Scripture in which Infant-Baptism either in express words or in the interpretation of any Apostolick or Primitive Church or Father in the purest Times nor can you shew one visible Church from the beginning of the World to the time when your Opinion was lately broached which was of any long continuance and did neither admit into it nor permit in it any Infant-member Finally §. 5. Should you or I be required a Command for admission of women to the Supper as you require a Command for Infant-Baptism though you can neither shew command
possibly you that published this Catechism may be of the strictest Sect of your Religion as the worst of these at their first separating from us seemed also to be and do abhor to have communion not only with these but with Drunkards Adulterers Swearers c. To you I say if there be not amongst you Drunkards Adulterers Swearers c. Satan himself is none of these but are there not seditious schiâ—matical persons that say all the Church is holy sacrilegious persons that devour that which is holy or dedicated to the service of God and his Church not by themselves which was Ananias his sin but by others Are there not Murderers Railers false Accusers Lyars proud boasters covetous traytors heady high minded lovers of themselves despisers of good men having a form of godliness c. Such an one is Satan As for the rotten members in Paedobaptists Congregations they are or should be duly proceeded against and much good is done that way in many Congregations where Government is set up and people help forward the work humane infirmities both in Rulers and ruled ever have been and will be And more good had been done had not the separation of some from us the exemption by the Civil Powers from Church-government of whosoever will not freely own it the unjust clamors of Presbyterian Rigidness and Tyranny together with the Tumults and Troubles of the Times hindred it As for Infant-Baptism §. 4. it is a consecrating of children to God and formally initiates them into the Church which is a great benefit as casting out or excommunicating out of the Church is a great censure it is an outward distinctive sign of Christians children from Pagans signifies their original sin and necessity of regeneration even before the commission of actual sin and the Salvation of Infants as well as grown men by Christ It makes Infants partakers of the Ordinances at least of the Prayers of the Church as members thereof it pre-engageth them to a Christian Course when they have the least prejudice and obstruction against it and as soon as they are capable to receive the nurture and admonition of the Lord to frequent Ordinances to own Jesus Christ by external profession it binds Parents to be more careful and conscientious of their Religions Education it comforts their hearts godly Parents may speak this experimentally to see their Children thus sealed in assurance that God is their God and the God of their seed Yea God doth sometimes yea always as we ought to judg till the contrary appear baptize them inwardly or inâ—use grace or the seed of it into the Soul of the baptized Infant These and the like were counted great benefits in the time of the Law and are they or can they be mischiefs in the time of the Gospel You assert indeed That delaying of Baptism would make men careful to get knowledg and holiness whereas now they viz. they that do not delay Baptism are careless of both But may they not be as conscientiously taught and as careful and apt to learn in Christs School in his visible Kingdom as out of it baptized as unbaptized Are not many grown persons as forgetful and careless of the Promises they make on their sick beds and other occasions as of those which were made in Infancy Are Anabaptists the only men that are careful to get knowledg and holiness Are not multitudes of persons which were baptized in their Infancy as careful to get knowledg and holiness and as good Proficients therein as any others Is it better not to put children into a lease or grant of a priviledg lest they should be secure and careless to pay rent and do homage then to put them in May not deferring of Baptism so long make them despise it when they come to age Satan may more easily keep children when grown up from receiving Christianity then work them to renounce it though he sometimes prevails with Witches and Wizzards to renounce their Baptism received in Infancy that they may be his vassals and more assured to him Keeping the children of Christians out of the Church is a strange way sure it is none of Gods ways nor is it likely to prevail to make them in love with Christianity If any good can be done by such mediums the warrantable deferring of the Lords Supper alone may do it as well as the unwarrantable delaying of Baptism As for darkening the Doctrine of Baptism experience teacheth us that the Doctrine thereof was clear enough in Scripture and competently understood as well as the Doctrine of the Lords Supper before such opposition hath been made to Infant-Baptism If it be now darkened the darkness is not from Infant-Baptism but from your opposite Opinion and Practice ANABAPT CAT. Q. But may not Infants be baptized if they be Abrahams seed A. Yes But we Gentiles are only Abrahams seed by believing Gal. 3.7 so Rom. 4.16 Gal. 3.29 They that would make the children of Believers to be the seed of Abraham are mistaken for the Scripture speaketh but of three seeds of Abraham viz. Christ Gal. 3.16.2 The carnal seed 3. The Believer Jew or Gentile Gal. 3.28 And they add a fourth seed of Abraham viz. the seed or children of Believers amongst the Gentiles about which the Scripture is silent EIther you do not sufficiently enumerate Exam. Chap. 7. or not rightly understand your enumeration of the Scripture-kinds of Abrahams seed or both For 1. Christ personal is not the whole of Abrahams seed to whom though he be the whole in whom 2 Cor. 1.20 the Promises were made but Christ mystical the whole Church of Christ 1 Cor. 12.12 13. all which whether Jews or Gentiles bond or free I may add young or old are but one in their Head Jesus Christ Gal. 3.28 All that are Christs are Abrahams seed vers 29. and Infants are his as well as grown persons for he became an Infant suffered much in his very Infancy was the Head of the Church while an Infant and therefore might well have Infant-members dyed for Infants as well as for grown men bad his Disciples to suffer little children to come to him if not that he might baptize them for he baptized none at all Infants or others Joh. 4.1 2. yet that he might bless them and said that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven 2. As for the carnal seed of Abraham their fleshly relation was not sufficient to entitle them to Church-priviledges except they had a spiritual relation also Rom 9 6 8. Open Apostates and Revolters though the carnal seed of Abraham were not counted of the Church but as strangers and Heathens as David calls them Psal 54.3 59.5 That Text Exod. 12.48 prohibiting strangers did by the rule of proportion prohibit from the Passover all such Jews as did forsake the Faith The Caldee Paraphrast saith No son of Israel that is an Apostate or fallen from the Faith shall eat of it Cain and his posterity were rejected Gen. 4.15
â—â—ll age which qualifies him for Baptism is not an Hypocrite at this minute and will not be an Apostate the next nor can we know that they are in the Covenant for then we should know they are elected whereas this is a secret known only to God 2 Tim. 2.19 Deut. 29.19 And the little ones of the Church though they make no personal profession as adult persons do yet are as visibly within the Covenant of Grace parents having as much authority and reason to covenant for their children now as Deut. 29.10 with 30 6. and as charitably to be accounted of seeing of adult Christians the weakest can hold forth no more then the least degree of absolute probability and the strongest no more then the highest degree of probability Peter saith § 2. Act. 2.38 39. The promise is to you and to your children Concerning which observe 1. That hereby is not meant Christ is exhibited as some gloss The promise Is id est fulfilled Christ is come for this they had heard before vers 36. and knew to their trouble and therefore were pricked in their hearts and these words are not any where in Scripture so taken nor is Baptism a seal barely to Christ being come in the flesh but to the benefits thereof covenanted and promised not is it a promise of the gifts of the Holy Ghost but the promise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gospel promise of remission of sin Heb. 8.10 12. signed and sealed in Baptism Act. 3.19 which belongs to Gods people at all times might heal their being pricked in their heart vers 37. and is fitly used as a motive to perswade them to repent and be baptized and is a suitable answer to their question What shall we do to be saved 2. He saith not The promise is to you and to as many as God shall call whether of your children or strangers as he might have said if he would have levelled the children of Christians and Pagans but he saith The promise is to you and to your children and to as many making their children a distinct party as from those that then were so from those that after should be called the words holding out their right are in the Indicative Mood The promise is to you the like is never said to Pagans or to any out of the Church 3. These words are the same in substance with the reason and ground of Circumcision Gen. 17.8 10 11. That Promise and Covenant was a Gospel Covenant In thy seed shal all the Nations of the Earth be blessed and was an everlasting Covenant made four hundred thirty years before the Law and to be fulfilled in a great part of it after the ceasing of Moses Paedagogy and of Circumcision Gal. 3.15 16 17. Rom. 4.12 16 24. Heb. 13.20 Rev. 14.6 and the said everlasting Covenant was not only with actual Beleevers but with the lineal seed of Abraham even before they actually believed till some open revolt did disable them and with the Infant-seed of Proselytes or Gentiles converted to the saith 4. His motion that every one of them should be baptized doth imply they had right to Baptism for he doth not perswade them to be Usurpers of that to which they had no right and he grounds his motion not only upon their bare personal interest in the Promise but their childrens joynt interest with them as in Gen. 17. God doth for Circumcision which latter could not rationally be urged as a motive to perswade the Jews to be baptized and to embrace Christian Religion if the joynt interest of their children with them were not at least fully as great in the Christian as in the Jewish Church Now if a Jew had a child born before his Conversion to Christianity that child was Sacramentally to be initiated but if he had a child after you say it was not but was in the same condition with a Pagans child viz. not to be admitted into the Church till it were called And if so then where is the benefit belonging to the children of Jews converted by virtue of their Christianity If a Landlord should move his Tenants to give up his old Lease or Grant which hath certain immunities and priviledges to him and his children and to take a new one in which his children should have no more priviledges then meer strangers could he rationally perswade him to surrender the old Lease or Grant and to take a new one from the benefit that may accrue to the Tenant and his children by it 5. Here seem to be three ranks and conditions of persons 1. The Jews themselves then present and adult 2. Their children the present issue which already was or should be born of their bodies what ever they were younger or elder Infants not excluded 3. Those that were afar off not in estate for the mystery of the calling of the Gentiles was not fully closed with by Peter till Act. 10. nor could the Jews yet bear that saying but those that were afar off in time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we with Piscator may add 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a different phrase from that used of the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 2.13 17. and fitly may denote the posterity of the Jews in after ages 6. These Jews it 's likely were pricked in their hearts not only for their crucifying of Christ but their cursing their children about two months since Matt. 27.25 which curse did include their very Infants then newly born and others that should be born afterward and therefore if Peter had not included Infants in this Promise the plaister had not been large enough for their sore Lastly The Jews were apt long after this to scruple lesser matters Acts 21.20 and can it be thought that they should not startle and be discontented to have both Circumcision and Baptism taken from their Infants nor enquire whether this seclusion of their Infants was not a fruit of their cursing of them or how it could be justified by the Old Testament there being then no other written Word or by what warrant the Church-membership and Covenant-interest which their children formerly had was repealed and taken from them By all which seriously considered it will appear that the children of Believers are included within the Promise and to be baptized Besideâ— if Infants be not within the Covenant of Grace then they are strangers from it and consequently without God and without hope as Pagans children are and if they dye though in Infancy their Parents may mourn over them as such that have no hope contrary to 1 Thess 4.13 yea while they live they may lament over their children as such whom they have begotten and brought forth to the Devil and not to God in respect of their visible estate ANABAPT CAT. Q. What is Circumcision A. It was an Obligation to keep the whole Law Gal. 5.3 Rom. 2.24 and shewed unto them that it was their duty to circumcise their hearts Jer. 4.4 CIrcumcision in it self
that can beleeve yet it may be applyed without in those that cannot beleeve else how could any Infants be saved IF you know nothing of their Salvation Chap. 5. Christ doth Mark 10.14 Of such saith he is the Kingdom of Heaven He means not only those that are meek humble harmless like little children for he would not have blamed those that would have kept little children from him nor have blessed them when they came if they were only meer emblems of such as are blessed as a Lamb or a Dove may be but little children themselves David judged that his child though adulterously begotten and whom God took away in his wrath was saved else he would not have eaten and drunk and rejoyced that he should go to it 2 Sam. 12.20 If any affirm That all Infants of Christians dying in Infancy are certainly saved I know no Scripture against it and if there be no place punctually proving it we are bound to encline to the more charitable opinion Mat. 7.1 especially when we speak of this or that particular Infant You say they may be saved without Baptism true there is a possibility of it so if Infants of the Jews had not been circumcised the eight day and had dyed uncircumcised they might also have been saved their parents or governors being guilty of the contempt or neglect of the Ordinance not they and why should their Salvation or Damnation depend upon others doing or not doing their duty That phrase of cutting off Gen. 17.14 either concerns grown men only or threatens only excommunication or death not eternal damnation God had mercy on the penitent thief yet it is presumption in us to defer repentance till death or to neglect Baptism God can bring a child into the world without a midwife shall we therefore neglect the means Parents when their children are baptized before they dye may not only be comforted in the performance of their duty but also have more grounded hopes of their childrens Salvation Your Antipoedobaptistical Doctrines do take away all or most of the grounds of hope which Christian parents have of the Salvation of their dying Infants ANABAPT CAT. Q. Whether do you think it were better for persons to have Baptism deferred till they be able to make a profession of faith A. Yes it would be far better for hereby the Churches would have right matter i.e. Saints in profession and persons would be careful to get knowledg and holiness whereas now they are careless of hoth Infant-haptism brings many mischiefs besides that it fills the Church with rotten members confounds the Church and the world together and is a groundwork for more tradition and doth so darken the Doctrine of Baptism that we cannot know the true meaning of it when we read it in Scripture THe many mischiefs of Infant-Baptism and the benefis of such delaying of it Examinat Cap. 6. § 1. were unknown to the Apostolique Primitive Church else sure they would have left us some Precept or President of their delaying the Baptism of the children of Christian parents The Jewish Church had Child Circumcision and Child Baptism too as Rites of Initiation had it been better they had been deferred was not the Jewish Church to be freed from mischiefs as you call them as well as the Christian Church If Childrens admission did not bring such mischiefs upon the Jewish how comes it to be so mischievous to the Christian Church We have a Command for Child-baptism not indeed such a direct express Command as they had for Circumcision but a virtual implicite and consequential Command as you shall hear anon Chap. 10. and this is abundantly sufficient to clear it from being a cause of it self of any mischief at all You hold and pretend to prove § 2. that John Baptist and the Disciples of Christ did not baptize Infants but were no rotten members baptized when Jerusalem all Iudea and all the rigion round about Iordan came and were baptized Mat. 3. Mark 1. yea that people or multitude whom or some of whom he called Generation of Vipers Luk. 3.7 with 21. Mr Cobbet a New-England Divine saith Iohn Baptist did and might lawfully baptize those multitudes albeit in the general he knew that many yea most of them would prove false and frothy Mr Nyes another of them saith The Apostles for the baptizing of three thousand expected no testimonies nor a day much less a month or years experience nor could they in so short time make any inquisitions or hear any perswasive relations When all the Samaritans very lately bewitched by Simon Magus Act. 8.9 10. were baptized vers 12. was there then no rotten members Suppose all London Middlesex and all the region round about Thames or Trent should be Jews or Heathens and surely you account them now much better and should presently upon hearing of a Sermon make some profession of faith or confession of sins and be baptized would you judg all these right matter Saints and that there is no rotten member amongst them What became of those multitudes and Myriads of baptized ones when Christ suffered or afterwards if they were not rotten members Were not Judas Ananias Saphira Himeneus Philetus and many others rotten members Were there not amongst the Corinthians though called Saints a parte meliore as we call a Whe it-field a Corn-field though we see many tares and thistles in it known carnal Schismatiques Fornicaters Idolaters some that sacrificed to Devils drunken Communicants Heretiques denying the Resurrection Despisers of Paul Admirers of the false Teachers Men as Paul feared that had not repented of the uncleanness fornication and lasciviousness they had committed amongst whom were debates envyings wraths strifes backbitings whisperings swelling tumults c. were none of these rotten members It is the work of the Ministry to convince rotten members of their rottenness and by the blessing of God to convert them and make them sound 1 Cor. 5. 6. 10. Gal. 4.19 And if so be they remain incurable and after much means pains and patiences are not reclaimed the Church may cut them off Though the draw-net doth take in both good and bad yet the bad afterward may be cast away Matth. 13.47.48 Are there not also amongst the Anabaptists notwithstanding their rejection of Infant-Baptism many rotten members §. 3. Heretiques Blasphemers such as deny the Trinity the Divinity or Humanity of Jesus Christ the Immortality of the Soul the Morality of the Sabbath Authority of the Scriptures the guilt of original sin the necessity yea very being of the Ministry Officers and Ordinances Assertors of the whole Body of Arminianism of immediate Revelations and Enthusiasms of Antinomianism of Poligamy perfection of grace Who more then the Anabaptists I had almost said who but they have been given up by God to those strong and strange delusions to those damnable Opinions and abominable Practices mentioned in the late Act Where is there a more wicked and wretched Sect then the Ranters But
16. cum Gen. 6.1 2. So Ishmael cast out and the Ishmaelites Gal. 4 30. Gen. 21.10 14. Psal 83.6 which last place mentions the Edomites also which were the posterity of Abraham yea all the twelve Tribes which were the seed of Abraham were cast off at the last and yet their being begotten after the flâ—sh and being circumcised in the flesh was an help not an hindrance to their being begotten of the Promise or to Circumcision in the Spirit Jacob was of Isaac and Rebecca after the flesh and yet also the heir of Promise And as then some were born only after the flesh as Ishmael Esau and some were also born after the spirit as Isaac Jacob So the Apostle looking not only to the Parallel but to the History saith So it is now some even in the time of the Gospel are born of Christian Parents only after the flesh and some also after the spirit and these do persecute one another Gal. 4.29 This difference may discover it self in riper years but in Infancy it is as undiscoverable now as then 3. It was not necessary that they should be the carnal seed of Abraham that were in Covenant-relation and initiated into the Church for Abraham was as to this not only the father of the Jews but of many Nations and upon this account his name was changed Gen. 17.4.5 Proselytes being Gentiles as well as we and not of his carnal seed nor many so much as of his family yet they were the seed of Abraham by believing as wel as we are now and they were not only initiated into the Church but those of them that were of Abrahams family were the foundationals and first members of the Church as constituted in Abrahams family his 318 trained servants besides others were not all if any of his carnal seed 4. As for the Infants of Believers which you separate from their Parents of which see before Chap. 3. § 3. and make them a fourth seed you know that Proselytes became Abrahams seed only by believing as you say we Gentiles now do and yet their children were accounted Abrahams seed though they be none of the three which you mention and as such were initiated into the Church Gen. 17.12 23. Exod. 12.48 49. In the same sence that Abraham was a father to a Proselyte or believing Gentile and his seed then he is a father to a Christian Gentile and his seed now for his Paternity abides the same nor can you shew a better warrant for his Paternity over the one then over the other nor have the Gentiles lost any priviledg by the coming of Christ which they had before The Scripture saith The Brethren now are the children of the Promise as Isaac was Gal. 4.28 Now Isaac was the seed of Abraham and in the Promise as an Infant of believing Parents before he was an actual Believer and his Infants waâ— within the Covenant and accordingly initiated into the Church Abraham might say God is my God and the God of my Infant seed and so might the Gentile proselyted say also and why may not a Christian who is blessed with faith-ful Abraham Gal. 3.9 say so too especially seeing Jesus Christ the Minister of Circumcision did not abrogate but confirm the Promises made unto the fathers and that the Gentiles might glorifie God for his Mercy c. Rom. 15.8 9. God alluding to the outward Circumcision of his people and their seed promiseth to circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their seed Deut. 30.6 and this promise is Gospel and a parcel of the Covenant of Grace as appears by Deut. 30.6 10 11 12. with Rom. 10.6 7 8. and this circumcision of the heart is commended Rom. 2.28 29. and is signified and sealed in Baptism Colos 2.11 12. It is observed that Gen. 17.7 speaks not of Abraham and his seed which you say are actual Believers abstractedly taken but of his seed in their generations which words necessarily imply and include as the Parents generating so the Children generated Lastly Abraham is not only called the father of particular Believers but the father of Nations professing the true faith as well as of the Jewish Nation Every Nation receiving the true Faith as they did and in which there is a National Agreement in Doctrine Worship Discipline as was in the Nation of the Jews is an holy Nation a peculiar people to the Lord even Egypt and Assyria with Israel and may call Abraham father Isai 19.21 Gen. 17.5 When the Gentiles were graffed into that stock from which the Jews were broken off and did partake of the root and fatness of the Olive tree Rom. 11.17 and Abraham began to be the father of many Nations Rom. 4.16 17. Regenerate Infants are Abrahams spiritual seed by Mr. T. his confession and he professeth that he would baptize them if he could know them I am sure no one dare say of this or that particular Infant that it is not regenerate yea we are bound to judg they are such till something appear to the contrary ANABAPT CAT. Q. But are not the children of godly persons visibly in the Covenant of Grace A. No the Covenant of Grace is an invisible thing and we cannot know who are in it nor have we grounds to judg persons are in it till we see some profession of holy life of faith and repentance which Infants cannot make NOt to speâ—k of such as are only intentionally in the Covenant of Grace as children yet unborn may be Examinat Cap. 8. § 1. Deut. 29.15 Those that are Actually in the Covenant of Grace are of two sorts Some are externally in it as Ishmael Judas Simon Magus and so all such as own God to be their God and themselves to be his people as the Jewish Church did and every true Christian Church doth though but externally are said to be within the Covenant Your self say that profession of faith and repentance are grounds to judg some persons to be in the Covenant of Grace There is external being in Christ Joh. 15.2 Vocation Mat. 22.14 Sanctification Heb. 10.29 and purging from sin 2 Pet. 1.9 But some are also internally and savingly in the Covenant of Grace as Isaac Jacob while Infants and when adult also Zacheus Lydia and her houshold the Jaylor and all his This distinction is grounded upon Rom. 9.4 6 7 8. We may know who is in the Covenant of Grace externally but the Covenant of Grace in the second sence is invisible and none could know who were in it in the time of the Jews though Infants were then visibly in it and initiated as such or amongst Christians If the invisibleness of the Covenant of Grace and our not knowing who are in it doth exclude Infants it doth also exclude adult Professors from admission into the Church for the signs of their being savingly in the Covenant of Grace are but conjectural hopeful and probable not certain and infallible none can be sure that he that makes profession at a