all Mosaical Rites ended so did the Covenant of Circumcision also God never said he would be the God of Abraham's natural Seed as such as he gave himself to him and to all his true spiritual Seed for to them he gives himself or an Interest in all God is or has so far as communicative even for ever and ever or to all Eternity the Covenant of Grace being ordered in all things and sure 2 Sam. 23.5 'T is impossible this Covenant and Covenant Blessings which is comprehensive of all Grace here and Glory hereafter should referr to a certain Period of time and since he was not thus in Covenant with Abraham's carnal Seed as such 't is evident the Covenant of Circumcision tho' called an Everlasting Covenant was not the Covenant of Grace And so much to this Objection 8. Obj. There was never but one Covenant of Works and that God made with Adam and in him with all his Postâ—rity therefore the Covenant of Circumcision did not appertain in the Covenant of Works See Mr. Flavel Answ. First Our Controversie lies not so much about the Covenant of Works as given to Adam but about the Nature of Sinai Covenant since Circumcision appears to be of the same Nature with that I do not say in every respect there is no difference between the Covenant of Works made with Adam and that made with the Peopâ—e of Israel though theâ— differ not Essentially in Substance 't is all one and the same Covenant viz. Requiring compleat and perfect Righteousness 2. Therefore tho' there is but one Covenant of Works yet there was more than one Addition or Administration of the said Covenant This is evident although given upon a different end purpose and design by the Lord. Adam's Covenant I grant had one end and design and the Sinai Covenant of Works had another yet may be both as to the Essence and Substance of them but one and the same Covenant Which doubtless is all Mr. Cary intends 1. Adam's Covenant had Happiness and Justification in it by his perfect Obedience thereto and he being able in the time of his Innocency to keep it he was thereby Justified 2. But the Second Edition or Ministration of the Covenant of Works given to the People of Israel tho' in its Nature and Quality it was a Covenant of Works and one with the former yet it was not given for Life or to Justifie them nor was it able so to do by reason of their Weakness through the Flesh Rom. 8.3 But it was added because of Transgression 1. To restrain Sin or as I said before to regulate their Lives under those external Covenant Transactions of God with them as his People as before expressed 2. To make Sin appear exceeding sinful 3. To discover to them what Righteousness it is God doth require in order to the Justification of the Soul in his Sight 4. To make known to them thereby what a Righteousness Man originally in the First Adam had and lost and 5 thly It did discover their woefull Condition to them and might put â—hem upon seeking Relief and Justification by the promised Seed and so be as a School-Master to bring them to Christ. 6. That in their Conformity to it to their utmost Power to continue â—ll those outward Blessings and Privileges to the House or Church of Israel as God promised to Abraham upon that Account for 't is evident the Promises made to them upon their Obedience were Earthly and Temporal Promises and not Spiritual Hence the Apostle saith the New Covenant is established upon better Promises And Now that the Sinai Covenant was a Covenant of Works as considered â—n it self notwithstanding the end and design of God therein I find many of our sound Protestant Divines do affirm tho' given with a merciful and gracious intention or in subserviency to the Gospel 1. It commanded or did require perfect or compleat Obedience 2. On these Terms Do and Live 3. It gave no strength nevertheless to perform what its just Demands were Hence the strength of Sin is called the Law it did Condemn but could not Save 4. Nor was there any Pardon or Remission of Sin by that Covenant for any Soul that broke it for He that despised against Moses's Law dyed without mercy under two or three witnesses Heb. 10.28 Moreover 5. It cursed all that did not continue in all Things that were contained in the whole Book of the Law to do them Gal. 3.10 6. The Holy Ghost calls it the Old Covenant in contra distinction and direct Opposition to the Covenant of Grace or Gospel Covenant The law is not of faitâ— but the man that doth those things them shall live in them Gal. 3.12 And tho' Moses was the Mediator of that Covenant yet he was but a Typical Mediator and stood between God and them to plead for the Blessings of that Covenant and to prevent the Threatnings of Temporal Judgments for there was never but one Mediator between God and us upon a spiritual Account i. e. To stand between eternal Wrath and us or to make Peace with God for our Souls Take what the Learned Bishop Usher hath said about the Law as a Covenant of Works viz. Quest. How doth this Covenant i. e. The Covenant of Grace differ from that of Works Answ. His Answer is much every way for first in many Points the Law may be conceived by Reason but the Gospel in all Points is far above the reach of Man's Reason Secondly the Law commandeth to do good and giveth no strength the Gospel enableth us to do good the Holy Ghost writing the Law in our Hearts Thirdly The Law promised Life only the Gospel Righteousness also Fourthly The Law required perfect Obedience the Gospel the Righteousness of Faith Fifthly The Law revealeth Sin rebuketh us for Sin and leaves us in it but the Gospel doth reveal unto us Remission of Sins and freeth us from the Punishment belonging thereunto Sixthly The Law is the ministration of Wrath Condemnation and Death the Gospel is a ministry of Grace Justification and Life Seventhly The Law was grounded on Man's own Righteousness requiring of every Man in his own Person perfect Obedience Deut. 27.26 And in default for satisfaction everlasting Punishment Gal. 3.10 12. But the Gospel is grounded on the Righteousness of Christ admitting Payment and Performance in another in behalf of so many as receive it Gal. 3.13.14 Bishop Usher's Summ and Substance of Christian Religion p. 159. A multitude of Protestant Writers I might produce who all assert the same Doctrine And if the Sinai Covenant was not a Covenant of Works Why do all our Brethren say as it was a Covenant of Works 't is done away and Why doth the Apostle say Christ is the end of the Law as touching Righteousness It is not abolished or done away as 't is a Rule of Righteousness for as so it abides as a perpetual Rule and Law to us Therefore I wonder at Mr. Flavel's Out-crys against
to it since they are forced to fly to such an Argument as this to prove Circumcision to be a Gospel Covenant I shall not now enter upon the Debate Whether the Ceremonial Law was a part of the Covenant of Works or not tho' I must say I judge it was an Appendix to it and that it appertained to the First Covenant the Apostle affirms Heb. 9.1 They are to clear up this viz. How the Ceremonial Law is part of the First Covenant and yet no part of the Covenant of Works 2. Yet their Work lies not so much in that neither as it doth in this Respect viz. They are to prove That the Ceremonial Law was part of the Covenant of Grace which as yet none of them that I ever heard of have attempted to do tho' we grant it was a Shadow of it when they have proved that they have in the 3. Third Place another Task viz. To prove that Circumcision was â— part of the Ceremonial Law for tho' it was a Figure or a Sign yet it may be doubted of Whether it was a part of that Law or not Yet 4. It might be a part of or appertain unto the Sinai Covenant for 1 t is called a Covenant that 's evident but Where is the Ceremonial Law â—o called 2. It gave the Children of Israel an Assurance of the Sinai â—ovenant and that the Apostle calls The great and chiefest Advâ—ntage â—hey had by it 3. It also was of the same nature and quality and had â—e like Promises annexed to it upon their Obedience and the same â—hreatning upon their Disobedience 4. It obliged those who were Cirâ—umcised to keep the said Law Gal. 5.3 It was I have proved of the â—â—me Nature and Quality i. e. a Conditional Covenant and like Promise â—f Earthly Blessings and like Threatnings annexed to it Secondly Was not the Ceremonial Law a Part of that Law St. Paul â—alls The Hand-Writing of Ordinances that was against us which was contrary 〈◊〉 us and took it out of the way nailing it to his Cross Col. 2.14 If Cirâ—â—mcision was part of this Law sure it did not appertain to the Gospel or â—ew Covenant much less the Seal of it for then it could not be against us but for us not contrary to us but agreeable to us as a Choice Blessing 2. And if the Covenant of Circumcision was a Part of the Ceremonial Law 't is evident that Covenant is abolished and if the Covenant be cancelled or abolished What good will the Seal do them 3. That the Ceremonial Law was part of the First Covenant 't is evident Heb. 9.1 2. Then verily the First Covenant had also Ordinances of Divine Service and Worldly Sanctuary The Old Covenant comprehended not only the Sinai ministration as a Covenant of Works do this and live but also the whole Mosaical Oeconomy and Aronical Priesthood Sacrifices and all manner of shadowing Rites and Ordinances whatsoever amongst which Old Covenant Rites or Legal Ordinances Circumcision was one of the chief so that this makes against them 4. All the Holiness and Sanctification of the Ceremonial Law only appertained to the Flesh and therefore no part of the New Covenant Heb. 9.13 What tho' it was dedicated by Blood it was but Typical Blood Blood of Bulls and Goats that could not take away Sin purge the Conscience nor make any thing perfect Mr. Elton on Colossians speaking of Col. 2. ver 14. puts forth this Question viz. Quest. How were the Legal Ceremonies of the Jews a Hand-Writing of Ordinances Answ. I answer saith he they were so in regard of their Use to the Jews who in using them as it were Subscribed to their own Guiltiness of Death and Damnation In using Circumcision they made known they had ordinal Sin and were guilty of it their Washings shewed they were exceeding filthy in God's sight and so guilty of the Curse of the Law and so did their Sacrifices Hence God in infinite Mercy sent his Son to pay our Debts and he has satisfied Divine Justice and so has cancelled this Hand-Writing that witnessed our Guiltiness and bound us over to Punishment What good will it do them to grant That Circumcision was part of the Law I know not these Things considered For they evident it is were bound exactly to keep all the Laws Statutes and Ordinances of that Law which I think a Learned Man says were more then 300 nay and if they continued not in doing all these Things they were Cursed when they sate down and when they rose up wheâ— they went abroad and when they came home see Deut 27.20 to 26. Gal. â—â— 10. Cursed is he that continueth not in all things that are written in the Book of tâ—â— Law to do them Mind it well all Things in the whole Book of the Lawâ— not only the Ten Precepts but all things contained in the Ceremonial Laâ— also 6. Therefore tho' the Blood of Bulls Goats and Heifers are called thâ— Blood of the Covenant yet it was not the Blood of the New Covenanâ— but of the Old neither the First Covenant was dedicated without Blood Heb. 9.18 True the Blood of the Old Covenant figured the Blood of the New yet that doth no more prove the Ceremonial Law was part of the New Covenant then the Shadow can be proved to be the Substance and therefore tho' those Sacrifices pointed to Christ yet that Law was part of the Covenant of Works i. e. no Life by it In those Sacrifices God's Soul had no Pleasure 7. Nor could they see or look beyond those things which are abolished see 2 Cor. 3.13 From hence I argue If the Ceremonial Law was a Hand-Writing i. e. a Bond or Obligation of Conviction Accusation and Condemnation to the Jews binding them farther to the Curse of the Moral Law it was no part of the Covenant of Grace but the former is true Ergo Therefore whatever gracious Design God had in it or however useful to the Elect yet in it self it was a Law of Works tho' given in Subserviency to the Gospel Law as the Sinai Law was 6. Obj. God gave himself to Abraham to be his God and the God of his Seed in the Covenant of Circumcision or made over himself by way of special Interest to them in it so Mr. Flavell positively affirms Therefore it was the Covenant of Grace Answ. I Answer This I am persuaded is the grand Cause of their great boldness and mistake in affirming the Covenant of Circumcision was the Covenant of Grace and therefore ought the more carefully to be Examined Considered and Answered for if Mr. Flavel and the rest of our Brethren are right in this Assertion i. e. That God gave himself in Circumcision to Abraham and to all his Seed to be their God by way of special Interest they say a great deal but this we deny 1. As to Abraham God gave himself to him to be his God yea gave him special Interest in himself but it was before he
Mr. Cary as if it was impossible for the Saints to be under the Covenant of Works under the former Dispensation and yet in the Covenant of Grace for I would know Whether or not they were not at that time under the Ministration of that Covenant but what tho' no sooner did they believe in Christ the Promised Seed but they were delivered from the Curse of the Law Nor is this any strange Thing For are not all now in these Days under the Dispensation of the Gospel yet untill Men and Women believe in Christ they abide still under the Curse of the Law of the First Covenant for Christ is not the end of the Law to all the World so as some erroneously assert i. e. all are justified in God's sight from the Curse of the Law but he is only the end of the Law touching Righteousness to every one that beleiveth to them and to no other Adult Person Therefore Men might be under the outward Dispensation of the Law of Works and yet through Faith be Justified and also others may be and are now under the Dispensation of the Gospel and yet for not believing in Christ be Condemned and under the Curse of the Law For the Gospel is not the Cause of our Sickness but our Cure none believing is the refusal of the Medicine So that there 's no Reason for him to say because we assert this That the Godly under that Dispensation hung mid-way betwixt Life and Death Justification and Condemnation and after Death mid-way betwixt Heaven and Hell p. 180. Therefore as all that lived under the Dispensation of the Law or Covenant of Works were saved by Faith in the Promise of Christ or by the Covenant of Grace Abraham saith our Saviour saw my Day and was glad so without Faith or Interest in Christ such that live under the Dispensation of the Gospel cannot be saved nor are they delivered from the Curse of the Law or Covenant of Works Therefore to conclude with this 't is evident the Covenant of Works though but one as to the substance of it yet there was several Ministrations of it as it was given also upon different Ends and Designs by the Lord And therefore because the said Covenant of Works was first given to Adam by vertue of which he was accepted and justified in his Innocency Could not God give forth a Second Addition Ministration or Transcript of his Righteousness and Holy Law requiring perfect Obedience though not to Justification yet to aggravate their Sin and so to their just Condemnation And doth not the Apostle assert the same Thing Rom. 3.19 20. compared with Rom. 7.13 Gal. 3.19 But saith Bishop Usher Quest. Doth not God wrong to Men to require of him that he is not able to perform Answ. He Answers No for God made Man so that he might have performed it but he by Sin spoiled himself and Posterity of those Gifts Therefore To proceed I do affirm That always generally when the Apostle speaks of the Old Covenant or Covenant of Works he passes by in silence the Covenant made with Adam and more immediately and directly applies it unto the Sinai Covenant and to that of Circumcision as all careful Readers who read the Epistles to the Romans Galatians and to the Hebrews may clearly find And farther to evince the Truth we contend for 't is evident That although there is and ever was but one Covenant of Grace yet nothing is more plain then that there were several distinct Additions of it altho' we say the Promise or Gospel Covenant was one and the same in all Ages in respect of the Things promised with the Nature and Quality thereof which is a free and absolute Covenant without Works or Conditions of foreseen Acts of Obedience or Righteousness done by the Creature whatsoever Rom. 4.5 The Substance and Essential Part of this Gospel Covenant as to the Promises of it is Christ Faith a New Heart Regeneration Remission of Sins Sanctification Perseverance and everlasting Life Yet this Evangelical Covenant had divers Forms Additions or Transcripts of it which signified those Things and the various Sanctions by which it was given forth and confirmed To Adam the Promise of it was under the Name Of the Seed of the Woman bruising the Head of the Serpent To Enoch Noah c. in other Terms To Abraham under the Name of His Seed in whom all the Nations of the Earth should be blessed To Moses by the Name of A great Prophet among his Brethren and it was signified also unto him under dark Shadows and Sacrifices Unto David under the Name of A Successour in his Kingdom To other Prophets more clearer still made known Unto as a Child is born a Woman shall compass a Man a New Covenant I will make c In the New Testament in plain Words We all with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord 2 Cor. 3.18 But now because there were so many Additions or Ministrations of the Gospel or New Covenant Doth it follow there are so many New Covenants This being so Mr. Flavel hath done nothing to remove Mr. Cary's Arguments but they stand firm For he says not That the Sinai Ministration of the Covenant of Works was ordained to justifie Mankind nor was it possible it could after a Man had sinned and yet in its Nature an absolute Covenant of Works or do for Life or Perish The Man that doeth these Things shall live in them Obj. 9. Circumcision could not oblige the Iews in its own Nature to keep the whole Law because Paul Circumcised Timothy If in the very Nature of the Act it had bound Timothy to keep the Law for Iustification how could it have been Paul's Liberty so to do saith Mr. Flavel which he asserts it was Gal. 2.3 4. p. 226. Answ. 1. That Circumcision did oblige the Jews to keep the whole Law is evident Gal. 5.3 and as I hinted before our Learned Annotators on the said place speak the same Thing positively Take more largely their very Words They were obliged to one Part of the Law they must be obliged to all other Parts of it besides that Circumcision was an owning and professing Subjection to the whole Law c. Obj. But did not the Fathers then by being Circumcised acknowledge themselves Debtors to the Law he Answers Yes they did acknowledge themselves bound to the observation of it and to endure upon the breaking of it the Curse of it but they were discharged from that Obligation by believing in Christ who was made a Curse for them that he might redeem them from the Curse of the Law Thus Pool's Annotations 2. But as to Paul's Circumcising Timothy it was when he knew Circumcision was abolished and therefore it could not oblige him Paul well knew to keep the Law Sith no Law in its own Nature can oblige any Person according to the Nature and Quality of it when 't is abrogated and in no force tho' he saw
Water is applyed to the Body If it were so that all that were Baptised were Regenerated then all that were Baptised should be saved or eâ—se the Doctrine of Perseverance falls â—o the Ground And again he says That some indeed say That Regeneration is conferred in Baptiâ—m upon the Elect but how so active a principle as a spiritual Life should lye dâ—aâ— and sleep to loâ—g even many Years which intervene between Baptism and Conversion is not easily conceivable Charnock on Regen p. 75. Sir Do but prove what you here affirm and I will write no more against Infant-Baptism and till that 's done all you say is nothing in my Judgment But to proceed Such a Commission you speak of would not in your sense Authorize those Twelve Elders of Israel to go and Teach and Circumcise the Jews and their Children only but all others in all Nations of the World this would be an easie way of making People Christians But Sir The Gospel whatsoever you think according to our Doctrine is more extensive then was the Law to the Jews for that was restrained to that People He sheweth his word unto Iacob his statutes and judgments to Israel He hath not dealt so with any nation for his judgments they have not known them Psal. 147.19 20. But the Gospel is not restrained or limited to any one particular People or Nation but it is to be preached to all the World and whosoever are made Disciples i. e. Do believe and are baptised shall be saved Mark 16.16 Not that we suppose Men can't be saved without Baptism for that makes no Person a Christian or a Disciple of Christ neither Young nor Old though 't is the Duty of Believers to submit thereto We doubt not but that the same spiritual and eternal Blessings which the Jewish dying Infants had by the Death and Merits of Christ then the dying Infants of Christians have now according to the Election of Grace But as touching the legal and external Privileges of the Jews we have proved in this Tract and elsewhere that they had many more in divers respects under the Law than those we Christians and our Children have under the Gospel As to those great Advantages Blessings and Privileges of the Covenant of Works which you talk of I wonder what they were for the Covenant of Works could not give Life no Justification nor Righteousness that could save by that Covenant no pardon of Sin but contrarywise Death Wrath and the Curse is denounced upon every Soul of Man for the breach of it How vain then are your Arguments in the Gospel is Life is Justification is Pardon of Sin to every Man that believeth To the Iew first and also to the Gentiles Rom. 1.16 Time would fail me to shâ—w how absurd your Notions are to what almost all our Learned Protestant Divines have wrote about the Covenant of Works The Jewish Infants received no Soul Spiritual and Eternal Advantage by Circumcision What the chief Advantage or Profit was which they hâ—d thereby St. Paul tells us Rom. 3.1 2. Tho' it was commanded of God for the Ends and Designs I have already mentionâ—d and if so What Benefit can any Infant receive by Baptism or rather Rantism which is a mere humane Innovation You confess it was instituted by the Church as a needful Thing p. 37. And the Church hath Instituted it because it is needful it was indeed never Instituted or Appointed by our Lord Jesus And as to that Custom among the Jews you speak of p. 7 8 of their Baptising Proselytes I have fully Answer'd it in my Treaty called The Rector Rectified p. 24 25. and in my Answer to the Athenian Society Sir you go upon a Mistake all along taking it for granted That Circumcision and other legal Rites were great spiritual Privileges for 't is no such Thing It was a Yoke of Bondage not to be born and a great Mercy it was to them that they were delivered from it Act. â—5 And therefore the Jews did they believe in Christ and see the Nature of and Tendency of Circumcision would never speak after that manner as you mention in p. 9. Viz Obj. I will rather be a Iew then a Christian because as soon as I own and profess their Faith my Child after such a Declaration is in covenant as well as my self and hath a Right to the Sign c. Answ. Sir The Jewish Childrens Right to Circumcision was not deferred till their Parents made a profession of Faith but as they were the natural Seed of Abraham as such it was the Command of God to Abraham that gave them that Right and nothing else Obj. So that by this account it plainly appears That denying Infants Baptism is an hindrance to the progress of the Holy Gospel Answ. True if Infant-Baptism doth make them Christians you say right it must follow That the denying them Baptism hinders the progress of the Gospel but this is false which you assert Baptism makes them not Christians we say none but Christ by his Spirit can Regenerate the Souls of Men or make them Christians True you may thereby give them the Name of Christians but can't give them the Nature of Christians you may deceive them and make them believe they were so made Christians and thereby undoe them eternally by relying upon a mere Cheat and Delusion This is a way to make false Christians counterfeit Christians What a Christian is he whose vile Nature was never changed You would do well to get a great Number of Ministers if Baptism does make Christians as I said before to go into the Heathen Nations and Baptise them and so make all the World Christians but if you know no other way for the progress of the Gospel then this of making Christians by Baptism God deliver the World from your way of Christianing the Nations You will not see That the Gospel Church is not National but only Congregational the Jewish Church in that differ'd from the Christianâ— For What is more clearer than this Christ's Church is called a Garden inclosed Christ's Flock is a little Flock Those who were added to the Church were separated either from the Jewish People or Heathen Nations were commanded to separate themselves and not to touch the unclean Thing Ye are not saith Christ of the World You would make whole Nations the Church and from the Commission inferr such a false Conclusion I have consider'd what you have said in p. 10 11. Sir When all the Pagan World are instructed and believe in Christ we will say they have a Right to the Sign i. e. Baptism but not till then hath one Soul a Right thereto prove what you say if you can i. e. That the Children of Christians as such are Christians as the Children of Iews were Iews or that Baptism makes any either old or young True Christians or regenerates their Souls 'T is not your bare Assertions or your Saying it that is worth any thing what Authority