many things to say First that Orthodox Divines both ancient and moderne have made circumcision to be of the same signification and use as Baptism and till Anabaptists closed they had no adversaries but Papists who to advance their â—pus operatum in the Sacraments of the New Testament will have them as far to exceed the Old as heaven doth earth and the substance doth the shadow This is observed by Chamier Panstrat Cathol Tom. 4. lib. 2. cap. 19. sect 58. having reckoned up several testimonies to this purpose he addes There are very many like testimonies by which it appears that Christians were heretofore perswaded that there was no so great difference between circumcision and baptisme and why saith he is it now changed Truly in favour of the Papists and according to the pleasure of the Iesuites Secondly if circumcision have respect to those Promises that were no Gospel mercies but civil domestical restrained to Jews and not appertaining to Christians How could it be a distinction between Jew and Gentile respective to Religion it might have made a civil distinction and the want of it have been an evidence against other Nations that they had been none of the multiplied seed of Abraham according to the flesh and that their interest had not been in Canaan But how it could have concluded them to have been without Christ strangers from the covenant of Promise having no hope and without God in the world as the Apostle determines upon their uncircumcision Eph. 2. 11 12. cannot be imagined Thirdly How is it that we hear so much in Scripture of circumcision of the heare Jer. 4. 4. Rom. 2. 28. Deut. 10. 16. Deut. 30. 6. Ezek. 44. 9. and the circumcised to have this character that they worship God in Spirit and in Truth if circumcision have not relation to Promises that are spiritual When complaint is made of uncircumcision in heart is it not as it is ordinarily understood that their â—â—ndes were carnal and not taken up with spiritual things or is it that they were not fixt on their civil and domestick interests when they are said to be uncircumcised as Ier. 6. 10. is it not upon that account that Ieremy there gives that they could not hear the Word of the Lord that they had no delight in it that it was a reproach to them or is it because they could not suck in Promises of meer civil home and self-interests So it must need be if circumcision be such a Seale when they emproved it for the use to which it was instituted they kept the right use of it and were not worthy of reproof concerning it Fourthly what Sacraments had the Jewes of any Gospel-relation if this respected alone their civil interests There might be more spoken to that of the Passeover to carry it to peculiar National mercies than to this of circumcision See Exod. 13. 14 15. And it shall be when thy sinne asketh thee in time to come saying What is this that thou shalt say unto him By strength of hand the Lord brought us out from Egypt from the 〈◊〉 of Bâ—ndage And it came to passe when Pharaoâ— would hardly let us go that the Lord slew all the first-borne in the land of Egypt both the first borne of man and the first-borne of beasts therefore I sacrifice unto the Lord all that openeth the Matrix being males but all the first-born of my children I redeem I am sure far lesse can be said to carry it to that which is spiritual and of common concernment both to Jews and Christians Fifthly how is it that the Apostle giving a definition of circumcision refers it to nothing national civil or domestick but only to that which is purely spiritual Speaking of Abraham he saith He received the signe of Circumcision a seale of the righteousnesse of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised The righteousnesse of faith is a Promise purely Evangelical Romanes 3. 22. Romanes 3. 30. Romanes 10. 3. Philippians 3. 8. and this Circumcision sealed the self-same thing that our Sacraments seale So that as their extraordinary Sacraments are expressely affirmed to be the same with ours by the Apostle 1 Cor. 10. 3 They eat all the same spiritual meat and did all drink the same spiritual drink so are their appointed established Sacraments Circumcision and the Passeover Will they with Bellarmine lib. 1. cap. 17. de Sacramentis in genere deny that Circumcision was an universal seale of faith and affirme that it was only an individual seale of the individual faith of Abraham that so all may fall to the ground which is spoken from that Text of the use of Circumcision to the Jewes all that is there spoken having reference only to Abraham in person I answer 1. This Popish shift is flat against the Apostle He brings it as an argument for proof of the way of our Justification to be by faith alone which were a meer inconsequence if proper to him and not belonging to others 2. It is flat against Moses who referres this of circumcision to the covenant there mentioned Genesis 17. 7. But the covenant is not with Abraham alone but his seed also together with him as is there plaine 3. It carries several absurdities with it 1. By this meanes Gods covenant with Abraham in person and his covenant with Christians in Gospel-times is indeed the same but his covenant with all beleevers in the Old Testament and with beleevers in the New Testament are essentially differing Abraham and New-Testament beleevers are under one covenant Old Testament-beleevers are under a covenant essentially differing 2. Then Zachary Luke 1. 72. interpreting the covenant made with Abraham of salvation by Christ should have limited it to Abraham and not extended it to the Fathers But we see all are there under one and the same mercy our father Abraham and all that followed him even all that came out of Egypt and were for Canaan are called Fathers 1 Corinth 10. 1. All our Fathers were under the cloud and all passed through the sea and all these had the same mercy in promise with Abraham To performe the mercy saith Zachary promised to our Fathers and to remember his holy covenant the Oath which he sware to our father Abraham 3. Then Abraham himself in person and Christians in the dayes of the Gospel are interessed in Christ and all other beleevers in the Law were without Christ but the contrary is plain Moses esteemed the reproach of Christ greater than the treasures of Egypt Heb. 11. 26. 4. Then Abraham and Christians have from God the Kingdom of heaven and salvation but the rest of the Jewes have nothing better than the land of Canaan They have no more than the covenant reaches unto and the seale of the covenant did confirm But the covenant reaches only temporal Promises as the land of Canaan in their opinion These evasions Bellarmine is put to and Anabaptists are glad to follow both of them willing to say any thing
rather than confesse a truth But they say Object This was a seale to Abraham of the righteousnesse of faith that he might be the Father of all them that beleeve c. But only Abraham is such a father Answ This priority of receiving the Faith and the signe and seale is proper to Abraham each one could not be first but father and childe both received it and both had the righteousnesse of Faith sealed in it If Bellarmine please so well I shall referre to Bellarmines opposites Chamier de Sacramentis in genere lib. 2. cap. 9. Ames Tom. 3. more especially Whittaker praelectiones de Sacramentis page 22 23. Hâ—c desperationis c. So that which way soever they take truth fastens upon them and the friends of truth flie in their face and all to make it appear that a pure Gospel was preach't to Abraham and that the first covenant was not mixt but truly Evangelical CHAP. XXXV The Covenant of Grace in Gospel-times admits Christians in a state of unregeneration and is not limited in the bounds of it to the Elect regenerate THe two former supposed differences did lay the first covenant too low not vouchsafing it the honour of a Gospel-covenant or at the best a mixt Gospel Two others follow which will hold us longer that put too great a limit to the second covenant in respect of the latitude and extent of it A third difference therefore assigned by some is that the first covenant took in all the seed of Abraham by Isaac and Jacob as many as professed themselves to be of the Faith and that were willing to joyne in the worship of the God of Abraham The New Covenant they affirm admits no more than Elect Regenerate persons The Gospel strips us of all relative Covenant holinesse of all holinesse that is not real and intrinsecal and God ownes none as his Covenant-people but Elect regenerate persons In the first place we shall take what is yielded or at least not gain-sayed and after proceed to the examination of what is affirmed In Old Testament-times the covenant was made with Israel in the uttermost latitude and extent with all that bore the name of Israel as we may see Deut. 29. at large held forth There is a covenant entred and the words of it exprest 1. With Israel verse 1. 2. With all Israel verse 2. 3. With them to whom God had not given an heart to perceive eyes to see and eares to hear ver 4. viz. with unregenerate persons 4. It is made with Captaines of Tribes Elders Officers little Ones Wives Strangers Hewers of wood Drawers of water vers 10 11. 5. With them that were present and with them that were absent verse 14 15. All this clearly shews in how great a latitude this covenant is entred No Israelite of any Sex Age Rank nor any that joyned themselves to that body are exempted Which also farther appears in those innumerable places of Scripture where God owns that people generally promiscuously as his people professing himself to be their God and he is the God of none but a covenant-people of his own covenant-people others are without God Eph. 2. 12. He was the God of all that came out of Egypt Exod. 20. 2. I am the Lord thy God which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt out of the house of Bondage Of all that whole family Amos 3. 1. Hear this word that the Lord hath spoken against thee O children of Israel against the whole family which I have brought up from the land of Egypt Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord Deut. 6. 4. Yea Isreal at the very worst is thus owned as Gods in covenant Hear O my people and I will testifie unto thee O Israel if thou wilt hearken unto me but my people would not hearken to my voice Israel would have none of me Psal 8 8 11. The Oxe knows his Owner the Asse his Masters crib but Israel doth not know my people doth not consider Isa 1. 3. Therefore my people are gone into captivity because they have no knowledge Isa 5. 13. My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge Hos 4. 6. And when they entred into the Heathen whither they went they prophaned my holy Name when they said unto them These are the people of the Lord Ezek. 36. 20. This is brought as a motive to withhold Israel from sin Ye are the children of the Lord your God ye shall not cut your selves nor make any baldnesse between your eyes for the dead for thou art an holy people to the Lord thy God Deut. 14. 1 2. This is pleaded as an aggravation of sin You have I known of all the Nations of the earth and therfore you will I punish for all your iniquities Amos 3. 2. This is brought as a motive to prevail with God under misery for mercy Behold we beseâ—ch thee we are all thy people Isa 64. 9. Yea this covenant takes with God for national mercies The whole of the Nation then is in covenant Then will I remember my covenant with Jacob and my covenant with Isaac and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember and will remember the land Levit. 26. 42. The Apostles authority puts it out of question Reckoning up the priviledges of Israel according to the flesh nine in number Rom. 9. 4. This is one The covenants Israel then after the flesh was in covenant All Israel were the covenant-people of God There were many not Elect not Regenerate but there was not a man not in covenant not owned of God as visibly his Thou hast avouched the Lord this day to be thy God And the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his people Deut. 26. 17 18. This was the state of the Church of old But now as is affirmed it is far otherwise God is not so large in his priviledges nor so ample in his munificence none have honour to be in covenant in Gospel-times but real beleevers men truly sanctified and regenerate And here it cannot be denied but there are many expressions ordinarily found in many Orthodox Writers and like passages frequently heard in Sermons from godly Ministers seemingly implying if not asserting it and restraining the covenant onely to the elect and regenerate As when they give Marks and signes of mens being in covenant with God this must needs imply that some professing Christians are in covenant with God and some without which is yet farther evidenced when they conclude that in case a man be in covenant with God then happinesse and salvation follows But when these men fully explain themselves they yeeld up again to us that which seemingly they had taken from us and ordinarily do distinguish of an outward and inward covenant acknowledging the outward covenant to be made with every member of the Church and the Parents with that hear and professedly accept the promises and their children But the inward covenant as they say belongs to
are under the same covenant as was Isaac to whom the promises were made If some of Abrahams children were left out that concerns not us so that we are taken in yet the instance is very weak to prove it As appeares saith he verse 19. concerning Ishmael and Heb. 11. 9. that Ishmael was himself in covenant though not established in covenant as God there and verse 21. promised concerning Isaac not his seed never received appeares not alone by the signe and seale which he received verse 23. which yet is sufficient for God to seale to a blanke is very strange to signe a covenant to a man never in covenant but also from Gal. 4. 30. What saith the Scripture Cast out the bond-woman and her sonne for the sonne of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the sonne of the free-woman A man cast out of covenant was before casting out in covenant Ejection supposes admission unlesse we will give way to our Authors dreame of Ejection by non-admission He was cast out after the time of the solemnity of his admission by circumcision as may be seen Gen 22. For that of Heb. 11. 9. it is a mystery what he will make of it unlesse he will conclude that because Abraham sojourned in the land of Promise that therefore none were in covenant that were not taken into that land so Moses and Aaron will be found out of covenant It is further said As for a visible Church-seed of Abraham that is neither his seed by nature nor by saving faith nor by excellency in whom the Nations of the Earth should be blessed to wit Christ I know none such in Scripture therefore some men have fancied such a kind of Church-seed as it is called I know not how saving faith comes in when a faith of profession will serve the turne The whole of Abrahams seed had circumcision as a seale of the righteousnesse of faith when many of their Parents had no more than a faith of profession Fourthly Were all these things yielded yet the Proposition as is said would not be made good from hence All these we see are made good against his exceptions Let us now see the strength which is reserved for the last push for overthrow of this Proposition The inference is not concerning title or right of infants to the initial seale as if the covenant or promise of it self did give that but the inference is concerning Abrahams duty that therefore he should be the more engaged to circumcise his posterity This should rather have been left to us for the strengthening of our proposition than have made use of it himself for refutation of it It was Abrahams duty to give them according to Gods command the initial Seale in this we are agreed whether it will thence follow that they had right and title to it or were without right let the Reader determine It is further said He was engaged to circumcise onely those that are males and not afore eight dayes and not onely those that were from himself but also all in his house whose children soever they were which apparently shewes that the giving Circumcision was not commensurate to the persons interest in the Covenant but was to be given to persons as well out of the Covenant as in If of Abrahams house and not to all that were in the Covenant to wit Females which doth clearly prove that right to the initiall Seale as it is called of circumcision did not belong to persons by vertue of the covenant but by force of the command If it could be proved that Abraham kept Idolaters in his house professedly worshipping a false god and gave circumcision to them in that faith and way of false worship it would prove that a man might have the seale and not be in covenant but it would not prove that he might be in covenant and be denied the Seale and then infant-Baptisme might be of easier proof Though they were not in covenant though they were not holy yet they might be baptized But I will not yield so much I do not believe that Abraham carried circumcision beyond the line of the covenant and that he had those in his house which were aliens from God seeing I finde that Testimony of the Lord concerning him Gen. 18. 19. For I know him that he will command his children and his houshold after him and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgement that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him And that resolution of Joshua That if others would serve the gods that their fathers served that were on the other side the floud or the gods of the Amorites in whose land they dwell yet he and his house would serve the Lord Josh 24. 14 15. As it is a private mans duty to serve the Lord and not Idols so it is the Master of the Families duty to see that the Lord and not Idols be worshipped in his house As I do beleeve that if any of our adversaries had a profest Heathen in his Family he would not keep him there and not chatechize him and that he would not during his profession of Heathenisme baptize him So I beleeve concerning Abraham He catechized all that he took in as Heathens and did not circumcise them in their Heathenisme This some Paedobaptists as is said are forced to confesse when they grant the formal reason of the Jewes being circumcised was the command and the covenant he makes only a motive I wonder what need there is of an Argument to force such a confession The reason I say why Jewes were circumcised and Christians baptized is the command were there a thousand covenants and no institution of a signe or seale such a signe or seale there could have been no circumcision nor no Baptisme The command is the ground and the covenant is the directory to whom application si to be made We say all in covenant are entituled to the Seale for admission but we pre-suppose an institution They will have all Beleevers and all Disciples baptized which they cannot conclude upon their faith and knowledge barely but upon the command to baptize Beleevers and Disciples So that the command is with reference to the covenant with reference to interest in the covenant From these foregoing exceptions a conclusion is drawne that all this doth fully shew that the proof of the connexion between and the initial Seale without a particular command for it is without any weight in it And I conclude that it fully shewes that the proof of the connexion between the covenant and the initial Seale pre-supposing the institution of such a Seale and a general command is of that weight that all are meere frivolous trifles that are brought for exceptions against it Another Scripture holding out the connexion between the covenant and initial seale is Acts 2. 38 39. Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sinnes
love in a graciously disposed soul cleaves to Christ for communion but receives him not for justification These two stand as relatives there is no soul entituled to this righteousnesse but by faith and faith is it that entitles to it the beleeving soul hath interest in it Therefore justification in Scripture is ascribed to faith and denied to works when neither faith nor works can beare us out of themselves before the tribunal of God but faith takes hold and the soul by faith rests on this righteousnesse of grace which the Gospel tenders It is true that faith receives the Spirit as well as it receives the blood of Christ Joh. 7. 39. Gal. 3. 14. But this is for another use for the work of sanctification inherent not justification by righteousnesse imputed And it is also true that faith accepts Christ as a Lord as well as a Saviour But it is the acceptation of him as a Saviour not as a Lord that justifies Christ rules his people as a King teacheth them as a Prophet but makes atonement for them onely as a Priest by giving himself in sacrifice his blood for remission of sins These must be distinguished but not divided Faith hath an eye at all the blood of Christ the command of Christ the Doctrine of Christ but as it eyes and fastens on his blood so it justifies He is set out a propitiation through faith in his blood Romans 3. 24. not through faith in his command It is the blood of Christ that cleanseth all sin and not the Sovereignty of Christ These confusions of the distinct parts of Christs Mediatourship and the several offices of faith may not be suffered Scripture assignes each its particular place and work Sovereignty doth not cleanse us nor doth blood command us faith in his blood not faith yeelding to his Sovereignty doth justifie us There are several acts or fruits of justifying faith Heb. 11. But all are not justifying It is not Abrahams obedience Moses self-denial Gideon or Sampsons valour that was their justification but his blood in which faith alone gives interest who did enable them in these duties by his Spirit Paul went in these duties as high as they living in more clear light and under more abundant grace I doubt not but he out-topt them and yet he was not thereby justified as 1 Cor. 4. 4. James indeed saith that Abraham was justified by works when he had offered Isaac his son on the Altar James 2. 21. But either there we must understand a working faith with Piscator Paraeus Pemble and others and confesse that Paul and James handle two distinct questions The one whether faith alone justifies without works which he concludes in the affirmative The other what faith justifies whether a working faith onely and not a faith that is dead and idle or else I know not how to make sense of the Apostle who streight inferres from Abrahams justification by the offer of his sonne And the Scripture was fulfilled that saith Abraham beleeved God and it was accounted to him for righteousnesse How otherwise do these accord He was justified by works and the Scripture was fulfilled that saith he was justified by faith Neither can I reconcile what he saith if this be denied with the whole current of the Gospel The Rhemists indeed understand those texts of the Apostle where he excludes works from justification to be meant of mans moral works done before faith and conversion The works of the Law done without Christ Annot. in Rom. 3. 20 28. As though the Law did not command those duties unto which Christ through faith strengthens a Christian converted by grace And when the Apostle concludes the impossibility of being justified by the works of the Law his meaning should be unlesse grace assist the Law that it may justifie This could not be the Apostle calls it a righteousnesse of God without the Law not a righteousnesse of the Law with addition of strength from the Gospel All works before or after conversion inherent in us or wrought by us are excluded from justification See Ravanellus in verbum Justificatio Num. 3. page 867. This justification wrought freely by grace through faith Rom. 3. 24. is no way consistent with justification by works And what the Apostle speaks of election we may well apply to justification the same medium equally proves the truth of both If by grace then it is no more of works otherwise grace is no more grace But if it be of works then it is no more of grace otherwise works were no more works Rom 11. 6. And these things considered I am truly sorry that faith should now be denied to have the office or place of an instrument in our justification nay scarce allowed to be called the instrument of receiving Christ that justifies us because the act of faith which is that which justifies us is our actual receiving Christ and therefore cannot be the instrument of receiving This is too subtile a notion we use to speak otherwise of Faith Faith is the eye of the soul whereby we see Christ and the eye is not sight Faith is the hand of the soul whereby it receives Christ and the hand is not receiving And Scripture speaks otherwise We receive remission of sinnes by Faith and an inheritance among them that are sanctified is received by Faith Acts 18. 26. Why else is this righteousnesse sometimes called the righteousnesse of Faith and sometimes the righteousnesse of God which is by Faith but that it is a righteousnesse which Faith receives Christ dwells in us by Faith Ephes 3. 17. By Faith we take him in and give him entertaintment We receive the promise of the Spirit through Faith Gal. 3. 14. These Scriptures speak of Faith as the souls instrument to receive Christ Jesus to receive the Spirit from Christ Jesus The instrumentality of it in the work of justification is denied because the nature of an instrument as considered in Physical operations doth not exactly belong to it which if it must be alwayes rigidly followed will often put us to a stand in the assignation of causes of any kind in Moral actions The material and formal causes in justification are scarce agreed upon and no marvel then in case men mind to contend about it that some question is raised about the instrument But in case we shall consider the nature and kinde of this work about which Faith is implied and examine the reason and ground upon which Faith is disabled from the office of an instrument in our justification and withall look into that which is brought in as an instrument in this work in the stead of it I do not doubt but it will easily appear that those Divines that with a concurrent judgment without almost a dissenting voice have made Faith an instrument in this work speak most aptly and most agreeably to the nature of an instrument The work about which Faith is implied is not an absolute but a relative
be full and how to be hungry he can beare prosperity and not be puffed up He can be under adversity and not be cast down In the worst of times the just lives by faith Hab. 2. 4. He can make use of every Ordinance for his spiritual advantage The word preach is for his benefit Being mixt with faith when he receives it Heb. 4 2. He knows how to improve the Sacraments for his spiritual growth those seales of the righteousnesse of Faith Rom. 4. 11. Abel by Faith exceeded Cain in sacrifices Heb. 11. 4. and so do these exceed all unbeleevers in their performances All of these might be farther and more fully enlarged but that it is done at large by better hands Master Ward in his Life of Faith Master Culverwel especially Master Ball in his elaborate treatise on that subject CHAP. XXIII Repentance is a condition of the Covenant of grace THe condition immediately serviceable for mans reconciliation to God we have seen that which respects his reparation in his qualifications to hold up communion with God follows which is Repentance The end of Christs coming in the flesh being to save sinners He saves them not in their sins but from their sins and therefore calls them to repentance and engages all to it that he receives into covenant As God will have a self-outed and beleeving people So he will have an humble and an holy people So John Baptist the forerunner of the Mediatour began his Ministery Repent giving in this as his reason The Kingdome of heaven is at hand that is a New Testament-state in which the covenant of Grace was to be opened and the glorious priviledges of it made manifest Matth. 3. 2. With the self-same words Jesus the Mediatour of the covenant begins his Ministery Matth. 4. 12 17. verses compared From that time Jesus began to preach and to say Repent for the Kingdome of Heaven is at hand To this he resolves to engage those that he receives So it was with the twelve that were men employed to bring Nations into covenant They thus began their Ministery Mark 6. 12. They went out and preached that men should repent Neither let any make these two Faith and Repentance or Faith and Obedience which is comprised under Repentance one and the same and old project to introduce justification by works The Scriptures evidently distinguish them Paul makes them two distinct heads in the Ministery when he preached either to the Jews or Gentiles Acts 20. 21. Testifying both to the Jews and also to the Greeks repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ They are two distinct heads of Catechisme in the Apostles times Repentance from dead works and Faith towards God Heb. 6. Repent ye and beleeve the Gospel Mark 1. 15. There are those acts in Scripture attributed to Faith that will by no means be ascribed to love or obedience as the taking in of the priviledges before mentioned If Faith work by love as the Apostle speaks Gal. 5. 6. And love be the end of the commandment out of a pure heart and of a good conscience and faith unfeigned 1 Tim. 1. 5. then faith is a distinct thing from love If by Faith the Worthies of old wrought righteousnesse then righteousnesse may be distinguished from it Heb. 11. 33. As Faith and Hope make two Graces so Love a third 1 Cor. 13. 13. It is not the Gospel way to confound them together They must not be divided but they are to be distinguished In this of repentance which is a Gospel-grace and condition of the covenant we may observe First A necessary pre-requisite to it Secondly The essential parts of it A necessary pre-requisite to this of repentance as to the other of Faith is Conviction Compunction Remorse Unto which the name of repentance is often given though it be of farre more narrow comprehension than the whole work yea it reacheth not unto any thing which is of the essence of it Called repentance as some say by a Synechdoche the part for the whole but I rather take it to be a Metonimy Sorrow is rather an adjunct than a part of it yet such an adjunct that still accompanies it and makes way for it as the needle as the Ancients use to expresse it enters the cloth not to stay but to let in the thread An Officer enters an house to throw out one inhabitant and to let in another but not to stay himself It hath its name from paine grief or trouble which affects the soul for sin which must needs follow when once we look upon it with shame and wearisomnesse Who can imagine a man to have his eyes opened to see that through his whole life he hath risen up in hostility and opposition against God hath taken off that stamp which God in creation put upon him run his soul upon everlasting hazard and all of this without sense of shame fear or trouble Who can imagine that the soul can leave so ugly a path as that of sin formerly so pleasant and desired without any grief or trouble of minde that he hath so long held it Or that any will make out for help in a Saviour till they see themselves through sinne in a lost and undone condition I speak not of infants who neither act faith nor repentance but of those of growth whom God works for himself by his Ministers As they have their call by the Word So the Word hath its efficacy in some measure of soul-shaking by the Lawes discovery by which is the knowledge of sinne as Rom. 3. 20. Evangelical allurements on which by some the whole of the work is laid can never I suppose work on the soule without Law-convictions If these Gospel allurements draw to Christ they must draw from sinne and how shall any be drawn from what he does not know nor ever understood either to be evil or dangerous It is with me no lesse a Paradox that a man may be drawn from sin without the discovery of the Law as to be drawn to Christ without the light of the Gospel And to say the Gospel discovers sin as well as the Law taking the Gospel in opposition to the moral precepts as here it must be taken is the greatest absurdity Exem gr If it be questioned whether to take up armes be a sin whether to fight a duel be a sinne whether usury be sin or to marry within the Levitical degrees forbidden be sin shall I determine this out of a Gospel-promise That Jesus Christ came to save sinners That the blood of Christ takes away all sin That in him all that beleeve are justified A thousand of these will contribute nothing to the expediting of these or like questions or the conviction of any under guilt The work must be brought to the rule the action to the line for discovery Upon the Laws convictions there may follow Gospel-aggravations But conviction is the work of the Law as an instrument of the
narrative of the work but onely doctrine given in charge which they were to deliver which least of all speaks the order in which the duties specified must necessarily be practised All that can be collected is that we must in Gods ordinary way of conferring salvation have both Faith and baptisme though there be not the like absolute necessity of baptisme as of Faith baptisme being necessary necessitate precepti Jesus Christ having instituted it and commanded it but Faith is necessary both necessitate medii and praecepti seeing Christ not only commanded it but salvation at no hand can be obtained by men in capacity of it without it And therefore it hath been well observed that in the words following the like stresse is not laid on Baptisme as on Faith not he that is not baptized but he that beleeveth not shall be damned 2. Let Peter where he speaks of salvation by baptisme interpret these words Baptisme doth now also saith he save us by the resurrection of Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 3. 21. and then explaines himselfe Not the pntting away the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good conscience towards God This answer or restipulation unto the outward administration of baptisme is that which follows upon baptisme but justifying Faith is that restipulation at least a principal branch of it and therefore there is no necessity that it go before but a necessity that it must follow after baptisme It is true that in men of yeares justifying faith sometimes goes before baptisme as in Abraham it went before Circumcision but it is not of necessity required to interest us in a right neither of baptisme nor circumcision Thirdly Object That faith to which the promise of Remission and Justication is made it must also be sealed to or that faith which is the condition of the Promise is the condition in foro Dei of the title to the seal But it is onely solid true faith which is the condition of the promise of Remission Therefore it is that onely that gives right in foro Dei to the seal Here is an Argument first proposed Answ secondly in a parenthesis paraphrased for the proposition I say faith is not sealed to but remission of sinnes or salvation upon condition of faith A professour of Faith that goes no farther may engage himself to a lively working faith and upon those termes God engages for and puts his seale for Remission and Salvation For the parenthesis That faith which is the condition of the Promise is the condition in foro Dei of the title to the seale I judge the contrary to be undeniable That faith which is the condition of the Promise is not the condition in foro Dei of title to the seale An acknowledgement of the necessity of such faith with engagement to it is sufficient for a title to the seale and the performance of the condition of like necessity to attaine the thing sealed To promise service and fidelity in war is enough to get listed as to do service is of necessity to be rewarded Fourthly as for the Argument ad hominem framed against those who make initial or common faith sufficient to entitle to Baptisme and yet affixe remission of sins to all Baptisme even so received without any performance of farther engagement I leave to them to defend who maintaine such doctrine and to speak to the absurdities that follow upon it Fifthly that of Philip to the Eunuch seems to carry most colour The Eunuch must beleeve with all his heart before he be baptized and I have known it troublesome that are fully convinced that a dogmatical faith gives title to Baptisme satisfying themselves with this answer That howsoever Philip called for such a faith which leads to salvation yet did not expresse himself so far that no Faith short of this gives title to baptisme It may be answered that a dogmatical faith is true faith suo genere as well as that which justifies therefore I know not why men should give it the terme of false faith seeing Scripture calls it faith and such as those beleevers and the heart in such a Faith as to an entire assent is required If we look into the Eunuchs answer on which Philip did rest satisfied and proceeded upon it to baptisme it will take away all scruple his answer is I beleeve that Jesus Christ is the Sonne of God There is no more in that then a common faith this is beleeved by men not justified yet this faith entitles to baptisme and upon this confession of faith the Eunuch is baptized CHAP. XLIV Impenitence and unbelief in professed Christians is breach of Covenant 4. IT yet follows by way of consectary that men in impenitence and unbelief that lie in sin and live in neglect of the sacrifice of the blood of Christ live in a continual breach of covenant They engage by covenant to believe in Christ and forsake their sin when yet they lie in unbelief impenitence are convinced that they are Fornicators Idolaters Adulterers Effeminate abusers of themselves with mankinde thieves covetous drunkards revellers and extortioners These do not only transgresse the Law which on the severest penalty forbids these wayes but break covenant with God and so are shut out of the Kingdome of Heaven the reward upon covenant to those whose hearts are upright For howsoever I fully assent to learned Master Baxter that all weaknesses are not covenant-breaches and therefore with him judge it to be their mistake who in their confessions acknowledge that we break covenant all that we do yet those men in the list mentioned having given their names to God and entred covenant with him walking in these forbidden wayes are found covenant-breakers and therefore the Psalmist deservedly sayes to them Psalme 50 16 17. What hast thou to do to declare my statutes or that thou shouldest take my Covenant in thy mouth seeing thou hatest instruction and castest my words behinde thee that is to claime any mercy or favour by vertue of Gods grant in covenant as appeares in the context Engaging to him and thus flying off from him they desert the mercies which they might receive from him As a wife by adultery so they by sin forsake the covenant by which they stand betrothed and by consequence it must needs follow that Christ died for breach of the covenant of Grace as well as for breach of the covenant of Works unlesse we will say that all men by name Christian and found in any of these sinnes are in a lost and unrecoverable condition joyning with them that have said that there is no grace or pardon for those that fall into sinne after baptisme That he died not for their sinnes that live and die in final impenitence and unbelief may be easily granted and that rises to no more then that he died not for those that finally and unrecoverably break covenant with him It is granted by a learned adversary that final unbelief and impenitence are violations
so large in returning praise for the Colossians Giving thanks unto the Father who hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light Col. 1. 12. As alone the blood of Christ sets free from hell so alone the Spirit of Christ makes fit for heaven This is done by a double work 1. Of regeneration or first implantation of grace which is called the birth of the Spirit John 3. 5 6. 2. By acting improving carrying on this work of grace which is properly sanctification so that when the Spirit is gone thus farre here is a certainty of the object It is sure nothing more sure than this that a regenerate sanctified man shall be saved But here is more required for a certainty of the subject Here is certitudo de re but more is required to attaine certitudinem de se If Peter do beleeve and repent he shall be saved is out of controversie But that Peter doth beleeve and repent is not alwayes so soone discovered And this is the Spirits work as the former It is not my businesse now to hold out what is the Spirits whole office in concluding our Assurance but to shew that the conditions of the covenant are the bottom ground not of salvation but of our evidence of interest in salvation We must know that we do beleeve and repent before we have assurance and we must first beleeve and repent before we know that we beleeve and repent If before faith and repentance there can be no salvation then before we know we beleeve and repent we cannot be assured of salvation But without faith and repentance there is no salvation Mark 16. 16. He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved but he that beleeveth not shall be damned Luke 13. 3. 5. I tell you may but except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish Therefore before we beleeve and repent we cannot be assured of salvation And how assurance can be gained without a practical syllogisme and how a syllogisme can be framed with any other medium than the conditions of the covenant is above my understanding Man is so far from abilities to conclude salvation without faith and repentance that be must conclude himself to be in faith and that he doth repent before he can conclude any interest in it The covenant of God is the ground of our salvation if that be waved all is lost and we must make good our part in the Covenant Grace must assist to answer what the covenant requires or no salvation How is it a covenant if nothing be required and why is it required if it must not be performed To gather up assurance from the conditions of the covenant is a businesse of greater consequence even the highest pitch of Christianity It is a great work to beleeve and repent a greater work to know that we savingly beleeve and repent The work it selfe is difficult no businesse of a lazy soul but to know that the work is aright done is a greater difficulty but that it must be gathered from the conditions is easie to resolve I know some finding the seal of the Spirit and the witnesse of the Spirit mentioned in Scripture in order to assurance will have the whole of the work of Assurance to be carryed on alone by the Spirit and that all is done in us without us They expect a secret whisper from God that we are Gods and no more This witnesse they say must be heeded and our faith and repentance in the work not at all regarded But I would know of those if the Spirit be a seale whether the soul doth not bear the impresse and what this impresse is but the graces of the Spirit The Seale sealing and the impresse made fully answer one the other Sometimes it may dimmely answer where the wax or clay or whatsoever is sealed takes not a full impression but if it answer not it is no Seale The graces that the Spirit works are its impresse and these are the conditions of the covenant and so instead of an objection we have a proofe For the witnesse of the Spirit I desire to know whether it be a single witnesse giving testimony to us without us or a witnesse concurring with our spirits The Text is cleare Rom. 8. 16. The Spirit it self beareth witnesse with our spirits that we are the children of God Our spirits bearing witnesse are our consciences Rom. 2. 5. Their consciences also bearing them witnesse and therefore Master Baxter rightly affirmes That the testimony of the Spirit and the testimony of our consciences are two concurrent testimonies or causes to produce one and the same effect But every conscience cannot witnesse thus with the Spirit or joyne in a concurrent testimony It is the witnesse of a good conscience 1 Pet. 3. 21. Baptism saves saith the Apostle by the resurrection of Christ Explaining himself not the putting away the filth of the flesh not the bare outward act of administration which is worthily set out by the most undervaluing termes when it is put in opposition to the inward work but the answer of a good conscience towards God Baptisme is a seal of the covenant and it engages to what the covenant requires which as we have been still catechized is to beleeve in God and to forsake our sins and when conscience answers that this is done Baptisme is a seale that Christ saves The seale of the Spirit is an impresse of those graces and the witnesse of the Spirit is a clearingup of these graces and giving in testimony to the truth of them opening our eyes to read the characters which it selfe hath made 1 Corinth 2. 12. We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit which is of God that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God So that in vaine do men talk of the Spirit that have not on their own hearts the impresse of it or of the witnesse of the Spirit when a renewed conscience cannot concurre in testimony that these engagements are answered in faith and repentance let that Text of the Apostle be considered 1 John 3. 24. He that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him and he in him and hereby we know that he abideth in us by the Spirit which he hath given us I know there are some that admit of all this and freely yeeld that this is a safe way to conclude Assurance from Sanctification Confessing that the Spirit never witnesseth with an unsanctified heart yet they contend for a farther and immediate teste of the Spirit without any consideration had of inherent graces wrought or any reflection made by the the soule upon it selfe in review of any gracious qualifications Yet here they confesse danger and limit this doctrine of theirs with diverse cautions as I have met with some from an eminent hand in a manuscript 1. This is extraordinary as they say very seldome seene or known it is no common way of
conclude our Assurance of happinesse but the determination of that being thus put is easie No man in true grace shall go to hell or misse of heaven God doth not adorne man with that glory to reject him The Apostle exhorts to love not in word nor in tongue but in deed and in truth and for a motive adds Hereby we know that we are of the truth and shall assure our hearts before him 1 Joh. 3. 18 19. But the minimum quod sic when it is that grace may be accounted true is not so easie to determine It is not every faintish desire that is the work on which all this glory rests It must be a work of farther power and efficacy on the soul for satisfaction of which I shall referre the Reader to the learned labours of my much honoured neighbour Master Anthony Burgesse in his spiritual refining CHAP. XXXI The distribution of the Covenant of Grace into the Old and New Covenant with the harmony and agreement that is found between them BY Gods assistance we have been thus farre carried on in the work in hand to finde out the nature of a covenant and Gods way of entring covenant with man And for the more clear discovery of both we have held forth the agreement which is found between the covenant of Works which God entred with man in his state of integrity and the covenant of Grace entred of God with man in his fallen condition as also their respective differences So that all that is essential in this covenant and necessarily required to the attainment of the priviledges and mercies promised in it hath been made known and a compleat definition given with such corolaries and inferences that have been judged necessary Now this covenant thus entred with man in his lapsed estate and hitherto cleared admits of distinction and is distinguished in Scripture by the names of the Old and New Covenant Heb. 8. 13. The first and second covenant Heb. 8. 7. The first some call and not unfitly a covenant of Promise under that covenant Christ was known in promises only and not manifested in the flesh Others call it a subservient covenant being to lead in the second in its full lustre and glory which alone they call a covenant of Grace and make it a third covenant But I shall content my self with the Scripture-termes calling the first Old not because it was first in being but because it is to be abolished and another to succeed the later New because it is never to be antiquated as the Apostle Heb. 8. 13. explains himself Now it must needs contribute much to the clear understanding of the covenant as well of the termes of it as the mercies in it and be a great advantage for the better understanding of sundry both Old and New Testament-Scripture in case the agreement between this Old and New covenant together with their true differences be rightly assigned and those imaginary differences assigned by some erroneous on either hand to the great prejudice of either of the covenants be throughly examined A work of difficulty but were it well followed of singular profit On this by the help of Gods grace I shall adventure and in the first place lay down their agreement afterwards their respective true and real differences and then proceed to examination of such differences which some have assigned which I reserve to the last place seeing in the two first I shall be brief The last will be found a businesse full of tedious difficulty and trouble In several things there is a full agreement between these covenants 1. In the Authour propounding God is the Authour of them both God is the God not of the Jews only who were in the first covenant but of the Gentiles also taken through grace into the second covenant Rom. 3. 29. 2. In the party accepting as specifically considered they are both entred with man Neither Angels nor any other creature articles or is articled with in it and hitherto there is an agreement of both with the covenant of works 3. In the motive or impulsive cause Both of these are of singular grace entred with fallen man in his lost condition there was no hint of this grace before the fall nor any need or use of it being not for mans preservation but his restitution 4. In the Mediatour Christ Jesus who was one and the same in both For though Moses have the name of Mediatour Gal. 3 19. Receiving the lively oracles and giving them to the people Acts 17. 38. as the Judges in Israel had the name of Saviours Nehem. 9. 27. and thereupon Camero makes this difference between the Old and the New covenant That Moses was Mediatour in one Christ in the other Thes 68. yet he confesses that that mediation by the benefit whereof men are truly and effectually united to God belongs only unto Christ De trip foedere Thes Moses work was only to deliver the way of the worship of God in those times and that not in his own name but as a servant Heb. 3. 5. He that Moses did serve of whom he wrote Joh. 5. 46. that Prophet like unto Moses whom God promised to raise Deut. 18. 15. in all ages was Mediatour 5. They agree in the conditions annext Both these covenants have one and the same conditions on Gods part Remission of sins and everlasting happinesse as after shall be shewed more fully They are the same on mans part Faith and Repentance The just then did live by faith Heb. 2. 4. And without faith it was then impossible to please God Heb. 11. 6. Acts 10. 43. To him give all the Prophets witnesse that through his name whosoever beleeveth in him shall receive remission of sins God then called for returne to himself and sincerity in our returnes accepting those that were sincere Ezek. 18. 31. The eyes of the Lord run to and fro through the whole earth to shew himself strong in the behalf of those whose hearts are perfect before him 2 Chron 26. 9. 6. They agree in the unity of Church-felloship constituting one and the same Church of Christ The Church in those dayes in which the Fathers lived is one and the same Church with this in Gospel-times In Gospel-times men come from the East and West and sit down with Abraham Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdome of heaven Matth. 8. 11. One and the same Kingdome receives both Their Faith was terminated upon Christ as well as ours Abraham saw his day and rejoyced John 8. 56. Moses bore his reproach and esteemed it greater then the treasures in Egypt Heb. 11. 26. They did eat the same spiritual meat and did drink the same spiritual drink they drank of the Rock that followed them and the Rock was Christ 1 Cor. 10. 3. The same not among themselves but the same with us They are saved by the same free grace and mercy as we Jews by nature are justified by the same faith in Jesus as
they so much glean yet far enough to sit down with Anabaptists to cast Infants as they hope out of the covenant and Church-membership and so exclude them from Baptisme Here I shall undertake to make good these foure particulars 1. That this expression of theirs is very untoward and such that will bear no fair sense without the utter overthrow even of that difference between the Covenants which they would build on this distinction 2. That the proof that they bring of this mixture of the first covenant is very weak and not at all cogent 3. That they are not constant to themselves but give and take and know not what to determine 4. In case all were granted yet they know not how to bring any thing home of all that they say to serve their own interests Their expressions I say are untoward in denying purity of Gospel in the first Covenant and affirming a mixture That which is not pure but mixt is a compound of pure and impure such that hath some ingredients such as they ought and others such that make all adulterate As silver mingled with dresse or wine with water Isa 1. 22. The false teachers Saint Pauls adversaries preach such a mixt Gospel when they urged with such vehemency a mixture of works which caused the Apostle to stand in such feare of the Corinthians lest they should be drawn away from the simplicity that is in Christ 2 Cor. 11. 2. They do not beleeve that the Gospel which Paul tells us was preached to Abraham Gal. 3. 8. was any such impure Gospel this sure is not their meaning they dare not say that Abraham was under any such delusion What then can be the meaning but that he had promises not only of blisse and in reference to eternal salvation but also promises of earthly concernment as that of the land of Canaan and his plantation there The Covenant takes its denomination from the Promises saith one of them but the Promises are mixt some Evangelical belonging to those to whom the Gospel belongeth some are domestick or civil Promises specially respecting the house of Abraham and the policie of Israel To this I readily agree and then the distinction falls to nothing Seeing in Gospel times in New Testament-dayes this will denominate a not pure but mixt Gospel as well as in those times we our selves are under such a Gospel as well as the Jewes I know not how we could pray in faith Give us this day our daily bread in case we were without a promise of these things or how man could live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God in case we had no word from God The Apostle tells us Godlinesse hath the promise of this life and that which is to come 1 Tim. 4. 8. It would trouble many a perplexed man in case he could not make good that those words Verily thou shalt be fed Psal 37. 3. did not at all belong to him There is no believing man in any relation but he hath Gospel-Promises in concernment to that relation as appears in that speech of Pauls encouragement of servants Epes 6. 8. Knowing whatsoever for good thing any man doth the same shall he receive of the Lord whether he be bond or free It It were ill with all sorts had not they their domestick relation-promises which these speak of as making a mixture 2. As their expressions are untoward so taking them at the best their proof is weak That the Covenant takes its denomination from the Promises but the Promises are mixt say these men The most eminent Promises which contain the marrow of all give the denomination and not such that are annext as Appendants to them The Promise of the land of Canaan is an appendant to the great covenant made of God with Abraham as Chamier with good warrant from the text Gen. 17. 7 8. calls it lib. de baptis cap. sec The Covenant being made of God to be the God of Abraham and his seed which might have been made good wheresoever they had inhabited or sojourned the promise of Canaan is over and above added to it The reason given in by one for his dislike of Chamiers expression calling it an Appendix to the covenant is little to purpose Psal 105. 10 11. The gift of the land of Canaan is called a Covenant saith he and therefore is not an appendant to it By the same reason Circumcision must be the Covenant and not a Seal appendant to it seeing Circumcision is called a Covenant Gen. 17. 10. they are not ignorant of these Scripture-metonymies 3. As the proof is weak to make the Covenant not a pure Gospel-covenant but mixt so they are not constant to themselves pointing that out which makes pure Gospel Gen. 17. 5. Gen. 15. 5. Gen. 12. 3. Gen. 18. 18. illustrated by some New Testament-Scriptures Rom. 4. 17 18. Gal. 3. 8 9 16. Acts 3. 25. one observes it is to be noted that those Promises which were Evangelical according to the more inward sense of the Holy Ghost do point at the priviledges of Abrahams house in the outward face of the words and thereupon raises a doubt whether any covenant made with Abraham be simply Evangelical And so he findes out Evangelical-Promises in the inwards of that covenant which is non-Evangelical in the outward face So Bellarmine with whom he so much to speak in his own language symbolizeth finds out spiritual Evangelical Promises in that which he concludes to be of another nature denying that the Promise made to Abraham in the letter was any Promise of forgivenesse of sins but of special protection and government and earthly happinesse yet confesseth that in a mystical sense they were spiritual Promises both of pardon of sin and life eternal and that they belong to us Bellar. de Sacr. Bapt. lib. 1. cap. 4. whereupon Chamier observes That which is promised mystically God in covenant doth promise but heaven is here promised mystically therefore in this covenant here is a Promise of heaven so the inward and outward face will be all Evangelical Lastly they yet know not how to bring any thing home were all granted to serve their interest they seem to contend that the Evangelical Promises are vested in the persons of true Belevers The other which are civil or domestick serving to make up the mixture were priviledges descendable and traducible to posterity and upon this account circumcision of the natural seed of Abraham came in for confirmation and seale of that which alone was civil domestical and non-Evangelical and being not considered as a leading Sacrament of the whole Church as Baptisme is now but only of the Jewish Church as such proper to Abraham and his posterity and much differing from Baptisme it is no argument that we in Gospel-times transmit any such priviledge to posterity or that our seed before actual faith have any title to the covenant This seems to be their meaning to which we have
in the same Church of Christ and not any of them did set up new Churches 3. The old Church-way of administration among the Jewes was then to fall that present administration to be taken down by Gods appointment and a new one to be set up according to his prescript 4. John set up a new Sacrament in a new way which after his days was the alone Church-way If any can shew as our seekers look after that Jesus Christ shall now put an end to this way and that they have a Commission for a new Sacrament of initiation then they speak somewhat for setting up new Churches in like manner CHAP. XLIII A dogmatical Faith entitles to Baptisme 3. IT farther follows by way of consectary that a dogmaticall Faith ordinarily called by the name of Faith historical such that assents to Gospel-truths though not affecting the heart to a full choice of Christ and therefore was short of Faith which is justifying and saving gives title to baptisme The Covenant is the ground on which baptisme is bottomed otherwise Church-Membership would evince no title either in Infants or in men of years to Baptisme But the Covenant as we have proved is entred with men of Faith not saving and therefore to them Baptisme is to be administred How the consequent can be denyed by those that grant the Antecedent Baptisme denied in foro Dei to men short of saving faith when they are in covenant I cannot imagine yet some that have confessed their interest in the covenant now deny their title to Baptisme and affirme If men be once taught that it is a faith that is short of justifying and saving Faith which admitteth men to Baptisme it will make foule work in the Church 1. All that hath been said for the latitude of the covenant may fitly be applyed in opposition to this tenent for the like latitude of Baptisme 2 All the absurdities following the restraint of the covenant to the Elect to men of Faith saving and justifying follow upon this restraint of interest in Baptisme 3. To make the visible seale of Baptisme which is the priviledge of the Church visible to be of equal latitude with the seale of the Spirit which is peculiar to invisible members is a Paradox 4. The great condition to which Baptisme engages is not a prerequisite in baptisme This is plaine to man is bound to make good his covenant conditions before his engagements to conditions no servant is tyed to do his work to gaine admission into service no souldier to fight in order to get himself listed under command But Faith that is justifying is the condition to which baptisme engages and no condition necessarily required to vest him in it 5. That Faith upon which Simon Magus in Primitive times was baptized is that which admitteth to baptisme Simon himself beleeved and was baptized Act. 8. 13. But Simons faith fell short of saving and justifying 6. In case only justifying faith give admission to baptisme then none is able to baptize seeing this by none is discerned and to leave it to our charity affirming that we may admit upon presumption of a title when God denies I have spoken somewhat chap. 38. and I refer to Master Hudson in his Vindication whom learned Master Baxter so highly commends to shew the unreasonablenesse of it Here it is objected First Objections answered When Christ saith make me Disciples of all Nations baptizing them he means sincere Disciples though we cannot ever know them to be sincere Object I answer Answ In case I make this first objection brought against me my seventh and last argument for me it will fully discover the weaknesse of it and thus I forme it All that are Disciples unto Christ and made disciples for Christ are to be baptized but some are made Disciples to Christ that are short of faith saving and justifying as hath been proved at large This Discipleship that Christ there mentions is such of which whole Nations are in capacity as is plaine in the Commission to which this Nation with others hath happily attained according to the manifold prophecies before cited of these the whole universal visible Church consists as is irrefragably proved by Mr. Hudson in his Treatise of that subject and his Vindication and most amply spoken to by Mr. Baxter in his plaine Scripture-proof of Infants Church-membership and baptisme page 279 280. Sir if you were my father I would tell you that when you say Christ makes no one City Countrey Tribe his Disciples you speak most malignantly and wickedly against the Kingdome and dignity of my Lord Jesus Hath he not commanded to disciple Nations Hath not the Father promised to give him the Heathen or Nations for his inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession Psalme 2. And that Nations shall serve him And that the Kingdomes of the world shall be become the Kingdomes of the Lord and his Christ and do you not see it fulfilled before your eyes Are not Bewâ—ly Keder Minsters c. and England till of late as full Christs disciples and so Church-members as the Jewes were in covenant with God and so Church-members We are not all sincere True no more were they for with many of them God was not well pleased but shut out all that Nation of covenanters from his rest save Caleb and Joshuah We may have Pagans and infidels lurk amongst us unknown but they had many amongst them known In the mean time we as generally professe Christianity as they did to serve the true God And are you sure there is never a City or Town that are all sincere I think you be not or at least is there never a godly family as Abrahams was you cannot be ignorant that the terme Disciples in Scripture is given to more to the sincerely-godly And if whole Nations yea the whole Universal visible Church consisting of discipled Nations were all beleevers it were a happinesse then election would be as large as Vocation when Christ saith many are called but few chosen Secondly Object When he saith he that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved here faith goes before baptism and that not a common but a saving faith for here is but one faith spoken of and that is before baptism 1. This is the weakest of all arguments to reason for a precedency of one before another Answ from the order in which they are placed in Scripture So we may say John baptized before he preached the baptisme of Repentance for his baptizing is put before his preaching of baptisme Mark 1. 4. and that those that he baptized did confesse their sinnes after their baptisme seeing it is mentioned after that it is said that they were baptized Mat. 3. 6. and both of these with a farre greater probability of reason seeing in both there is a narrative of the thing by the Evangelists and in the place in hand there is neither commission given for the work of baptizing nor yet any
I will be their God That seed of Abraham that had possession of the land of Canaan through the gift and by vertue of the promise of God is the seed here taken into covenant to have the Lord for their God This is so plaine that nothing can be plainer to any that read the words But the natural seed of Abraham all the seed of Jacob in their several Tribes according as God set them their bounds inherited the land of Canaan which is called the land of their inheritance and not onely the spiritual seed Regenerate Look into the History of of Scripture who those were that inherited Canaan and you may see who were in this covenant The natural seed were there and not only the spiritual Even those of Abrahams posterity that died not having obtained the promises Heb. 11. 13. that only so journed in Canaan and were never possest of it had title to it It was theirs in reversion though they never came into actual possession My next Argument is drawn from the Seale that is annext in the words immediately following this additional promise ver 9 10 11. And God said unto Abraham thou shalt keep my covenant therfore thou aâ—d thy seed after thee in their generations This is my Covenant which you shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee every man-childe among you shall be circumcised And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your fore-skin and it shall be a token of the Covenant betwixt me and you They that had the signe and seale of the covenant that had it by divine appointment were a people in Covenant This is so plaine that nothing can be more plaine God doth not enter covenant with one and give the signe and seal to another but all the natural seed of Abraham by Isaac and Jacob had the seal viz. all the males all those that were in a capacity of it it was not limitted to the spiritual seed There had been no place for that distinction of Circumcision in the flesh and Circumcision of the heart if none must be circumcised in flesh but those that are circumcised in heart My third Argument is drawn from the Comment that God himself makes of this covenant in the whole Series of Scripture-history holding it out every where in this way of tenure to Abraham and his natural issue as before Where God himself speaks to the whole body of Israel when they were newly come up out of the land of Egypt he sayes I am the Lord your God Exod. 20 2. Deut. 5. 6. God owned all of that whole people as his all of them being Abrahams natural issue yet all of them were not spiritual and while they were in Egypt God speaks of them all in community as his Let my people go that they may hold a feast unto me in the wildernesse Exod. 5. 1. We see the titles that he gives them Children of the Lord your God an holy People a peculiar People above all Nations Deut. 14. 1 2. That speech of the Lord to Israel Amos 3. 1 2. is very full to our purpose Heare ye the Word of the Lord that he hath spoken against you O children of Israel against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt saying You only have I known of all the families of the earth therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities Every one that descended from Jacob the whole of the family that came out of Egypt were a select people to God in covenant He was according to the termes of that Covenant their God There is not a place where God calls them by the name of his people which are almost endlesse but there we have this confirmed that that people were the Lords by vertue of this grant made to Abraham and his seed In the fourth place I argue from the practice of the people of God making this Covenant of God entred with Abraham and his seed a plea to obtaine mercy from God for all Israel the worst of Israel in their lowest state and condition Deut. 9 26 27. O Lord God destroy not thy people and thine in heritance which thou hast redeemed through thy greatnesse which thou hast brought forth out of Egypt with a mighty hand Remember thy servants Abraham Isaac and Jacob look not unto the stubbornnesse of this people nor to their wickednesse nor to their sinne If this Divinity had been then known Moses might have been sent away with this answer That he spake for dogges and not for children not for Israel but for aliens and strangers to the Common-wealth of Israel But as this and the like requests of the people of God were made in faith so they prevailed with God Moses there urges They are thy people and thine inheritance verse 29. as doth the Church Isa 64. 9. Be not wroth very sore O Lord neither remember iniquity for ever behold see we beseech thee we are all thy people and Moses petition takes as the History shews Exod. 32. 14. And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people yea when God vouchsafes mercy to his people thus in covenant Levit. 26. 42. it is upon this account of the Covenant Then will I remember my Covenant with Jacob and also my Covenant with Isaac and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember and I will remember the land Lev. 26. 42. And appearing for the deliverance of Israel out of their hard and pressing bondage he saith to Moses I am the God of thy Father the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob Exod. 3. 6. and that to stay up his faith in confidence of deliverance To this here in this place delivered one replies Object The Covenant saith he with Abraham and his seed I finde Gen. 17. 7. and the urging of this covenant I deny not Exod. 32. 13. Deut. 9. 27. Lev. 26. 42. Exod. 3. 6. And though I say not that it contained only the promise of Canaan but grant it contained the Promise of Redemption by Christ Luke 1. 17. yet I like not Chamiers saying to call the Promise of Canaan an appendant to the covenant sith the Holy Ghost me thinks speaks otherwise Psalme 105. 8 9. 10 11. I shall say no more but leave it to the Reader whether this be any answer only for his censure of Chamiers calling the promise of the land of Canaan an appendant to this covenant the thing is so clear in the narrative of it Gen. 17. that nothing can be more evident The Covenant is full vers 7. To be a God to Abraham and to his seed and this he might have been had he pleased in the land of Vr of the Caldees or in any land whatsoever where Abrahams seed had been planted But when the covenant is thus made there is added And I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee the land wherein thou art a stranger
all the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession As for that of the Psalmist where he thinks the holy Ghost speaks otherwise the force of this Argument must needs be this That which is any where called a Covenant that is not an appendant to a covenant but the giving of the land of Canaan to the seed of Abraham is there called by the name of a Covenant He will not I think say that Circumcision is the Covenant between God and his people he will not deny but it is a signe and seale annext to the covenant and yet Gen. 17. 10. it is called a Covenant This is my Covenant which she shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee every man-childe among you shall be circumcised Metonimies of the adjunct are well enough known and the common use of them in Scripture but that it is his wisdome for his advantage to conceale it My fifth and last argument is drawn from those several Texts in the New Testament which interpret this Covenant thus entred with Abraham in that latitude as extending to his natural issue and not with limit to his spiritual seed and that not barely in domestick or civil but in spiritual promises so that this one hath many in the bowels of it First Rom. 9. 1 2 3 4 5. verses The Apostle aggravating in the highest and saddest way that great heavinesse aud continual sorrow of heart that he had for Israel not respective to civil or domestick but higher concernments even for the whole body of Israel his brethren and kinsmen according to the flesh as he expresseth himself v. 3. For amplification of the real grounds of his trouble that such a people should be cast off he reckons up their priviledges the priviledges of all that according to the flesh were Israelites Priviledges formerly enjoyed but now lost nine in number Who are Israelites to whom appertaines the Adoption and the Glory and the Covenants and the giving of the Law and the service of God and the Promises Whose are the Fathers and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came who is over all God blessed for ever Amen Here sure is enough to conclude them of the seed thus in covenant to be of Gods adopted seed under the Promises Secondly Rom. 11. Throughout the whole body of the chapter the Apostle speaks of the casting off of Gods people Those that are cast off from being a people of God were once his people those that are put out of covenant were a people in Covenant but the natural issue of Abraham called natural branches verse 21. being by right of birth of that Olive are there broken off cast off therefore the natural issue was the seed in covenant Thirdly Mat. 8. 11 12. Upon occasion of the Faith of the Centurion which Christ so magnifies and preferres before the faith of any in Israel he prophecies of the call of the Gentiles and the rejection of the Jewes I say unto you that many shall come from the East and West and shall sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdome of heaven But the children of the Kingdome shall be cast out into utter darknesse there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth Nations from all quarters of the world every point of the Heavens shall embrace the Faith and be received visible members of the Kingdom of God when the children of the Kingdome that are now in it and enjoy it shall be cast out of it children of the Kingdome that are to be cast out are in the Kingdome only upon an interest of birth for the fruition of the priviledges of Ordinances and not upon any spiritual title infallibly giving interest in Salvation But the children of the Kingdome were upon our Saviours sentence to be cast out therefore they were in the Kingdome only on an interest of Birth Fourthly Gal 2. 15. In that chapter among other things we have a narrative from the Apostle of his dealing by way of reproof with Peter at Antioch In which we may observe 1. The occasion given by Peter vers 12. Before that certain came from James he did eat with the Gentiles but when they were come he withdrew and separated himself 2. The issue which followed upon this carriage of his And the other Jewes dissembled likewise with him insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation 3. Arguments brought for conviction of Peter of this error which are two The first in the 14. vers If thou being a Jew livest after the manner of the Gentiles and not as do the Jewes why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jewes Thus the Argument runnes It is unreasonable to draw others into a practice that thou thy self purposely forbearest But thou thy self keepest not the Jewish Rites and Ordinances and therefore it is an unreasonable and blame-worthy practice by thy example to compel others to their observation yea thou being a Jew takest thy self to have freedome unreasonably then dost thou draw on others who were never under any such obligation The second Argument is in the 15. and 16. verses We who are Jewes by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Jesus Christ even we have believed in Jesus Christ that we might be justified by the faith of Christ and not by the works of the Law for by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified which is thus enforced In that way wherein we who are Jews with all our birth-priviledges cannot attain to righteousness we may not teach the Gentiles to attain to it But we who are Jews by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles cannot this way attaine to righteousnesse We know that a man is justified by faith we are compelled to quit the Law and to cleave to Faith without works for justification These words which come up to our present purpose containe 1. The priviledge of Peter Paul Barnabas with the rest of the Jewes 2. The character of the Gentiles in opposition to the Jewes As to the full purpose for which these words are brought by the Apostle they have for the sense of them their dependance on the words that follow but so farre as they containe the priviledge of the Jewes in opposition to and above the Gentiles to which we are to speak so farre they are full of themselves shewing First Positively what himself and Peter were Jewes by nature Secondly Negatively what they were not sinners of the Gentiles Where nature is taken not in the proper but vulgar acceptation for birth or descent from Ancestours as usually in our common phrase of speech we say men are naturally Dutch French Spanish Irish when they are such borne and bred This Scripture therefore Camero cites for one in which the Apostle speaks after the vulgar manner We have a Scripture parallel with this Rom. 11. 24. wher
them John Baptist in that place doth not deny them which also now they had in visible possession All sorts of men fare better by priviledge of birth in civil things Prov. 19. 14. House and riches are the inheritance of fathers The Jews fared better respective to Religious things Rom. 3. 1. VVhat advantage then hath the Jew or what profit is there of Circumcision Much every way Priviledge of Ordinances in the Church of God is a Birth-inheritance CHAP. XLVIII The Covenant in New Testament-times takes in parents with their children BUt in case all this be yeelded in Old Testament-times that the Covenant entred was in this latitude that the whole of Abrahams seed were taken with him into Covenant and that then it ran in a race by carnal descent yet it is otherwise at least in New Testament-times No childe fares now the better respective to any visible Church-interest for the Faith or Religion of their Ancestours And here is a fourth difference between the first and second the Old and New Covenant according to some The first Covenant was entred in that latitude to take in Children with their parents Posterity with their Ancestours according to the Charter so long infisted upon But in New Testament-times the Covenant reaches no farther then the person that actually enters He covenants for himself his seed have no more or farther interest then the seed of Heathens and Pagans When I first published my Birth-priviledge I here expected opposition and did look that some would appeare to put this limit to the Covenant in New Testament-times but for the state of the Church under the first covenant I thought I should not have found an opposite and therefore was lesse mindful of the confirmation of it which I hope is now done to the Readers full satisfaction As to those that plead such a change of things in New Testament-times we might interrogate them in sundry particulars First when God by free Charter did once vouchsafe such a grant to his people how it can be made appear that it was ever reversed or any such limit put to it when the Church of God hath held it in see from Abraham to this present hour they may well look that they should produce some plaine word from God revoking his grant that challenge them for usurpation It is true that Gods Sovereignty is such that he may contract his grace at pleasure As he may wholly strike a people out of covenant so he may put what termes he pleases to it but such that affirme it should make it appear in which hitherto they have been silent They that will eject us out of so long a possession had need to make their plea firm for our eviction Secondly we might demand the reasons why the Covenant should run in so narrow a limit now being vouchsafed in so great a latitude then being once made of God as with men of yeares so with little ones Deut. 29. Why should little ones be now excluded and onely men of growth admitted when it is granted on all hands that God continues a people to himself how comes it to passe that he admits them on such new termes That his favours are now thus shortened that as a lease for terme of life differs from a fee-simple for inheritance so the Covenant in New Testament-times differs from the Covenant vouchsafed of God to our fathers Where the absurdity lies that Baptisme should be administred to those that do not actually beleeve when yet Circumcision was administred to infants in as great an incapacity Thirdly we might demand how they can avoid that great scandall that must needs by this meanes be given to the beleeving Jewes who waved the old way of the administration of the covenant and embraced the new to have their infants upon this new admission struck out of Covenant A man that should be seized on an inheritance for ever will hardly be brought to quit that tenure and accept with limit for terme of life God was their God and the God of their seed Gen. 17. 7. They did bring forth children to God Ezek. 16. 20. Now they bring forth children without God They have a seed but no holy seed a world replenished but not a Church or people to God continued The savage Indians in a married condition have this priviledge that their issue are not bastards and this is all that can be claimed by Christians Fourthly we might demand if so great a change were made and held in the Apostolique Primitive times how it comes to passe that there was such silence no man moving a question about it The pomp of worship and observation of places formerly in use was laid aside in Gospel-times but this we hear of and the reason of it John 4. 22. The initiating Sacrament of Circumcision had a period put to it of this we hear and many complaints about it Psalteries Harps Organs Cymbals and such instruments of musick in use in the time of the Law were laid aside in Gospel-times and not known in the westerne Churches till after Thomas Aquinas his dayes As this was done so it was not past in silence but spoken of as elsewhere I have shewn and given reasons of it by Justin Martyr or at least one that beares his name Chrysostome Isidore Thomas Aquinas When none of these changes can passe but observation is made it is more then strange that so great a change as this in the termes of the Covenant between God and his people can be so carried on without any observation at all or one word once moved about it or spoken in it See Master Baxters Treatise of Infants Church-membership proving that Infants were sometimes Church-members page 26 27. that there is no repeale of this grant vouchsafed of God p. 27 28. Waiting for some faire answer to the former demands I shall proceed to those texts of Scripture where the Covenant in New Testament-times is held out in this latitude to beleevers and their seed comprizing their parents in the same priviledge of Covenant and participation of promise First let us look into those words of Peter delivered in his first Sermon after the receiving of the holy Ghost the first place in which the Covenant of promise and Baptisme the Seale of the Covenant are mentioned to the Jewes with whom the Apostles as yet held communion being not actually rejected out of a visible Church-state Repent and be baptised every one of you in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of sinnes and ye shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost For the promise is unto you and to your children and to all that are afarre off even as many as the Lord our God shall call Acts 2. 38 39. In which words we may observe 1. An Exhortation as to repentance for the guilt of the blood of Christ of which they stood convinced so also unto Baptisme 2. A Motive stirring them up to embrace baptisme in the
concerning grace and works verse 6. to the 11. 2. He speaks to the Gentiles and to take down their insultation over the Jewes he shewes that this rejection of theirs is not final And this as the former is 1. Asserted verse 11. I say then have they stumbled that they should fall viz. irrecoverably fall God forbid 2. Proved by giving account of a twofold end of this rejection of the Jewes 1. The call of the Gentile verse 12. But rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles for to provoke them to jealousie 2. A more glorious returne of the Jews in emulation of the Gentiles verse 12. Now if thâ— fall of them be the riches of the world and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles how much more their fulnesse Hereupon he falls upon a large discourse of his zeal toward them and their re-ingraffing vers 13. 14 15. adding the words of the Text If the first fruits be holy the lump also is holy and if the root be holy so are the branches This Paraâ—us makes a farther Argument for proof that the Jews shall again be called Gomarus makes it an encouragement to the Apostle to endeavour their call howsoever here is a double similitude One drawn from the Ceremonial Law If the first fruits be holy the lump is also holy The other from Nature If the root be holy so are the branches The first is only mentioned the second is largely commented upon In both we see 1. A supposition 2. An affirmation The supposition is of the holinesse of the first fruits the holinesse of the root The affirmation is the whole lump is holy the branches are holy This last is grounded on a principle in nature universally true As is the root so is the branch they are both of one and the same nature As is the one so is the other Which he applies to the state of the Church of God first to the Church of the Jewes and that 1. In their ancient estate when they were a people of God in Covenant-relation holy so stiled of him frequently in Scripture 2. In their present state for a great part broken off and so made no people 3. In their future condition when they should be called of God and as it were risen from the dead Secondly he applies it also to the Gentiles 1. In their ancient estate as no people 2. In their present estate made a people of God in the place of the Jewes 3. In their possible estate and condition to be rejected and cast off On which we may ground several undeniable Positions some concerning the subject root and branch some concerning the predicate holy First concerning the subject root and branch in this place as by way of Metaphor set out the estate of parent and childe ancestor and issue 2. The whole body of the Church is compared to a tree to an Olive tree 3. The root of this tree viz. the first supreme universal root is Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Not Abraham alone so Ishmaelites would be of the body Nor Abraham with Isaac alone so the Edomites from Esau would have been taken in But the Apostle in this chapter from Old Testament-authority excludes both of them Abraham Isaac and Jacob are therefore joyntly the root 4. The branches of this tree are of two sorts â—ome natural issuing from the root by descent others ingraffed put in by way of insition The â—ewes were natural branches descending from the loynes of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. The Gentiles are branches by insition put into the stock the natural branches being broken off 5. The fatnesse of this tree is the glory of Ordinances of which the whole Church partakes or as some say Christ is the fatnesse but that is onely as he is tendered in Ordinances for he walks in the middest of the Golden Candlesticks In which sense onely we may yeeld that Christ is that fatnesse Secondly concerning the predicate Holy There is one and the same holinesse goes through the whole tree all the branches natural and engraffed through the whole Church and all the children of it Jews and Gentiles The whole of this holinesse is from one Original root and therefore one and the same 2. This holinesse is such as is communicable from parent to childe and necessarily communicated as a root communicates sap to the branches This is so plaine that if it be denied all the Apostles dispute falls 3. It is no holinesse of inhesion but relation not qualitative but federal The holinesse of the Jewes who were a holy Nation was such The holinesse of the Gentiles can be no other Holinesse of inhesion is not communicable but only holinesse of relation In holinesse of inhesion the proposition holds not as is the father so is the child who knowes not that holy fathers have unholy children regenerate parents have issue unregenerate These things considered it is evident that as the father is in regard of Church-state Covenant-holinesse so is the childe both in the Church of the Jews and Gentiles The father being without the childe is without the father being within the childe is within eo nomine because a branch of such a root a childe of such a father which is a full confirmation of the point in hand that the childe is in Covenant with the father and the person that actually enters Covenant is not solely vested in it One stands upon the contrary part and puts it to this issue for trial Whether this ingraffing be into the visible Church by profession of Faith or into the invisible by Election and Faith and concludes that it is meant of the Church invisible which if he can make good I shall confesse all Arguments drawn from hence as to this point are lost I would to avoid impertinent cavils and quarrels each Text were brought to such issue I shall in the first place bring arguments to evince that the breaking off and engraffing is respective to the Church as visible and then proceed to answer arguments from a late hand against it 1. That ingraffing which is into Abraham Isaâ—â— and Jacob as a root is not an invisible graffing by saving Faith and Election This is plaine we live not by power received from Abraham Abraham cannot say he bears us up in saving graces and that without sap from him we can do nothing But the ingraffing is into Abraham Isaac and Jacob as a root This argument as is said by one were of force if Abraham were made a root by communication and for prevention he is put to it to tell us of a root communicating nothing but an exemplary root or an exemplary cause of beleeving only what an exemplary non-communicating root is or meanes let the Reader Consider Secondly that ingraffing which caused disputation and contention in some emulation in others upon the sight and report of it was not by saving faith only into the invisible body but open visible and apparant into the
dwells in us by Faith so we in Christ Ephes 3. 17. 2. All ingraffing is into that which gives sap and juice to the ingraffed as the stock from the root to the syens Now Christ gives sap to the Elect beleeving not the Church and therefore it is not into the Church but into Christ 3. If saving faith ingraffe the branch into the Church invisible then the Church invisible is the proper object of such Faith but the Church is no such object of Faith but Christ 4. That supposed ingraffing into the invisible Church is either known to the body invisible or unwitting if know then it is no invisible They have no light to discerne an invisible work if unknown then there could not be such a dispute about the new ingraffing of Gentiles nor complaint of breaking off of the Jewes all being done by an invisible translation and so the subject of the question is taken away To dispute whether ingraffing into the Church be into the Church-visible or invisible is to dispute whether the Mount of Olives be a Mountaine of Earth or Aire I shall assoon finde a Mountaine of Aire in Geography as this ingraffing into the invisible Church in Divinity And here I tie not any up to the word which I conceive in reference to any Ecclesiastical or Spiritual station is not elsewhere used in Scripture but to the thing All that accesse to the Church from Gentile Nations which is so large fore-prophesied in the Old Testament and Historically related in the Acts of the Apostles was an ingraffing into the Church visible and this ingraffing here mentioned The visible Church did immediately receive these new branches and so the whole body of Jews and Gentiles professedly beleeving Ephes 2. 15. became one new man The visible Church communicates sap and juice which is the fatnesse of the Olive in Ordinances This is known by the Church visible they were sensible of and full of praises for the new addition to this number Argument 4. Fourthly That ingraffing is meant verse 17. whereby the wilde Olive is co-partaker of the root and fatnesse of the Olive-tree as is asserted there But such is only Election and giving of Faith Ergo. The minor I prove by considering who the root is and what the fatness of the Olive-tree is 1. Negatively the root is not every beleeving parent Answ I suppose I may answer for my self that I never said that every beleeving parent is the root I willingly yeeld that every beleeving parent is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the root but I affirm that every beleeving parent is a root I cannot reach this mystery that Abraham can be a root of all the branches in Israel reaching down to the Apostles times no intermediate rootes intervening no more then Adam can be a natural root of mankinde to this time without intermediate fathers of our flesh deriving us from him as Jacob with Rachel and Leah was a root from whom Israel sprang as branches of an Olive so Judah and Tamar Boaz and Ruth were roots likewise They built up the house of Israel Ruth 4. 11 12. The house of Israel was this Olive-tree these several Metaphors expressing the same thing the building of the house and bringing out the branches are one and the same All builders are roots these are builders therefore roots Abraham may be called the builder laying the first foundation so the root from whence every branch was derived yet every particular Beleever that had issue a builder a root Those Israelites that had no holinesse of inhesion but only of relation that were members of the Church visible not invisible were fathers by way of communication of this holinesse 1 Cor. 10. 1. All our fathers were under the cloud and all passed through the sea It is as necessary to have intermediate fathers between us and Abraham as to have intermediate mothers between us and Eue. Eve may as well be the mother of all living and no other mother between us and her as Abraham can be the father of the Faithful and no intermediate father to derive from him and communicate to us But his proof is very well worth the hearing that every beleeving parent is not the root For then all the branches should be natural the childe of every beleeving Parent is a natural branch from his father But here Apostle makes the Gentiles branches and a wild Olive graffed in besides nature and the Jews only natural branches growing from the root verse 21 24. The Apostle makes them wilde onely at their first ingraffing and so was all Terahs race wilde likewise till that change of Faith wrought in Abrahams call and the covenant of God entered with him We now are natural as they were and cannot be called wilde but in our first Original Positively he sayes the root is no other then Abraham that Abraham onely is a holy root or at most Abraham Isaac and Jacob. If this have any face of Argument it runnes thus If Abraham be the root and not every beleeving Parent then the ingraffing is by Election and Faith that justifies The truth is the sequel is undeniable on the contrary If Abraham be the root then the ingraffing is not into the invisible Church which he strangely calls by Election but onely into the visible This Master Blakwood saw and faine would have maintained that Christ is the root for ingraffing into Christ and not into Abraham makes a member of the Church invisible If the ingraffing be by a saving Faith only to derive saving Graces personally inherent as a fruit of Election from Abraham then it must needs be that we are Elect in Abraham Abraham may say Without me ye can do nothing and he that beleeveth in me out of his belly shall flow forth rivers of living water and we may say The life that we live in the flesh we live by faith in the sonne of Terah This must necessarily follow if Abraham be the root not only respective to a conditional Covenant but to the grace under condition covenanted It had been more safe for our Authour with Master Blackwood though in contradiction to himself to have made Christ the root when these consequences must follow To which he answers If I made Abraham a root as communicating Faith by infusion or impetration mediatory as Christ this would follow But I make Abraham a root as he is called the father of all them that beleeve Rom. 4. 11. Not by begetting Faith in them but as an exemplâ—ry cause of beleeving as I gather from the expression verse 12. That he is a father to them that walk in the steps of our father Abraham which he had yet being uncircumcised A root not by communication but example an ingraffing not to have any thing communicated from the root but to imitate it is such a Catacresis as may well make all Rhetorick ashamed of it and if the Sun ever saw a more notable piece of nonâ—sense I am to seek what sense is A
Baptisme according to many eminent Divines by vertue of their Adoption Reverend Master Cawdrey observes a three-fold way to circumcision from Gen. 17. One is personal upon profession of Faith in a mans own person so Abraham entered A second is paternal when a man comes in by right derived from his Parents so Isaac and Ishmael had title A third adoptive being taken into the family of a Beleever according to that Gen. 17. 12 13. He that is eight dayes old among you shall be circumcised every man childe in your generations be that is born in the house or bought with money of any stranger which is not of thy seed He that is borne in thy house and he that is bought with thy money must needs be circumcised c. Any bondman that he would take and adopt into his family in such case had right of circumcision Riveâ— on Gen. 17. Exercit. 8â— is cleare of this judgement and sayes he remembers that it was so determined in the National Synods of the French Churches quoting in like manner Prosper in his second Book De vocatione gentium Chap. 8. Sometimes this priviledge is vouchsafed to the children of Infidels when by a secret providence they into the hands of the godly Master Cotton I remember in his book of Infant-Baptisme is for it Master Norton against Apollonius for present suspends his judgement page 38. I had rather go his way than theirs that determine it and in my thoughts with submission to better judgements I rather incline in present to the contrary Those that Abraham bought with his money I suppose were men of years who were to be circumcised and their issue But whether they were not first instructed is the question No uncircumcised person was to be in his house and whether he might compel to circumcision may well be disputed He found them explicitely in covenant with false gods and whether he might give them the seale of the covenant of the true God in that state I question It is said Gods covenant shall be in their flesh verse 13. and that this should be done and no covenant with the true God at all professedly in their mouth no notion of him by way of assent in their heart to me is strange I think it implies Abrahams work first in instructing of them in the covenant and upon their assent they were received and their seed with them Circumcision did denominate them a people of God and that is a strong contradiction to have them circumcised whose faith was in a false god and who applied themselves to such worship Their entrance I should rather take to be personal than adoptive Consider them then as descending from the loynes of Christian progenitors having fathers of their flesh heretofore in covenant with God and we shall finde them in a better condition than those Heathens that had ever been strangers And here the Apostle will help us to a distinction Rom. 11. 28. Speaking of the Jewes cut off from the body of the Church visible As concerning the Gospel saith he they are enemies for your sakes Their present condition is as Heathens being alienated from God by reason of unbelief of the Gospel which Apostasy of theirs hath given occasion to and made way for the calling of the Gentiles But as touching the Election they are friends saith he God hath respect to them not totally to reject them for their fathers sake for the covenant which he entered with and the love that he shewed unto their fore-fathers being beloved upon the account of their fathers When there is a father found to do them that office to take them out of the wild Olive to put them into the true Olive I do not doubt but that they have title Though Baptisme should be denied to infants respective to all predecessors pure Heathen notwithstanding Adoption which I will not determine yet the Apostle speaking so much in favour of Jewes even in their state of blindnesse respective to the hope of their future call I do not doubt but it might be vouchsafed upon this account of Adoption to an infant Jew if we can have any ground fairely to conclude his descent from Abraham much more where we can easily evidence a descent from parents that are Christian And this I hope is some explication of my meaning where in answer to the demand of an adversary I say That infants be capable of Baptism by descent from parents either within mans memory or beyond it when a line of profession holdi or is againe restored that the infants may be received into the visible Church and enjoy the saving Ordinances of Christ Jesus page 68. of my answer and some satisfaction to the question concerning the power of mediate Parents giving title to Baptisme where out of the case of total Apostasy there is small difficulty I shall conclude in the words of Rivet If a parent wants true Faith yet makes profession of it and in the external society of the Church is accounted a Beleever or hath been accounted heretofore under the Old Testament the infants borne of such parents are in covenant with them and partakers of the promise even upon this account because the promise was received of the Ancestors in behalfe of the posterity that should issue from them which the unbelief or hypocrisie of the immediate parent cannot make invalid as long as the infant cannot imitate the unbelief or hypocrisie of the parent CHAP. LIX A Defence of the former Doctrine respective to the latitude of Infant-Baptisme A Reverend Authour putting it to the Question Whether the Ministers of England are bound by the Word of God to baptize the children which say they beleeve in Jesus Christ but are grossely ignorant scandalous in their conversations scoffers at godlinesse and refuse to submit at Church-discipline determining it in the negative a work most candidly carried on must be ingeniously acknowledged yet a work in which the Authour appears rather diffident than confident more in suspition than assured of the verity of his own tenent or warranty of his present practice Sometimes he consesses himself at a disadvantage and comes very weakly off it page 13. Sometimes he calls for better fingers to untie the knot that he meets with page 32. Sometimes he even yeelds all as the state did stand not onely with the Jewes but also as it doth stand with us though it ought de jure to be otherwise page 34. Sometimes he professes not to deny any infants but to delay them page 42. Sometimes he sayes he had rather grapple with those who think he is too large than with those who judge him to be too streight page 43. Suspecting his errour as indeed it doth if Scripture may determine to lie on that hand I shall as briefly as may be take a view of it He premises two things page 1 2. for the clearing of the question First Premises two grounds on which he builds his discourse 2. Puts the Question
regard of persons for Themselves Posterity For themselves it is much to be able with the Psalmist to say Thou art he that took me out of the wombe Thou didst make me to hope when I was upon my mothers breasts I was cast upon thee from the wombe thou art my God from my mothers belly Psal 22. 9 10. This puts upon confidence in prayer as an argument drawn from long continued acquaintance as there follows Be not farre from me for trouble is neer Ver. 11. Such have timely knowledge of God sucking in somewhat of him while they suck milk from the brests An expression of height setting out this birth-happiness that hath sure more in it then can be applied to sinners of the Gentiles see how the Psalmist yet farther pleads it with God O Lord truely I am thy servant I am thy servant and the son of thy hand-maid Psal 116. 16. an allusion to the law of servants who were the inheritance of the Master in whose house they were Exod. 21. 4. Levit. 25. 16. I am such saith the Psalmist thy servant thy servant with all earnestneâ—â— of affection I am of thine inheritance I am one of those that are thy house-borne-servants my mother was thy hand-maid I have therefore this relation to plead and this he pleads again and again in the same words Psal 86. 16. This great priviledge Isaiah in like manner takes notice of Isa 49. 1. The Lord hath called me from the wombe from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name The Apostle mindes the Ephesians of their former condition and will have them to remember the time past when they were without Christ being aliens from the Common-Wealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise having no hope without God in the world But there never was a time in which men of this birth-priviledge were in that condition these are Gods heritage from the wombe and with Timothy some in greater some in lesse measure from children have the knowledge of the Scriptures if not with John Baptist full of the Holy Ghost from the wombe Luke 1. 15. which yet doubtlesse is the happinesse not of few who are eminent in sanctification whose growth in grace is seen and yet the beginnings not known Howsoever it is with them for personal qualifications yet they are nigh when others are afarre off Ephes 2. 13. at the pools brim waiting the Angels moving of the water John 5. 3. Salvation is of the Jewes saith our Saviour John 4. 22. Saving Ordinances are their inheritance They are happily seated under that joyful sound which is able to save the soul Jam. 1. 21. Salvation is of his house who is the sonne of Abraham Luke 19. 9. As it is full of consolation to Beleevers in respect of themselves so also in reference to their posterity their children are Gods children they being the Lords inheritance their children are his heritage in like manner they bring â—orth children to God and he ownes and challenges their seed as his Ezek 16. 20. An infinite love in God an unspeakable comfort to a perent when the Infant who by corruption of nature is in Satans jawes and in no lesse danger of hell than Moses sometimes was of the water and not so much as sensible of his condition God pleases in this sad state to look upon him and to make it the time of love finding out wayes for his freedome What the Apostle speaks from the Prophet Rom. 10. 10. of Gods care of the Gentiles is certainly true being applied to infants I was found of them that sought me not and made manifest to them that enquired not after me Had we that hopelesse opinion of our children as Papists have of theirs that die without Baptisme what a wretched case were it with David to part with an infant out of the world How could such mourne in any other way than as those that are without hope parting with an infant without any part in Christ and in no better posture towards God than the seed of the sinners of the Gentiles doomed both by the Psalmist and the Prophet Jeremy Psalm 79. 6. Jerem. 10. 25. Pour out thy wrath on the heathen that have not known thee and upon the families that call not upon thy name they might with Rachel weep for their children and refuse to be comforted because for eternity they are not But we finde God more rich in mercy entring covenant with his and their seed Christ himselfe imbracing them in their infancy and taking them into his special love as those that bear his name and though death should prevent their Baptisme whereby they have an actual interest in visible Church-priviledges yet he that hath appointed Ordinances is not tied to them but where he hath entered covenant can save without them Bellarmine confesseth that the desire of Baptisme in one that is in the number of the Catechumoni instructed in the principles of Christ and not baptized doth save though the text John 3. 5. so much urged by that party against the salvation of infants understood with their Comment be in the letter against it why then should not that grace which would shew it selfe in like desires when the person is of capacity qualifie for salvation in like manner Finding this love in God these bowels in Christ we may safely conclude that children have blisse parents have comfort parents and children have their interest in Church-Ordinances and Administrations And let God have the glory FINIS AN ALPHABETICAL Table Relating to the chief Heads handled in this Treatise A Abraham CIrcumcision was not a Seale of Faith peculiar to him pag. 239. Arguments evincing it ibid. All his seed were not in Covenant but his seed by Promise only pag. 298 He was not taken into Covenant as a natural Father but as a natural Father accepting Gods tender pag. 299 His seed is entitled to saving mercies on Gods termes ibid. His houshold-members out of Covenant not circumcised page 425 See Circumcision Root Actions Immanent and transient pag. 132 See Justification Adam Was in Covenant with God pag. 9 His integrity was connatural pag. 103 Stood not in need of a Mediatour p. 91 In what sense imperfect ibid. In case he had stood whether he had been translated out of Paradise into Heaven p. 100 He might have gone quick to Hell if Christ had not been promised p. 102 See Covenant Adoption Adoptive-right to Baptisme questioned p. 454 Angels In Covenant with God p. 7 Needed not a Mediatour p. 91 In what sense their obedience was imperfect ibid. Antiquity For Infant-Baptisme cleared p. 416 Apostasie Total and partial p. 453 Assembly Of Divines vindicated p. 406 Assurance Is to be gathered from the conditions of the Covenant p. 195 See Spirit B. Baptisme SIgnifies not barely dipping but every way of washing It is the door for admission into the Church visible p. 275 Pharisees not denied it seeking but being tendered rejected