was but an Obligation to the Law as a rule of Righteousness Examinat Cap. 9. §. 1. subservient to the Covenant of Grace as Baptism also is Rom. 6.3 not to the Law in the rigor of it as it was a Covenant of Works for Abraham Isaac and Jacob were not so obliged they were in the Covenant of Grace as well as we and Circumcision was to Abraham by your own confession a seal of the righteousness of Faith Christ did profit may hundreds and thousands that were circumcised in the time of the Law he was the Lamb slain from the begining of the World and they were saved by Faith in him 1 Cor. 10.1 2 3. Heb. 11. but when Christians were circumcised in the time of the Gospel out of a perswasion of its necessity and their justification by it then it did bind them to keep the whole Law and Christ in that case did profit them nothing and this is all can be inferred from your Texts as to this matter As Circumcision did shew it was their duty to circumcise their hearts so Baptism shews it is our duty to wash our hearts Jerem. 4.14 Jam. 4.8 between heart circumcision and heart-washing is no great difference if any And as there was a precept for the circumcision of the heart so God promised his people that he will circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their seed of which before Chapt. 7. Though Circumcision did shew forth you say a Duty on our part as well as a Promise on Gods part yet you know Infants were then circumcised though they had no actual knowledg of either What you can gather hence if any thing against Infant-Baptism I expect to know ANABAPT CAT. Q. Was not Circumcision also a seal of the righteousness of Faith Rom. 4.11 A. Yes to Abraham only and if Abrahams believing children amongst the Gentiles should be baptized as he was circumcised then is must not be till they have the righteousness of Faith as Abraham here had at least they must have it in profession The Text saith It was the seal of the righteousness of Faith §. 2. which Abraham had being yet uncircumcised but it saith not that it was so to him only The Apostle brings it as an argument to prove the way of our Justification to be by Faith alone which were a meer inconsequence if proper to him and not belonging to others There was adult persons Believers in Abrahams Family when Circumcision was first instituted and many be-lieving Proselytes afterward which had Faith while yet they were uncircumcised as Abraham had of whom their Circumcision also was a seal of the righteousness of the Faith they had before yea Moses makes it to all a sign of the Covenant Gen. 17. which doubtless was the Covenant of Grace or to use Pauls dialect the righteousness that is by Faith Rom. 3.22 30. 10.3 6 c. cum Deut. 30.6 10 11 12. Phil. 3.9 this being the Tenor of that Covenant Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved Acts 16.31 Your passage implying that there are some believing children of Abraham which have not the righteousness of Faith as Abraham here had I do not understand except you make actual believing and having the righteousness of faith two things not only distinct but separable But whatsoever your meaning be I cannot see here any shew of proof that children must necessarily believe or make profession of faith before they may be baptized as Abraham did before he was circumcised Abraham could not be circumcised in Infancy nor before Circumcision was instituted no wonder therefore if he believed before had Circumcision been instituted in the days of his fathers Abraham might have been circumcised before he actually believed as well as Isaac his son was Christ could not be baptized till John did baptize which was about the thirtieth year of Christs age nor did he receive the Eucharist till the night before he suffered yet some that pretend to imitate him can be baptized and possibly preach too at 15 16 20 21 c. years of age though Christ was neither baptized nor did preach till he was thirty ANABAPT CAT. Q. Whether doth Baptism succeed Circumcision in the same Office A. No Circumcision was to every Male though reprobate but Baptism only to the Believer Matt. 28.19 There being a change of the visible Church and of the Ordinances this cannot succeed in the room thereof nor hath any dependance thereon Your Argument against the succession of Baptism to Circumcision is weak §. 3. viz. Baptism is not like Circumcision in some things therefore it is not like in any thing therefore it succeeds not in the same office By this you may prove as well That the Supper doth not succeed the Passover nor the Lords-Day the Jewish Sabbath The office of Circumcision was to shew original sin to teach necessity of Regeneration of Mortification of Salvation by Christ the seed of Abraham to sign and seal the Covenant or the Righteousness that is by Faith to distinguish Jews from others to initiate solemnly and formally into the Church And doth not Baptism also initiate into the Church 1 Cor. 12.13 Yea doth it not Circumcision being now abrogated perform the foresaid Offices Indeed it is not every way the same for then it were not a successor Add hereunto that the Covenant was the ground of Circumcision Genes 17.7 9 10 11. the equity whereof obligeth to Baptism as the equity of the fourth Commandment extends to our Lords-Day As for the positive command vers 12. it only determines the time and day which circumstance of day and time was not built upon the Covenant of Grace as Circumcision it self was and therefore is not perpetual and without such a positive determination of the time Circumcision should and might have been administred to Infants the Jews did circumcise children bought with their mony the same day they bought them though they bought them the same day they were born See Ainsw in Genes 17.12 Oft-times Circumcision was not administred the eighth day but deferred in which cases the command of circumcising the eighth day was not observed yet Circumcision was and according to right reason ought to be administred to Infants by virtue of the naked institution thereof as we contend that Baptism ought now to be both of them being as was said seals of the Covenant But you in saying Circumcision was to every Male though reprobate do imply that it Was not to Females true but both Males and Females were then baptized and so they were in the New Testament Acts 8.11 Gal. 3.28 29. which is a sufficient justification of our deserting Circumcision in that point And the Infant-females as well as the adult were counted members of the Jewish Church and though by reason of their incapacity or Gods respect to the modesty of that Sex they were not personally circumcised yet they were circumcised in the Males Hence the whole Church of the Jews
possibly you that published this Catechism may be of the strictest Sect of your Religion as the worst of these at their first separating from us seemed also to be and do abhor to have communion not only with these but with Drunkards Adulterers Swearers c. To you I say if there be not amongst you Drunkards Adulterers Swearers c. Satan himself is none of these but are there not seditious schiâ—matical persons that say all the Church is holy sacrilegious persons that devour that which is holy or dedicated to the service of God and his Church not by themselves which was Ananias his sin but by others Are there not Murderers Railers false Accusers Lyars proud boasters covetous traytors heady high minded lovers of themselves despisers of good men having a form of godliness c. Such an one is Satan As for the rotten members in Paedobaptists Congregations they are or should be duly proceeded against and much good is done that way in many Congregations where Government is set up and people help forward the work humane infirmities both in Rulers and ruled ever have been and will be And more good had been done had not the separation of some from us the exemption by the Civil Powers from Church-government of whosoever will not freely own it the unjust clamors of Presbyterian Rigidness and Tyranny together with the Tumults and Troubles of the Times hindred it As for Infant-Baptism §. 4. it is a consecrating of children to God and formally initiates them into the Church which is a great benefit as casting out or excommunicating out of the Church is a great censure it is an outward distinctive sign of Christians children from Pagans signifies their original sin and necessity of regeneration even before the commission of actual sin and the Salvation of Infants as well as grown men by Christ It makes Infants partakers of the Ordinances at least of the Prayers of the Church as members thereof it pre-engageth them to a Christian Course when they have the least prejudice and obstruction against it and as soon as they are capable to receive the nurture and admonition of the Lord to frequent Ordinances to own Jesus Christ by external profession it binds Parents to be more careful and conscientious of their Religions Education it comforts their hearts godly Parents may speak this experimentally to see their Children thus sealed in assurance that God is their God and the God of their seed Yea God doth sometimes yea always as we ought to judg till the contrary appear baptize them inwardly or inâ—use grace or the seed of it into the Soul of the baptized Infant These and the like were counted great benefits in the time of the Law and are they or can they be mischiefs in the time of the Gospel You assert indeed That delaying of Baptism would make men careful to get knowledg and holiness whereas now they viz. they that do not delay Baptism are careless of both But may they not be as conscientiously taught and as careful and apt to learn in Christs School in his visible Kingdom as out of it baptized as unbaptized Are not many grown persons as forgetful and careless of the Promises they make on their sick beds and other occasions as of those which were made in Infancy Are Anabaptists the only men that are careful to get knowledg and holiness Are not multitudes of persons which were baptized in their Infancy as careful to get knowledg and holiness and as good Proficients therein as any others Is it better not to put children into a lease or grant of a priviledg lest they should be secure and careless to pay rent and do homage then to put them in May not deferring of Baptism so long make them despise it when they come to age Satan may more easily keep children when grown up from receiving Christianity then work them to renounce it though he sometimes prevails with Witches and Wizzards to renounce their Baptism received in Infancy that they may be his vassals and more assured to him Keeping the children of Christians out of the Church is a strange way sure it is none of Gods ways nor is it likely to prevail to make them in love with Christianity If any good can be done by such mediums the warrantable deferring of the Lords Supper alone may do it as well as the unwarrantable delaying of Baptism As for darkening the Doctrine of Baptism experience teacheth us that the Doctrine thereof was clear enough in Scripture and competently understood as well as the Doctrine of the Lords Supper before such opposition hath been made to Infant-Baptism If it be now darkened the darkness is not from Infant-Baptism but from your opposite Opinion and Practice ANABAPT CAT. Q. But may not Infants be baptized if they be Abrahams seed A. Yes But we Gentiles are only Abrahams seed by believing Gal. 3.7 so Rom. 4.16 Gal. 3.29 They that would make the children of Believers to be the seed of Abraham are mistaken for the Scripture speaketh but of three seeds of Abraham viz. Christ Gal. 3.16.2 The carnal seed 3. The Believer Jew or Gentile Gal. 3.28 And they add a fourth seed of Abraham viz. the seed or children of Believers amongst the Gentiles about which the Scripture is silent EIther you do not sufficiently enumerate Exam. Chap. 7. or not rightly understand your enumeration of the Scripture-kinds of Abrahams seed or both For 1. Christ personal is not the whole of Abrahams seed to whom though he be the whole in whom 2 Cor. 1.20 the Promises were made but Christ mystical the whole Church of Christ 1 Cor. 12.12 13. all which whether Jews or Gentiles bond or free I may add young or old are but one in their Head Jesus Christ Gal. 3.28 All that are Christs are Abrahams seed vers 29. and Infants are his as well as grown persons for he became an Infant suffered much in his very Infancy was the Head of the Church while an Infant and therefore might well have Infant-members dyed for Infants as well as for grown men bad his Disciples to suffer little children to come to him if not that he might baptize them for he baptized none at all Infants or others Joh. 4.1 2. yet that he might bless them and said that of such is the Kingdom of Heaven 2. As for the carnal seed of Abraham their fleshly relation was not sufficient to entitle them to Church-priviledges except they had a spiritual relation also Rom 9 6 8. Open Apostates and Revolters though the carnal seed of Abraham were not counted of the Church but as strangers and Heathens as David calls them Psal 54.3 59.5 That Text Exod. 12.48 prohibiting strangers did by the rule of proportion prohibit from the Passover all such Jews as did forsake the Faith The Caldee Paraphrast saith No son of Israel that is an Apostate or fallen from the Faith shall eat of it Cain and his posterity were rejected Gen. 4.15
16. cum Gen. 6.1 2. So Ishmael cast out and the Ishmaelites Gal. 4 30. Gen. 21.10 14. Psal 83.6 which last place mentions the Edomites also which were the posterity of Abraham yea all the twelve Tribes which were the seed of Abraham were cast off at the last and yet their being begotten after the flâ—sh and being circumcised in the flesh was an help not an hindrance to their being begotten of the Promise or to Circumcision in the Spirit Jacob was of Isaac and Rebecca after the flesh and yet also the heir of Promise And as then some were born only after the flesh as Ishmael Esau and some were also born after the spirit as Isaac Jacob So the Apostle looking not only to the Parallel but to the History saith So it is now some even in the time of the Gospel are born of Christian Parents only after the flesh and some also after the spirit and these do persecute one another Gal. 4.29 This difference may discover it self in riper years but in Infancy it is as undiscoverable now as then 3. It was not necessary that they should be the carnal seed of Abraham that were in Covenant-relation and initiated into the Church for Abraham was as to this not only the father of the Jews but of many Nations and upon this account his name was changed Gen. 17.4.5 Proselytes being Gentiles as well as we and not of his carnal seed nor many so much as of his family yet they were the seed of Abraham by believing as wel as we are now and they were not only initiated into the Church but those of them that were of Abrahams family were the foundationals and first members of the Church as constituted in Abrahams family his 318 trained servants besides others were not all if any of his carnal seed 4. As for the Infants of Believers which you separate from their Parents of which see before Chap. 3. § 3. and make them a fourth seed you know that Proselytes became Abrahams seed only by believing as you say we Gentiles now do and yet their children were accounted Abrahams seed though they be none of the three which you mention and as such were initiated into the Church Gen. 17.12 23. Exod. 12.48 49. In the same sence that Abraham was a father to a Proselyte or believing Gentile and his seed then he is a father to a Christian Gentile and his seed now for his Paternity abides the same nor can you shew a better warrant for his Paternity over the one then over the other nor have the Gentiles lost any priviledg by the coming of Christ which they had before The Scripture saith The Brethren now are the children of the Promise as Isaac was Gal. 4.28 Now Isaac was the seed of Abraham and in the Promise as an Infant of believing Parents before he was an actual Believer and his Infants waâ— within the Covenant and accordingly initiated into the Church Abraham might say God is my God and the God of my Infant seed and so might the Gentile proselyted say also and why may not a Christian who is blessed with faith-ful Abraham Gal. 3.9 say so too especially seeing Jesus Christ the Minister of Circumcision did not abrogate but confirm the Promises made unto the fathers and that the Gentiles might glorifie God for his Mercy c. Rom. 15.8 9. God alluding to the outward Circumcision of his people and their seed promiseth to circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their seed Deut. 30.6 and this promise is Gospel and a parcel of the Covenant of Grace as appears by Deut. 30.6 10 11 12. with Rom. 10.6 7 8. and this circumcision of the heart is commended Rom. 2.28 29. and is signified and sealed in Baptism Colos 2.11 12. It is observed that Gen. 17.7 speaks not of Abraham and his seed which you say are actual Believers abstractedly taken but of his seed in their generations which words necessarily imply and include as the Parents generating so the Children generated Lastly Abraham is not only called the father of particular Believers but the father of Nations professing the true faith as well as of the Jewish Nation Every Nation receiving the true Faith as they did and in which there is a National Agreement in Doctrine Worship Discipline as was in the Nation of the Jews is an holy Nation a peculiar people to the Lord even Egypt and Assyria with Israel and may call Abraham father Isai 19.21 Gen. 17.5 When the Gentiles were graffed into that stock from which the Jews were broken off and did partake of the root and fatness of the Olive tree Rom. 11.17 and Abraham began to be the father of many Nations Rom. 4.16 17. Regenerate Infants are Abrahams spiritual seed by Mr. T. his confession and he professeth that he would baptize them if he could know them I am sure no one dare say of this or that particular Infant that it is not regenerate yea we are bound to judg they are such till something appear to the contrary ANABAPT CAT. Q. But are not the children of godly persons visibly in the Covenant of Grace A. No the Covenant of Grace is an invisible thing and we cannot know who are in it nor have we grounds to judg persons are in it till we see some profession of holy life of faith and repentance which Infants cannot make NOt to speâ—k of such as are only intentionally in the Covenant of Grace as children yet unborn may be Examinat Cap. 8. § 1. Deut. 29.15 Those that are Actually in the Covenant of Grace are of two sorts Some are externally in it as Ishmael Judas Simon Magus and so all such as own God to be their God and themselves to be his people as the Jewish Church did and every true Christian Church doth though but externally are said to be within the Covenant Your self say that profession of faith and repentance are grounds to judg some persons to be in the Covenant of Grace There is external being in Christ Joh. 15.2 Vocation Mat. 22.14 Sanctification Heb. 10.29 and purging from sin 2 Pet. 1.9 But some are also internally and savingly in the Covenant of Grace as Isaac Jacob while Infants and when adult also Zacheus Lydia and her houshold the Jaylor and all his This distinction is grounded upon Rom. 9.4 6 7 8. We may know who is in the Covenant of Grace externally but the Covenant of Grace in the second sence is invisible and none could know who were in it in the time of the Jews though Infants were then visibly in it and initiated as such or amongst Christians If the invisibleness of the Covenant of Grace and our not knowing who are in it doth exclude Infants it doth also exclude adult Professors from admission into the Church for the signs of their being savingly in the Covenant of Grace are but conjectural hopeful and probable not certain and infallible none can be sure that he that makes profession at a
consisting of Females as well as Males were called the Circumcision in opposition of the Gentiles which were called Vncircumcision Gal. 2.7 8 9. Again It was not administred to reprobates as such not to every Male but to the Males of the Church externally in Covenant some whereof possibly were Reprobates So Simon Magus Judas Ananias and Sapphirah were baptized and yet it is at least likely that they were Reprobates Circumcision did belong to the Believer as well as Baptism doth those that were strangers to the Jewish Church could not be admitted but they must be Proselytes not of the gate only but of righteousness they must disclaim Paganism and profess the Jewish Religion A stranger continuing in his unbelief was not circumcised not did partake in the Passover Exod. 12.48 And by proportion that Text prohibiteth all such Jews as should forsake the faith See before Chap. 7. As for the change of the Church and Ordinances notwithstanding it the Lords-Day may succeed the Jewish Sabbath and those same persons which were bound to keep the Jewish Sabbath are tied to observe the Lords Day viz. servants and children as well as Parents and Masters though the persons be not so distinctly set down in the New Testament as in the Old Paul did use arguments from Analogy from the purging out of the old leaven at the Passover to the casting out of the incestuous from the Supper 1 Cor. 5. from the maintenance of the Priests to the maintenance of Ministers 1 Cor. 9.13 To argue à genere ad speciem affirmativè is not good reasoning The Church was changed therefore it was changed in this particular The Church might be changed and yet not in this the Sacrament may be changed and not the subject what belonged to the Jewish Church as a Church belongs to the Christian Church also that which belonged to it as Jewish was altered as High-Priest Temple Sacrifices Ceremonies c. Infants Church-membership did not belong to the Church as Iewish not was it a Ceremony or Type if you think it was shew what it was a type of and what was the antitype that hath succeeded it and prove it so you can There was a Church before there was an High-Priest Temple c. in the Families of Adam Noah and Sem which was alive in the time of Isaac Melchizedek surely had subjects and people which were the Church as well as he was a King and a Priest of the most high God This Church might continue long not be united to the Church in Abrahams family for ought we know whatsoever the extent of the Church was Domestical Congregational or National Infants are reckoned of the same Church with their Parents the Church before Christ and after Christ is the same Church as an Heir While in nonage and when adult is the same person The Jews that believed were never unchurched the Tree was not broken down but some branches broken off some additionals to the Church ceased the Church it self ceased not the partition Wall Was broken down and Iews and Gentiles made one Church Eph. 2.14 3.6 And when the wall was down were their Infants turned out of the Church at one door as the Gentiles came in at another was the Church so changed that it lost so many materials and was the Covenant of Grace changed too did it lose so many out of it Visible Professors and their Infants are alike in every age and there is nothing in them inconsistent with propriety in God or interest in the Covenant or the Seal thereof in one age more then in another Baptism is the seal of the Covenant now and may be administred to visible Professors and their children now as Circumcision was then if there should be any difference Reason would tell us considering the painfulness and peril of Circumcision Gen. 34.25 and the easiness of Baptism That only grown men should have been circumcised and Infants baptized rather then contrary ANABAPY CAT. Q. Whether may not Infants of Believers be baptized by virtue of Covenant-holiness A. No for Baptism is not a sign or seal of any such outward holiness which may befall Reprobates as Well as Elect but it is a sign of Death Burial and Resurrection Which the Believerthath with Christ 2. There is no command for baptizing such if the Gentiles Were so holy BAptism is a sign and seal of Christs Death Examinat Cap. 10. § 1. Burial and Resurrection and of the truth and faithfulness of those exceeding great and precious Promises bundled up in the Covenant of Grace which are in Christ Yea and Amen a Cor. 1.20 but it is not an absolute sign or seal of the baptized's Death Burial Resurrection With Christ of his putting on of Christ of grace already Wrought in him as you assert in your Answer to the second and third question but only conditional Acts 16.30 31. if he believe as the Romans did Rom. 6.3.4 with 5.1.2 A Christian gathers the assurance of his Justification and Salvation by this or such a like Syllogism He that believeth is justified and shall be saved I believe therefore I am justified and shall be saved The Major or former Proposition Baptism doth absolutely and universally seal but not so the Minor or second Proposition viz. I believe If Baptism should seal to all baptized ones as suppose Simon Magus Judas c. the truth of their Faith and their saving interest in Jesus Christ then should God set his Seal for Baptism is Gods Seal not the Churches to a lye and falshood or at least command Ministers so to do when they are bound by the Rules of Christ to baptize such as are not inwardly holy as Simon Magus c. Children of Believers sect 2. 1 Cor. 7.14 are said to be Saints or holy whereby is not meant that they were legitimate only for so had they been if both the Parents had been Infidels and children are not holy because they are not bastards nor only sanctified to the use of the Parents as the unblieving yoke-fellow though not holy in se nor sanctifying is sanctified to the believing yoke-fellow the Holy Ghost neither here nor elsewhere speaking of any thing to be sanctified to unbelievers but they are holy a distinct phrase from being sanctified to another as birds and beasts may be and this holiness proceeds from the believing yoke-fellow which is the reason why he saith your children viz the children of you Christian yoke-fellows the Infidel yoke fellows writ not to Paul are holy which seeing it cannot be meant of internal and saving holiness for all children of the Church are not such though we are bound to judg the best till the contrary appear it must needs therefore be meant of outward federal holiness which is the privlledg of the children of believing Parents above the children of Pagans the Jews having had the like priviledg before See Gal. 2. 15. which I conceive runs parallel with this Or if but one of the