Some of them as the Sorbonists do place it in the Council others as the Jesuits in the Pope alone and finally others in them both both joyntly Now chuse which of those you please you 'l find your self involv'd into inextricable difficulties and as I said before under a necessity to sacrifice to an unknown God which I shall shortly evince Let us suppose that the Church and her Infallibility consists in the Council alone you shall presently be contradicted by some men of that same Church But to pass this Whence pray doth it appear that this Council is infallible For first it is impossible that of things of one and the same nature there can be made up another thing of a quite contrary nature Therefore all the Members of which this Council consists being fallible how comes the Council it self to be infallible for if this Infallibility came but then to the Council when they met together to constitute one Synodical Body where pray' was it before in what corner of the World did it lurk from whence and in what manner did this good Infallibility come down upon the Fathers of the Council or what shall become of it after the Council is dissolved Where shall it compose its Head to rest that hath been tossed and wearied by so many janglings and Gramatications Moreover how shall you know that all the Members of the Council have been lawfully or at all baptized seeing you cannot be certain of the intention of the Priest or Old Woman that baptized them upon which the Efficacy of the Sacrament depends that they were Canonically ordained and not per saltum that they were not intruded by force or Simony All which are required to the constitution of a Bishop in suo formali And unless you can perswade your self that you believe all these with a Divine and Infallible Faith you cannot imbrace their Decrees for infallible Again if this Infallibility of the Church do consist in the Council there should be always extant such a Council to which disagreeing Parties might have recourse and receive a final determination of their Controversies that so all scruples being removed out of their minds they might live in peace and concord among themselves But where is all this to be found And if there were such a Council always in being which yet is impossible how should you know that this Council is not misguided by partiality that it is not as bad as that of Ariminum and needs not to be corrected by a subsequent Council as many Councils have been if we believe Augustine You 'l say perhaps that Christ promised unto his Disciples and consequently to the Church that the Spirit of truth shall come and guide them into all truth Joh. 16.13 and that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against it Mat. 16.18 For answer I deny not that Christ promised his Discipies the Holy Ghost but extraordinary things are not to be confounded with ordinary for they received both the matter and words of what they wrote from the immediate inspiration of the Holy Ghost but in after-Ages the Church was tyed to the Scriptures as sufficient for all manner of holy instruction Cal. 1.2 Tim. 3.15 16 17. which if the Fathers of the council do follow it is not to be doubted but God will afford them the assistance of his Spirit But it cannot be said that the Council doth hereby become infallible 2. When Christ saith that the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church he doth not understand any particular Churches of their Bishops but the Universal Church which that it cannot erre in Fundamentals we believe and assert 3. How do you know that the Holy Spirit presides in this or that Council seeing the Council of Ariminum may be called a Council as well as the Nicene 4. How can you be sure of any Council that the Members thereof speak from a love to truth and desire of peace or from the Dictates of the Holy Ghost and not rather from partiality that their Decrees are framed more by the weight of Reason and Scriptures than by the multitude of Votes that it is not such as the Council of Trent to which as a Member of that Synod said the Holy Ghost was brought from Rome in the Bags of the Roman Pacquet and stayed longer away when the waters did rise but came quickly thither when they were sallen as being afraid to be wet or drowned 5. It 's ridiculous for a Papist to go about to prove the Infallibility of Councils from Scripture for I ask him this question Whence doth it appear that that Church is Infallible whose office it is both to make a Rule or Canon and to give Authority to the Scriptures for they hold that the Authority of the Scriptures as to us left depends upon the Church Now if the Church give the Scriptures their Authority as to us how can they convince us of the Authority of the Church Thus you see into what difficulties they involve themselves who place the Church with its Infallibility in the Council Nor is it less but rather more absurd to settle it in the Pope alone an Assertion so foolish and ridiculous that the very reciting of it might be a sufficient confutation namely to place the Church in one Man the Church I say which even though representative is formally a Congregation of many Nevertheless we shall proceed in the Method we have begun The Jesuits do generally hold this Opinion and affirm that the Pope alone like the Pythia of Delphos may frame Decrees and impose them upon the people But the forementioned difficulties return For how can you perswade your self that the Pope was Popable that he was rightly if at all baptized that he obtained not the Popedom by force by fraud or by Simony that he was a Man and not a Woman for we have an instance of a Woman Pope namely Pope Jone any of which being supposed renders the Pope no more a Pope Moreover How shall you know that the Pope when he went about the framing of his Decrees neglected not the usual preparations namely Fasting and Prayer for seven days c. that he acts by the advice of his Conclave and not rather from the dictates of his own private judgment or humor Now if these Conditions be wanting the Decrees are not pronounced from the Chair and therefore not infallible nor obligatory to the Conscience Further By what Argument can you be convinced that this Infallibility doth not belong to the Bishop of Paris for example as much as to the Bishop of Rome and that it cannot be removed from the Roman Chair for Gerson hath written a Treatise concerning the possibility of removing it Finally It cannot be conceived that one single man is Infallible in matters of Faith seeing he hath no promise of an Infallible Spirit and there are manifest examples of his having been actually deceived But perhaps you will sly to that Vulgar distinction of the
THE TRUE CHURCH OF CHRIST EXPOSED To the View of all SOBER CHRISTIANS from the Word of GOD Sound Reason AND THE Ancient FATHERS By JAMES SALGADO a Spaniard a Converted Priest London Printed by T. B. for the Author 1681. To the Right Honourable HENEAGE Earl of Nottingham Lord Chancellour of England THis most Important Affair which concerns the Conversion of a Man to God cannot better be offered to any Person than to one that manages the greatest Affairs of a Mighty Monarch to the Glory of his God to the Credit and Interest of his Prince to the Honour and Repute of the Nation to the gladding of the hearts of all good Subjects therein and the Terrour of Offenders to his own Immortal praise here and Immortal Felicity hereafter with universal steady unshaken Loyalty Justice and Integrity It is to speak in short most agreeable for one that is the Quintessence of all Excellencies both Divine and Humane The boldness which I have to present this Book to your Honour doth not only bid me hope for Excuse but also promise my self that your Honour will receive it according to your wonted Noble and Generous Condescention being your Poor Offerer tenders it with the Profoundest Reverence and Respects imaginable I humbly pray your Lordship to take both my Self and Book to your Honours Protection and it shall be my daily Prayers to Almighty God to take under his Especial Charge your Honours Person and under his Especial Conduct all your Honours Actions so that both may be acceptable to his Divine Majesty and his Majesty of Great Britain and to all true English Spirits being My Lord Your Honours most obedient Servant JAMES SALGADO THE TRUE CHURCH OF CHRIST c. IT was not without Reason that the Fathers compared the Church to the Ark of Noah because that as none that were out of the Ark could escape destruction by the Flood so none that are without the Bosom of the Church can escape Everlasting Damnation for those that are no Members of the Church cannot partake of her peculiar Priviledges such as Vocation Justification Sanctification c. without which it 's impossible to attain Eternal Life And as any Member cut off from the Body is thereby deprived of Life Sense and Motion because it is no more united to nor influenced from the Head even so those that are cut off from the Church are thereby deprived of Eternal Life because they are not united unto Christ who is the Head of the Church and therefore want that influence of his Spirit which is the Author of all Spiritual Life For this reason David affirms that the Heathen knew not the Laws of God even because they were not in the Communion of Israel to which the Church was confined under the Old Testament Psa 147.19 20. The Apostle Paul writing to the Ephesians doth yet further confirm this Assertion At that time you were without Christ being Aliens from the Commonwealth of Israel and Strangers from the Covenant of Promise having no hope and without God in the world Eph. 2.12 Namely because they were not in the Bosom of the Church they were therefore excluded from the Communion of Christ who is the faithful Husband of the Church his only Spouse as he himself affirms Cant. 6.1 My Dove my Vndefiled is but one But when the Fathers used this similitude they meant the Universal Church whose beginning Augustine deriveth from Abel and deduceth the continuation thereof even to the end of the World Therefore it is not this or that Church in this or that part of the World that can be called Catholick in this sense but that Church which was which is and which is to come and comprehends the Triumphant as well as the Militant And if that be properly Catholick which hath been always and every where believed by all Vincent Lirinensis contra profanas novitates then that is the Catholick Church which hath and will be always found in all Nations for the thing ruled cannot be narrower than the Rule and Faith cannot be found but in believers I don't deny that there are many particular Assemblies and many Provincial or National Churches and some of these purer than others but none of these Assemblies or Churches can be called Catholick taking the word strictly because they are only parts or members constituting one general body and therefore cannot be called universal without a plain contradiction unless you would give to the Hand or Foot the name of the whole body Hence it follows that the Roman Church being but a particular Church supposing that it were Orthodox which yet we utterly deny cannot claim unto it self alone exclusively to other Churches that profess Christ the Title of Catholick I confess I am not so rigid as to exclude the Roman Church and her Followers from the Latitude of the Universal Church because besides that men living in that Communion but in the simplicity of their heart professing God and his Christ and sincerely endeavouring to work out their Salvation although in many points they neither understand the thing it self nor the manner of the thing because of an invincible ignorance may attain unto eternal life for God is no respecter of persons but in every Nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted with him Act. 10.34 35. I say besides this the Popish Church may be called a Church in a Physical though not in a Moral sense even rs an Adulterous Wife doth not lose the name of a Wife although she lose the name of an honest Wife But because the Court of Rome will have their Church to consist in the Pope or Council or both I shall evince their Church so taken to be fallible erroneous and false And although the Church in this sense be but representative yet seeing all the rest do depend upon her as infallible and have nothing left them but a blind obedience taking the denomination of the whole from the principal part I rightly affirm that the Roman Church is false uncatholick yea and no Church at all The Papists not contented to pronounce all Churches without their Communion Hereticks and Schismaticks and therefore without any hope of Salvation have moreover asserted that their own Church is infallible and void of all Errour A great Assertion indeed and which is not only false in it self but also is one great reason why other Churches dissenting from her cannot joyn into one Body nor hold Communion with her For besides that no particular Church such as the Roman is can be called infallible it necessitates them after the manner of the Athenians to worship they know not what and erect an Altar to the unknown God It is in vain to dispute concerning the property or priviledge of any thing while they that attribute these priviledges to it have no certain knowledge of the thing it self Therefore in vain do they assert that their Church is infallible while they cannot determine when or where this Church is
shunned not to declare the whole Counsel of God professeth that he had said no other things than those which Moses and the Prophets did say should come I quickly concluded that the only mark of the true Church is to be taken from this Fountain That the Church is built upon the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles and the chief Corner-stone is Jesus Christ And I found that Augustine that glorious Light of Antiquity did agree with me writing Contr. Ma. Arian l. 3. Neither will I alledge the Nicene Chuncil to your prejudice nor ought you to alledge the Council of Ariminum to mine Let us not make use of Writings partial to the one or to the other Party but of the holy Scriptures that are impartial Judges of both and compare Cause with Cause Matter with Matter and Reason with Reason And elsewhere writing against Donatus There namely in the Scriptures let us seek for the True Church there let us discuss the point Being now fully confirmed in this general Principle I began to enquire narrowly into the Purity of particular Churches and upon enquiry found that none do so exactly agree with the Scriptures as the Reformed Churches Wherefore I firmly resolved with my self to forsake the Roman Idolatry and associate my self to the Protestants which I accordingly performed in France and having renounced the Romish Superstitions I adjoyned my self to the Reformed Church as being the true Church of Christ which I shall now shortly evince by the following Arguments That is the true Church which 1. Vindicates and maintains the Authority of the Scriptures 2. Teacheth Doctrine agreeable to the Scriptures 3. Because I will not be so Scripturary as to neglect the Testimony of the Fathers and Councils Which agrees also with the Testimony of Ancient Fathers and Councils But the Reformed Church is such Therefore the Reformed is the true Church As for the first the Reformed Church maintains the Authority of the Scriptures against the Papists who affirm That the Scriptures have no Authority as to us at least but from the Church Which distinction was found out by Bellarmine namely that the Authority of the Scripture considered in it self doth not depend upon the Church but only in respect of us But how frivolous is this distinction For all Authority is Relative and therefore it cannot be considered without a relation to us And moreover the Supposition is false that the Scriptures Authority as to us depends upon the Church But before I come to overthrow this Assertion it will not be amiss to observe that the reason which induceth the Papists to defend it is evidently this They know not how to answer the Protestants Arguments from Scripture without wresting the sense and therefore hold that the sense of the Scriptures depends upon the interpretation of the Church which obligeth them to desend that the Authority of the Scriptures depends also upon the Church being that without the Churches Tradition we can have no certainty of the Scriptures themselves nor of their sense In this they imitate exactly the Ancient Hereticks of whom Tertullian says When the Hereticks are confuted from the Scriptures they presently begin to accuse the Scriptures as if they were not of sufficient Authority or were otherwise written than they are cited by the Orthodox and of which there is no certainty without Tradition Where you may see an exact Portraicture of the Modern Papists But to return to our purpose we assert That the Scriptures Authority doth no way depend upon the Authority of the Church but of the Holy Ghost only speaking internally in our hearts and externally in the Scriptures because he is their Author 2 Tim. 3.16 2 Pet. 1.21 and therefore he alone can give them their Authority And as Christ seeks a Testimony from none besides the Father so neither doth his Word need any other which he hath left upon Earth instead of his own Person And as it were very absurd to affirm that the Authority of the Kings Proclamation depends upon the Cryer or a Rule upon the thing ruled or that the Sun borrows his light from his own Orb or Vortex so it is no less ridiculous to affirm that the Authority of the Scriptures depends upon the Church The Church is the Candlestick the Word of God is the Candle Revel 1.20 Luk. 8.16 Now as a Candlestick contributes nothing to the light of the Candle so neither doth the Church to the Authority of the Scriptures We reject not the Ministerial Testimony of the Church in this affair because thereby we come to the knowledge of the Scriptures as the Samaritans came to the knowledge of Christ by the Samaritan Womans Testimony which nevertheless was not the reason or ground of their Faith but the Instrument only The Papists object that the Church is called the Pillar and Ground of Truth 1 Tim. 3.15 And from hence they conclude that the Authority of the Scriptures as to us depends entirely upon the Church But to pass Camero's observation that these words belong to the sixteenth verse where there is a Copulative Particle which otherwise were useless and that the Apostle first compares the Church to a House and then teacheth us what is the chief Pillar of that House viz. God manifest in the Flesh For a House cannot be called a Pillar but a Pillar is in a House In this place Paul means not an Architectonical Pillar that sustains the Authority of the Scriptures but a Political to which the Fdicts of the Supreme Governour are affixed Nor is Bellarmines Exception against this distinction of any weight that the Church may be as well called a Bibliotheck as a Pillar in this sense For we affirm that the Church doth not only keep these Books but also teach and publish the Contents thereof and expose them to the view of the people So then the Testimony of the Church may be one Motive to induce us to believe the Divine Authority of the Scriptures but cannot beget in our minds a firm and certain perswasion of it which is the work of the Holy Ghost only whom God joyns with his Word Isa 59.21 My Spirit which is upon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth c. Augustine speaks well to this purpose in his Confessions But how shall I know that these are thy words Moses said so indeed but Moses is gone and if he were present and should speak Hebrew I could not understand him but if he spoke Latin and I understood him how could I be certain that he spoke the truth The Truth it self which is neither Greck Latin Hebrew nor Barbarian without any sound of the tongue or noise of Syllables would say unto me inwardly in the Cabinet of my heart he speaketh truth You see Christian Readers how Augustine was perswaded of the Divinity of the Scriptures not by the Authority of the Church nor of Moses and the Prophets but by the Internal Truth
speaking in his heart which is the Holy Spirit It 's in vain to reply hereunto that every one may pretend the Spirit for pretensions cannot prejudice the Truth the Question between us and the Papists is not Whether the Scriptures are of Divine Authority or not for both of us assert that they are But Whether he that admits this is perswaded of it To which whether they or we give the most satisfactory answer we leave the whole Christian World that are not partial to either Party to judge We conclude therefore that as this Question Whether the Scriptures are the Word of God is unworthy of a Christian So Jesuit Sambays's Assertion de fide Orthodoxa is foolish and ridiculous That the Protestants have not the Scriptures For besides that he defends it for no other end but that he may shun the dint of their Arguments drawn from the Scriptures He useth no other Medium to prove that Assertion but that the Reformed Church wanting the Marks of the true Church is a false Church and therefore cannot have the Scriptures which do both in their matter and form depend upon the Church Which Argument is most false and doth manifestly beg the Question viz. That the Scriptures and their sense depend upon the Authority of the Church which we utterly deny and that not without reason as I shewed above Moreover the Jesuit sheweth his Cause to be desperate by endeavouring to rob us of the Scriptures for none of the Ancient Fathers denied the Scriptures to any Heretick that argued his own Cause from them and Augustine that we quoted above affirms that the Scriptures are not peculiar to any one Party but impartial Judges of all We might with far better reason return this Argument upon the Papists because we have proved that their Representative Church is not only false but no Church at all But I am not so much afraid of their Arguments from Scripture and therefore do not deny them the Bible Having established the Opinion of the Reformed Churches in reference to the Authority of the Scriptures I shall now proceed to the properties of the same First therefore I affirm that the Scriptures are perfect by a perfection of parts as well as degrees and so sufficient to Salvation Psal 19. The Law of God is perfect Their sufficiency appears from the forecited place 2 Tim. 3.16 17. The accession of the New Testament to the Old doth not disprove the perfection and sufficiency of the Scriptures For he that revealed the whole Counsel of God to Believers did nevertheless reveal no other than what Moses and the Prophets had written before as we hinted above Hence the Ancient Fathers said very well As the New Testament is hid in the Old so the Old is made plain and clear in the New Nor doth a difference in degree alter the nature or species of a thing neither is the Question betwixt the Papists and us concerning this or that part of the Scriptures but concerning the whole Canon as it was received by the Ancient Church and enumerated by Hierom. So that in this Argument there is evidently the Fallacy of dividing what ought to be joyned together And as we justly cut off the Apocryphal Books from this perfection and sufficiency of the Scriptures because they contradict both themselves and the Canon nor were they ever received in the Jewish Church to which the Oracles of God were committed Rom. 3.2 So we reject the Popish distinction of Protocanonical Deuterocanonical Books with the same facility that they propose it being without proof Hence we do but little esteem unwritten Traditions because what is written doth sufficiently instruct us what we are to believe and do in order to life eternal John 20.31 It 's ridiculous to refer the several Orders of Monks and particularly the shaving of their Crowns to these unwritten Traditions because Christ says I have yet many things to say unto you but you cannot bear them now Joh. 16.12 For if this had been the thing that Christ had further to say unto them he might easily have sent for a Barber and caused their Heads to be shaved Besides that the Monks whose duty was to weep and not to teach saith Hierom were shaven as a sign of their penitence not of any honour or preeminence Secondly The Scriptures are plain and easie to be understood The Commandment enlightning the eyes Psal 19.8 Whatsoever things were written afore-time were written for our learning that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope Rom. 15.4 Those things therefore which are absolutely necessary to Salvation being very few and very easie are clearly and plainly set down in the Scriptures though other things not so absolutely necessary may puzle the most Sagacious understandings Chrysostom says well The holy Scriptures are such that a Lamb may wade in them and yet an Elephant may swim Seeing then that the Scriptures are plain as is evident from Reason and the Testimony of the Fathers the Reformed Churches do with good reason attribute a judgment of discretion in Controversies of Faith to every true Christian So that every Believer by frequent reading and comparing of the Scriptures may easily understand their meaning at least as to things absolutely necessary to Salvation For no Prophesie of Scripture is of aâ—y private interpretation nor came by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost 2 Pet. 1.20 21. As for the Fathers of the Ancient Church and the four Primitive Councils we willingly imbrace them as Interpreters of the Scriptures yea moreover we affirm that in subordination to the Scriptures they may bind but not force our belief But we utterly deny that the Fathers or these Councils or the Pope are Judges of Controversies about matters of Faith but the only Judge of all such Controversies is the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scriptures or as Augustine saith Christ himself Let Christ judge of this Controversie who although he be absent in his Person yet is present in his Word Hence it doth appear that the Scriptures may rightly be called a Normal Judge deciding the question in manner of a Law though not outwardly proclaiming the sentence The Word of God is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart Heb. 4.12 We have sufficiently proved that the Reformed Churches do vindicate the Authority and Properties of the Scriptures It remains now to be proved that they teach according to the Scriptures I shall pass the Doctrines of God and his Attributes of the Trinity and the like because there is little difference between the Papists and us in there Points except in some Preter-fundamental things which the Jesuits and Dominicans do also dispute among themselves I shall now only take notice of this that the Jesuits do very absurdly define Free-will viz. A Faculty whereby all things requisite to action being present the will may act or not act act this or the contrary For
treat of Passive Justification or Justification considered in respect of the man justified And thus it is nothing else but an assured considence of our righteousness in Christ and by the imputation of his Merits which we receive and apply unto our selves by faith Rom. 3.25 26. Hence it appears that the Meritorious Cause of our Justification is the Merit of Christ as we proved a little before and the hand by which we apply this satisfaction of our Saviour or the instrumental cause of our Justification is Faith Man is justified by faith without the works of the Law Rom. 3.28 It is as clear from the Scriptures as the light of the Sun in mid-day that we are justified by faith only By grace ye are saved through faith and that not of your selves it is the gift of God Eph. 2.8 So that I shall insist no longer upon this point but conclude with the Apostle That by the deeds of the Law shall no flesh be justified for by the Law is the knowledge of sin Rom. 3.20 There is therefore no Justification in the sight of God by our works but only by saith which applieththe Panacea of Salvation unto our dead hearts and causeth us to live in God and God in us We are not so unreasonable as to separate Works from Faith yet nevertheless we affirm that Faith only doth justifie it 's the eye only that sees the hand only that weighs yet neither can the eye see nor the hand weigh unless they be united to the body Even so Faith only doth justifie but this Faith is never separated from Good Works The Apostle James indeed saith We are justified by works and not by faith only Jam. 2.24 But he either means justification before men as in the eighteenth verse Shew me thy faith by thy works or else the confirmation of internal faith by external actions or else he speaks by a Metonimy of the effect for the cause so that by faith and works he means a working faith which seems to agree well with the words You see then how that by works man is justified and not by faith only that is not by a solitary or naked faith which is not accompanied with works for faith being alone is dead but by a living faith which shews its foundness by works So that we are not justified by works but by faith only and whosoever will narrowly look into himself and his own frailty must needs break forth into Bellarmine's words Because of the frailty of humane life and the uncertainty of our own righteousness it is safest to relye only upon the mercy of God Bel. de bon oper Consider Candid Reader the words of this Cardinal who as I can demonstrate if need be at the end of the greatest Controversies between us and the Papists yields at last unto the truth and appears though an Italian to be more a Protestant than a Papist Thus we have proved by Gods assistance that Active Justification is an external judicial absolution of an unrighteous man and pronouncing of him righteous and that Passive Justification is by faith only and that a living faith which applieth to us the Merits of our Saviour As for Sanctification I shall say little concerning it by reason the Papists don 't disagree much with the Protestants in this Point as to the nature of the thing only I utterly deny that the good works which we do are meritorious or necessary to Salvation necessuate medii as a mean to bring us to Salvation Bernard says well Good works are the way to the Kingdom not the cause of reigning nor does the Popish distinction between merit of congruity and condignity mitigate this Assertion for besides that the Congruity of Gods Reward for our Works consists onely in his own good pleasure Fear not little Flock for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you a Kingdom Luk. 12.32 I have often admired that they have found no Text of Scripture to prove the condignity of works but this one which is Diametrically contrary to their Assertion The Sufferings of this present time are not worthy but condign to be compared with the Glory that is to be revealed in us This is the onely place where the word condignus is to be found I will proceed now to shew how found and genuine the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches is concerning the Sacraments which are Seals of the righteousness of faith Rom. 4.11 And shortly refute the Popish Errours As for Baptism both Parties acknowledge it to be a Sacrament of Initiation by which in the faith of our Parents which is my opinion we are implanted into the Church which is the Body of Christ But the Papists falsely affirm that Baptism ex opere operato by vertue of the work wrought works in us Regeneration and abolishes Original Sin Not onely because an external corporal thing can have no influence upon things internal and spiritual in reference to the rectifying thereof which can onely be done by God himself every good and perfect Gift comes down from the Father of Lights saith the Apostle James But likewise because the sign of the Covenant cannot communicate to us the things comprehended in the Covenant And the contrary appears also from the effect because those that have been baptized are and have been subject to everlasting damnation And if this Sacrament ex opere operato did work Grace Regeneration c. then Abraham could not have been reputed righteous by faith in uncircumcision Rom. 4.9 Moreover in the Primitive Times and especially as to them that were baptized when come to Age Faith was required before the Seal of Righteousness were stampt upon their hearts and consciences Now because Faith is the Root of the rest of the Graces and hath annexed unto it that great work of Repentance It necessarily follows that the Apostle requiring faith in the Adult did suppose the rest of the Graces to be in them not imagining that they should be conferred upon them but rather sealed or confirmed by Baptism for Baptism is a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith and not a thing that by its internal vertue work Faith and Regeneration For this very reason Augustin and other of the Fathers affirmed that Infants are baptized in the Faith of their Parents if believing Parents or in the Faith of the Church if their Parents were unknown or Unbelievers because they were perswaded that Faith is rather required before than conferred by Baptism So that we believe that the holy Ghost doth operate in the tender hearts and minds of elect Infants even from their Birth and that effectually though insensibly and although perhaps he doth not work in them subjectively an actual faith yet he objectively applies unto them the benefits of Christ which in others are received by an actual faith But lest any should think that we falsely charge our Adversaries with this Assertion I will shew the candid Reader the reason why they assert it and then evince the same