the same to Abraham's Spiritual Seed in and through all Generations from him to us viz. such as Believed as he did 2. In respect to Temporal blessings and so it was peculiar to his Natural and Spiritual Seed during the Old Testament-dispensation and Typical administrations and in that respect it is not the same Believers being now under the former not the later As Abraham is considered under the notion of a double Father-hood so there must be a double Son-ship to answer that Relation the Jews were his Sons in one capacity namely a Carnal Generation of which they were wont to bragg as appears by the reproof John gave them Mat. 3.9 Think not to say within your selves we have Abraham to our Father and in the other capacity all Believers whether Jew or Gentile are his children This is evidenced Rom. 9.6 7 8. They are not all Israel that are of Israel they which are the children of the flesh these are not the children of God c. and v. 7. shews us that their Carnal Generation gives not the true notion of Son-ship The Jew as a Natural Son of Abraham may pretend to Baptism and New-Testament-Ordinances by a priority in respect of the Offer Rom. 3.1 2. Therefore Christ commanded his Apostles not to go into the wayes of the Gentiles c. but to the lost sheep of the House of Israel and Preach the Gospel to them Mat. 10.5 6 7. See Rom. 2.10 to the Jew first and also to the Gentile and this gave occasion to the Speech of Peter Acts 2.39 The promise is to you and your Children viz. primarily and to the Gentiles also but secondarily which they of the Circumcision were astonisht at Acts 10.45 The Gentiles are called afar off suitable to Eph. 2.13 Ye Gentiles who sometimes were afar off are made nigh by the blood of Christ Now as it was the preheminence of the Jews to have the Gospel first Preached to them so we find their carnal prerogative stand them in no stead Luke 3.8 where they are informed that Gospel-Ordinances are not bottom'd upon Carnal Generation or priviledges but true Holiness manifested by the fruit it brings forth viz. Fruits meet for Repentance He came to his own but they received him not and therefore as many as received him whether Jew or Gentile to them he gave power to become the Sons of God and to receive him is to believe in his Name Men are now admitted to Ordinances upon other considerations than legal denominations of clean or unclean viz. fearing God and working righteousness which is not generated or conveyed by Birth but by the New birth and the Spirit of the living God Therefore if the Natural Seed of Abraham could not pretend a right to New-Testament Ordinances by that Title much less the Adopted Seed by any such way of Natural Generation And if their Birth-right could not serve them how can our Birth-right serve us And this may serve as an Answer to the first particular that the Covenant as it respected Life and Salvation to Believers is one and the same now as then But as it respects external administrations and the qualification of Church-members it is not the same the legal typical faederal right vanisht and Faith is now the only qualification The second Whether Circumcision be the token sign or seal of the Covennnt This needs but a short Reply for we find it to be called the token of the Covenant Gen. 17.11 And the Apostle Rom. 4.11 calls it the sign of Circumcision a Seal of the righteousness of Faith c. intimating by distinguishing between a Sign and a Seal that Circumcision was to all a Sign but to Abraham alone a Seal of the righteousness of Faith And we find Circmucision never called a Seal but where it speaks of Abraham which intimates that it was only a Seal to him And this is sutable to what Chrysostome Theophilact and others quoted upon the place by a very judicious pen viz. It was called a Seal of the righteousness of Faith because it was given to Abraham as a Seal and testimony of that righteousness which he had acquired by Faith Now this seems to be the priviledg of Abraham alone and not to be transferred to others as if Circumcision in whom ever it was were a testimony of Dâ—vine righteousness for as it was the priviledg of Abraham that he should be the father of all the faithful as well circumcised us uncircumcised and being already the father of all uncircumcised having faith in uncircumcision he received first the sign of Circumcision that he might be the father of the Circumcised Now because he had this priviledg in respect of the righteousness which he had acquired by faith therefore the sign of Circumcision was to him a Seal of the righteousness of Faith but to the rest of the Jews it was a Sign they were Abraham's Seed but not a Seal of the righteousness of Faith 〈◊〉 all the Iews also were not the Fathers of many Nations And Ierom upon Gal. 3. saith Because Christ was to spring from the Seed of Abraham and many Ages were to pass from Abraham to Christ the wise God lest the Seed of beloved Abraham should be mingled with other Nations and should by degrees be joyned more familiarly distinguisht the flock of Israel by a certain mark or Circumcision then for 40 Years together in the wilderness none were Circumcised because they were out of the danger of such mixtures being alone but as soon as they were past the banks of Jordan Circumcision prevented the error of mingling with others whereas it is written that they were Circumcised that second time by Joshua it signifies that Circumcision ceased in the Wilderness which was rationally used in Egypt 3. Whether Baptism doth succeed in the room place and use of Circumcision To answer this doubt let us consider the great difference between Circumcision and Baptism Circumcision was a legal Ordinance appointed to the Jewish Males Reprobate as well as Elect by a positive command to distinguish them from the rest of the World as a Token of the Covenant God made with Abraham viz. that the Messiah should come of his Loins according to the Flesh But Baptism is an Evangelical Ordinance whereby Jew or Gentile Male or Female upon a profession of Faith and Repentance is baptized in Water in token of Regeneration and to signifie the death burial and resurrection of Christ the Messiah already come and so added to the Visible Church and admitted to all the priviledges thereof which being not the Office of Circumcision Baptism cannot be said to succeed in its room place and use The consideration of the great difference in their institution illustrates this also for when Christ instituted Baptism he saies Go teach and baptize and in the administration they confessed and were baptized Believed and were Baptized not a word of Infants And in the Precept of Circumcision not a word of Teaching or Faith but of Infants the
see how this learned man ere he was aware hath spoyl'd Infant-Baptism for if baptism be a symbol of regeneration as undoubtedly it is then unless you say and that from Scripture grounds that your infants are regenerated or seem so to be baptism doth not at all belong to them And it will no ways help you to say that the Baptists do baptize some persons that are not regenerated for it is enough to warrant our practise if they profess so to be and give us those Scripture characters i.e. actuall faith and Repentance Poed But pray Sir what think you of the Covenant made to Abraham and his natural seed what kind of Covenant was it Bap. I confess there are various opinions about it some say it was a Covenant of grace others a Covenant of works others a mixt Covenant But surely that Covenant made with Abraham and his natural seed called the Covenant of Circumcision or Covenant of the Law was not the Covenant of Eternal life and salvation which was made with all the elect in Christ upon the condition of faith but a distinct Covenant of it self concerning the worship and service of God and so may be called a Covenant of works rather then a Covenant of grace though there was also grace in it as there was in all the Covenants that God ever made with men yet we say it was a distinct Covenant and therefore called the old Covenant and the Covenant of grace the new Covenant And if you say the Covenant of grace was the same in all ages under various administrations we confess it and say that the Covenant of grace was made to Adam after the fall to the Patriarchs and to Abraham before the Covenant of Circumcision was mentioned and is the same to us now But as ours it s called new or renewed yet it doth not follow but this Covenant of Circumcision was a distinct Covenant still for Abraham and all believers in that age were in the Covenant of grace before this Covenant was made and would have been so if the Covenant of Circumcision had never been And if you demand then why the Covenant of works is called the old Covenant and the Covenant of grace the new 1. I answer because of its priority it being the first Covenant God made with man before the fall as Protestant Divines say that God made a Covenant of works with Adam concerning perfect obedience which he had then power to perform And some think God renewed this Covenant of works after the fall as appears by the sacrifices that Adam Abel c. offered and from that Scripture if thou dost well shalt not thou be accepted if not sin lyes at the door And afterwards this Covenant of works or Covenant concerning worship is renewed to Abraham and his posterity 2. It is called the old Covenant in respect to its deteriority it being a Covenant found fault with as the Scripture saith 3. In respect to its decaying and perishing nature it was not durable or lasting as the Apostle saith that which decayeh and waxeth old is ready to perish meaning this Covenant And the Covenant of grace is called the new Covenant First because of its meliority or bitterness it is more excellent as the new heavens and the new earth that God will make will be more excellent then the old 2. In opposition to the old as appears Heb. 8.8 when God says he will make a new Covenant he adds not according to the Covenant when I brought your fathers out of Egipt which was by virtue of the Covenant made with Abraham 3. In respect to its perpetuity and duration it is the everlasting Covenant the Covenant made with Abraham and his natural seed is vanished and done away but this remains as the Apostle says if that which was done away was glorious how much more that which remains That which was done away was the old Covenant or Covenant made with Abraham and his natural seed with all the priviledges of it And that which remains is the new Covenant or promise of eternal life made in Jesus to all believers 4. It is called the new Covenant as to us because renewed in a more Gospel and glorious manner So that we are indeed still under the same Covenant of grace made with Adam and all the partriarchs but not under the same Covenant of works made with Abraham and his natural seed But further that you may know what the Covenant made with Abraham was take the opinion of a late learned Author The old Covenant saith he was a political Covenant made with the Jews as Princes compacts are with their people when they first set up Government God promises them his protection and that he would lead them to a fruitful land overcome all their enemies c. with the like blessings And they promise they will be ruled by him c. To this purpose did God in sundry ways appear to them To Moses to their elders to them all in the cloud and fire and then causes a Tabernacle to be made for him which was a keeping house amongst them where the sacrifices and offerings were his provisions and the Priests his servants that lived on him And unto that Tabernacle and Ark might they repair for counsel and Judgment This people then being under a Theocracy which Samuel does in two places expresly signify at least unto the time of Saul so that the Church and Common-wealth of the Jews were but one It is no wonder if Religion be made their laws and so required of them together with other political Ordinances and statutes for their happinesse and publick peace as a nation And though in their ceremonial offerings and Priests appointmens there was a remembrance still of sin yet had they Types of Christ of remedying mercy and of the glory to come Their sacrifices as I have said serve to the maintenance of this house the Tabernacle and Temple which he was pleased to keep up amongst them for a time God indeed making use of these for Types and representations of other things that is to say spiritual and so the law being a Paedagogy under a temporal dispensation leading men to Christ So far my Author But God hath quite pulled down this house brake up house-keeping as we say and turned the servants Infants and all out of doors Rom. 11. The natural branches are broken off and Heb. 8.13 That which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish And saith the Apostle if that which was done away was glorious c. what was that but this old house with all the priviledges of it But now God hath built him a new house into which he hath admitted none as his houshold servants but believers or such as profess so to be And these two houses are mentioned Heb. 3.2 3 4. where one is called Moses his house and the other Christs house As Moses was faithful in all his house For this man was accounted worthy of more honour then Moses
but directly and properly and by their own personal faith which I despair ever to hear of though Mr B. himself that unparalleld distinguisher should undertake it Poed But our Ministers tells us that when the promises are said to be made to Christ it is not meant of Christ personally but of Christ mystically as in the 1 Cor. 12.12 and so it s to be understood of the visible Church of which infants born of believing parents are a part Bap. It s true these are your sayings but I must tell you we must not be put off with fancies and bare affirmations but we expect solid proof from Scripture And whereas you say the promises are to be considered as made to Christ mystically that is to the visible Church the contrary appears in Gal. 3.16 where he affirms that Christ was the seed to whom the promises were made And in vers 19th he saith the law was added because of transgression till the seed should come to whom the promise was made where it is observable that the law i. e. the Mosaical administration is said to be before the seed was come and was to have its period then Now if by Christ the seed be not understood personally but mystically for the visible or invisible Church take which you will then the law could not have been before the seed for God had his Church in Abrahams family 400 years before the law was of which Christ was the head and they his mystical body And so by this interpretation the seed should have been before the law contrary to the Apostle who makes the law to have been before the seed and to have its period when the seed to whom the promise was made was come and now the promises running to Christ personally God makes him over for a Covenant to the Elect and all the promises in him Isa 42.6 So that in Christ he is our God and in Christ he takes us to be his people In Christ and a right to the promises out of Christ and strangers to the Covenants of promise Eph. 2.12 So that it is evident that the promises respecting the eternal inheritance and spiritual blessings were first made to Christ personally and in him to his mystical body the Church who are united to him by faith Secondly as to that Scripture 1 Cor. 12.12 for as the body is one and hath many members and all the members of that one body being many are one body so also is Christ It rather seems to be meant of the invisible Church of true believers then of the visible for the Apostle there calls none the body of Christ but such as â—ad received the gifts of the spirit and such as by one spirit as the concurring cause had been baptiZed into one body yea such who had received the spirit to profit withall such that had a real sympathy one with another vers the 26th If one Member suffers all the members suffer with it if one member be honoured all the members rejoyce with it All which cannot in any tolerable sence be applyed to the visible Church amongst whom there are many hypocrites that never received the spirit nor by the spirit could sympathize one with another c. But however it is most certain infants are not called the body of Christ if it be meant of the visible Church indeed by vertue of the grace of election some of them may be members of his mystical body the invisible Church but not at all members of the visible especially from this chapter for it is said if one member suffer all the members suffer with it and the manifestation of the spirit is given to every one to profit withall which cannot be applicable to infants For none in this Chapter are counted the body of Christ but such as are usefull to the body as an eye an eare or a foot a hand a head c. as vers 21. the eye cannot say unto the hand I have no need of thee nor the head to the feet I have no need of you So that I draw these two conclusions First every member in a Chuch stands in need of the help of all the other members Secondly that every member in a Church must be usefull in his place to the rest of the members But of what use are infants to the rest of the members in respect to edification Now this objection being answered I hope you see plainly that all the promises respecting spiritual blessings and the eternal inheritance were first made to Christ personally and in him they are made over to his mistical body the Church who are united to him by faith which being well weighed would put an end to the whole Controversy And in the next place you may see to what little purpose the promise in Gen. 17.7 is brought to prove that God made a Covenant of eternal life with believers and their Children The text speaks of a Covenant made with Abraham and his seed it doth not say with all believers and their seed or all Church-members and their seed neither doth it follow by any necessary consequence that because God made a Covenant with Abraham and his seed therefore he hath made a Covenant with believers and their seed sure I am the Apostle was of another mind who when he expounds the Covenant Gen. 17.7 understands it to be made to Abraham as it contains Gospel blessings not as a natural father but as the father of the faithfull both Jews and Gentils Rom. 4.11 12. he received the sign ef Circumcision that he might be the father of all them that believe and walk in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham so Gal. 3.7 know ye therefore that they which are of faith the same are the children of Abraham And these only are the seed to whom the Covenant was made in respect to Gospel priviledges and not to the natural seed either of Abraham or of any other believers as hath been evidently made appear before and that beyond all Contradiction And whoever affirms otherwise preaches another Gospel then Paul knew and incurrs that doom mentioned Gal. 1.8 9. Poed But we are told that as the Jews and their Children are broken off from the Covenant so the Gentils and their Children are ingrafted in in their room according to Rom. 11.20 because of unbelief they were broken off and thou standest by faith Bap. in answer to which I grant there was a time when the Jews and their children were broken off as the Apostle saith but there are two things to be considered First why they were broken off Secondly from what they were broken off 1. Why Answ It was not because they had not believing Parents for Abraham Isaac and Jacob were the fathers of them all and upon whose account they had right to the priviledges of the Covenant 2. Not because they wanted title for they were Abrahams seed when they were broken off but 3. Because the terms of standing in the Church
were now altered and the Church it self removed For before the Gospel came they stood members of the old Church though as much unbelievers for many generations as they were when they were broken off and why did not their unbelief break them off before But now Abrahams Church state is at an end and all the priviledges and immunities cease the Jewish Church must give way to the Gospel Church the Messiah being come and about to build him a new house into which none are of right to enter but profest believers and the Jews not believing now in that saviour who has the substance of the shadows and which all their types pointed out and whom all those ordinances signified yea for whose sake they did enjoy their ordinances and to which end were committed unto them the oracles of God the giving of the law and the promises yea therefore was their seed counted holy to point out and keep them in memory of that holy child Jesus that was to come as the Anti-type of all these things For the old house or Jewish Church was not intended to abide for ever but to the time of reformation then the law must be changed the priesthood chang'd the priviledges and ordinances chang'd the seed chang'd yea the Covenant chang'd which they not believing being willing to abide in the old house still and to remain Churchmembers upon a meer fleshly and natural birth still crying out Abraham is our father and we are his seed and are free and were never in bondage and here it seems they are resolved to stand wherefore they were broken off and that whether they would or not by reason of their unbelief that is because they would not believe that the old Covenant and all the priviledges thereof were ended and the substance come the Lord Jesus the Antitype of their types The second thing is from what they were broken off I answer From all the glory they boasted so much of as the Apostle sayes thou art called a Jew and makest thy boast of God and trustest in the law but all these things are now gone yea the Typical Adoption the glory and the Covenants the giving of the law and the service of God and the promises all their birth-priviledges Church membership and ordinances which continued but till the time of reformation yea from that Covenant which had also ordinances of divine service and a worldly sanctuary which is now all abolished as you see Heb. 9.1.2.3.4 c. And all because they did not believe in him who was the Antitype and substance of all their shadows but were willing to abide in the old house still and loath to lose their outward priviledges their worldly sanctuary their ordinances and Church membership upon the account of Abrahams faith for it was indeed an easy service a flesh pleasing religion if salvation could have been obtained by it notwithstanding the bondage and laboriousness of some services yet how willing would the carnal Jew have born all if he might have been saved by the faith of another rather then to lose all the righteousness of the law and to count his circumcision and Church membership as dung to winn Christ as Paul did when converted and be found in him only not having his own righteousnesse which is of the law but that which is by faith in Jesus Christ Thus you see why the Jews ars broken off and from what But they are not all broken off from the Gospel Covenant for there is yet a remnant according to the election of grace and as many of them as believe and repent of their sins shall be admitted to the more easy and more excellent priviledges of the Gospel Church membership and ordinances and shall be a pillar in the Temple of God and shall go no more out Besides we see many of the Jews have been converted and shall be more generally in the later days And if you say May not the children of the Jews be broken off from the Gospel Covenant I answer They are no more broken off then the children of the Gentiles for those that dye in infancy as many as belong to the election of grace shall be saved if they live to years of discretion and then believe they shall be saved as soon as any children of believing gentiles But if the children of the Jews be broken off from the Gospel Covenant it is either because of their parents unbelief or their own personal unbelief If it be meerly their parents unbelief then if any do believe in their own persons they cannot be admitted because of their parents unbelief for that which cuts them off will keep them off and so the parents unbelief keeps the children from the Gospel Covenant and so is the cause of their damnation for causa causae est causa causati But where do we finde that children shall be damn'd for the sins of their parents the Scripture saith the soul that sins shall dye And if you say the Jews unbelief doth not keep their children from the Covenant of grace but only from the administrations of it as Baptism c. I answer that according to your principles it amounts to the same thing for you say out of the Church no salvation But if you say their parents unbelief keeps them out of the Church only during their infancy when they come to years if they believe they may be admitted Then it will follow that such children of the Jews yea of all unbelievers that dye in infancy are in a miserable condition their case is deplorable for their parents secundum te can have no hopes of their salvation Poor souls had you lived a while longer you had been in the Covenant of grace and enjoy'd the priviledges thereof but meerly because of your parents unbelief you are cut off while you are infants But if this be true parents have cause to mourn to the breaking of their loynes when their children dye But David was of another mind who when his child dyed rejoyced though it dyed on the seventh day the day before circumsion and that not without hopes of its good estate as learned men conceive for he said I shall go to that but that shall not return to me which is not meant only of going to the grave but to a state of happynesse for our going barely to the grave is no cause of comfort Poed But we are told that Circumcision was a great priviledge as the Apostle saith Rom. 3.1 What advantage is there of Circumcision much every way and therefore to be broken off was their misery Bap. It s true the Apostle propounds that question what profit is there of Circumcision his meaning is that there was a time when they had advantage by circumcision and the main was that Christ should come of their flesh of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came But this and all other advantages are ceased and now it is a mercy rather then a misery though they thought otherwise to
which Mr. Baxter drives at can never be prov'd viz. that there was a lineal successive conveyance of grace from the parent to the child If so it is strange that all flesh should so soon have corrupted its ways that God saw cause to bring the flood upon the world of ungodly Surely had there been any such Covenant holyness as the Poedo-Baptists dream of before the flood there would have been some godly society some greater number of believers to have been preserv'd besides Noah and his Family who were not all godly neither there was a Cham among them which would not have been if there were such a conveyance of grace and Covenant holyness from the Father to the son So that notwithstanding what hath been said Infant Church-membership came in with the law of Circumcision and went out and was repealed with it as hath been abundantly proved For when there was a change of the Priesthood there was a change of the law which must needs include Circumcision with all the appurtenances and priviledges belonging to it Poed But what think you of that principle that some told that Infants are Church-members before they are baptized so Mr. Wills pag. 27. saith The first and chief end of Baptism is to be the initiating sign and seal of Gods Covenant and favour to us in Christ and not to give an entrance or admission into the Church Vnless persons are to be reputed members of the Church they are not to be baptized For Baptism in its own nature is the seal of our being already ingrafted into Christ and consequently into the Church For which he Quotes Dr. Ames And pag. 45. We deny saith he that Baptism doth give Formality or make a man a member of a visible Church though that Orthodox Divines have frequently termed Baptism the Sacrament of our initiation into the Church and have ascribed our admission or entrance into it thereunto pag. 46. To which I answer Bap. It seems then that Mr. Wills is wiser then his orthodox Divines 2. If Baptism be a sign of our being already in Christ and so members of the Church before they are Baptized Then I hope our children may be in Christ reputed members of the Church though they are not Baptized And then what need is there of these clamours against the Baptists for keeping their children out of the Church and in as much as in them lyes hindring their salvation when they are in Christ and members of his Church before Baptism by vertue of their parents faith And if you say we deny them a priviledge that is due to them We say we do not Our great desire is they should be Baptized and do instruct them in the principles of Christianity for that end that as soon as they are capable to improve the priviledge they may have it And as for the Circumstance of time your selves say that is not materal wâ—eâ—her it be done on the 8th 10th or 20th day and why may not the Baptists deferr it to the 20th year there being as much warrant in Scriptures for the one as for the other though indeed no positive rule for either only the time of believing is the most certain time assigned for Baptism 3. But thirdly Mr Wills spoiles all he has said and contradicts himself pag. 229. where he saith that as Circumcision gave entrance into the Church of the Jews so are believers and their seed by Baptism entred into the Gospel Church And it will not help him to say that Infants by vertue of their parents faith are only members of the universal visible Church as he calls it before Baptism but not of any particular Church For he himself saith that he that is a member of the universal Church may at any time claim his priviledge in any particular Church What confusion is here sometimes Baptism gives not admittance into the Church but they are members of the Church before as pag. 27 28. And then again that believers and their seed are by Baptism admitted into particular Churches at another place that Baptism only admits them into the Universal visible Church I think Mr Wills has little hopes to reconcile the Baptistâ— and the Poedo-Baptists seeing he is not reconciled to himself But as to the principle you mention that persons may be Church members before they are Baptized Its true Mr Wills makes a great stir against Mr Paul and others whom he calls rigid Anabaptists because they cannot see any ground to admit persons to the supper before Baptism And therefore labours hard to prove that which he confesses Orthodox divines are against yet he would be singular and force this novelty upon the world which himself but few others have of late contended for But what would the man have suppose a Turk or a Jew should be converted would he admit them to the supper before Baptism and so own them Church members whether ever they were baptised or not God strictly commanded of old that no uncircumcised person should eate the passeover And what rule have you that unbaptized persons should be admitted to the supper But he tells us this is the opinion only of some rigid Anabaptist and thinks there to shelter himself Indeed Mr Iessey and some other good men were of that opinion that some persons might be admitted to the supper who were not yet convinced but that their Infant-Baptism was true Baptism But why must all others be counted rigid Anabaptists because they cannot see with other mens eyes But this is one of the many scurrilous reflections in Mr Wills's Book to supply the scarcity of Argument I could tell him of some rigid Independents and rigid Presbyterians too who are so far from having Communion with the Baptists that they would pluck up such Tares so they account them out of the â—ield of the world and that before the harvest contrary to the expresse words of our Saviour Let both grow together till the harvest And the reason is very cogent lest plucking up the tares you pluck up the wheat also But Mr Wills makes amends for this and tells us that some of the Baptists are godly liberal men of holy and pious conversations and such whom he could have communion with but this is Joabs curtesy who salutes Abner friendly but smote him under the fifth ribb And I may say Meliora sunt amici vulnera quà m inimici oscula The many hard speeches and uncomely reflections the so often mentioning the miscariages of the people in Germany he calls by that denomination shew what gall his pen was dipt in But for all these things I say The Lord forgive him Paedo Sir I thank you for this discourse and the pains you have taken in order to my satisfaction I confesse I finde my self more convinc'd then I was and do think you are of the surest side it being most certain that believers were and ought to be baptized but whether any Infants were or ought is very uncertain And surely it
finds Contention raging within him for now those inferior powers will be no longer subject unto Reason but the rebellious pride of the Carnal appetite is such that the Body ceaseth to be any longer subject to the Soul upon which strivings and contentions enter and from thence all manner of Diseases and Distempers upon the Body for death and all corporeal infirmities are but the immediate effects of the disobedience of the Body to the Soul and man is entred into Contrariety not only with himself but others also and hath a property and principle of Contradiction whereby he opposes quarrels divides from and contends with others And is so far departed from the unity and harmonious agreement that should be in the minds of men especially Christians that now there ariseth passion anger and envy which so disturbs torments and disquiets the mind because others are not like us that from thence follow in a great measure diseases infirmities and bodily distempers because the Soul departs from Harmony and is in continual vexation and anxiety so that the Humors of the Body are disquieted and the radical moisture destroyed Persons that are of a Cholerick Temper are more subject to Diseases than those of a more quiet and sâ—rene disposition their passion inflames the inward parts and disorders the whole frame of Nature and envious men are subject to Consumptive distempers Invidus alterius rebus macrescit Opimis because his mind is full of dissatisfaction and disquietness being departed from Unity And Solomon tells us The bloody-minded man shall not live out half his dayes And we know those Anchorets and Monks that have retired from the World into Dens and Caves of the Earth that they might live a contemplative Life and be free from all manner of discord contention and division have lived to an exceeding Old Age and free from those distempers and Bodily Infirmities that others meet with the unity agreement and harmony of their minds much conducing to their bodily health So it 's said of Moses that he was an hundred and twenty years old when he dyed his Eye was not dim nor his natural force abated Deut. 34.7 we know of what quiet serene and meek Spirit he was of Numb 12.3 Now the man Moses was very meek above all the men which were upon the face of the Earth so that the quietness of his mind did very much contribute to the sanity of his Body And if Men and Women would more follow the Counsel of the Physitian of their Souls who bids us live in peace unity and love they would not perhaps so often want a Physitian for their Bodies FINIS Some Short Questions and Answers for the Younger Sort. Quest WEre not the Children of Believers Church-Members before Abraham's time Answ No the Scripture makes no mention of any such thing neither was there any visible sign or mark appointed by God to distinguish them from the Children of Unbelievers Quest Was there no successive conveyance of Grace from believing Parents to their Children Answ No because the Children of Believers prov'd as wicked as others insomuch as all flesh had corrupted its wayes and God brought the flood upon the World of Ungodly Quest What then became of the Children that Dyed from Adam to Abraham Answ Those that belonged to the Election of Grace were Saved though in no outward Covenant nor signed by any Visible Ordinance Quest Why then did God make a Covenant with Abraham and his Seed and distinguish them from all Nations Answ Because he had a design that the Messiah should come of his Loins and therefore his Males only are commanded to be Circumcised to signifie that Christ should be a Man-child and should shed his Blood for the sins of Believers Quest What other Ends were there of Circumcision Answ To distinguish them from other Nations with whom they were not to Marry lest the Succession should be Interrupted and so the Messiah not come of Abrahams Loynes Quest What advantage had they of Circumcision besides Answ They were counted the Visible people of God for a time had the Laws of God committed to them and the Land of Canaan and divers Earthly Blessings bestowed upon them Quest But had any other People any right to Eternal Life and Salvation Answ Yea It being evident that God had divers of his people amongst the Gentiles who belonged to the Election of Grace as Job and his Three Friends and others which appears by Bildad's appeal to the Ancients Job 8.8 10. For enquire I pray thee of the Former Age and prepare thy self to the search of their Fathers and vers 10. shall not they teach thee c. Quest But how came it to pass that the Jews became the People of God and not others Answ By vertue of a Grant from God to Abraham who freely made a promise to be a God to him and his Seed after him Quest Was this promise made to Abraham because he was better than others or before or after he Believed Answ No It was freely of Grace for God sound him an Idolater and these Promises were made to him before he Believed for we hear nothing of his Faith till Gen. 15.6 Quest Were his Children then Partakers of those Priviledges meerly by being descended from his Loynes Answ Yea we find no other Reason rendred Quest But we hear Abraham was a Believer and received the sign of Circumcision as a token of the righteousness he had by Faith Is it necessary then that his Children have the like Faith Answ 'T is true Abraham Believed after the Promise and was Circumcised but it was not Commanded that his Children should Believe in order to Circumcision Quest But as Abraham was a Believer before his Children had a right to Circumcision so should it not be known that every Father in Israel were a Believer before his Child were admitted to Circumcision Answ No for all were required to Circumcise their Children whether the Parent Believed or not Quest Were none to be Circumcised but those that Descended from Abraham Answ Yea all that were born in his House or bought with money Quest But was it not required that those Servants in Abraham 's House should profess Faith before they and their Children were Circumcised Answ No It was not commanded to be done upon any condition of Faith in the Parent or Child that was a Servant Quest Were Abrahams Children Circumcised by vertue of any right they had to the Covenant of Grace above others Answ No for some of Noah's Children c. had a Right to the Covenant of Grace yet not Circumcised and Esau and Ishmael c. had no right to the Covenant of Grace and yet Circumcised Quest Were not Infants Church-Members in Abraham 's time Answ Yea the Church and the Common-wealth being all one they must needs be Members Quest When did their Membership cease Answ When Christ came and had suffered when the Priesthood was changed when the Law of Circumcision ceased when the natural
command expresly notes the time age and sex The Levitical and Typical Holiness in Abraham's Houshold whether natural or adopted included not Regeneration nor heart cleanness which is our holiness land fruit and trees were holy in a typical consideration when Circumcision was predicated of Trees as well as Men Lev. 9.23 And for us to affirm that Trees ought to be now baptized as they were then reputed to be Circumcised is a wild way of reasoning And therefore since things become Ordinances to us by vertue of a word of institution and no such word is found to make out that Baptism succeeds Circumcision in its room place and use we think it safe to be sober and advance no further than the Scripture guides And to make Circumcision institutive of Baptism is to send us to School to the Law and that Old first vanishing Covenant as it is stiled Heb. 8. as if the Law-giver in the New-Testament had not by a positive institution establisht his Ordinances there nor left us any Warrant for our Gospel-Duties without that retrogression to Moses and assimilating them to the Paedagogy and similitude of Types So that these things being found meer mistakes on Mr. Whiston's side we may conclude in his own words that they have no sure footing in the Covenant for the baptizing of Infants He saith page 81. The Covenant Gen. 17.7 was made with Abraham in both capacities viz. as a Natural and Spiritual Father What then This is a meer Ignoratio Elenchi and Mr. W. has a peculiar Talent to prove that which is not deny'd But to this I have spoke before He argues page 89. thus If Jacob and Esau in their Infant-state were heirs of the World through the righteousness of Faith when they had no personal faith then the Infant-seed of Believers may be so too But Ergo the Text he grounds upon is Heb. 11.9 dwelling in Tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob heirs with him of the same Promise The vanity of which consequence will appear if you consider 1. That there is nothing in that Text to countenance his assertion We grant Isaac and Jacob were heirs of the same Promise as well in respect of Gods Covenant with their Father Abraham and his Seed as their own personal faith when they came to years but that it should follow that all the Carnal Seed of Believers should be so too is that that needs proof and we deny 2. I humbly conceive That to be heirs of the world through the righteousness of faith and yet have no personal faith as he words it is meer contradiction and non sense 3. The promise to which Isaac and Jacob were heirs is That the Messiah should come of their Loins according to the Flesh and how that being already fulfilled can be applicable to the children of believers I cannot tell nor Mr. Whiston neither Therefore his Syllogism is vain and empty He proceeds pag. 93. To demand Whether there be any Original Sin If so how came any Infants to be saved unless through the righteousness of faith viz. Gods non imputation of guilt to them c. Now says he if they are capable of the righteousness of faith why may they not have that righteousness sealed to them by an outward and visible sign To wave many things that may be said to shew the childishness of the Quaere we say The same reason may be urged for Vnbelievers children for if they be capable of the grace and mercy of Christ in order to their salvation viz. non imputing sin and imputing the righteousness of Christ to them as well as the children of Believers then at your rate of reasoning they have as good right to the outward visible Sign If you deny the former you impeach the free grace of Christ and have little of Christian Charity If you grant it your Position's overthrown In pag. 101. he tells us if we 'll believe him That Circumcision was administred to the Adult considered as believers Here I confess I do not understand what he means by Believers I thought the term Believer had not been used to have been appropriated to any person but in respect to Christ viz. Such as had some knowledge of and believed in the Messiah to come or already come Otherwise sueh of the Ethnicks who believe a Deity but not a Redeemer must needs be saved I am sure the Jews are accounted Vnbelievers to this day because they reject Christ which could not be if their admission to Circumcision and to be Members of the Commonwealth and the Church of Old had been upon the account of faith So that there is no truth in this position for it doth not appear that the Proselytes or any others were informed of the Messiah before they were circumcised or that they gave any testimony of their belief in him but only that they owned the God of Israel to be the true God and were willing to be joyned to that Common-wealth And Mr. W. knows that that is not sufficient now there must be saith in Christ else no believer But what would he conclude from hence Suppose the Adult that were circumcised were eonsidered as Believers if he say So all the Adult that are baptized are to be so considered which is the most natural inference that can be drawn hence we are agreed But I perceive the pains he takes here is to make way for that absurd Position he is now coming to and which I conceive he is the Protoplast of pag. 116. That Circumcision was administred to the Jewish infants considered as the seed of Believers By the way I wonder the man will trouble himself so much about Circumcision when he professes so gravely pag. 75. That he pleads not for Baptism from any Analogy with it Which would make one suspect that he is apt to forget himself or that he thinks we 'll believe any thing so soon as he pronounces his Magisterial Thus I say it c. But let 's hear how he proves it Why says he because the Adult that were circumcised were considered as the seed of Believers A worthy proof indeed but 't is all we are like to have He takes it for granted it seems that the Adult were circumcised as Believers and grounds his Argument upon it as his Medium But Logicians will tell him that such a way of Argumentation is but a silly Petitio Principii or begging the question But in order to a further and more particular satisfaction I offer these Considerations 1. That the Congregrative Body of the People or Jewish Males were Circumcised in their Infancy pursuant to the Command of God being else to be cut off from his people Gen. 17.14 and therefore this Argument being grounded upon a false Hypothesis will vanish Besides it is a non-sequitur for will it follow That if the Adult were circumcised upon their own faith which is but begg'd too therefore Infants were circumcised upon the faith of others 2. All that the Scripture mentions
to be circumcised at Age are 1. Those that were at years at its first Institution 2. The Proselytes that were made from time to time 3. The Jews in Joshuah's time circumcised after 40 years discontinuance of it in the Wilderness Now as to the first We find no other qualification required to entitle them to Circumcision but to be Jews or Abraham's natural Seed nor any mention made that Belief was a condition sine qua non nor any excluded for want of it Yea Ishmael was Circumcised though not in the Covenant when 13 years of age for God said verse 21. My Covenant will I establish with Isaac which phrase is brought by an Antithesis to Ishmael excluding him though born of Abrahams body and we find the numerous Family of Abraham circumcised immediately without any examination of their Faith And whether Mr. Whiston or the Scripture be to be the sooner believed is easie to be determined 2. As to Proselites he says he remembers not any particular instance of any such that were circumcised but concludes some were Circumcised and that as Believers because they kept the Passeover to the Lord Exod. 12.48 which indeed proves that strangers when Circumcised may keep the Passeover but not any thing to his purpose For if all that kept the Passeover be Believers how come the Jews that kept and do still keep it to be rejected by Christs Law for their Unbelief Or is the Faith he pleads they had some other Faith not sufficient in Gospel-dayes if so then that Faith that 's insufficient for their admission to Christ is not sufficient to intitle them to Gospel Ordinances ordained by Christ But what do's Mr. Whiston think of the 10 Tribes in Jeroboam's dayes when they fell to Idolatry and Worshipped the Calves for 200 Years Were there no Proselytes all that time if so were they when Circumcised considered as Believers Or were the Sechemites after the Rape of Dinah Believers when Circumcised Gen. 34 Were the Servants bought with money Believers or those Proselytes the Pharises compassed Sea and Land to gain Christ says they made them two-fold more the Children of Hâ—ll But this is a fine new Toy and let Mr. W. take the credit of its first promulgation 3. Those that were Circumcised in Joshua's time 5 chap. of whose Faith we find no Enquiry they were Circumcised because God commanded them so to be and if they were to be excluded upon the want of Faith 't is certain that among such a multitude there were many Unbelievers We read of an Achan in the 7 chap. that was stoned and the 36. that were smitten at Ai for the accursed thing though Circumcised a little before and numbers of them fell in Rebellion against the Lord afterwards So that upon the whole the Scripture tells us of no qualification that intitled to Circumcision save to be a natural Jew or such as were Proselyted or bought with money And to invent others is point blank arrogance So that our conclusion is firm viz. that to be the fleshly Seed of a Jew or bought with his money was enough to qualifie for Circumcision no profession of Faith being pre-required of either Gen. 17.12 And he that is eight dayes old shall be Circumcised c. not he that believes or is a Believers Child c. And what advantage the extravagant round-abouts in which Mr. Whiston so abounds has got him I cannot yet perceive I am sure it convinces me that he is in extream poverty of argument when he is forced to have recourse to such Forreign and Remote Projects to uphold his tottering cause As to the trouble he is in about the promises made to Abraham Whether they belong to the Covenant of works nature or grace or no Covenant at all concluding thus If our Author will help us out here he shall have hearty thanks for his pains To which I say that I doubt Mr. W. dissembles egregiously for I cannot conjecture how he can be so ignorant But the perplexity he involves himself in is a needless impertinent one and whoever goes to pluck him out is as idle as himself But yet if he be really at a loss and to deserve his thanks if it be not a complement I shall adventure to direct him where he may learn what the promise made to Abraham was and how to be understood in relation to both Natural and Spiritual Seed Let him turn to Dr. Owen's 6 Exercit. on the Hebrews page 55 56. c. where he will be informed the Doctor exactly agreeing with us and fully speaking our sense in that point and therefore quoted by me at large in my Treatise And I hope Mr. Whiston cannot suspect the partiality of the Informer And for his interpretation of Gal. 3.29 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if ye be of Christ or appertain to Christ were it admitted it is no disadvantage to us it being the same in sense with our Vulgar Translations And if Believers Children as he says be of Christ it must be in respect of Calling or Election the former is not to be alledged and the later may be true for ought we know but that 's no ground for any Gospel-administrations which are dispensable only according to appearance and since no Faith or Signs of Election appears and that de non apparentibus de non existentibus eadem est ratio we according to Scripture-warrant and example suspend our Baptizing them till they can give some evidence of their right to it and if a supposing them to be Elect be a good ground to baptize then the children of Unbelievers have a good plea because some of them are Elect. As to what he offers in order to remove the absurdities charged by Mr. Danver's upon the practice of baptizing Infants and his essay to vindicate the practice of Sprinkling for Dipping they are fully and clearly as to the substance of them already so blaâ—led by Mr. D. himself that I shall pass them and shall only conclude that consideration with the words of Dr. Martin Luther in his Book de Baptismo Tom. 1. p. 71 72. speaking of the signification of the word Baptizmus Graecum est latine potest verti mersio cum immâ—rgimus aliquid in Aqua ut totum tegatur Aqua Et quamvis ille mos jam aboleverit apud plerosque debebant tamen prorsus immergi statim retrahi Et sane si spectes quid Baptismus significet idem requiri videbis that is Baptism is a Greek word and may be interpreted an Over-whelming when we plunge any thing into the Water that it may be covered all over And although that custome is now out of use with many yet they ought truly to be dipt and presently lifted up again And certainly if you consider the nature of the thing you will see that to be necessary which being the true signification of the word we find cause rather to adhere to it than follow Mr. Whiston's unscriptural Dictates As to what he