yea in that it 's the same with it By this which hath been said it appeares how short and unsafe the speech of Mr. B. is who in answer to the argument from Gen. 17. saith that Gen. 17. the new Covenant is promised but not covenanted even as it was before to Abraham Gen. 12. 3. bringing Jer. 31. 35. where God saith not I have made but I will make a new Covenant which was made good at the death of Christ as the Apostle makes it appeare Heb. 8. 9 10. I confesse I have met with such a notion in Cameron de triplo foedere Thes 20. distinguishing of faedus gratiae promissum et promulgatum or sancitum proving it by Gen. 3. 12. 15. But with reverence to so worthy a man bee it spoken I cannot readily subscribe to his notion and proofe thereof in that the covenant made with Abraham is called both by the name of promises made to him Vers 16. and the covenant confirmed before of God in Christ that mediator of the new covenant Heb. 12. 24. 430. yeers before the Law which exactly considered referreth us to Gen. 12. 3. so that though God said Jerem. 31. Not I have but I will make such a covenant this proveth not that it was first made good or verified in Heb. 8. 10. c. For it was confirmed in Christ long before saith Paul Gal. 3. In respect of the vertue and efficacy of Christs blood in which it was ratified else neither Abraham nor Isaac had been saved see Heb. 13. 20. and Revel 13. 8. albeit actually and fully accomplished afterwards hee had not made it in so many words expresly as Jer. 31. noteth but in substance hee had both Gen. 12. 3. and 7. 7. and Deut. 30. 6 c. those particulars in Jer. 31. being branches 1. Of being blessed in Christ 2. Of God his being a God unto them 3. Of circumcising their hearts to love him c. He had not made that covenant in that way in Sinai upon their comming out of Egypt which is there hinted Jer. 31. 32. but that hee made no more Evangelicall a covenant then at Sinai before or after with the Jewes it followes not not according to the covenant made with your fathers when I tooke them by the hand to bring them out of Egypt not according to it scil for externall dispensations with thunder and lightnings and in the former of the ten words c. but hee saith not that it should not bee according to that Covenant with Abraham for the matter which or sorts of persons to which it was dispensed or as if hee had made no covenant of grace with them before their comming out of Egypt in Abrahams covenant c. or that the covenant made with Abraham was not the covenant of grace which was made with him above foure hundred yeers before that time Ieremy speakes of Gal. 3. 16. Exod. 19. 1 2 3. 20. 1 c. and 12. 2. 6. 40 41. and Gen. 15. 13. and 21. 9. and 12. 3 4. compared together A. R. is also too presumptuously bold with Christ that faithfull and true witnesse when not content to vent his owne unsound notions but hee will needes father them upon Christ himselfe and bring him in as speaking thus to the Jewes from Iohn 8. You see then how the Covenant of Circumcision made with Abraham and you his naturall seed was to bee an everlasting covenant in your flesh to wit in mee who was to come of your flesh Gen. 17. 13. And to this end to this covenant of circumcision was that covenant of the Law added c. by which you plainely see how that circumcision was to you naturall Jewes both a covenant and yet also but a signe of another covenant Gen. 7. 11. scil of that everlasting covenant made with Abraham and all his spirituall seed But how dareth A. R. to father such unsound things upon your faithfull Prophet of the Church as these are first that by that your flesh is meant him or Christ who was to come of their flesh whereas the context speaketh thus of all and every male in their generations stranger or oâ—her borne in their house or bought with money amongst them yet this should bee his covenant in their flesh that is Christ who was to come of their flesh even of Ishmael and Esau and of the strangers of other countries will Christ owne this as his doctrine at the last day Yea restraine it of your flesh that is of you Jewes of all the Tribes when yet Christ came of the tribe of Judah onely Would Christ speake so heterodoxly Secondly that there were three distinct covenants besides that covenant of nature made with Adam in innocency and so foure covenants besides that with all the creatures Gen. 9. and besides these there are three distinct covenants here mentioned first that of Circumcision secondly that superadded of the Law thirdly that everlasting covenant unto which Circumcision was but a signe will this doctrine be owned by Christ Nay doe not these sayings crosse each other scil That the covenant of circumcision was to bee an everlasting covenant in their flesh Christ and yet it was not that covenant The Text saith for my covenant shall bee in your flesh c. that is as here Christ is said to affirme the covenant of circumcision This covenant then of circumcision being in their flesh scil Christ it seemeth there is some other covenant ratified in Christ then that which is the covenant of grace even this covenant of circumcision which this Pseudo-Christus affirmeth to bee another covenant distinct from the everlasting covenant scil the covenant of grace I dare not see the Lord Jesus Christ thus abused Thirdly that was plainely to bee seene that circumcision was to them a Covenant and yet but a signe of another covenant scil that of grace As if these two expressions were as wide as a covenant which circumcision it selfe was and a signe of another covenant when every one that hath read catecheticall doctrine will say that when in one verse it 's said of circumcision in their flesh that it was his Covenant in their flesh it is a usuall Metonymy in speaking of Sacraments to call the outward sacramentall signe and seale by the name of the thing signified and sealed As the cup is called the testament of Christs blood 1 Cor. 11. 25. that is the visible signe or seale of it The bread is called Christs body ver 24. So in mentioning that extraordinary sacrament the rock is called Christ 1 Cor. 10. and here in Gen. 17. 11. Circumcision is called a token or sacramentall signe of the covenant in Rom. 4. 11. The seale of the righteousnesse of faith where the Scripture speaketh plainly and explicitely Yet here A. R. will have Christ himselfe to hold forth other doctrine then is usuall in speaking of Sacraments Fourthly that God made with Abraham and those Jewes another Covenant distinct from that everlasting covenant scil that
covenant of circumcision And yet also made with Abraham and his spirituall seed that other everlasting covenant of which the circumcision of Jewes was a signe as if God at one and the same time made with one and the same person Abraham two distinct covenants one which was not the everlasting covenant or covenant of grace namely the covenant of circumcision as 't is called and the other which was that everlasting covenant it selfe And likewise that circumcision was given by God who said it shall bee a signe to them to bee a signe of a covenant made not between God and them that by his appointment were thus circumcised but of a covenant made betwixt God and others when the letter of the Text is thus Gen. 17. 11. It shall bee a token of the covenant between mee and you What covenant was that was it that Vers 10. where it 's said This is my covenant which you shall keep between me and you and thy seed after thee nay that was a dutie and condition of the covenant rather which they were to keepe or observe as it followes this is my covenant every manchild amongst you shall bee circumcised Vers 11. yee shall circumcise the foreskin of your flesh So then circumcision is but a branch of the covenant or a condition of the covenant on their part which in the sacramentall nature of it is a signe not of that mentioned which was their dutie in being circumcised and so circumcising their flesh Vers 11. should bee a signe of being circumcised Vers 10. which were absurd But rather it is a signe of the covenant of God even that covenant mentioned Vers 7. scil of Gods becomming a God to them which is essentially the very everlasting covenant of grace And whereas A. R. his Pseudo-Christus saith that circumcision in their flesh was to bee an everlasting covenant in their flesh and yet to bee but a signe of that everlasting Covenant c. grounding upon that Vers 13. my covenant in your flesh shall bee for an everlasting covenant As if it should meane that that eternall covenant was not made with them that had that signe of the covenant at the present but yet it was to bee made with others when yet the same phrase used in mentioning the signe is used in expressing the forme of the covenant it selfe Vers 7. I will establish my covenant between mee and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in faedus seculi unto or for a covenant of perpetuitie to bee a God to thee and to thy seed after thee Here the phrase for an everlasting covenant evidently noteth not any future covenant which is not here held forth but the qualification rather of that covenant which God saith hee will establish at present with Abraham and his seed for having mentioned the covenants hee expresseth the qualifications of the covenant it selfe that it is of no temporary but of an everlasting nature And then setteth downe the matter of his Covenant thus made with him and his seed scil that hee will bee a God to them and that vers 13. is but a Sacramentall phrasing of the same thing SECT III. Conclu 2. THat the covenant of grace in Gen. 17. is to be considered as invested with Church-covenant and therefore mention is made of this covenant as to bee kept by them vers 9. which is further expressed in one particular thereof vers 10. Not as if this were all which God required of Abraham and of his seed but because this was the first initiating condition and that which did as an initiatory sacramentall signe in a more peculiar way incorporate him and them into one instituted Church-body at present which should more fully bee carried on for after time in Isaacs time ver 19. 21. and 21. 12. Besides this made them further capable afterwards of partaking of other Church ordinances Hence also if others desired to partake of that Church ordinance of the passeover albeit they might bee otherwise godly yet they might not bee admitted to the same unlesse by circumcision initiated into their Church body Exod. 12. 44. 48. Hence when the Scripture would speake of the Jewish Church it sets them forth by that name those of the circumcision Act. 11. 2. Rom. 15. 8. and 3. 30. Gal. 2. 17. But verily in requiring circumcision many other duties lay upon them virtually As first the knowledge of their owne undone estate by nature as being persons whose blood not of one member of their body alone but even of their whole man the life of body and soule might in justice bee required of them and this not so much in regard of actuall sins of their owne as in regard also of Adams sinne derived to them by propagation if they had no more guilt then that they deserved to die Secondly also knowledge of their extreame need of Christ whose blood as the blood of the principall seed of Abraham was to bee shed in fulnesse of time and by virtue whereof that covenant was at present ratified Gal. 3. 4. 17. Hence also faith was required of them to apply that benefit of Christ and his blood Rom. 3. 30. Those of the Jewish Church had faith required of them to justification as well as the baptized Gentiles all duties and branches and acts of repentance and mortification were therein required also of persons admitted to the seale of circumcision hence such exhortations thereon grounded Deut. 10. 16. All inward acts and branches of renovation and sanctification were therein also involved as that which they were bound to endeavour and attaine Rom. 2. 29. And all outward obedience of faith to the Law as a rule of life was therein also required Whence that Rom. 2. 25. The profitable use of circumcision is to keepe the Law the righteousnesse of it What as that whereby they should be justified No verily God gave it not to them for that end but such a keeping thereof as the godly gentiles who being not circumcised but baptized it shall bee all one as if they had beene externally circumcised Rom. 2. 26 27 28. SECT IV. Conclu 3. THat there is a bare externall being in the covenant of grace of persons who possibly never shall be saved Hence the promise is said to belong to those Jewes Rom. 9. 4. on whom yet the word tooke no saving effect vers 6. hence by opposition to the Gentiles they were those which were not strangers to the Church but of it They were not strangers to the covenant of promise but in the same Ephes 2. 11 12. hence God saith hee maketh his covenant with them all Deut. 29. 10 12 13 14 15. speaking there of that solemne renuall of the covenant of grace as Deut. 30. 6. 10. 12 13 14. compared with Rom. 10. 6 7 8. evinceth So Ezek. 16. 8. hee made a Covenant with that Church and people many whereof proved very base as that Chapter sheweth Now this was a covenant
If this therfore bee not the rule of Church administration of the Initiatory injoyned seale of the Covenant then the other of visibility of interest is that which wee must goe by therein Which may suffice for answer to what A. R. suggested to the contrary And I say visibility of the parties interest in the Covenant I say not meere visibilitie of faith or repentance The Initiatory seale is not primarily and properly the seale of mans faith or repentance or obedience but of Gods Covenant rather the seale is to the covenant even Abrahams Circumcision was not primarily a seale to his faith of righteousnesse but to the righteousnesse of faith exhibited and offered in the covenant yea to the Covenant it selfe or promise which hee had beleeved unto righteousnesse hence the covenant of grace is called the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. 6 7 8. The righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise verse 8. and it 's called the word of faith hence albeit Abraham must walke before God who is now about to enlarge the Covenant to his as well as to make it to him in a Church reference Gen. 17. 1. c. yet the Initiatory seale in his as well as in their flesh is Gods Covenant verse 13. or a Sacramentall signe firstly and expresly of Gods Covenant Verse 11. and 7. compared albeit it implicitly oblige him and them to other duties formerly mentioned Hence Act. 2. 38 39. the seale of baptisme is put to the promise as the choyse matter and foundation in view and as that was a ground of repentance it selfe Repent and bee baptized for the promise is to you Not for you have repented as if that were the thing to bee firstly sealed by baptisme but the promise rather and when wee speake of visibilitie of Covenant right as such a rule to goe by wee exclude not the lowest and least degree of visibilitie since degrees doe not vary the species of any thing if we propound a higher degree where shall wee stay and pitch Why not a higher degree as well as that wee must looke to it that not the least of Gods Covenant little ones bee left out unfolded in the Church visible Wee were better seeme to bee remisse in respect of Church care of 99. which are but seemingly just ones then neglect any and leave out any which possibly is savingly as well as seemingly of the flock of the covenant Church the least of Gods visible family or Church must have their portion as of the family if Ministers bee faithful in their office the least visible measure of grace must occasion our judgement of charitie to judge them gratious so the least degree of visibilitie of covenant right may challenge the like charitie not in word and in tongue but in deed and act of expression Wee put a difference betwixt those in Heb. 6. 4. and Infants in degrees of visibilitie of this right but in the nature of the visibilitie wee say they are all one all are visibly in covenant albeit that visibilitie in point of degree bee not in all equall God putteth a difference in point of degree of faith in justifyed persons but in his act of justifying of persons hee puts no difference the least sparke in Flax is enough that way For if it were more it would flame as well as make a smoake and yet if but so much it 's not sleighted by the Lord. I might apply the same in point of degrees of visibilitie of Covenant right in reference to the Churches act of approbation It 's a higher degree indeed of visibility of interest in the Covenant to make personall profession and confession of faith in the Covenant as it is in Adultis then to have onely the visible testimony of God in his word of Covenant expressing his mind of grace touching the seed of Abraham to bee a God to them And to adde theâ—…â—…sible testimony of his providence that these children are of thâ—… race and parentage to which also Abraham and other inchurched parents by visible owning of the covenant in the Latitude upon the termes of it and as now Christian Parents doe make profession of their parentall faith in the Covenant as made to them and their children and this profession of theirs may not bee possibly sincere yet it 's visibly a federall confession and such an avouching of God to bee their Covenant God as taketh in their children as that did Deut. 26. 17. and that Deut. 29. 10 11 12 c. And this is to the Church a degree of their childrens visibilitie of covenant right and Church right albeit not so high as the former and not varying the species of visibilitie it sufficeth not to vary the species of Church admission to fellowship of the initiatory Church-seale Judgement of charitie reacheth further then to judge of persons estates by their own personall words or workes Charitie beleeveth all things in way of testimony if they give any testimony as that of God who testifyeth more absolutely for that species of beleevers children that they are such as hee doth covenant to bee a God to them And the parents testifie alsâ— for them in the profession of their faith in that covenant of God for their seed The Churches also owne them as visibly such leaving secrets to God which particular Infant is not the elect seed principally intended here charitie as it beleeveth all things witnessed so it hopeth all things of the particular persons which are themselves dumbe but are included in the testimony of others mouths opened for them nothing being of counter-force to the contrary touching this point of visibilitie of their covenant and Church interest And I the more wonder that any which confesse that it 's not to be denyed that God would have Infants of beleevers in some sense to bee accounted his to belong to his Church and family and not to the devills as true in facie ecclesiâ—… visibilis c. yet doe oppose us in this particular now in question SECT VI. Conclus 5. THat Christ is in Scripture considered as head of the visible Church in which are many members of Christ the head in that respect which prove unsound as well as in other respects hee is considered as head of the visible Church wherein are none but elect ones And when Gal. 3. 16. it 's said to Abraham and to his seed which is Christ were the promises made it 's not meant of Christ personall as if the promises as that of pardon of sinne c. were made to Christ personally considered or the promises were first made to Abraham and unto Christ personall as the Text hath it Promises were made to Abraham and to his seed Christ Nay Christ personally considered is rather Abrahams seed not to but in which the promises are confirmed Gal. 3. 17. with 16. But rather of Christ with his body the Church whether of Gentiles or Jewes Gal. 3. 14. which though many personally yet make but one seed and
them all witnesse their sacrifices expiatory and propitiatory injoyned the whole congregation in case of sinne Levit. 4. 13. unto 22. witnesse the two Goates one for a sinne offering for the whole congregation and the other the scape goate over which all the sinnes of the children of Israel were confessed by the Priests and then it was in a typicall way to carry away all their sinnes into a place farre remote Levit. 16. 15 21 22 c. what this did externally signifie none is ignorant which knowes the Scriptures And albeit all made not effectuall use of it by saving faith yet God herein testified what a covenant they were under even that of grace confirmed in Christ and to what they had according to men externall right Hence the high Priest in type of Christ bare the names of the 12. Tribes and made intercession and atonement for them upon the like ground Adam with whom that covenant of workes was made had no such sacrifices Gal. 3. 16 17. the Apostle speaking of the promises to Abraham not excluding this Gen. 17. albeit more especially relating to Gen. 12. 2. 31. saith not they were to bee confirmed in Christ as if not at all ratified in Christ to them of old but saith the covenant was confirmed long before the Law in Christ so as that could not disanull the validitie of it and Acts 3. 25. they are said to bee children of the Gospell promise Gen. 12. 3 hence Luke 1. 54 55. 67 68. unto the 76 Verse and Christ as a Minister not of circumcising for he neither circumcised nor baptized personally Iohn 4. 1. but of the circumcision that is the Jewish Church and people Gal. 2. 7. hee came actually and personally to confirme those promises made to the fathers as Gen. 17 7 8. which hee had before virtually confirmed Gal. 3. 16 17. And which is observable the Apostle Rom. 15. 9 10 11 12. brings in foure reasons to prove the receiving in of the Gentiles to the fellowship of the covenant and Gospel as that which was opposed much but to confirme that of the Jewish covenant estate verse 8. hee brings no further reason then that taken from one end of Christs comming in the flesh as if to deny the former were to question the later And how can it bee imagined that such an Evangelicall covenant as that Gen. 17. 7. made with reference to them should bee made without respect to Christ in whom salvation was really exhibited to the elect among them Acts 4. 10. 1 Pet. 23 24 with Isa 40. 8. Psal 115 8. to 16. and 111. 3 4 44. 17 18. 22 with Rom. 8. 36 Heb. 11. per totum Johns converts were but turned to the wisedome or faith of their righteous fathers Luk. 1. 17 and to the rest externally ministred in the visible seales and types thereof to shew it was their visible covenant and Church-right also if they had hearts to improve it and that they should answer dearely for rejecting their owne mercy if despisers c. as they afterwards did Rom. 11. 20. hitherto was their injunction of the brazen Serpent and their looking upon it Numb 21. 7 8 9 10. with Iohn 3. 14 15. Fourthly the covenant of workes holds out no pardon or mercy to transgressors as did this covenant made and dispensed to the Jewes Gen. 17. 7. as before wee shewed so Acts 2. 38 39. Fiftly the covenant of works required not either faith in Christ or repentance those Gospel duties Mac. 1. but perfect personall obedience much lesse did it offer grace inabling to repent but this their covenant did both require and offer the same Deut. Chap. 30. Verse 6. as I. S. confesseth see more Acts Chap. 3. Verse 25 26. Sixtly No salvation at all to any by acceptance of the termes of the covenant of workes nor possibilitie of it Gal. 3. 10. but hâ—re was rest and salvation in the word to them dispensed if they had hearts to have improved it else none had ever been saved by it contrary to Heb. 11. yea chap. 12. 1 2. they are madâ— our patternes and leaders that way that was Gospel even glad tidings of salvation by Christ to come which was dispensed to them albeit it were not Gospel strictly taken for the revelation of Christ as actually incarnates and personally ratifying the same Rom. 1. 16 17. Revel 14. 6. Heb. 4. 2. compared with 2 Tim. 1. 10. and 1 Pet. 1. 10. Seventhly all the Jewes best and worst had the same dispensers of the covenant as their Ministers in whom they were all interested and by whom they were ministerially urged with their covenant-right in common Exod. 19. 5 6. and 24. 7 8. with Heb. 9. 15 16 17. 20. Psal 50. 5. 16. and 44. 17. Isa 24. 1. Ier. 31. 37. and 33. 25 26. Ezek. 16. 8. 59. 60. 62. Zach. 9. 11. Eighthly the covenant of works was made with all men without distinction in Adam but this covenant was a peculiar covenant made with the seed of Abraham Isaac and Jacob as before was shewed Nâ—…thly the cause of the Jewes not profiting by the Gospell so ministred to them as their priviledge was not their not doing which is the defect of the condition of the legall covenant but their not beleeving or want of the condition of the Evangelicall covenant Hâ—b 4. 2 And lest any should say yea true the Gospel was preached to them as it is or may be to Indians with us which have not so much as externall right in it I say they were cast off from their Evangelicall covenant priviledges not for not doing but for not beleeving hence cut out of their root and cast off from the priviledge of their first fruits Abraham Isaac and Jacob not as begetting and naturall fathers for they are still their children thus even the worst of them John 8. 37. but from them as covenant spirituall fathers Rom. 11. 20. And observe that hee speaketh that if the worst part of the Jewes as if they accepted interest in the proper object of faith scil the covenant not of workes but of grace out of which they are broken by their Gospel sinne of unbeleefe Tenthly the refuse Jewes thus cut and cast off I demand from what they are cast and into what estate they are now put to the former none will say they are cut out and cast off from a visible right or estate of a covenant of workes and the dispensation thereof that were well for them if so So then their former priviledged estate for their covenant fathers from which they were cast by reason of unbeleefe was not barely a ceremoniall yoake the which our opposites urge as grievous to them all and a priviledge rather to bend thereof Nor the bare subservient covenant at Mount Sinai as Cameron calleth it For first the branch priviledge which they had in reference to those covenant fathers as such was long before Moses or his fathers were borne and that is that to
therefore will bee your God But I will be a God to thee and thy seed therefore thou and they shall bee circumcised the nature of a seale supposeth a covenant to bee sealed Againe that also is of like truth which is said that it required onely a male of eight dayes old The promise being made indefinitely to the seed whether male or female and not to the eighth day old seed but to the seed albeit but a day old else what had become of them if they died then in respect of that ordinary covenant meanes of their good Rom. 9. 6. 11 Object That promised temporall things to both seeds as Canaan this spirituall Answ Was not Canaan typicall to both seeds as you call them Else why were any condemned for their unbeleefe Heb. 3. last and 4. 1 2. compared Or were temporall things all that was promised in this I will bee your God or was hearts circumcision promised them Deut. 30. a temporall thing or doth not the Gospel now promise and exhibite temporall things also 1 Cor. 3. 21 22. 1 Tim. 4. 8. 12 Object With the Jewes the Church and the State were the same but not so now Answ God never confounded Church and civill state either then or now Who dare make God the author of confusion which is the God of Order Hee then kept them severall paling in the civill state with the judicialls with which the Church as such dealt not but as civill cases came under a Church-consideration Shee had her ceremonialls and moralls to regulate her Kings and Princes Priests Levites and Elders had their proper worke and moved onely in their owne spheres The Elders of the assemblies knew and acted in their places Ecclesiastically without interruption from civill officers or intruding upon civill offices as such Josh 9. and 16. 1. 2. Act. 14. Luke 4. the matters of the King and of the Lord were carefully bounded and sundred 2 Chron. 17. 11. And because I. S. maketh many of these objections let us see whether what himselfe affirmeth will not necessarily confirme much of what wee have said and undermine many things which hee and others of his mind doe hold To bee a God to them saith I. S. was to fulfill his promise to Abraham in particular or to his seed in generall Citing for that Nehem. 9 8. Psal 105. 9 10 11 42. Luke 1. 72 73 74. In token of which God annexed Circumcision as a seale to confirme the same Gen. 17. 11. And againe unto which covenant circumcision was added to put the people alwayes in mind of the said covenant Gen. 17. 11. and a seale to confirme the covenant on both sides God to be a God to them as aforesaid and they to be his owne people above others and so to performe the same condition of faith and obedience as Abraham their father did and to walke as such circumcised in heart unto which they were ingaged by that ordinance Rom. 2. 25 26 27 28 29. otherwise that covenant stood not in force c. First then there was a covenant of grace which onely requireth faith and repentance made with Abrahams seed in generall and so with the body of the Jewes Infants and all as being then particulars of that seed of Abraham in generall God anexing circumcision in token thereof as his mind touching them whilst Infants visibly to confirme the same to them whether they proved elect or reprobate Gen. 17. 11. Secondly then the Initiatory seale of the covenant of grace was not alwayes of present actuall grace in the party sealed but unto future grace and with condition of future actings of faith and repentance Albeit not then able practically and personally to restipulate otherwise then passively and in their parents It being confessed to bee a seale on both seeds of Gods being a God to them c. And putting the people circumcised in mind scil afterwards of the covenant and to performe the conditions of it of faith and repentance c. 3 Then circumcision sealed spirituall things even that covenant I will bee a God to them and so fulfill my promises to them such like as Luke 1. 72 73 74. In token whereof circumcision was annexed to confirme the same And surely it confirming a promise of such mercies as Luke 1. 72 c. it did confirme very spirituall things to them and so not temporall things onely as Canaan c. as sundry have affirmed Also then circumcision ingaging the circumcised persons to beleeve as Abraham did and to bee in heart circumcised c. as I. S. cited that place for that purpose Rom. 2. 25. to the end Hee else-where contradicteth himselfe affirming that faith in the blessed seed was not required either in Abraham or others to be circumcised If it ingaged them to his faith then hee and adult proselytes stood prae-ingaged to the same faith Likewise Infants albeit not actually beleeving at present yet that seale was on them virtually as a present ingagement to after faith c. Nor doth this accord with what I. S. elsewhere affirmeth that circumcision required not the second birth but first Since it ingaging to the hearts circumcision this could not bee without a second birth supposed This which hath been said accordeth with much of that which wee speake touching baptisme that it sealeth the covenant indefinitely to all sorts and that it sealeth on Infants present federall Grace and unto future grace likewise unto growne ones it sealeth personall grace lesse principally covenant grace principally From what hath beene said in this sixth proposition it appeares that the Infants of Abraham Isaac and Jacobs loynes were as well as their covenant and Church-seed as any others Gen. 17. 7. and 26. 3 4 and 28. 13 14. hence the covenant runs in the indefinite notion of seed and the same seed to which Canaan was to bee given for an outward inheritance whereof children were heires as well as parents hence upon that ground of Gods being a covenant-God to them was the injunction of their being sealed by Circumcision Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10 11 c. hence in that way is the Covenant of grace renewed to all Israel in the termes of you and your seed Deut. 30. 6. I have beene the larger in this matter of Gods covenant with the Jewes as conceiving the contrary opinion to have beene a great ground both of Anabaptisme and Familisme SECT IX The Childrens Covenant estate in Gospel Conclus 7. THat the Covenant interest at least externall and ecclesiasticall of Infants of inchurched beleevers is Gospell as well as such covenant interest of growne persons Now because Antipaedobaptists or rather Anabaptists wholly deny the Covenant-right of Infants of beleevers let us here also addesome particulars for further clearing of this proposition But first let us consider of that place Deut. 30. 6. 11 12 13 14. compared with Rom. 10. 6. 7. 8. the matter of the promise scil inward power of grace inabling to love the Lord intirely
in reference to Church administrations of Sanctuary and Tabernacle ordinances as they are capable thereof by which they shall become a visible Church or sanctified and sequestred people in the very view of the heathen which cannot nor doe not attend to gratious efficacies but externall administrations and dispensations and priviledges and the like see vers 28. other places to like purpose might bee quoted but I forbeare 3. Argument if the Infants and little ones of visibly beleeving parents in church estate before they can make any personall confession or profession of faith in the Covenant yet then are Abrahams Church seed then is it Gospell that the promises belong to them but the former is true Ergo the latter The major is in substance the Apostles Gal. 3. 16. to Abraham and his seed are the promises made the minor is proved 1. In those of Abrahams loynes in the elect seed I should thinke it should not bee questioned but yet it hath by some that Infants while Infants and till beleevers are not in the covenant c. and by such other speeches of our adversaries in this point the covenant right not only of the individuall Infants of beleevers but the covenant estates of that species and sort of persons is wholly denied and so since it 's evident and acknowledged that some are elected of that sort yet it 's denied that they have part in the word of Gods Covenant so that if they die in Infancie as many of the choyce seed of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob did c. yet that ordinary meanes of saving efficacie in all the saved elect is denyed them contrary to that principle Rom. 9. 6. but more hereof anon but Rom. 9. 7 8 9 10 11. is so cleare for it I wonder any deny it Isaac and Jacob are made precedentiall instances of interest not onely of election but of Gods calling unto the fellowship of his free covenant without respect either to their desire or indeavour of it personally vers 16. It was that God might shew not barely in the act of his choosing of them in his secret counsell but in the act of his covenanting grace likewise that it was not of their workes but of him that called them unto that covenant estate in the example of Jacob most fully when God would shew the rise of that his covenant grace to him the younger that hee should have the preheminence vers 12. hee vers 11. instanceth in the time when that was revealed with so personall a reference to Jacob even whilst in the wombe and expresseth the forenamed cause as the reason why and so God expresly mentioneth his covenant as to bee established with Isaac in Infancy or with Isaac to bee borne the next yeare of Sarah Gen. 17. 21. And hence when Isaac was growen and was actually a beleever hee hath indeed then more actuall benefit of his owne improvement of the covenant by faith but hee did not then first enter into covenant but hee had interest in the covenant before made to his father with reference to him that being to be minded in covenant expressions uttered the persons spoken unto and understanding what is spoken are not the onely covenanters ingaged but aswell the persons spoken of with covenant reference in the declaring of the covenant so in Gen. 17. 7. 21. and 21. 12. and 26. 3 4. and 20. 13 14. and Deut. 29. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 c. Now that Isaac had such a former covenant interest appeareth in that Gen. 26. 3. when God spake so expresly to him touching his covenant hee saith not I now make a covenant with thee or sweare to do such and such things for thee but I will performe the oath which I sware to Abraham thy father hee referreth him to a former grant and ingagement of grace to him see verse 4 5. hee doth not retract any thing but confirmeth in solemne wise the validitie of the former bond and the like might bee said of all the rest of the elect seed if all the elect seed were not involved in that covenant Gen. 7. 7. then the Apostles reasoning should bee undermined Rom. 9. 6 7 8. who is so farre from denying the elect seed to bee these choyce children of the promise Gen. 17. 7. and 21. 12. that he maketh that choyce company of the children of the promise to bee the onely elect seed now if all the elect seed bee included in that Gen. 17. 7. and 21. 12. then since some of Abrahams and Isaacs seed died in Infancie either none of those were elect and saved which none dare avow or if some bee supposed to bee saved and elect then were they in Infancie and as Infants of Abraham and Isaac children of the promise Sith the promise and covenant runs to them as Abrahams seed not as elect also supposing they were circumcised before they died that was no seale to a blanke albeit they being Infants had no actuall faith c. but rather a seale of the covenant of grace or promise of which they most properly were children Yea to all the rest which were in an Ecclesiasticall respect children of the covenant that injoyned circumcision was to be that his covenant or the visible Sacramentall signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith or the covenant of God holding the same forth Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13. Rom. 4. 11. and 10. 6 7 8. and Deut. 29. and 30. 6. 11. 12 13 14. compared And what is true of them of Abrahams and Isaacs loynes as Infants of Abraham and Isaac considered as beleeving and inchurched is true of the Infants of others as beleevers and in church estate the formalis natio of the interest of the Infants of the former as such is as valid in those of the latter the formalis natio being the same in both as also the covenant of grace in the essentialls thereof is the same and therefore Abram had then first his name changed to Abraham and then first was called a father of nations in reference to this covenant of grace to bee made with him and his in this politicall Church way and latitude of Church interest and dispensation thereof as Gen. 17. 4 5 6 7 c. compared and then first propounded as a father and exemplar to other beleevers of other nations Rom. 4. And albeit it were a name given him before hee was actually circumcised yet it was not to intimate that there was no need of a visible seale to his children and seed whether of his loynes or otherwise for hee was a father aswell of those of the circumcision Rom. 4. 11 12. But to shew that hee was not a father to those which were bound to bee circumcised onely but withall a father to the Gentiles albeit neither circumcised by actuall taking away of the flesh of their foreskinne nor yet bound thereto vers 12. It was not then spoken to evacuate the force of reasoning from right to the
promise as invested or Church promise or covenant unto right to the seale or to shew that albeit Gentile beleevers did not partake of the initiatory seale of the covenant yet having the promise they therefore have the seale in Abraham their father albeit they never are nor may bee sealed in their persons the Apostles discourse cleareth it to bee otherwise his scope being not to infringe any Gospel right to the Gospell seale but to take off any reasoning in point of justification from any work of the Law considered apart from Christ as the five first verses evince and because that of circumcision was chiefely gloried in by the Jewes hee taketh off any reasoning that way in opposition to faith which is all in all rather in point of justification whether of Jewes or Gentiles for which end Abrahams example in the way and manner of his justification is propounded as verse 9 10 11 12 13. declare as for the sealing of Abrahams beleevers children the Gentiles in Abrahams sealing if that were intended as much might have been affirmed of the beleevers Jewish children of Abraham as they were such and so the circumcising of such Jewes at least had been more then needed so farre forth Yea but the Jewes were commanded to be circumcised true and so were the Gentiles to be baptized yea but they were to be circumcised when Infants yea and when adult too in case as Joshua 5. and in that case at least many of them being actuall beleevers Joshua 5. and 6. compared with Heb. 11. 30. might have pleaded exemption as being quatenus beleever circumcised in the circumcision of their father Abraham It was not then spoken at all to weaken the bond to an initiatory sealing of Gentiles but to that initiatory sealing up of the covenant to them by circumcision of the foreskin of their flesh thus much by the way in answer to what some thus object But to returne to the proofe of that propounded let us shew that even in the dayes since the time of the fathers before Christs time such children mentioned were are and will be eyed by divine approbation as covenant and Church-seed of Abraham God hath promised to blesse the inchurched nations in Abrahams seed Christ behold Christ by an outward Symbole testifying that the little ones of inchurched visible beleevers are in Church account such witnesse that act of his and his offence that any such should bee hindred from any approach to him in the use of any meanes to attaine at least externally that blessing of him the promised seed Luke 18. 15 16. 7. with Marke 10. 16. hence in the purer dayes of the Gospel It was of old prophesied that such children should bee accounted the seed which the Lord hath blessed aswell as their parents should come under that account by the Gospelled Gentiles Esay 61. 9. yea God himselfe expresseth his account as of such parents so of their children to be such Church and covenant seed both are under one account so far forth Esay 65. 23. besides that if such parents suppose Jewes or Gentiles be Abrahams spirituall seed Anabaptists will grant then are their children also the parents being not meerely abstractively considered the covenant seed Gen. 17. 7. but as in reference to their children with them for the seed of Abraham to whom the covenant Gen. 17. 7. is made is the seed in their generations which necessarily imply and suppose as the parents generating so the children begotten of them the parents make not the generation alone nor the children alone but joyntly considered together Here Anabaptists sever the subject parties taken into the covenant consideration they agree it 's Abraham and his spirituall seed but leave out that notation of the seed scil seed in their generations the proselyte gentiles in Abrahams house they were not his carnall seed why are they then sealed but as they were rather Abrahams spirituall and Church seed Yea but their babes also have the visible seale of Abrahams covenant yet are they not his fleshly seed nor yet are they his actuall beleeving seed and yet have they the feale of Abrahams seed surely then in and with their parents they are Abrahams Church and spirituall seed You will say God commanded them to be sealed and therefore sealed Answ Suppose it so yet God commanded their circumcision to be on them also his covenant or the Sacramentall signe of that his covenant sealed to Abraham to his seed in their generation Gen. 17. 7. 9 10 11 12 13. either then they which in one sense were not of his seed or loynes v. 12. yet were of his covenant and Church seed vers 7. or else God solemnly enjoyned a seale to a blanke or a seale to no covenant of his no other covenant being then in mention to bee sealed by circumcision which was enjoyned to bee his covenant or the Sacramentall signe of his covenant vers 11 12 13. Yea but they partaked not of the covenant many of them at least in their Infancy Answ If yee speake of saving actuall efficacy upon them then neither did many others no not of the elect seed which lived to maturitie of yeares so partake of the covenant in their Infancy nor doth that hinder but that circumcision in the nature of it and in the institution of it was a visible seale of the covenant of grace that which Moses phraseth touching circumcision that it was a signe of the covenant Paul explaineth that it was a seale of the righteousnesse of faith scil not so much subjective as objective Rom. 4. The baptisme of Simon Magus was in the nature of it and in Gods institution a visible seale of the most spirituall part of the covenant and yet did not Iscariot and Magus partake of the spirituall part of the Covenant It is peculiar to the elect to bee in the covenant in respect of participation of the saving efficacy of it Rom. 9. 6 7 8. But it is common to Iscariot and reprobates adult or Infants to bee externally in the covenant in the face of the Church as verse 4. of which before But as for the visible seale it selfe whether to elect or reprobate to such as partake of the spirituall good of the covenant or not this varieth not nor multiplyeth nor nullifieth the nature of the seale The nature of it depends on God the author not upon the sealed persons worthinesse or unworthinesse sex or age Circumcision was not covenants but one and the same covenant ex natura rei nor was it a part but the covenant even the whole covenant Sacramentally to elect or reprobate Infant or adult circumcised The commandement of God did not put or cause any difference but injoyned it all equally to all sorts The covenant sealed was but one not two covenants albeit God did hold forth varietie of covenant blessings as doth the Gospell some more common to all and some more peculiar to a few and so the seale it selfe was to Infant and adult
This argument supposeth that one cannot bee within the covenant of saving grace externally but they must bee in a saving estate the contrary whereto appeareth Conclus 3. And it 's said of sundry illegitimate Jewish children that they were within the covenant of saving grace namely externally for the author cannot meane other And yet of all such who will say they were all in a saving estate even Esaus birthright was more then right to Isaacs temporall estate as borne of Isaac why else doth the Apostle apply Esaus example of selling his birthright in such sort as Heb. 12. 15 16 17. hee propoundeth his example to deterre the Hebrewes which were in Church estate Heb. 10. 25. and 12. 17 18. from the mischiefe of falling short of the grace of God not of meere temporall blessings nay expresly the thing hee fell short of as his birth heritage as Isaacs first borne is said to bee the blessing indefinitely even Abrahams blessing to his seed the same blessing whereof hee rejecting his externall right Jacob his younger brother came to possesse which was a Church blessing as well as naturall and civill Gen. 28. 3 4. as for temporall blessings he had store of them notwithstanding nor was Isaacs trembling when hee saw how strangely God had ordered the blessing of the first borne to Jacob the younger sonne Gen. 27. occasioned from a bare disappointing him of the externall right to temporalls but withall to spiritualls and ecclesiasticall good also whence the Apostle calleth him for his contempt a prophane person Heb. 12. 3 Object But saith I. S. the covenant of grace being a covenant there must be mutuall agreement betwixt the covenanters and so knowledge and consideration of the termes thereof and restipulation as in mens covenants Hen. Den a little differently maketh a necessitie of the persons entring into covenant with God scil by faith unto covenant right and not meerely Gods entring into covenant with the creature for so hee entred into covenant with the beasts c. Gen. 9. 10. Answ To which I answer the covenant of grace is as well a testament 1 Cor. 11. Heb. 9. Now a testament may bee and useth to bee made in reference to little ones without knowledge nor doe any use to deny a childs right in the testators will because it was taken in amongst other legacies in the bequeathed legacies before it understood the same nor will it bee denyed in the case of the elect seed the choyce parties in Gods covenant Gen. 17. that they many of them dying Infants without actuall knowledge were not therefore children of the promises or that that solemne covenant Deut. 29. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15. and 30. 6 7 8 9 10 c. with that people wherein conditions also were propounded on their parts that therefore the covenant was not made betwixt the little ones there present because they neither understood nor could actually subscribe to the conditions the contrary being there expressed no rather it sufficed that the childrens covenant estate being the parents priviledge whence the incouragement to Abraham to walke with God Gen. 17. 1 c. From that amongst other incouragements that God would become his seeds God also c. vers 7. and so Deut. 29. and 30. amongst other incouragements to the parents that is one vers 6. that God will doe thus for their seed also yea the children being reckoned as in their parents as Levi payd tithes in Abraham c. yea the externall avouching in a covenant way of God being owned as the childrens Deut. 26. 16 17. yea the childrens circumcision being as well the covenant dutie Whence called the covenant or the covenant parties covenant part or dutie as well as the token of Gods covenant Gen. 9. 7. 9 10 11. they restipulate in their parents knowing acceptance of the covenant and professed owning of it upon the covenant termes as well on their childrens part as their owne and they restipulate in a passive reception of the covenant condition and bond to after imitation of their father Abrahams faith and obedience to which purpose I. S. confessed circumcision was annexed to the covenant Yea the bastard children of Iudah and Gilead and others are acknowledged to bee in the covenant of saving grace which yet could not personally restipulate in a way of actuall knowledge or faith or the like 4 Obj. Your doctrine would make God the author of sin partly in causing persons to beleeve untruths partly in promising life to the wicked and so keeping of him from returning I.S. C.B. I.S.C.B. C.B. Besides it will make every beleever an Abraham and make Christs body to consist of dead members and even confound the world and the Church as if one Answ To the first wee require the parents in reference to the Church and covenant estate of their children to make confession of their faith in the covenant of God as made with them and their seed indefinitely according as the termes of the covenant are and being the termes of the covenant it 's no untruth or sinne to beleeve it in foro dei or confesse that faith in foro Ecclesiae which of the beleevers children is elect or saved or not it 's to us a secret and our doctrine requireth them to beleeve revealed things as are those indefinite words of the covenant leaving secrets to the Lord and no other was Moses doctrine having propounded the covenant of God as with parents and children and being yet further to inlarge hee joyneth the former and latter part of his speech with that item that secret things belong to God but things revealed scil touching this his mind of grace indefinitely these are for us and for our children And for further taking off of this cavill together with the second I answer when some say that even bastard children were in the covenant of saving grace and even I. S. which objecteth the same confesseth that God promiseth to bee a God or to fulfill his promises even such as Luke 1. 74 75 c. and gave them circumcision to confirme the same on both seeds requiring them to walke in the footsteps of Abrahams faith c. I demand were the carnall seed saved I. S. will not say so yet God promised and gave circumcision as a seale to that end that hee would bee their God requiring them to beleeve c. did not then God faile in his promise or in requiring them to beleeve an untruth surely no so when they were on that ground according to I. S. to walke in the footsteps of Abrahams obedience and circumcision of heart was required of them did not this rather further then hinder their repentance is it not the Apostles argument to the Jewes to prevaile with them to repent Repent for the promise is to you c. Act. 2. 38 39. Nay doth not our doctrine holding forth the interest at least externall of such in covenant thereby hold forth as well an externall interest in that
was an example as they apprehended tending to trouble Christ more then ordinary to meddle with poore shiftlesse babes Fourthly if they had been little ones which could goe yet it sufficeth to prove what Anabaptists deny that before persons could actually hold forth personall Faith or repentance may be actually in covenant with God and inrighted to the initiatory seale of it and that albeit Christ did not actually cause these babes then to be baptized that they had therefore no right to bee baptized it followeth not But I. S. hee acknowledgeth those children to bee of that kingdome or members of that Jewish Church and therefore have right as well as others to temporall blessings and that these children were brought to Christ for cure producing some Scriptures for that end where prayer and imposition of hands was used upon that occasion but doth the Text say of such or such like was that kingdome no verily but indefinitely of such is the kingdome of God and what though those children were of that Church since Christ inlargeth his speech as wee shewed to such like persons and so to other babes of like condition with those and had the Jewes and their babes onely right to temporall blessings will I. S. say when that Abrahams covenant of God his being a God to them scil to fulfill his promises instancing in that Luke 1. 73 74 75. as one is acknowledged by I. S. elsewhere to bee by circumcision visibly sealed upon both seeds as hee termeth them True it is that as 2 King 5. 11. Matth. 8. 3. and 9. 18. Luke 4. 3◠40. one way of healing was putting on of hands and prayer but is all here meant the Lord blessed them scil in way of cure onely or the like other Scriptures mention imposition of hands and prayer in that way of curing true but here is no mention either of the diseases or of the cure of the little ones following upon Christs imposition of hands as there is in the other Scriptures in other cases no nor is here prayer mentioned the parents desired him to pray Matth. 19. but hee blessed them saith Marke whether in prayer way it 's not said yea since the Scriptures mention these acts of blessing and imposition of hands in way of ratification of covenant right and priviledges of the covenant of grace as externally at least the heritage of such and such witnesse that Gen. 27. 17. and 28. 1. 3 4. and 48. 14 15 16. why should not wee on better grounds look at this as comprehended in this act of Christ and why is I. S. so uncharitable to limit the requests of these pious persons intreating Christ to pray indefinitely for the little ones that this was onely to move him to desire temporall things for them Christ doth not seeme to make any such interpretation of their request when hee blessed them as Marke saith what was that onely in regard of temporals who would limit Christs blessing within so short a compasse nor was it the Disciples use to hinder but further the cure of persons children brought for that end as the instances in Marke 9. Matth. 15. shew Object But if you make Infants of inchurched beleevers to bee actuall members of a visible Church doe you not destroy the usuall definition of a visible Church given by Divines that it 's a company of persons professing the faith c. Answ Musculus Aretius Melancton Calvin Beza Bucer Dr. Ames Mr. Cotton Dr. Whittaker Peter Martyr generally all our Divines which define a visible Church severally but in substance to like purpose they yet make that no undermining of their owne doctrine de ecclesia or of the descriptions visibilis ecclesiae which they doe give when the same authors maintaine from Scripture grounds that such Infants are actually members of the visible Church and externally in the covenant of grace and such as are to bee baptized yea such Infants being of the Church It is not therefore not a company of professors of the faith since Infants are fideles as they are rationalls as some say scil actu primo non secundo yea they confesse and avouch the Lord in their parents avouching of him as they did of old Deut. 26. 16 17 18. and 29. 9 10 11 12 13 14. they promised to stand to those conditions in their parents promise made with respect to them Object But if they are of the Church and in the covenant and have right to the Seale then to both as well as to one to the Lords Supper as well as Baptisme Answ We do not say they are compleat members of the Church but incompleat as Ames speaketh to this purpose in his Medullâ having interest in the Church and covenant wee say they have right to the initiatory Seale but not therefore to all memberly priviledges of voting in Church censures elections admonitions c. even growne persons that are with us as transient members by communion with other Churches yet are not reckoned as in full Church communion with us in all Churches priviledges as in chusing officers censuring offenders c. Nor will Mr. B. his paralleling of Baptisme and the Lords Supper prove that if to bee admitted by Church interest unto the one then also unto the other for suppose one and the same thing bee sealed yet not by one and the same way the former onely being the initiatory seale of covenant and Church interest not the latter nor is it true that the same preparations is required to the former as to the latter since no where spoken so exclusively of persons to bee baptized as to come to the Lords Supper Let a man examine himself and so no otherwise let him eate nor doth it follow that because there is but one excommunication there is but one communion excommunication being properly of persons in full communion of all Church priviledges in this or that Church where the offence is committed For to instance in no other case but in that of a brother in another Church which is in Church communion in Mr. B's Church by vertue of communion of Churches yet not in compleat membership full communion of all Church priviledges there he offendeth will Mr. Blackwood now put him out of Church communion with his Church by actuall censure from his Church I suppose not in that the partie hath not personally submitted yet to the Churches power but they will withdraw communion rather this then is a different way of discommunicating and by Mr. B's grounds ergo argueth a different communion and so not the same which was that hee assayed to prove nor doe his proofes evince but that others were baptized then did partake of the Lords Supper Object Before wee passe further let mee remove another objection which I meet with scil that if wee make Infants members of a visible Church which doe nothing from whence to denominate the same but are meerely passive It will follow that there may bee a visible Church
compleat in the substantiall and most materiall parts or branches of it had the one a covenant and Church blessing and heritage as to them so to their children so are these compleat that way too if the ratification thereof by a solemne covenant and Church initiatory seale bee the great thing they have to boast of these are compleat in Christ in that respect too Christ hath not left his Churches and the members of them without such covenant priviledges nor without a solemne way of initiatory sealing thereto and ratifying thereof whether as Churches or as members of it in particular or as such members who have children to partake thereof with them doe the false Apostles then urge against them their incompleatnesse without circumcision It 's answered in the generall v. 10. they are compleat in Christ how as fulfilling the types which were in any Jewish ceremonies onely no verily not onely so albeit firstly and principally so for Christ nailed them on his crosse and tooke them away as such by his death And what need then any Church ordinances at all wee have all in Christ might some say as 1 Cor. 1. I am for Christ I care not for Paul nor Apollos nor Cephas nor for their dispensation of the word or seale of the covenant I have enough in Christ such a spawne of our seekers there was in those times v. 12. Yea but the Lord Jesus in wisedome and faithfulfulnesse will have his Church and people to bee graced and perfect as of old they were in substantialls of the same Church ordinances and the like The beautie of the Church was perfect through that Church comelinesse which God did in this respect put upon them Ezek. 16. 14. not a comelinesse of outward possessions in a temporall land in temporall jurisdictions kingdomes cities what had the Church quà Church and as in covenant with God as his covenant Spouse to doe with them nay the heathen might vye with them for as good land as large possessions territories riches honours dominions c. yea but not for Church ordinances hee dealt not so with any nation besides Psal 147. 19 20. Christ had as mediator and as a Priest compleated all ceremonious types yea but as Prophet hee will have it held forth and cleared by that dispensation of the Gospel and as King of the Church hee will have all also exhibited in such a way and by such evangelicall meanes 2 Tim. 1. 10. the Word and the Seales they are parts of the Gospel in the dispensation of them and by them all is brought to light yea by them as by pipes is Christs fulnesse conveyed as head of his visible body the Church outwardly as it is by his spirit to his elect inwardly Zach. 4. 11 12 13 14. Col. 2. 19. hence the Church hath such officers given it whose proper work it is to exhibit and communicate such things as tend to make them every way compleat Ephe. 4. 11 12 13. wee are compleat in Christ as the signatum but yet in baptisme too as the signe Yea but regeneration and sanctification both in respect of mortifying and quickning grace c. signified by circumcision is conferred on us by Christ And so it was of old in him in whom Ezek. 36. 25 26 27. and Deut. 30. 6. was yea and amen 2 Cor. 1. 20. and by his Spirit as hee held all forth then in the ministry of the Prophets of old 1 Pet. 3. 18 19 20. so hee exhibited the same to his elect among them yet then hee had covenant and Church Symbols to confirme the same and instrumentally to convey the same and so now Ephes 5. 25 26. As by the word of covenant as the principall instrument and the Spirit maketh baptisme it selfe to become efficacious so by washing too hee sanctifyeth his Church both as that whereby hee ratifyeth it so to their faith that they have the more strength of hold and influence for that end and as that which he blesseth as one ordinary meane also in respect of the word of promise to which baptismall washing is annexed as the Seale Sanctifying and purging is the signatum and end washing with water through the word is the ordinary Seale and meane whence here in Col. 2. 10. when hee had laid downe that thesis he declareth it by two instances partly in that wee are circumcised by the circumcision of Christ which is the fulfilling of the type v. 11. partly by applying the benefits of the circumcision of Christ to them and theirs by the like or an equall ordinance to that of circumcision which the Jewes injoyed to wit of baptisme else were not the Church and Saints now as compleat as those of old which as they had virtually all fulfilled in Christ to their faith Act. 15. 11. and 26. 6 7. Heb. 13. 8. Revel 13. 8. Heb. 12. 1 2 3. So had they withall sealing ordinances applying the spirituall circumcision of Christ to them and theirs And so Aretius which maketh Christ the perfect organon of our salvation without any other equall externall cause joyned with him in that respect it was by him alone that all was fulfilled Col. 1. 19 20. and by himselfe he did that worke Heb. 1. 3. yet in point of externall application hee denieth not any thing wee say for in the same place in his notes upon Colos 2. within foure or five lines hee addeth it as an observeable thing from the place that baptisme comes in the stead of circumcision as is evident in that the Apostle calleth it the circumcision of Christ scil in a Sacramentall way under the name of the signe in whose stead baptisme is set comprehending the spirituall thing signified by a metonymy as the covenant scil the Sacramentall signe of it Gen. 17. 11. 13. Act. 7. 8. the testament scil the visible seale of it 1 Cor. 11. 25. So his body and blood ibid. the Sacramentall communion of it 1 Cor. 10. 16 17. or communion of it in a Sacramentall sense So that the Apostles answer is full to prove the uselesnesse of circumcision which the false Apostles would have intruded upon them as necessary to the Gentile Churches Gal. 1. 6 7 8 9. and 4. 21. and 5. 11. Acts 15. 24 24. 25. It was a generall false doctrine troubling all the Gentile Churches ibid. but it 's now uselesse in respect of the maine thing signified Christ to come who hath fulfilled it as ceremonious and in respect of the externall signe and meane of application of Christ scil circumcision supplied by baptisme whence Gentile Philippians as well as Paul a Jew are of the circumcision Phil. 3. 3. Abraham Isaac and Jacob were inwardly circumcised so are they at least ecclesiastically judged to bee they were externally circumcised so are they in their baptisme ergo now circumcision is wholly uselesse Yea but what is this to Infants the Apostle directs his speech to growne ones Suppose he did yet this speech is of and reacheth to
must the faithfull bee sealed with Baptisme Faith must praecede and goe before Mr. Blackwood inlargeth the testimony in words to like purpose For Baptisme is the seale of faith faith the confession of the Deity For first hee scil that is made godly by grace of whom hee before spake must first beleeve and after bee sealed with baptisme and baptisme is the forgivenesse of the debt of prisoners the death of sinne the regeneraon of the soule How can this saith Mr. Backwood bee affirmed of Infants And againe I will roule in mire walke deceitfully sweare and lie and then when I am full with evills I will cease and receive baptisme which shewes saith Mr. B. at what time persons were wont to bee baptized not in their Infancy but when they were men if the faithfull if one that is made godly by grace bee to bee baptized hee must first professe his faith ergo none other is to bee baptized if brought to baptisme in any other way non sequitur yea but that doth plainly resist the tradition of wholesome baptisme For baptisme is the seale of faith c. saith Basil What doth resist the wholesome tradition of baptism Paedobaptisme without actuall faith expressed Basil intended it not but if one that is made godly by grace being changeable by nature sometimes by negligence fall from grace c. and so hold forth any other thing then is consonant to the doctrine of the Trinitie confessed in Baptisme This is resisting that tradition of Baptisme he doth not intend by tradition of Baptisme a rule that onely actuall confessors of the Trinitie must bee baptized Let him expound himselfe for in his fifth booke against Eunomius pag. 119. speaking of that forme of baptizing in the name of the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost hee calleth that the tradition scil touching baptisme if by his description hee intend the seale of faith scil the Covenant and doctrine of faith it hurts us not if of faith whereby wee beleeve it is an imperfect description of baptisme Baptisme saith hee is the forgivenesse of sinne c. if he meane it that it is so really to all that are baptized then Simon Magus and Ananias had not perished in their sinnes if hee speake it that it is so Sacramentally that may bee affirmed of Infants Baptisme As for Mr. B's exposition that Basils other speech I will lie and sweare and when full of evills c. then receive Baptisme sheweth the time when persons were wont to bee baptized I wonder at his collection doth hee thinke men should sinne to the full till they are even weary and then come to bee baptized is that a fit time when they have served the Devill to the utmost and been his old sworne trustees then to list themselves under Christs command Verily if Mr. B. thinke so Basil did not for hee rather reproveth persons for deferring their Baptisme as if a man might bemire himselfe in sinne as much as hee would and then at last one washing in baptisme would make all clean which hee thus sarcastically derideth Aretius had no such thought of Basils judgement in this case who yet had reason to know Basils mind better then Mr. B. or I. And hee in his Commentary on Luke 18. brings in Basil as using this argument amongst others Infantes capaces sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ergo etiam participes sunt ipsius Baptismi Basil then had other arguments for Paedobaptisme but this was one Infants are capable of salvation sealed in Baptisme therefore are they also partakers of Baptisme SECT IIII. EVsebius testimony lib. 6. hist eccl touching Origens and others being Catechists at Alexandria might have been spared Mr. B. in his Preface useth the same argument none denying but that Adult Pagans or the adult children of persons baptized were to bee so catechised thence the name of Catechumeni in Authors usually so taken But that hindred not but that children also were baptized in Origens time witnesse Origens words in his second Tom. Hom. 14. upon Luke little ones saith hee are baptized unto remission of sinnes c. The Authors stories to confirme the third fourth and fifth Proposition might have been also spared as not concluding what they intend that in those times no Infants were or were to bee baptized Some were adult Pagans which came in upon their owne right onely and were amongst the number of such Catechumeni whose baptisme were prevented by Martyrdome as the woman the Treatise mentioneth Proposition 3. and Evirenitana the Virgin Proposition 5. and sundry others mentioned by Cyprian de baptismo haeret quoted by Mr. B. in his Preface Some adult Pagans which after instruction actually came to receive baptisme of which the treatise mentions examples as Clodoveus king of France with his 3000. Souldiers also those learned men Virinus Marcellinus and Justinus in the time of Decius Quirinus the Roman Captaine under Trajan Hermingildus Anno 700. in the dayes of Tiberius the second Torpes in the dayes of Nero Nemissius in the time of Pope Stephen and of Valeriaâ—… and Gallienus Emperours and Basilica in Gallienus his time Mauro Honoratus Ragatianus Hilarius Victorinus Apronianus Tobia King of Persia Claudius the Roman and his wife in Pope Gayus his time they might have more instances too but these are more then enough unlesse pertinent proving what is not denied that adult Pagâ—ns were first catechised ere baptized But what then ergo none else but such baptized Non sequitur If we were now to deale with Indians in such sort wee would take the like course yet maintaine Pedobaptisme to bee an ordinance of Christ Cyprian which mentions that of the Catechumeni yet who more strong for Paedobaptisme then hee Austin who l. 8. Confessionum writeth of Victorinus his open confession before his baptisme yet who pleads more for Paedobaptisme then hee some were children of Christian parents which yet were not baptized till growne as Ierome Ambrose Austin Gregory Nazianzen added by Hen. Den Constantine the Emperour Theodosius the Emperour Luâ—gerus Pancratius Pontius Nazarius Tecla and Erasma Tusca a certaine brother mentioned in Eusebius And what of all this ergo children of inchurched Parents ought to stay unto adult yeers before they bee baptized because these did so Non sequitur A facto ad jus non valet consequentia Nay then they should stay till neere their death because Constantine Theodosius and others did so which to our Authors would bee a non sequitur Yea or at least wee must stay till 30. yeeres old because Jerom Austin and others did so or what is the sequell hereof Is it this ergo none other which came of Christian Parents were in those times baptized till grown up to full yeers of discretion I wholly deny it if the Authors had brought as many more instances unlesse they could say and prove it and so it was with all other children of Christian Parents their induction is not regular It is evident that the baptisme of
Inchurched parents at least one of them so he considereth them at least as Ecclesiasticall beleevers visibly in Covenant with God his people and holding forth faith in God and in his Covenant as beleeving brethren and sisters and not barely as lawfull man and wife as the context and proofes formerly urged declare But let us heare the reasons why meant of them as man and wife and not as beleevers in the case propounded Obj. 1. When the Infidell party is spoken of he is named and so is not the beleeving party but is barely mentioned under the common name of man or wife therefore so to bee considered in the case there spoken to An. This hath been formerly answered That as much is expressed in that case Vers 16. man and wife onely named but it were absurd to reason that therefore in that case there mentioned they are considered as man and wife not as beleeving nor in that concealing of the word beleeving in the mention of the beleeving partie is it said the wife or husband is sanctified in or to or by the unbeleeving partie as if they as such had an influence in this sanctifiednesse of the other spouse but still the phrase is rather thus the unbeleeving husband is sanctified in or to or by the wife and the unbeleeving wife by the husband evidently pointing out the wife or husband as the subject of that sanctifiednesse which in the other is an effect and applyed to them as the object Obj. 2. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath been sanctified in the preterperfect tense twise repeated therefore probably relating to their estate when both were unbeleevers Ans He repeateth the word twice as being to speake of the unbeleeving parties in some couples the husband in others the wife as sanctified in unto or by the other parties beleeving for as such the wife or husband to or by whom the Infidell partie is sanctified are considered as before proved now in the preter-perfect tense such were so sanctified not whilst both unbeleevers since not then an unbeleever sanctified to a wife beleeving but in reference to past time since their comming to the faith and to the Church-estate which was some good space of time as in which many had sundry children Obj. 3. The same word is used in 1 Tim. 4. 5. concerning the creatures being lawfull to use that therefore is the sense here Ans If that had meant onely lawfulnesse of use for the way there mentioned as in some other Scriptures some such use of the Greek word here used may be found yet it 's not therefore consequent that here as it is circumstantiated it must be so meant likewise But as for the place in Timothy the confirmation it yeelds to this text is rather for us then against us since intending a way of the creatures becomming not barely lawfull to use as it is to others which makes no improvement of the word of Covenant as well as command in prayer but of a way of a holy use to such as take that holy course for that end And even so it is here of which more anon As much is mentioned in another phrase to like purpose Tit. 1. 15. but the opposition to unbeleeving persons sheweth that albeit many things are lawfull to them yet is nothing pure as it is to the Saints namely in a preter-naturall way holy to their use Obj. 4. But this is most pertinent to the Apostles scope of encouraging to abide together Ans The Apostles scope is not to speake to a case of civill lawfulnesse of such abode then indeed it had been lawfull to have spoken in that sense but to a case of persons troubled in conscience about pollution even by a communion which out of doubt was amongst all and so to them civilly lawfull Heb. 13. 4. This therefore were but to beate the ayre to tell them for satisfaction to their troubled conscience of a matter of which they never doubted and of which if never so well assured by what they knew now or before yet still their wound is not healed but might bleed and fester for all that in as much as many things lawfull in respect of civill use amongst men yet are not alwayes such things by the use whereof the Saints may not bee in conscience polluted as in the case of divorce of old tolerated Obj. 5. Hee speaketh of things not as contingent and possibly never likely to be but of things certaine in order to effects necessarily following and so of civill lawfulnesse of spouses a certaine effect of the ordinance of marriage Ans And so is the sanctifiednesse of a lawfull spouse as certaine a sequell in reference to the other making improvement of the word of Gods covenant as well as commandement by faith in prayer 1 Tim. 4. 4 5. Repl. Yea but it 's not so certaine a sequell that the holinesse of children should follow from that spirituall condition and consideration of the parent as it 's necessary it should if the Apostles reasoning hold good from the cause to the effect since then it must necessarily follow or else hee reasons impertinently nor will it reach the trouble of such which never had nor it may bee through age or other naturall inabilitie might never have children or how could their faith sanctifie their conjugall communion in reference to children Answ The Apostle reasons from cause to effect ex natura rei and not barely ex natura eventus rei It doth not follow that such a cause is not in its nature a cause of such an effect or that one may not pertinently reason from the cause to the effect because that sometimes a second cause may bee suspended in its full operation either by the first over-ruling cause or by secondary impediments But to come to the matter propounded We will suppose it meant of matrimony which as Gods ordinance is a certaine cause as of legitimacy of the husband to marriage use so of the children begotten in and by marriage fellowship This you will say will satisfie all sides But will it indeed Is it certaine all married people should have children Is it not a very contingent effect how can you reason from cause to effect rationally Are not many married persons past having of children by each other or naturally disabled from generation what satisfaction is it to such persons to tell them of an effect so unlikely and naturally so unpossible All will answer here yea but in the nature of the ordinance it is such a cause tending by Gods appointment to such an effect and ex hypothesi supposing the object to bee qualified with that effect of legitimacy scil children actually begotten by marriage fellowship then the effect is not contingent but alwayes followeth And all married persons may bee incouraged to their condition in that the ordinance hath not influence alone upon the spouses in reference to their marriage-fellowship but upon such children as God pleaseth to bestow upon
married persons for that both became lawfull and not unlawfull As much say I in this case That a faithfull man in covenant with God and his Saints hee by improvement of Gods word c. hath this certaine to him and for his incouragement whether hee stand in relation to a spouse onely and have yet no children yet hee hath a sanctified use of his spouse or if God make his spouse fruitfull hee hath a sanctified use of her yet further in a reference to any child by her to which hee stands in relation as a parent That as another effect of the covenant improved and of faith also therein hee hath this priviledge of a Federall and Ecclesiasticall condition of his child and this is a comfortable incouragement to all such persons that there is such an influence of the word of God improved by faith that as marriage-use is sanctified by it so children begotten in marriage are Ecclesiastically and Federally holy when the Apostle saith All things are pure to the pure Tit. 1. and every creature is sanctified by the word and prayer 1 Tim. 4. hee doth not thereby weaken or falsifie the ground-worke from cause to effect or weaken their comfort thence because it may bee said it is very contingent yea impossible that one beleever should have all things or creatures c. but it sufficeth ex hypothesi what ever hee hath more or lesse its pure to him And if hee have any thing more which he had not that then it becomes actually pure to him so in this case Therefore the Apostle doth not reason thus else you should have no children but supposing you have children it would follow they were else uncleane but now they are holy Obj. 6. But hee speakes of an holinesse incident to an unbeleever remaining an unbeleever and therefore of a civill holinesse Ans When the Apostle saith every thing is sanctified by the word c. 1 Tim. 4. and Tit. 1. 15. All things are pure to the pure will any say that hee speakes of a puritie meerly civill and naturall in reference unto the pure say an Indian servant yea say a beast to whom this puritie is attributed remaine Heathen or irrationall in themselves and are civilly pure onely to the unbeleeving yet they are in a more peculiar and spirituall respect said to bee pure to the pure else why is there put such a distinction between them therein Tit. 1. 15 It is in a peculiar way and sense that the creatures 1 Tim. 4. and the Infidell spouse 1 Cor. 7. are sanctified to the faithfull Obj. 7. Yea but he speakes of an unbeleever as a joynt cause of the childrens holinesse therefore that is but civill holinesse or legitimacy Ans Hee is a joynt cause of the child properly but of the child thus priviledged hee is not any proper cause as an unbeleever but as an unbeleever sanctified to his beleeving spouse 3. I. S. hath some further expression tending to the same end that the children are holy to use as are other creatures to the Saints and concludeth that the holinesse of the parent and child is the same in nature scil the holinesse of the creature in a naturall not in any spirituall respect That is they are made lawfull to use as before he spake when he shewed in what sense the husband was sanctified scil made lawfull to use or as others say as C. B. doth That children in this Text are not holy with any holinesse distinct from Idolaters as appeareth in the repetition of the word sanctified and that holinesse hee afterwards saith it is civill holinesse Ans Albeit this hath been in substance objected before and answered yet let me give a distinct answer to it 1. Then I deny that the same word used touching the parents is repeated in mention of the children if wee speake Grammatically Yea but they are of the same roote one the verbe the other the noune And what then is there no difference in the use of the words non sequitur Aquinas is right in that touching the meaning of words saith hee non tam attendendum est à quo quam ad quid Wee must not so much heed the roote whence they are derived as the use to which in common speeches they are applied Sanctified in or to a person is one thing and holy is another Afflictions persecutions yea the falls of the Saints are sanctified to them but they are not holy It 's Pauls wont when intending that use of the word sanctified either expresly or implicitly to mention to whose use the person or thing is sanctified As here twice in this verse ◠sanctified to the husband and to the wife so Tit. 1. 15. To the pure all things are pure and 1 Tim. 4. 4 5. mentioning prayer he noteth out Gods suppliants c. to whom the cretures are sanctified But here is no mention to whose use the children are holy yea in that holy for civill use they are holy to the infidel parent as well as to the beleever he may make a lawfull use of his child yet being unbeleeving the child is not sanctified to his use as Tit. 1. 15. sheweth 2. Suppose it of an holy or sanctified use of the children strictly taken as incommunicable to others then to Saints for use yet why rather your children holy then others then other Pagans children since to the members of Corinth the Pagan Cities children might be said holy for use and they might make a holy use of them many wayes in prayer c. Yea why not instancing as well as any other creature as holy thus as well as the children of the members of Corinth Church Obj. It was more suitable to instance in children being to prove that the Infidell parents were thus sanctified in their beleeving parents Ans Yea but if that bee the question it is not one particular instance like it would prove the same unlesse an induction of more particulars that the husband is thus sanctified for so are the children so are such and such things c. therefore so is the Infidell husband or wife to the beleeving party SECT V. HAving thus removed and cleared such mistakes in the expounding this Text we come now to what I conceive to take up the full meaning of what is said of these children of the body of the Corinthian-Church-members that they are holy Some take it of Federall holinesse some of Ecclesiasticall and Church-holinesse I would exclude neither It being spoken of the children of parents in such sort in the Covenant of Grace as it is invested with Church-Covenant also explicit or implicite and in the same respect the children are Federally holy as the Covenant of Grace is cloathed with church-Church-Covenant in a Politicall visible Church-way And thus I conceive of the Apostles inference and argument else your children were uncleane but now they are holy Scilicet That unlesse your Interest in the Covenant of Grace which you hold forth and your faith
therein which you in a Church-way professe have so much influence upon your yokefellowes as to sanctifie them in and to your conjugall use But that there be invaliditie and privation of influence thereof in that your conjugall relation then must you be as well to seeke of any validitie thereof in another relation also scil in your parentall relation to your children even there also shall the covenant and faith have no influence unto such an effect of holinesse of your children If they produce not such an effect in the former by which yet the Infidell partie have no personall priviledge how will they produce the later by which children have according to you an unquestioned personall priviledge that they are holy hee that will question or cast off the force of such instruments influences in one thing hee by the same distemper will cast the same off in another Yea if it be groundedly and really for that the Covenant of Grace which beleevers lay hold of together with their faith therein have no efficacy in one condition or relation it is as well true in another only reserving the diversitie of influences as diversly elicited or expressed If they are not effectuall to produce something peculiar to beleevers in a conjugall relation differing from all Pagan spouses they will neither produce any thing peculiar to them in a parentall relation to their children But as your spouses shall bee to you as all other pagan spouses in common to each other meerely lawfull to use so your children with and to you shall be in your parentall relation but as pagan children are uncleane or profane which to all were absurd But now rather they are holy namely Federally and not as other Pagans children profane Now when I mention in this exposition the Covenant as in part having some influence in both relations as well as faith I doe it as not daring to sever faith from the word of faith which even giveth strength to faith it selfe And besides God having made a Covenant with Abraham and with his spirituall seed in their Generations as well as with the Jewes And that in such sort also as with respect to Church estate and as invested with church-Church-Covenant hence it is that the meere Infidelitie of a Pagan spouse abiding Pagan when the other comes to the faith shall not hinder the course and force of Gods Covenant to In-Churched beleevers seed witnesse the example both of the son of Moses Exod. 4. 24. c. and of Eunice Act. 16. 1 2 3. even many personall sinnes of the Saints hinder it not much lesse doe other personall sinnes evacuate the same Hence so long as this Covenant-Interest holdeth in force that either it be not rejected by the parents as it was by those Jewes Rom. 11. 20. or that they be not justly for covenant breaches dispoyled of Church benefit by it by some Church-censure so long the covenant is Ecclesiastically of force to the childrens federall Church-estate So in the case of those Idolatrous Church-members being not discovenanted and discharged by Gods hand or by Ecclesiasticall authoritie their children were federall and Church-seed the Churches children borne by her unto God Ezek. 16. 8. 20 21 23. compared That holy Covenant produceth that respect of holy persons Dan. 8. 24. compared with 11. 28. 30. 32. Hence the Covenant and Church-estate of Covenant and In-churched parents is firstly the parents priviledge and so to bee considered Hence also I conclude then that the little ones of visible beleeving and In-churched parents such as these mentioned in the Text were 1 Cor. 1. 1 2. with 1. and 14. they are Federally and Ecclesiastically holy In this sense the word holy is frequently used yea of many persons which were neither inherently holy nor imputatively holy in a strict sense no nor so much outwardly holy in point of lively expressions of personall holinesse yet are called holy scil Ecclesiastically and in externall respect to the Covenant and that not a Covenant of workes for that calleth no sinners holy nor by any meere ceremoniall holinesse but by vertue of Abrahams Covenant Gen. 17. 7. with Ezra 9. 2. They are called the holy seed and the same phrase in the same Covenant and Church respect is in Scripture frequently used with respect to such Infants the holy people destroyed by Antiochus Dan. 8. 24. were the Jewish children as well as growne persons The children were a part and a speciall part of that chosen beloved and people redeemed from Egypt which were called holy Hence both Deut. 14. 2. and 26. 18 19. and 28. 2. 9. speaking of the whole people as holy it is in the phrases thou thee loved and established Thee that thou mayst bee an holy people c. Adoption belongeth to the little ones as did the promises as well as to the rest of Pauls kindred Rom. 9. 4. They were children of the Church and borne to God as husband to the Covenant Church Ezek. 16. 8. 20 21. 23. compared with Jer. 2. 2. 3. 1. and Esa 54. 4 5. nor was this as I intimated a ceremoniall matter no more then either Abrahams Covenant was with some which oppose us confesse did belong in speciall sort to the Jewes and that Covenant was the very Covenant of Grace and therefore that did by this grant in speciall wise belong to them nor was it more ceremoniall then was that Deut. 30. 6. 11 12 13 14. which the Apostle maketh the very doctrine of faith which they preached as by comparing that with Rom. 10. 6 7 8. wee shall God willing declare This was not as the ceremonies against them but for the good of them and theirs and avowed by the Apostles after Christs ascension Act. 2. 38 39. of which afterwards And as 1 Pet. 2. 9. which Interpreters agree relateth to Exod. 19. 6. spoken of them not as an invisible Church but visible such as had officers over them which the invisible Church as such hath not For supposing a company with Church-officers they are now not an invisible but visible Câ—…us see 1 Pet. 5. 1 2 3. and 4. 10 11. hee calleth them elected such they were to the judgement of charitie and in respect of visibilitie so that visible Church of Babylon hee calleth it elected 1 Pet. 5. 13. yet were there in that visible Church as in others some tares and vessels of dishonour Some things mentioned in Peter of their obedience exercise of faith c. are not actually appliable to Infants yet that hinders not but that Infants are intended in that Inchurched part of the 10. Tribes as Calvin and Ames thinke in reference to James 1. 1. and Hos 1. 10. or in that In-churched part of the Gentiles as Oecumenius Aretius c. thinke since in Exod. 19. 6. to which this place is to bee referred this condition of that Covenant-priviledge scil Actually and personally to keepe Gods Covenant and to obey his voyce indeed Exod. 19. 5. was applyable onely to the
growne part yet the Infant part were in that account of an holy people c. and as much may bee conceived of 1 Pet. 2. 9. SECT VI. AGainst what is usually brought from 1 Cor. 7. 14. That is objected that children of parents not sanctified by faith in their matrimoniall fellowship as Pharez and Zarah of Judah and Thamar Jepthah of Gilead and many others were within the Covenant both of saving grace and Church-priviledge Therefore faith sanctifying of the use of the marriage bed is not such a cause of sanctifying of the children Federally and Ecclesiastically so as that unlesse that bee the children are uncleane in that respect Ans This objection may seeme to make a faire flourish against such as give the Apostles meaning as onely such But mee it hurts not who make the maine spring of the holinesse of the children not to be the sanctifying of the unbeleeving yoke-fellow to the beleeving but the grace of the Covenant to the beleever and his seed even the sanctification of the beleeving yoke-fellow springeth from the grace of the Covenant sanctifying beleevers seed by vertue whereof the infidelitie of the yoke-fellow becomes no overpowering let thereunto and so in part by vertue of that Covenant as well as faith in it such a yoke-fellow is sanctified so farre forth nor is the Apostles influence from the cause to the effect of that communion but rather from a like effect of the Covenant and faith in another relation of a beleever as a parent to children unto that in that relation of an yoke-fellow that if the influence of the Covenant and faith bee wholly denyed in the one it may well bee wholly denyed in the other and that hee makes account was an absurditie in the sight of all Concerning the assertion that Bastards were Interested in the Covenant of saving grace I will not now dispute it but reason ex suppositis That Covenant interest of those bastard-Infants it was not from the parents faith sanctifying of that communion Whence was it It could not be from any actuall faith of the babes they had it not it was surely from the force of Abrahams Covenant at least as invested with Church-Covenant from which the parents being not cut off by Gods hand nor cast out by the Churches power their Covenant relation still stood so far in force that is they were interessed externally therein and so their seed with them and thus in foro Ecclesiae the force of the Covenant took off even that impediment according to that position of the objectors and how much more doth the same force of the Covenant take off any impediment of a Pagan parents infidelitie in the Texts case of lawfull conjugall followship so that such children of a Gentile Corinthian Church-members have an interest at least externall in the saving Covenant of Grace and Church-priviledge Obj. Whether the parents beleeve or not the children may bee in the Covenant and regenerate therefore that 's no cause thereof Ans Wee speake not of the inherent holinesse of the child as regenerate that is immediatly from God but of holinesse Federall and Ecclesiasticall which may bee applyable to persons unregenerate as Psal 50. 5. 16. 17. Of which more afterwards The parents visibly beleeving and Inchurched are instrumentall causes of that holinesse of their children yea whether beleevers in veritie or onely visibilitie It sufficeth thereunto nor are little ones thus in Covenant with God and his Church without either the visibilitie of faith in the parents past or present personall holinesse consisteth not with living in knowne sinnes but Federall holinesse may Ezek. 16. Obj. The Text is a reason of the question which was not about Federall holinesse but living together Ans The former part of the Text is a reason of that and none pleades for the Infidell spouses Federall holinesse but the latter part is a confirmation of that reason from another ground And Mr. B. knoweth in proofe of conclusions we take divers mediums Obj. Yea but if the child bee Federally holy then the Infidell wife is holy with covenant sanctification Ans It followeth not The word sanctified in and to another and being holy differ and signifie different things as before said Obj. If Federally holy then Abrahams seed and then they have faith Gal. 3. Ans Wee shall in due place I hope prove that they are Abrahams seed without actuall personall faith of their owne and so as Abrahams seed federally holy Obj. The Apostle speakes of an outward holinesse common to reprobates also Heb. 9. 15. and not of holinesse knowne to the Church for which persons ought to bee baptized and it 's either inward holinesse which the Church deales not with or outward of which Baptisme is not a signe Ans Outward holinesse scil that which is visible to the Church is seal'd in Baptisme The Church deales not with inward holinesse therefore with outward unlesse there is an holinesse which is neither invisible nor visible Hebr. 9. is of Ceremoniall holinesse This of Federall and Church-holinesse knowne to the Church and holinesse visible or knowne to the Church is common to Reprobates unlesse any will say the Churches judgement erres not and confound visibilitie and infallibilitie CHAP. II. Sect. I. Touching the Explication of Act. 1. 38 39. ANother Scripture confirming the Doctrine of Federall holinesse of children of In-churched parents as approved and held forth by the Apostles is that Act. 2. 38 39 where Peter directing his speech chiefly to the Jewes vers 22. and 36. saith the promise is to you and to your children not was to you c. as intending any legall blessing but a promise then in force after Christs ascension to effect some chiefe promised blessing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used to signifie the free promise or Covenant of Grace to which they had visible right SECT II. THe promise here I. S. conceiveth to bee meant onely of the Messiah which was the promise to be sent and by children to be meant allegoricall children which others inlarging expresse these two wayes 1. That the promise made unto Abraham was then fulfilled Act. 2. in sending Christ to them and to their children and to all that are afarre off namely those of the dispersion as many as the Lord our God shall call that they may bee turned from their iniquitie and bee baptized into his name for the remission of their sinnes Secondly supposing the promise to bee of a saving grace of Christ sent of the outward ordinance of baptisme of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost c. It is none of these wayes true but with that limitation scil If they repent For neither God promised saving grace nor outward ordinances nor extraordinary gifts nor sent Christ to them their children or all that were afarre off without calling them and every of them Hen. Den speaketh to like purpose as this second particular hath first the promise is to you upon calling to them that are afarre of
9. 4. To whom belongs the adoption and the promises comprehending Gen. 17. 7. Jer. 31. 33 34. holdeth forth no bare offer thereof but at least an externall interest therein And C. B. who maketh the promise to bee the offer of it to them their children and those afar off as many as the Lord shall call will not easily reconcile himselfe to others of his mind denying that the Scripture hath to doe with children that way in that they understand not And how then is the offer of the promise at present the promise is to your children unto those children many of which were but Infants Besides those afarre off from them as were the Gentiles how was the promise to them then in the offer thereof when as yet it was not offered to them untill afterwards that the Jews came to reject the same Act. 13. 46 47. unlesse in respect of some few sprinklings and first fruits which yet was after this also Act. 8. 10. Or if he doe stretch it to the future with others scil that it is to them upon that limitation that they be called namely effectually surely he will not say that the promise i. e. the meere offer thereof is to beleevers Now to come to that wherein A. R. and Hen. Den and others doe center scil That it was no otherwise to the Jewes then to those afar off and so and no otherwise to their children or as A. R. phraseth it it was equally to all three sorts scil when they beleeve then they are in the Covenant c. But why are all made equall herein Act. 3. 25 26. even as it is expounded by our opposites will give the Jewes the prioritie the Text is expresse and to you first c. all are not then equall therein The Gentiles come not in but by occasion of the Jewes casting out and then they considered as in Olive or Church-estate partake of no other Church fatnesse for substance then did their predecessors the Jewes Rom. 11. 12. 15. 17. no other kingdome for the nature of it and in the essentialls of the externall right and administration of the royall Covenant to the Gentile successor then was to the Jewish predecessor Matth. 8. 11. 12. and 21. 43. In a sense then the Jewes are preferred and not made equall albeit in another respect of essentiall samenesse of Covenant priviledges wee have now proved and yeelded them to bee equall yet so as it maketh against A. R. and others more of which anon SEâ—T VI. BUt A. R. I suppose forgets himselfe when he maketh the sole condition of the promise to bee equally to Jew and Gentile scil beleeving meaning saving-beleeving For hee expounds this Text Act. 2. 38 39. to bee the promise mentioned in Joel 2. of powring out the extraordinary gifts of the spirit upon them Now doth A. R. suppose the same reason of pouring out such gifts on the Gentiles to bee called to the worlds end as was in those first times of planting the Gospell or would hee have all beleevers now expect such extraordinary gifts as having according to his exposition this place and promise for it I suppose not why then doth hee make them all equall And if effectuall calling bee the onely condition of obtaining these promised gifts those that cast out devills in Christs name c. might have had something more to say they plead Matth. 7. 31. But why doth any speake so exclusively when expresse mention is made of remission of sinnes Act. 2. 38. in confirmation also whereof the promise is partly occasioned vers 39. And for further discovery of this mistaken exposition let it bee considered 1 That the very confessed occasion of this here spoken to these heart-pierced Jewes was the guilt of hainous sinnes and of that cursed wish Matth. 27. 25. They were not troubled for want of such extraordinary gifts and to tell them of such gifts was both impertinent and unsatisfactory and it could minister but little comfort to sin-sick soules to promise them such gifts which they might have and yet die in their sinnes Matth. 7. 23. 2 As the maine thing propounded Act. 2. scil of remission of sinnes is not so much as named Joel 2. so neither is that in Joel set downe in this order I will poure out my spirit upon you and upon your children or thus you and your sonnes and daughters onely shall prophesie 3. The subjects instanced in Joel 2. are not reducible to the notions as here mentioned you and your children your sonnes and daughters might fall under the notion of you and your children but not your old men and servants It were absurd to explaine your children that is your old men as if they were these hearers children And thus much to that wherein A. R. is singular SECT VII AS for that wherein hee joyneth with the rest that the children are put in the same skale with those afar off c. The promise is to them all upon condition of effectuall calling True it is that the phrase The promise is to you and is to your children and is to those afarre off c. is the same but non sequitur that ergo it is to them all alike and in the same sense It is at present to them all that is evident by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the present tense but not alike to all The notion of the other as persons afarre off intimateth that these Jewes and their children were not all accounted afarre off too scil strangers from actuall externall interests in the Covenants of promise and commonwealth of Israel or the visible politicall Church Ephes 2. 11 12 13. but rather nigh in that sense and yet the promise is to them afar off intentionally and quoad deum even whilst afarre off and uncalled but to the other the Jewes and their children the promise is to them actually and quoad hominem To all Pauls kindred Infants or elder Jewes belonged the adoption and the promises indefinitely Rom. 9. 1 2 3 4. nor is it unusuall in Scripture to expresse covenant grace made over as in present to divers persons some whereof are future and to come others are in present existence and view Deut. 29. 14 15. neither with you doe I make this Covenant but with him which standeth here this day scil the Jew and Proselyte and the little ones present and with him that is not here this day scil with the persons unborne comming of you or of the Proselyte The phrase is alike to them which were actually existent in Church estate and humane being and to others which were not so with both doe I at present make my Covenant c. In the one it is verified actually and quoad homines in the other intentionally and quoad deum And this promise here mentioned Act. 2. 38 39. containing in it remission of sinnes and so the righteousnesse of faith on which faith pitcheth Rom. 4. 7 8. with 11. what was it other then
that which by circumcision was visibly sealed unto them and their children by Gods owne appointment Circumcision being in the Sacramentall nature of it a visible seale of the righteousnesse of faith it selfe and not meerely in a personall respect to Abraham as applyed by his faith to his justification And albeit beleevers came with Abraham to have the saving experience of it Rom. 4. 7 8. 11 12. yet to the rest Circumcision was a Covenant or a Sacramentall signe or seale of Gods Covenant Act. 7. Gen. 17. even of that his Covenant mentioned vers 7. I will bee a God to thee and thy seed which containeth that promise of justification Jer. 31. 33 34. Nor will it suffice to say that Covenant was a mixt Covenant It held forth temporall things indeed but by vertue of a Covenant of Grace Psal 111. 5. as doth the promise now 1 Tim. 4. 8. but it holds forth also spirituall things in the externall right and administration thereof as to all albeit in the internall operation as to some The promises are to them all Rom. 9. 4. sci in the former sense and yet ver 8. some onely are the children of the promise and the choyce seed in that generall Covenant scil in respect of the saving efficacy of the Covenant upon them vers 6. And the same distinction is now held out in such sort amongst persons in Church-estate unlesse any will say that there are none in the Covenant as well as in Christ the Vine John 15. 2. externally onely which I suppose will not bee affirmed And in this sense Peter speaking to these Jewes before they had actually repented or beleeved vers 38. with 40 41. saith the promise of remission of sinnes is or belongeth to you scil in the externall right and administration of it the Apostle calls upon them to repent and be baptized not because then the promise should be theirs but because the promise was theirs already in the sense mentioned repent and bee baptized for the promise is to you or belongs to you as Rom. 9. 4. hath it Both baptizing and repenting are joyned as duties unto which upon this Covenant ground they are called and not as conditions of their comming by externall right in the promise none will say of the one branch that bee baptized was a condition propounded by Peter to them of their comming to right in the promise since baptisme as a Covenant Seale presupposeth a Covenant right yet is the dutie of being baptized as well as of repenting alike urged on the same ground upon the Jewes Yea but Peter having exhorted them to repent c. would not have baptized them unlesse they had repented therefore it was not their Covenant-right which hee looked at Admit he would not yet that doth not make voyd either their Covenant or Church-right thereto because being adultmembers under offence and admonished thereof by Peter they might for their obstinacy against such an admonition notwithstanding Church or Covenant-right have been debarred that seale If one of our members be under offence and the Elders admonish him to repent thereof and hee doth not hee is debarred the seale of the Lords Supper and his children of Baptisme the while not that hee is not a Church-member and so hath Church-right as well as covenant-right thereto but in that this intervening obstinacy doth suspend his jus in re albeit otherwise considered hee had jus ad rem so in the case of these offensive members of that Jewish Church which was a true visible Church and not yet dischurched and divorced by the Lord which maketh way for answer to A. K. that if they were then in Covenant they were then in the Church of the Gospel if hee meane it of being internally in the Covenant it is not that we plead for it of being externally or quoad homines we have proved they were so in Covenant and Church estate also as being yet in the Olive and kingdome of God and not cast out untill their unbeleefe or totall and finall rejection of the Covenant as ratified in Jesus of Nazareth as that promised Messiah Rom. 11. 20. to which the Jewes had not as yet come and this Church was a Gospel Church visibly interested in the Covenant of Grace the subject of the Gospell and the same essentially with that Gospel or Christian Church unlesse whilst the Jewish Church stood any will say there was no Evangelicall visible Church in the world but a legall Church for there was no other visible Church then that of the Jewes that then something further was required by Peter of the Adult-Jewes to actuall participation of baptisme and it was not because their Church of which they were members was no true visible Evangelicall Church since it was Gods onely visible Church in the time of Christs incarnation of which hee lived and dyed a member and none will say hee was no member of any Evangelicall Church but of a legall nor was it because the seale of Baptisme was not administrable in or by or to that Church of the Jewes for it 's evident that the Commission of Baptisme was first given by God to John Baptist in reference to that Church of the Jewes as a seale of their membership therein the same God that told him who should Baptize with the holy Ghost hee sent him to Baptize John 1. 33. the Pharisees themselves could not deny Johns baptisme to bee from heavens authoritie Matth. 21. 25 26. and Baptisme being a Church-Ordinance to bee in ordinary dispensation or administred onely in and by a Church of Christ that baptisme was at that time the Jewish Church-Ordinance so farre forth there was no other floore wherein all sorts which John baptized whether they proved chaffy hypocrites or solid graine upright ones were in his and Christs time interessed Matth. 3. 11. 12. this was then the onely floore or visible Church of Christ for in the visible Church is no chaffe his floore hee shall purge his floore Into this Church fellowship also did Christs owne Disciples by that new way of initiation visibly seale persons which were the reformed part of that Jewish Church continuing still their relation to those officers of the Jewish Church and their fellowship in the Church-Ordinances then dispensed and not separating from the same Matth. 10. 6 7. and 16. 24. Iohn 10. 16. either gathering into distinct Churches or calling to them other ordinary Church-officers which yet were not actually given by Christ untill upon his ascension Ephes 4. 8. 11 12 c. but the reason rather was partly because as was said they were under such offence and partly because albeit their Church were a true Evangelicall Church yet it was not so pure and perfect but had many grosse mixtures both of meere ceremoniall administrations which were now to bee laid aside and of most palpably and openly corrupt and rotten members and partly because it was now requisite not onely to acknowledge the promised Messiah of Abrahams
the children also So of all collectively is that spoken not onely that God that day avouched them to bee his people Deut. 26. 18. both parents and children as also Deut. 30. 16. and 29. but thou hast avouched the Lord to bee thy God Vers 17. thou collective Israel yet it was acted but by the growne part in their own in their childrens stead Abrahams seed is either taken for the head and principall as was Christ and so rather intended Gen. 12. 3. and 22. 18. or for the head and body together even Christ mysticall so Gen. 22. 15. Thy seed shall possesse the gates of thine enemies and so Gal. 3. 16. Jew and Gentile but one seed with Christ the head of the Church Again Abrahams seed is either taken collectively or distributively collectively either his seed by propagation or proportion In the former sense the Jewes in their generations were the seed mentioned Gen. 17. 7. that is parents and children for they are seed in their generations seed by proportion were the Proselytes of old in their generations and visible inchurched beleevers in their generations scil parents and children together And both againe are considered specifically or individually specifically so some of that sort of parents and growne persons and some of that sort of children are as well internally and savingly in the covenant as externally albeit many individuall persons of both sorts are onely externally thus Deut. 29. 14. with him that is here and with him that is not here him not them as noting a collection yea a certaine species or sort of persons growne or babes and of babes borne or unborne according to a different respect of Gods making his covenant with them So in Gen. 17. to thy seed indefinitely God absolutely covenanting thus as Vers 7. with them in their species and sorts conditionally in respect of the individuall persons of each sort Or more briefly the seed of Abraham are either his choyce seed in speciall or his Church seed indefinitely wee consider herein the later and not so much the former SECT II. 1. COnclusion that Covenant Gen. 17. 7. was a Covenant of grace and the same in nature with that Covenant of grace now held forth to us Neither of the branches of this conclusion I think are denyed by the more judicious of our opposites albebeit both have been by some of the more vulgar sort making that covenant in Gen. 17. to bee a Covenant of workes c. that it was a Covenant of grace may appeare by the qualitie of the persons betwixt whom the covenant is made scil not God as a Creator men as innocent as in that covenant of works made with Adam but God as gratious justifying ungodly persons in the sense of the Law or such as cannot become legally godly perfect in themselves or workers covenanting with such like non-workers Rom. 4. 1 2 3 4 5. sâ—il God and Abraham yea God and Isaac yea God and the spirituall seed of Abraham to whom with him the promises indefinitely were made and so this also Gal. 3. 16. 2 By the matter promised on Gods part scil I will bee a God to thee and to thy seed holding forth more then any legall covenant as 1. to tender and give to them his ordinances according as they should bee capable of them as their peculiar priviledge by right of Covenant hence these two coupled Lev. 26. 11 12. Rev. 21. 3. I will bee a God to them I will set my tabernacle amongst them hence any without these or any externall right to them are according to men said to bee without God in the world Eph. 2. 11 12 13. 2 That hee will dwell amongst them and manifest his speciall presence with and in his Ordinances and providences among them hence being a God to any and Gods dwelling with them are coupled together Exod. 29. 45. Lev. 26. 11 12 Rev. 21. 3. 3 That hee will tender them deliverances as their federall right and bee really forward to give such deliverances from all sorts of miseries and from the causes of the same yea actually to worke such deliverances so far as is meet and sutable to their present conditions hence God his being a God to any and his removing sad mournfull thoughts from any are joyned Revel 21. 4. see Levit. 26. 41. 42. 45. Deliverances from common providences are common to all even Pagans but not such as spring from the vertue of the Covenant Zach. 9. 11. 4 so as to give to such an externall covenant right at least as to temporall blessings hence giving Canaan and his being a God to them joyned Gen. 17. 5. 7. 8. see Psal 111. 5. so to spirituall mercies as justification Jer. 31. 33. 51. Adoption 2 Cor. 6. 16. 18. also owning after death Exod. 3. 6. compared with Luke 20. 37 38. and glory after all hence as to the former so to this is joyned God his being a God to any Heb. 11. 6. All this is included as by vertue of Gods covenant offered to such as hee is a God to yea and as that which according to men and as men are in charitie to judge is with all the visible right of such Albeit the former two senses suffice to the visible administration of the covenant as their right in that God doth hold forth that hee is a God to such in covenant to whom hee giveth his ordinances and with whom hee vouchsafeth his presence therein as their externall covenant right 3. By the condition propounded and promised to adult Abraham with whom God was now in this solemne wise to enter into this Covenant not with him alone but with his scil the exercise of faith and Evangelicall uprightnesse or perfection Walke before mee and bee upright or perfect Vers 2. And I will make my Covenant between mee and thee Vers 4. as for mee behold my covenant is with thee c. this is my part of the covenant that was thine and Vers 7. I will establish my covenant betweene mee and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations c. Now that the same covenant is to us since Christs ascension appeares by the former in that it being the covenant of grace it is an everlasting covenant hence Gen. 17. 3. and Heb. 13. 20. hence too when God would expresse the matter of his Covenant since Christs incarnation hee useth and annexeth the old phrase and forme of promise I will be a God to such or such 2 Corin. 6. 18. Heb. 8. 10. Jer. 31. 1. spoken in reference to our times So when speaking of the Jewes and their children which hereafter are to come into Church estate actually he useth the same phrase Ezek. 37. 25. 27. compared Hence the same language in mentioning new Jerusalems condition priviledge I will be a God to them I will set my tabernacle among them Revel 21. 3. The Covenant then of the Gospell hath outward priviledges of Gods tabernacle annexed as well as Abrahams Covenant
of grace albeit invested with Church-covenant as appeares in that vers 60. that God for that his covenant sake considered as his will deale so gratiously with them after all their provocations as vers 62 63. Albeit hee did not thus properly for the sake of that investure of his covenant annexed scil Thy covenant the Churches covenant abstractively considered vers 61. see more Ezek. 36. from vers 17. to the Chapters end There is an externall being in the covenant of grace as there is an externall being in Christ John 15. 2. and partaking of Christ hence that of Heb. 13. 14. An externall belonging to Christ hence those Jewish refusers to beleeve in Christ yet called his owne John 1. 11. As there is an externall being called Matth. 22. 14. an externall being sanctified by the blood of the Covenant Heb. 10. 29. an externall being purged from sinne 2 Pet. 1. 9. an externall being purchased by Christ 2 Pet. 2. 1. an externall Saintship Deut. 33. 3. And therefore both are joyned being Saints and making a Covenant with God Psal 50. 5. and such as had Gods covenant made with them to glory of verse 16. yet what persons many of them were that Psalme doth declare There are those invisible Churches which are as Isaac was children of the promise Gal. 3. 28. children of the Gospel Church verse 31. and 26. this must bee verified in all the members of the Galatian Churches unto whom Paul wrote that Epistle Gal. 1. 2. for hee spake this of them all Jerusalem which is the mother of us all verse 26 27 28. compared They then were all such either effectually and savingly And then there were some particular visible Churches in which were no hypocrites Contrary to the very scope of the parable of the Tares and Net and Virgins and Wedding and varietie of vessels in the Church visible as an house of God 1 Tim. 3. 15. compared with 2 Tim. 2. 20. Yea then there should bee a possibilitie that such as are savingly interessed in the covenant of grace should end in the flesh Gal. 3. 3. suffer many things in vaine verse 4. have Apostolicall labour bestowed on them in vaine Gal. 4. 11. fall from grace and have no profit to salvation by Christ Gal. 5. 2. 4. for if there were not a possibilitie of some such members and cases to bee found in the Galatian Churches why doth the Apostle speake such things as there are mentioned but there is no possibilitie of fatall seducing the elect one savingly interested in the covenant and Church 2 Tim. 2. 16. 19 20. 1 John 2. 19. Matth. 24. 24. So then it must needs follow that according to God some were such indeed but externally and according to men all were children of the promise In which sense the promise of grace and glory may bee to one as ones legacy or portion externally and according to men of the saving good whereof it is possible one may fall short Heb. 4. 1. 4. When Antipaedobaptists admit any to the seales of Church and covenant fellowship is it not possible that some false brethren may creepe in unawares Jude 4. some wolves enter in and of their owne selves some turne seducers Act. 20. 29 30. can it be otherwise but that in visible Churches with us or them there will bee some unapproved ones to God 1 Cor. 11. 18 19. yet you admit them to the fellowship of covenant but without ground unlesse to them they are in covenant Will you ordinarily put seales to blankes and the seale must follow the covenant Gen. 17. 7. 9 10 11. 13. Acts 2. 38 39. 1 Cor. 11. 25. You will surely say they appeared to us to bee in the covenant of grace wee judged them to bee in it else wee had not admitted them So then according to your selves persons may bee externally and quoad homines in the Covenant of grace which are not savingly so I plead for no more wee are then thus farre agreed I yeeld no more advantage to Arminius nor undermine perseverance in grace nor the Polemicall doctrine of our choyse Divines more then you doe nor then Amesius Chamier Luther Calvin Beza and then your owne Tertullian as you count him doth who in his booke De Anima Chap. 21 22. urgeth that Text 1 Cor. 7. 14. for a peculiar cleannesse of beleevers children by priviledge of seed as the rest which I have named to whom Pareus Peter Martyr Bucer Melancton Mr. Philpot besides many others might bee added who pleading for Infants baptisme urge it from their interest in the Covenant As many of the ancients Cyprian Gregory Nazianzen Jerome Austine and others which plead for Paedobaptisme from the argument of circumcision must need implicitly if not expresly maintaine Infants Covenant estate to which the baptisme of the one as the circumcision of the other was ex natura rei a sacramentall signe Gen. 17. 11. And yet they held not that all such were infallibly saved and therefore must maintaine with mee an externall inbeing of some in covenant which possibly may never be saved But leaving humane authorities to returne to Scripture proofe of this third conclusion let our opposites consider of Gods breaking that gratious Covenant which hee had made with his people of old which was as his staffe of beautie Zach. 11 10 whether it can be verified of a legall covenant of workes and not rather of his covenant of grace in respect at least of the externall administration thereof amongst them as verse 9. and their externall right in that his covenant And whence else is there any supposall of some interested in that same covenant of God wherein the upright are faithfull stable and perminent but others are false treacherous and apostatising Psal 44. 17. Dan. 11. 30 31 32 33. If they were never in this holy covenant how came they to forsake it to deale falsely in it or was this Covenant wherein they together with those true beleevers were interested in communion other then the covenant of grace If it were not that from Sion was it that from mount Sinai which are the Apostles membra dividentia of the covenant Gal. 4. 24. If so then beleevers which as beleevers must necessarily be in the free covenant of life and grace yet also at the same time are under a contrary covenant of bondage and death and curse if this covenant in which they were with true beleevers were a covenant of grace as is evident then were hypocrites externally in it for internally and efficaciously they were not and whence else were they charged with breaking the everlasting covenant catâ—exochen if they were never in that bond And if in it it was but externally else had they never so fatally broken this covenant which is thus plainely described by the old periphrasis of Abrahams covenant Gen. 17. 7. 13. and whence also are some charged with not beleeving the faith or ingaged truth the covenant of God Rom. 7. 3. if it were not plighted with
them which notwithstanding tooke saving effect onely in the elect and in the beleeving Nor will any say that it was other then the covenant of grace which tooke such effect Rom. 9. 6. And what need that preoccupation of the Apostle when speaking before of the promise indefinitely as belonging even to those refuse Jews he saith not that the word of God tooke none effect scil in the persons to whom it belonged As if his meaning were thus to prevent all objection I yeeld that many to whom the word of Gods gratious covenant did externally belong never got any saving good by it as appeareth by their sad case at present verse 1 2 3. but yet this will not follow that Gods covenant had none effect at all namely in others which were savingly interested therein And the reason hee giveth is added for they are not all Israel which are of Israel as if hee would say they are indeed Israelites or of called covenant in-churched Israel verse 4. and 6. compared but they are not all elected Israel so then that the word of covenant taketh not savingly in such like persons it is neither in that they were not in that covenant externally for the promise belonged to them verse 4. nor that the word of Gods covenant is not per se efficacious since it doth take effect in as many as are the choyse seed principally intended in that Covenant but here rather is the secret ground of it They are not nor never were elected of God and such as in his secret counsell hee intended and ordained to extend eternall mercy to for had they been of that number they could never according to the objection included have so fallen as to reject and cast off so irrecoverably the revealed grace and mercy of Gods covenant as ratified in Christ Rom. 15. 8. Acts 4. 45 46 47 48. and Rom. 11. 20. and 9. 31 32 33. 1 Pet. 2. 7 8. compared This here said may serve for answer to Mr. B. his distinction of the Covenant of grace and an outward Covenant c. they are not two distinct covenants but the covenant of grace made with the elect in respect of their saving interest in that I will bee a God to them the same is made with others in respect both of visible interest and the visible administration of it nor is Gen. 17. 10. a proofe of an outward covenant distinct from the covenant of grace verse 7. but it is the covenant or conditionall part and dutie of the same covenant on their parts As God had before told Abraham what was his part of the covenant both more personally respecting Abraham verse 4 5 6. As for me or my part behold my Covenant is with thee and more parentally and radically in respect to him considered with his seed verse 7 8. So verse 9. hee telleth Abraham what is his and his seeds part of the covenant thou shalt keepe my covenant and thy seed c. If Abraham demand What is that his and his seeds part It is answered verse 10. c. From the same principle may sundry objections of I. S. against the truth in question bee answered as that there is but one way of entring into covenant scil by a true and lively faith The contrary whereof here appeares in that persons may bee said to bee in covenant with God in respect of externall right which never came to beleeve actually nor savingly Of like nature is that the promise being yea and amen in Christ 2 Cor. 1. 20. such as have not true faith in him as Infants c. have not they cannot bee interested in the covenant to which purpose also Gal. 3. 9. 27. 29. is brought now taking that of saving faith wee see others may bee called the children of God Ezek. 16. 20 21. 23. Rom. 9. 4. yea children of the promise Acts 3. 25. Gal. 4. 28. then such as doe attaine to saving faith as before was cleared Of the like nature is that that wee by our doctrine doe set up another way of salvation then by regeneration which is a meere non sequitur since unregenerate persons may bee in covenant with God on whom the word never taketh effect Rom. 9. 4. and 6. compared and no other is our doctrine we disclaime that conclusion that all that are externally in covenant attaine salvation nor doth that sequell of universall redemption follow from our doctrine of Federall holinesse since wee maintaine no other but that whatever such are quoad homines counted redeemed of the Lord and sometimes so stiled as that visible Church of Ephesus is said to bee purchased by the blood of Christ Acts 20. 28 c. yet in that and other visible Churches many prove otherwise even rent-members verse 29 30. so 2 Pet. 2. 1. If these had not been externally in Covenant they had not been in the Churches And albeit they were so yet the effect proved they were not internally of the number of redeemed ones Hitherto that Dilemma being reduced may receive answer That according to our doctrine beleevers children being in the covenant of grace that covenant is made with them either conditionally or absolutely if conditionally then either on condition of faith or workes Not of workes none will affirme that then of faith and that is nugatory to say this Covenant is to beleevers seed if beleevers to which branch wee answer the Covenant is theirs externally and quoad homines considered as invested with church-Church-covenant and in reference to Covenant Ordinances whereof they are capable as of old they were of Circumcision and are now of baptisme Thus it 's theirs at present in respect of the visible faith and interest of the parent or parents in the Covenant and for the future it 's theirs in the further grace of the Covenant upon condition of their beleeving if they live to yeeres of discretion If absolutely then God either keepes it and so all the seed of beleevers should bee saved which is false or hee doth not keepe what hee absolutely covenanted which to affirme were blasphemy Wee answer God may bee said absolutely to covenant with beleevers seed collectively and specifically considered and yet all the Individuall children not saved It is absolutely made and made good that that sort of persons shall bee and are saved by vertue of Gods Covenant for some of them are infallibly saved The Covenant is to the indefinite collective seed or children in respect of the internall saving interest else none of them dying Infants should bee saved Supposing they are the Israel of God a part of the elect seed yet the meanes of saving effect in and upon them is the word of Covenant Rom. 9. 6. It 's thorough the effectuall word and ingaged truth of God that that part of the Church are savingly purged Ephes 5. 25 26. The Covenant is to the individuall seede all and each of them in respect of externall interest and yet many of them not saved nor yet is
not many seeds being all one in Christ the head of the Church Verse 16. 28. compared like as Gen. 3. 15. the seed of Eve is Christ with his members in and with him So 1 Cor. 12. 12 13. the name of Christ is not ascribed to the head the Lord Jesus without his body the Church or to the Church of Jewes and Gentiles without him the head but collectively considered Quaeritur whether this in Gal. 3. and 1 Cor. 12. be spoken of the visible or invisible Church I answer to me it seemes that the places admit of the consideration of the Church as visible First in that the Apostle speaketh of all the Galatian Church-members as well as others as one in Christ Gal. 3. 28. Now were all those members elected will any say I suppose not yet all are one in Christ their head Secondly in that hee speakes of them all as Sacramentally one with Christ in baptisme Gal. 3. 27 28. compared so 1 Cor. 12. 12 13. Now albeit the spirit bee the cause of the internall and saving union with Christ in all which are united As Ecclesiastically all the Corinthian members were judged to bee yet indeed and in truth there were many of them not approved to God 1 Cor. 11. 18 19. compared But in both places the Apostle considering them as a baptized Caecus intimateth the consideration thereof as a visible and not as an invisible Church Baptisme being the seale committed to the visible Church by her officers to bee dispensed and not to the invisible Church which hath no Officers in it as such And baptisme being by the Church administred to persons as visible and not as invisible members of the Church Thirdly in that Christ hath head-like influences into the officers and members many whereof are not savingly joyned to him Fourthly in that it is the Church wherein hee hath set diversitie of Church-officers which are not set in the invisible but visible Church that Church being not invisible but visible where Church-officers are set and chosen and act From this consideration it followeth that albeit a mans owne personall faith uniteth him to Christ in respect of saving and invisible union yet the profession and confession of faith before and in a visible Church in reference to visible communion therewith this doth unite a person to Christ as head of the visible Church whether the party bee sincere or no. Hence also a Parent making profession of faith in the covenant of grace as invested with Church-covenant in reference to his children it doth unite them also to Christ as head of the visible Church so farre as to give right to solemne imitation of them into the fellowship of the Church in circumcision as of old or baptisme as now Parents acts in this case being in the face of the viâ—…ble Church their childrens acts as the places quoted Deut. 26. 17 18. and 29. 10 11 12 13 14 and 16 16 17 declared Whence contrariwise the parents neglect of ciâ—cumcision of a babe not capable of personall neglect was câ—unted the childs neglect the uncircumcised manchild whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised that soule shall bee cut off â—rom his people Hee hath broken my covenant And as in other cases the Lord Christ who required personall faith in growne ones to their cure yet in case of children is contented that their parents beleeve on their behalfe John 4. Marke 9. from verse 12. to 18. so Matth. 15. 22. to 29. so is it in the case of this externall Church benefit Albeit the just onely live an effectuall life of grace and attaine the vertue of the seale by their owne faith yet that hindreth not but a child may attaine as it were a Church-life and pertake of the visible interest and use of that initiating Church-seale by his parents covenant and Church faith or that faith which is such to the Church Nor yet doe wee hereby establish as some say a meriting faith no more then we make visibilitie of personall faith to merit personall right to baptisme c. But rather the parents professing to apply the covenant as made to him and his there doth result a parentall as well as a personall right Such weight there is in the covenant applyed as by vertue of the covenant of grace invested with church-Church-covenant thus professedly applyed there doth arise such a union as of the parent so of the child quoad homines unto Christ as head of the visible Church And looke as the covenant laid hold upon by the lively faith of gracious parents as made with respect to their children hath mighty force to effect very gratious things in the elect seed yea albeit dying young as sundry of those elect ones of Abrahams race did Rom. 9. 6. yea so as to make their outward washings to become effectuall in Christ to an inward clensing Ephes 5. 25 26. yea so as to bring in and bring home many of such covenant children Whence those revolters beloved for their covenant fathers sake as such Rom. 11. 28. and hence made as a ground of their returne verse 15 16. So is there such validitie in the covenant invested with Church-covenant albeit but unworthily oft-times held forth by the parents which doth beget upon the children an externall filiall relation unto God and to his spouse the visible Church whence that respect of children of God and his Church by vertue of that Espousall covenant Ezek. 16. 8. Even in the children of Idolatrous members verse 20 21. 23. Great is the force of this way of the covenant so clothed Albeit many unworthy members are girt up in it to hold them and theirs in externall Church-communion Jer. 13. 11. untill either that Church bee divorced from God or the particular members disfranchised by some Church censure of such a Church-covenant priviledge This consideration with the former mentioned in that first conclusion may also satisfie M. B. that our doctrine touching Infants covenant and Church-right to baptisme doth not necessarily produce either that absurdity of a state of grace and remission of sinnes before calling or of birth grace as J. I. hath it conveyed from parent to child understanding it of grace absolute and grace in them and not of grace upon them or relative grace And if of grace upon them yet if understanding what hee saith as meant of justification and saving adoption and not of externall adoption and covenant administration the former they convey not as neither doth a free Denison his personall gifts of wisedome c. the later hee may not as a man barely but with this reduplication considered as a parent in covenant and Church and spirituall citie estate for so by vertue of the covenant hee is in together with the professed parentall application and challenge of it as to him and his hee may convey such an externall right formerly mentioned Nor is that absurditie ours that wee make such visible members of Christs church before calling for if hee
which Rom. 11. 15 16. 28. speakes to as even our opposites will confesse Secondly according to Camerons grounds de Triplici faedere Thes 68. many things are in that subservient covenant which was 430. yeeres after the promise to Abraham Gen. 12 c. which are not applyable to that covenant Gen. 17. 7. as that that convinced of sinne and cleared divine justice but that covenant of grace tendred pardon c. And so did that covenant I will bee a God to thy seed as before that sheweth dutie but not grace to performe as doth the covenant of grace yea and as did that Gen. 17. 7. as before yea and as did that covenant made with all Israel After and besides that covenant in Horeb Deut. 29. 1 2. with 30. 6. that had the stipulation of Doe and live not so in the covenant of grace Gen. 17. no nor in that Deut. 30. 6. see Gen. 12. 3. with Gal. 3. 8. That was a carnall Symboll of the Jewish Church comparatively but that in Gen. 17. and Deut. 30. 6. more spirituall that shewed sinne and misery but this happinesse in remission of sinnes as well as misery without it Rom. 4. 6 7 8. 11. 13. of that was Moses of this was Christ Mediator Gal. 3. 16 17. Rom. 15. 8. Hence those of the first borne of that Hebrew Church of old Heb. 12. 23. priviledged in the blood and Mediator verse 14. That Covenant was imbondaging not so that in Gen. 17. 7. we now inheriting the same by faith in him not bondage in or by it nor sorrow but comfort see 2 Sam. 23. 4 5. that sheweth the way of worship but this grace to act it as before so Gen. 17. so Deut. 30. 6. that was against us yea but this was for us Gen. 17. 7. as is evident and so was for them whence the same subjects in that Deut. 30. 6. Even parents and children That held out Temporalls yea but this Eternalls Gen. 17. 7. with Heb. 11. 16. Matth. 22. 31. hence Abrahams bosome is heaven opposed to hell Luke 16. 22 23. Hence heavens glory is sitting downe with Abraham Isaac and Jacob in Gods kingdome Luke 13. 25. 16. 27. Yea all our opposites contend for the rigour and burdensomnesse of Sinai's covenant no such sore punishment of Jewish unbeleefe to bee rid of that nay they count it their glory at this day to retaine it and bee zealous for it but as was said they were discarded a former right and priviledge and cast into a contrary estate I enlarge here to cleare mistakes 11. The better part of the Jewes which abode in their covenant estate from which they were not broken off Rom. 11. 7. 17. 20. they changed not their estate in the substantialls of it but abode therein unbroken off Now I demand was this their priviledge estate in which they abode an estate of a covenant of workes or at best was it an estate of a subservient Sinai covenant as Cameron phraseth it the condition whereof was no other according to him then do and live or else die which if so was in effect as the covenant of workes strictly taken I suppose none will affirme that verily then what ever ceremoniall vailes were super-addded in Moses dayes yet that could not invalidate Abrahams covenant in which they with the rest of their fellow-members then cast out were interested in common albeit these had a more peculiar benefit thereby which the other fell short of by that unbeleefe 12. The Gospelled Gentiles stood in that very condition by faith and came into the very same kingdome estate for the nature or essentialls of it out of which the worser part of the Jewes were broken and cast they were gaffed in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place or roome of those broken branches as Beza hath it Rom. 11. 17. see vers 19 20. Matth. 8. 11 12. and 21. 43. but such Gentiles are not in such a preternaturall way Rom. 11. 24. brought under a bare covenant of workes or at most under Sinai covenant considered in the legall part of it but into a state of the covenant of grace and the externall right and priviledge thereof Therefore in the essentialls of that covenant estate the same Lastly God remembred the worst of them for good when in the worst estate by sinne and made it as I may say frequently a motive to himselfe to shew them this and that especiall favour even the respect to his covenant with them and with their fathers in their stead If this covenant made with them had beene as Adams or Sinai's covenant in the legall part of it a covenant of meere doing and living by it or else perishing c. that being minded by God would have called for justice against them in their just destruction and have urged God even for respect to his justice to have then cut off all such Idolatrous Apostates But verily in that it was a covenant prevayling for mercy and grace rather to bee freely extended to them albeit so unworthy what was it other then that free covenant of Gods grace which when they failed of their part of the covenant in all Ecclesiasticall respects Ezek. 16. 8. 59. 6 c. yet God will out of respect to his owne part of the covenant made with them shew them favour vers 60. 62 63. so Ezek. 36. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26. and 31 c. And marke what the phrase is speaking to that church-body of which Ezek. 16. 67. 8 9 c. he saith I will remember my covenant made with thee not with this or that particular Jew but with them all in an Ecclesiasticall way and in respect of externall right albeit some onely had the saving benefit thereof as being the select covenanters mainely intended So Esay 48. 1 2 3 4 c. God considers that people as Iron sinewed and refusing to heare c. Yet for his owne name or covenanted grace and truth and honours sake he saith hee will extend such and such patience and mercy to them verse 9 10 11. Against this are objected SECT 8. Objections against the Iewes covenant-state removed 1. Object They were the children of the flesh not of God and of his promise Rom. 9. 7 8. Answ If wee take children of God for such as were savingly regenerate and adopted or children of the promise for such as were of the elect seed in whom the promise tooke saving effect So it 's true onely of some of the Jewes John 1. 12 13. Rom. 9. 6 7 8. c. But if you take it of the Church-seed of the promise and such as were externally adopted of God and instated in the covenant of grace as invested also with Church-covenant so they were children even of that free covenant of blessing in Christ Acts 3. 25 26. and had the promises indefinitely as Deut. 30. 6. Jer. 31. 37. Gen. 17. 7 c. belonging to them Rom. 9. 4. and were children of God
essentially but one Besides it 's called a first and second testament scil in order of succession So the former is said to bee faulty comparatively not absolutely In a word in way and manner of dispensation that was different from the covenant now dispensed in respect of ceremony of administration not in the essentialls And this which hath been said may take off divers empty scruples which may make against Gods covenant of old with the Jewes as if not of any force to our purpose 4 Object It was not the same covenant made with them as with Abraham Isaac and Iacob Answ It was a covenant made for ever and the same with that unto Abraham and with that oath unto Isaac and it was that which God remembred for their good and so an Evangelicall covenant yea it was a soveraigne commanding word of grace and certaine Therefore said to bee commanded For which see Psal 105. 8 9 10. And of the phrase of commandment taken for the promise see Psal 119. 54. 66. 92 93. 96. and Psal 94. 19. and 133. 3. meaning of the Law of faith or of the promife Rom. 3. 27. which is mighty to effect notwithstanding other lets Rom. 3. 3. True you will say in respect of Canaan promised there was such a covenant with them Psal 105. 11. Answ That covenant was of another nature then meerely such else not lasting in such sort to 1000. generations verse 8. whereas Matthew noteth but 42. generations from Adam to Christ 5 Object It was a nationall covenant say some Ergo a covenant of workes Answ It followeth not ex natura rei for that Gospell covenant Gal. 3. 8. was of a nationall nature Gen. 12. 2 3. being a promise to Abraham to make a nation of him and not excluding a Church respect of that nation yet did not God make two contrary covenants of workes and grace with him nor if it had beene a covenant of workes which was made with that nation as it had not held them so long together by the strength of it Ier. 13. 11. so neither durst any have pleaded it in the revolted estate of that Church as hee did Ier. 14. 19 20 21. 6 Object It threatned and executed corporall punishments as well as rewards Answ And so doth the Gospel also Iohn 3. 18. 36. Marke 16. 15 16. 2 Thes 1. 8. Rev. 11. 3 4 5 6. Hebr. 2. 1 2 3. 1 Cor. 11. 29. 1 Tim. 4. 8 c. 7 Object That admitted of a fleshly seed and such as proved carnall this onely of a spirituall seed and such as beleeve Answ That as invested with Church covenant admitted none but a Church-seed and Church-members to the fellowship of the covenant externally dispensed And so much and no more is done if rightly done now Againe if the Author take fleshly seed for sâ—…h as came of Abraham Isaac and Iacob so in admitting all it must needs admit the elect seed of Abaham also unlesse any deny that there were any such of that Church Contrary to Rom. 9. 6 7 8 c. And so it did not admit onely of such as proved carnall but as well of beleevers also If he take it in an allegoricall sense as Gal. 4. so also it admitted of others then such And on the other side the covenant now as invested with Church-covenant and so most authoritatively administred it admitteth as of children which come of good parents so of carnall hypocrites yea of fleshly legalists which defy ordinances and rest in and trust unto them and to their Church and family and closet duties c. the Galatian Churches had such legalists Gal. 4. 21 22 23. Many are called into covenant fellowship which are not chosen Mat. 22. 13. 8 Object That was in the flesh this in the heart Answ Was that onely in the flesh was not the word of Covenant as well in their heart as Moses judging ecclesiastically avoweth of Israel Deut. 29. 10 11 c. with 30. 11 12 13 14. so Isa 51. 7. Gods covenant now is to write his Law in our hearts Heb. 8. but is not all that included in this I will bee your God whence all is closed up in that phrase ibid. or was not this first made to the Jewes after their returne from captivitie more expresly Ier. 31. as before more implicitely Gen. 17. Yea but God did not actually write such holy dispositions in them Suppose he did not that is the execution of the covenant as for the very berith or covenant it selfe it is the promise hereof dispense to them and this they had both Gen. 17. and Deut. 30. 6. To circumcise the heart to love God is to imprint gratious dispositions to promise the same to them is to covenant to imprint it and so he did covenant with them and theirs ibid. Besides is not Gods covenant now also Sacramentally on our bodies too and in many no further which are onely baptized with water but their soules filthy and chaffie Matth. 3. 11 12. which have barely the washing of the flesh not the heart Answer as some call it 1 Pet. 3. 21. 9 Object That was in their Generations Gen. 7. not so now Answ As that was to Abraham and Isaacs seed in their generations till they actually became obstinate perversely rejecting the covenant-grace and Christ so it is now Rom. 11. from 16. to 24. As In-churched Cain who was of Adams house-Church was then together with his and not till then rejected Gen. 4. 15 16. compared with Gen. 6. 1 2. where his posteritie are called daughters of men as contra-distinct from the children of God or of the Church Then also and not till then was Ishmael together with his rejected scil when hee mockt at both the head Christ and the body the Church in Isaac in whose race it was promised the covenant should bee confirmed and by them carried on see Gen. 17 18 19 20 21. compared with 21. 9 10 11 12. and Gal. 4. And then and not till then was Esau with his rejected Hebr. 12. 15 16 17. 10 Object That was a conditionall covenant this an absolute That had a commandement as the instrumentall meanes or cause of interest in the Covenant and that required onely a male of eight dayes old to interest them in the covenant of their fathers and for that end to bee circumcised c. but now not so Answ If the intent of the objectors be to exclude all conditions surely now the Gospell requireth faith and repentance and so it did then To externall interest personall faith was not required witnesse that Deut. 29. and 30. 6. But to effectuall interest it was in adultis Heb. 4. 2. But it 's false to say the commandement gave right to covenant-interest since covenant-right was first premised and declared to bee the ground of that commanded service of the initiatory seale Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10 11 c. Thou shalt therefore keepe my covenant Hee doth not say you must bee or are circumcised and
to purge away and mortifie heart sinnes and sheweth it was a very Gospel promise like that Heb. 8. 10 11 12. of writing the Law of grace in the heart now this was made to the seed or children of these Church-members assembled as Chap. 29. 14 15. here is not any evasion as is usuall in mentioning Abrahams seed to say hee meant their Allegoricall and their spirituall seede c. this people to whom this was made being not so spirituall themselves Nor was it some bare tender but it was in way of speciall Covenant and oath on Gods part as Deut. 29. 14 15. sheweth nay it was of a soveraigne nature to bring about what God in his secret counsell intended hence called a commandement Deut. 30. 11. like that Psal 105. 8. the covenant and the commanded word were one and lest any doubt should arise how this should bee ratified and made good Moses prophetically setteth out Christ as dead and risen in whom this covenant was virtually ratified vers 12 13. all which the Apostle further explaineth when to set forth the way of Gods free Covenant grace in Christ without workes Rom. 10. 6 7 8. calling it the righteousnesse of faith or Covenant of grace in Christ which justifying faith is to improve the righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise say not who shall c. where was this spoken but in Deut. 30. 11 12 13 14. That commandement or covenant was not farre off that any should say who c. but it was nigh them c. and that commandement which was not farre off vers 11. that any need speake as verse 12 13. who shall ascend c. was the same word which was nigh them in their mouth and heart vers 14. this the Apostle expounds to bee the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 10. 6. and word of faith verse 8. or covenant and promise of grace in Christ descending into the grave noting his humiliation ascending into heaven noting his exaltation verse 6 7. which faith was to beleeve and that very doctrine of faith was that which the Apostles preached as Paul saith this is the word of faith which wee preach this then albeit called in Deut. 30. a commandement yet was it a covenant and that not of workes nor a bare subservient covenant but the very Gospell covenant ratified in Christ the very object of faith and that which the Apostle preached now what this commandement or Covenant was that circumstance noteth Deut. 30. 11. this commandement or covenant which I have commanded this day for Moses had that day propounded it in a Church-way and as a mutuall covenant betwixt them and God as well as God and them the parents stipulating therein in behalfe of themselves and children and so in reference to them also a conditionall covenant made that day in the plaines of Moab Deut. 29. 1. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15. 29. and 30. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14. so that the places compared evidently prove 1. That the covenant interest of inchurched stipulating parents children is Gospel And secondly that the Apostles preached this doctrine Thirdly that beleevers are to eye the Covenant in such a latitude as to their children with them by faith Fourthly that the essentials of the Covenant of grace in the latitude of the extent thereof to covenant parents with their children held forth in the old Testament was delivered and held forth as valid to the faith of the Saints in the new and after Christs incarnation This second and fourth particular here mentioned might bee further confirmed both by rule in that it being proved to bee Gospel by the places now compared it must needs bee that the Apostles preached the same being injoyned to preach the Gospel Marke 16. unlesse they either disobeyed Christs charge or hid some part of Gods Evangelicall mind from his people contrary to Rom. 10. 15. 18. and Acts 20. 27. 2 In that also Peter being to call upon his hearers to repent and consequently to beleeve hee propounds the word of their faith in such a Latitude as with reference to their children Acts 2. 38 39. The like doctrine doth Paul hold forth to the Saints at Rome and inchurched beleevers there touching such children Rom. 5. 14 15. even touching the abounding of the graces of Christ to them And the like virtually also is held forth by him Rom. 11. 16 17 18 19. as elsewhere is proved and so 1 Cor. 7. 14. First then that which beleevers as such have doe and ought to beleeve as a branch of the covenant of grace that is Gospel but this is of that nature ergo The major needs no proofe the former Texts also clearing the same the minor de jure it 's evident they ought to beleeve the whole Covenant made with them as is evident faith must bee as large as it's object the Covenant is the word of faith A beleever in the exercise of faith should as well have respect to the whole covenant as in the exercise of the obedience of faith respect the whole word of commandement hee doth not else beleeve rightly which doth not desire and indeavour this this therefore being one branch of Gods Covenant to beleevers as beleeving and inchurched as these Scriptures compared shew they ought to beleeve this which respecteth their seed as well as that which respecting themselves if they beleeve aright God in making a covenant in a Church reference especially as was that with Abraham Gen. 17. 7. hee taketh in their seed or children as joynt covenanters Hence the phrase of seed in their generations taking in parents generating and children begotten as those in and by whom Churches are likely to bee continued whence God when to speake in reference to the Church seed as well as to the choyce elect seed of Isaccs line in which the visible and not meerly the invisible Church was to bee continued hee saith hee will establish his covenant with Isaac not with Ishmael Ishmael was Abrahams seed too and therefore externally in the covenant and therefore sealed but God knowing that Ishmael would reject this hee warneth Abraham of it a little before that it might not trouble him afterwards It is not to bee with him in his generations for that cause Gen. 17. 18. compared with Gen. 21. 9 10 11 12 13. but with Isaac in his generations God not opposing therein Isaac to his Church-seed but to Ishmael who by rejecting the covenant will and did come hee and his to bee cast out hence when God speaketh in reference to our times after Christs incarnation when a woman compast a man Jer. 31. 22. hee saith hee will bee a God not to the families in Judah or Israel meerly but to those throughout the earth It 's the old phrase in Abrahams covenant expounded and enlarged I will be a God to thee and to thy seed in their generations Hee saith not barely to thee and to thy seed in regeneration but in their generations Now
in that Abrahams seed were to bee gentile believers also in their generations in Jeremy it is I will bee a God to the families of all the earth scil where the Gospel shall take so farre place to bring on the parent or parents to him and to his Church not but that it may fall out that in a beleevers family some may come to hate their parents as Matth. 10. for Religion yet ordinarily it should bee and is otherwise and God speaketh of things as they ordinarily come to passe extraordinary cases breake not square here Yet even in that case too it followeth not but that the children were externally in covenant and Church estate when very children But apostatising when growne up they prove the desperatest enemies to the Gospel even to persecute their owne parents So it may bee the wife may remaine a Pagan and so an enemy But usually the Gospell when it commeth seasoneth the wife as well as the husband and so servants as well as masters Hence such frequent mention in holy story when speaking of persons which had families to whom the Apostles came that their families were Gospelled as well as themselves witnesse that of Cornelius Stephanus Crispus and the Jayler c. And even Anabaptists deny it not to bee verified in all the adult persons of the families mentioned usually then by their owne confession wives and servants were usually others at present at least then Pagans or persecuters which sufficeth to for answer Hen. Dens objection touching the desparitie of yokefellowes or masters and servants It was usually otherwise and God speakes of things as they usually prove extraordinary occurrents crosse not such a rule hence that testimony of the Angell to Cornelius Acts 11. Hee shall speake words unto thee whereby thou and all thy house shall bee saved verse 14 And so Pauls phrase runs in that notion Beleeve in the Lord Jesus and thou shall bee saved and thy house Acts 16. 31. so Christs testimony is to like purpose This day is salvation come to this house inasmuch as he also is become a son of Abraham where by the comming of salvation to the house hee doth not meane the bare comming of Christ who is called the salvation Luke 2. 30. to the materiall house of Zachaeus as if that were such a notable priviledge of Zacheus as a beleever since Christ went to many other houses then such as were the beleeving sons of Abraham Luke 14. 1. and 7. 36. 39. and yet no such singular note upon the same as here Nor by salvation come to his house is meant the comming of salvation to himselfe as if hee and his house were all one nor doe I know any parallel Scripture speaking in such language that when the scope and intent is to mention the comming of such or such a mercy to such a person that phrase is used to denote the same that such or such a mercy is come to his house What need such a circumlocution If so intended the word might more plainely have been set downe this day is salvation come to this Publican this person this man or the like inasmuch as hee also is become a sonne of Abraham And what though the Greeke word bee used in Acts 2. 45. and 4. 35. for secundum according as yet not for quatenus or in quantum forasmuch as the Texts and sense thereof are cleare that it noteth proportion of such administration not meerly the cause or reason thereof Or if it be supposed to imply the cause or reason thereof it 's evident it noteth the proportion also they gave to every one as or according as the needed scil proprortionably to their need It being regular as to give to the needy so to give them according to the measure of their present necessitie But how that sense will here bee fitly applicable I see not to say that salvation is come to his house or to him according as hee is a beleever but rather as our translaters render it it 's to be taken as a reason of the former salvation is come to this house forasmuch as he is a sonne of Abraham Yea but will it not then follow that one mans faith saveth others as well as himselfe No verily Paul when hee spake so to the Jaylor If thou beleevest thou shalt bee saved and thy house Acts 16. 31. hee speakes more likely to such a purpose as it may seeme yet verily hee entended not any such doctrine of others being actually saved onely by his faith but that hee imbracing the covenant of grace in Christ and by faith laying hold of the same his whole house even wife or servants and all as it is usuall shall fare the better and come in the Gospels way but if hee have children which are the continuers and upholders of the house in especiall there is a more direct Covenant-line and therefore ordinary meanes of salvation runs unto them by virtue of Abrahams Covenant and so if hee beleeve not barely in the Lord Jesus without reference to the promise but as held out in the promise of ratifying of the promise or covenant of grace in this sense his house Synecdochically shall be saved and brought within this covenant road and ordinary meane of salvation None ordinarily can be saved but in such a way It 's the word of covenant which must instrumentally bee effectuall thereto that is Gods order Rom. 9. 6. and Ephes 5. 25 26. and so in the ease of Zacheus whence that periphrasis of his being a beleever that hee was become a sonne of Abraham and so an heire of Abrahams covenant Gen. 17. 7. Nor is this sense of salvation for covenant meanes of salvation or the covenant and promise it selfe unusuall in Scripture The salvation which Christ and his Apostles preached and those Heb. 2. 3. neglected was not barely salvation it self but the promises holding the same forth for Acts 28. 28. the salvation to bee sent and heard by the gentiles was the promises and covenant and Gospell holding the same forth this was that mercy and riches and salvation also which came to the Gentiles as rejected by the Jewes Rom. 11. 11 12 17. 19 30. Verses compared So Esay 51. 6. 8. Gods salvation is his promise or covenant on which their salvation did depend Calvin in locum 2 Sam. 23. 5. David speaking of his house or posteritie which albeit it were not so orient then yet God had made a covenant with him scil in reference to his house ordered in all things and sure And this scil this covenant with mee and my house is all my salvation and all my desire albeit he maketh my house not to grow or flourish in such sort this covenant then was his salvation objective causaliter or Instrumentaliter Albeit a parents faith bee not a principall cause yet it may bee an occasionall meanes to stave off destruction from and to further the salvation of their children hence the faith of Moses parents preserved him
them and therefore pleaded there for that end vers 18 19. that covenant which God made in Bethel Gen. 35. 9. to 16. hee spake it not barely to but with them or covenanted it with them in Hoseahs time which were of the posteritie of Jacob Hos 12. 4. God found him in Bethel and there hee spake with us As much might be said of that 2 Sam. 23. 4 5. the covenant was made with David the father yet in reference to his house or children whence it was that his faith as a beleeving father of his family was the evidence of things not seene Hee beleeveth that whatever his house bee at present yet it shall excell in grace both of Gods feare and justice Vers 3. as in the glory of government c. nor was this other then a covenant of grace here mentioned since it had not else been to him as all his desire and salvation whence it was that in saddest times this covenant was pleaded by the Prophets in behalfe of Davids posteritie Psal 89. vers 38 39. 49. 50. see more vers 20. 28. and so on if the parents and the children both may thus act forth and must in the covenant so made it 's a signe parents and children were joyntly interested therein And so I come to instance as well in such as de facto have done so as to shew de jure they should doe it to let passe Davids example here the instance of our grandmother Eve is past exception her sonne Cain being discovenanted and discharged hee and his and Abel slaine shee beleeved the promise of God Gen. 3. 15. at first made to her and when infant Seth was borne shee beleeved that God had for his covenant sake lookt on her in that covenant babe and therefore as soone as borne she calls his name Seth for saith shee God hath appointed mee another seed in stead of Abel whom Cain slew Gen. 4. 25. shee spake not thus in reference to him as a meere naturall babe borne of her as a sinfull woman but as of a Covenant and Church seed therefore comparing him to Abel not to Cain and calls him by such a name as signified her faith touching the Covenant estate of this babe even whilst a very babe nor did shee faile in her faith therein as appeares by the sequell vers 26. whence the Church seed continued in his loynes externally at least albeit much degenerating as that distinction of sonnes of God and daughters of men doth shew Gen. 6. 1 2. And as Eve beleeved this way so did Lamech Gen. 5. 28 29. as soone as Noah was borne hee from saith in that promise of God Gen. 3. 15. * See Geneva Bible notes on the place gave the babe that name of Noah beleeved that that child should bee a root as it were to the Church albeit that corrupt world were to bee destroyed Another example of the Saints faith touching their childrens federall estate see in Psal 102. 25 26 27. with Heb. 1. 10 11 12. which referred unto Christ as in whom they pleaded and expected this touching their children And it 's evident that those Saints did expresse their faith in Christ touching their children and seeds being established before him nor did they exercise their faith touching the vanishing temporall good of their children barely vers 25 26. but in reference to induring mercies of Christ to them lasting when heaven and earth should dissolve Now did they take the rise of this their faith from possibilities of election or redemption without foothold from the covenant verily no they ought not to ground their faith on any thing but God his revealed will touching themselves or theirs Deut. 29. 29. the Covenant and promise is that which faith in its acts of beleeving doth build and rest upon and faith albeit it must goe as farre yet no further that way then the word of faith Rom. 10. 8. secrets of possibilities of election and redemption of the children would not might not have caused in them such a conclusive apprehension of faith but the revealed covenant and testament and will of Gods grace in Christ election and redemption though things which faith beleeveth yet not grounds in themselves considered without reference to the covenant revealed of any mans faith touching himselfe or others as being secrets It 's not the election of faith but the word of faith nor beleefe of election as such for as such it 's a secreâ— act of God hid within himselfe but the beleefe of the truth or revealed promise Another argument of the federall interest of beleevers Infants to bee Gospell and therefore of perpetuall validitie now as well as at any time may be in that it was held forth as Gospel in the beginning of the world and so will bee in the purer times of the Gospell towards the very end of the world and therefore it 's Gospell to us now The consequence is evident both from the everlastingnesse of the Gospell and covenant of grace of which this was and will bee made a branch which covenant of grace is Gospell Heb. 13. 20. Revel 14. 6. and from the essentiall samenesse and onenesse of the covenant of grace from the beginning of the world to the end for so farre forth as any thing partaketh of everlastingnesse it partaketh so farre of immutabilitie Now the covenant is not in nature the same if the covenant the confederate persons are not specifically the same the covenant in the nature of it supposing God as one partie and such or such a sort of persons as other parties betwixt whom that covenant is drawn and made if it were supposable that there were not the same God covenanting with man or not the same sorts of persons specifically accepted of by God into termes of covenant grace with him the covenant were not in nature the same Albeit it bee not shut up in families as of old in Adams Seths Enoshes Kenans Mahaleels Jareds Enochs Methuselahs Lamechs Noahs c. or in the posteritie of Abraham Isaac Jacob in respect of Church interest in and administration of it but inlarged to all the families of Gospeld persons yet if the persons admitted to covenant bee not specifically the same even that sort of inadult as well as adult persons whether male or female bond or free then is not the covenant in nature the same Now to prove the proposition in both its branches and first that it was held forth as Gospell that the species of the Infants of beleevers in Church-estate were taken into the verge of the covenant of grace Gen. 3. 15. sheweth Adam and Eve were eyed by God as a seminall visible Church by whom as well the Church as the world was to bee built up and God that he might especially glorifie his grace even in the weakest mentioneth Eve as one touching whom hee first expressed his revealed minde of grace to her and her seed not intending meerely the principall seed Christ in and by whom
which is in its self a most effectuall meanes to further their saving good and to bee as a seed of regeneration and faith c. unto them 1 Pet. 1. to the end Ephes 5. 25 26. Rom. 9. 6. and doe not our opposites rather block up so farre the ordinary way and debarre beleevers children from the ordinary meanes of their chiefe good by denying them interest in the word of promise the which is such a meanes Nor doe wee by our doctrine make every beleever an Abraham wee confesse many things in Abrahams covenant Gen. 17. to bee more personall and some more peculiar to those times yet this no way infringeth the covenant right of Abrahams spirituall seed on the samenesse of that covenant with us in the essentialls of it then there was such a particular land promised to him and his the Gospel holdeth forth temporall mercies to us as well as spirituall 1 Tim. 4. 8. 1 Cor. 3. end 2 Cor. 1. 20. 1 Pet. 3. 10 11 12. albeit not such a particular land so the multiplying of Abraham c. was of such a peculiar consideration yet that hinders not onenesse of the covenant now that the promise made with Abraham long before the Law should not be to his spirituall seed our opposites themselves being Judges the like may bee said of the promise of blessing all nations in his seed c. Gal. 3. 8. yet vers 16 17. the promises are to the whole seed so God saith to Abraham I will make thee a father of many nations Gen. 17. 4 5. hee never said so to Isaac or Jacob c. what were not they therefore children of the promise and heires of the covenant of Abraham that God will become a God as to them so to their seed none will say so or in that they were fathers of the covenant to their posteritie Rom. 11. 16. 28. that therefore they were Abrahams or that those Jewes assembled Deut. 29. to whom God maketh that promise of circumcising their seed Deut. 30. 6. as one part of his covenant Deut. 29. 14. so Ezek. 37. 25 26 27 28. God will bee a God to those mentioned parents and children so is Jesse a covenant root to David Esay 11. 1. yet are not these therefore made Abrahams no more are inchurched beleevers by any doctrine of ours Nor doe wee by our doctrine make Christs body such a body or make such confusion of world and Church thereby no more then did God of old which yet ordained the Jewes children to bee his and his Church covenant children Ezek. 16. 20 21 23. and how wee distinguish Church and world let our practise judge and our doctrine which holds forth the covenant of grace as invested with Church covenant if not explicit yet implicit to distinguish the politicall Church and its members from all others 5 Object Some in a more Familisticall way object against our proofes as most what in the old Testament which they make account are not valid unlesse the same things were come over in the new Answ 1. Wee have aswell brought grounds of these conclusions touching Gen. 17. from the new Testament Secondly Christ came not to evacuate the morall Law in the old Testament no not in a title of it but to fulfill it and by expounding it in the very spirit of it to establish it Matth. 5. 17. to the end and the Law it selfe is established through faith Rom. 3. 31. and it 's spirituall not carnall Rom. 7. 14. and what then is the Gospel of which this point in question is part as was shewed or would Christ make void a title of the Gospel in the old Testament as if in and of it selfe not valid unlesse come over againe in the new of what force then would many pretious promises bee in the old Testament expressed but never againe expressed in the new as Esay 12. 3. Ezek. 36. 26. and such like Thirdly if such proofes are not valid why keepe wee a weekely Sabbath as the Lords day is called Matth. 24. 20 why keepe wee solemne thanksgiving dayes c why doe the Apostles referre us for proofe even of the new covenant Heb. 8. 8 9 10 11 12 c. to what God saith scil in the old Testament as in Jerem. 31. or why doth Christ fetch his usuall proofes of the maine matters of faith thence John 5. 46 47. Luke 24. 44 45 46 see more in such way of proofes Acts 10. 43. and 28. 23. Rom. 1. 16 17. Rom. 4. 6 7 8. and 10. 14. and 16. 16. besides many other like which the Apostles urge this way Fourthly if such proofes bee invalid wee must blot out such charges and testimonies touching their perfection and validitie as Psal 19. 7 8 9 10 11 12. spoken before the new Testament was and yet so perfect was it and so efficacious and pretious so John 5. 39. 46 47. and Rom. 10 6 7 8. and Luke 16. 29. 31. 2 Tim. 3. 15 16. Paul makes account the Scriptures scil of the old Testament little else being then written were of sufficiencie to all uses whereof a Minister stood in need to make of the word as Cartwright on the place expounds it and 2 Pet. 1. 1. 19 20 21. speaking of Scripture by men inspired of old those of the old Testament Peter maketh them more valid then extraordinary voyces from heaven touching Christ c. and chargeth them to be in perpetuall request with the Saints see Ames and others in locum If Hen. Den. within his first part of Antichrist unmasked had kept to his testimony which hee brings from 2 Pet. 1. 19 20 21. against the argument used by Dr. Featly taken from the harmony of confessions bee had never so miscarried as in his second part page 25. as to say this is the Prophets to declare repentance as a meanes of remission Ezek. 18. 21. 22. but this is not the Gospell c. And the Law and the Prophets teach is to repent for remission but the Gospel repent unto remission c. to let passe his abuse of the testimonies he alludeth to this I observe that Prophets with him of the old Testament are set in opposition to Gospell as if inconsistent with it the absurditie of which is apparent enough in the very naming it Fifthly if they bee invalid unlesse come over in the new Testament then must all the Saints question their faith and comfort which was occasioned more immediatly from grounds in the old Testament not eying at that present nor possibly afterwards this or that like passage in the new touching the discovery of their good estate or otherwise of their spirituall support contrary to Rom. 15. 4. which Scriptures then mentioned were of the old Testament Sixtly if so how did John Baptist and the Apostles convince the Jewes before yet the new Testament was existing of such and such things touching their peace and touching Christs kingdome and government yea what ordinary meanes is left to convince the Jewes
in time bee of Gods kingdome that is beleevers or in that they were such as God would blesse For Christs words are not Of such may will or shall bee the kingdome of God nor that they were of his kingdome because such as hee would blesse but rather that they should not bee hindred from being blessed of him because of such is the kingdome of God as the context and force of that reason in reference to the occasion sheweth and as for that assertion of their being all elect the improbabilitie thereof hath before appeared nor doth Christ seeme to speal of the kingdome of God as taken for the invisible Church of actuall beleevers but of visible members of the visible Church as before was shewed Hee affirmeth that those little ones de praesenti were of the kingdome of God yet were not they actually beleevers hee asserteth as much of the Jews to be rejected afterward that yet at present they were the children of that very kingdome of heaven whereinto the Gentiles even the very best of them come to sit the Church estate in both was the same in the essentialls and the covenant estate the same essentially the externall right to grace and glory the very same essentially and so the reason of the grant here and assertion is the same in reference to the little ones of other visible beleevers as of these which brought their children to Christ unlesse God should bee made a respecter of persons their Infants must come to Christ and not bee hindred because they were Federally and Ecclesiastically priviledged or because of such is Gods kingdome the same is valid now since as adult persons externally in covenant and Church estate must not according to our opposites mindes bee hindred from Christ because such like as these little ones so neither beleevers little ones being also such like as well they may not bee hindred from any such way of initiatory approach to Christ as they are capable of as is externall baptizing in the name or fellowship as of the Father so of Christ the Sonne and also of the holy Spirit to which purpose I suppose our Divines had reference in urging this place for Paedobaptisme nor was this an affirming of Infants being saved by their parents faith but an assenting of their externall Church right by vertue of the latitude of Gods covenant applyed by the parents and by occasion of their holding forth of that faith which did foro ecclesiae unite them and their little ones to Christ as head of the visible Church in which may by externall adoption and insition are interested which are not saved as before wee shewed nor will that take off what it seemeth some worthy Divines have lately urged from hence for Paedobaptisme that if Christs mind had beene that Infants should have been baptized hee would have commanded these little ones to have beene baptized for an example for according to the principles of C. B. and others Christ did love these little ones with his everlasting love they received heaven of free gift as all that will bee saved must doe theirs was the kingdome of glory really and Christ as God and as an extraordinary Prophet of the Church knew all this c. now why should not or were not these Infants at least baptized C. B. will answer Infants of beleevers may die in their Infancy and they may live to commit actuall sinnes c. and wee not knowing which will live or die cannot baptize them what then according to C. B. it seemes the uncertainty of Infants deaths whilst young or living to growne yeares is an impediment to their baptisme Where did C. B. here or ever read in Scripture or of such a just barre to Infants baptisme but suppose it were so to us which know not this yet C. B. will not say but Christ knew all herein how matters would prove therefore that was no just hinderance in the nature of it thereto for then hee to whom this could bee no hinderance touching these children about whom C. B. saith hee revealed his Fathers eternall live and good will hee had caused at least these little ones to have been baptized Yea I demand upon the grant of those things mentioned whether C. B. or others opposing Paedobaptisme would deny that such as Christ receiveth and blesseth and alloweth the kingdome of heaven in their sense that is that of glory to be theirs if growne ones should not therefore bee baptized Now if this will not be denied as I suppose why supposing the like case of any little ones and Infants shall the same bee denyed where there is the same ground of baptisme in both sorts Nay suppose that by extraordinary revelation C. B. and others of his minde did know as much as here is mentioned in Marke 10. and Luke 16. that such and such children were Gods chosen ones that they were received and blessed of Christ not in any common way but as the very heires of glory as these Infants are by them supposed to bee and so were actually blessed with the spirit of grace c. would not they baptize these Infants I suppose the more judicious would and have said that in that case they would doe it because such an extraordinary revelation would suffice to warrant the act of baptizing such Infants without profession of faith and because of Peters principle Act. 10. 47. Can any forbid that these should bee bapzed which have received the holy Ghost as well as wee and the institution of baptizing Disciples would in this case beare it out such sanctified persons being Disciples c. Nor indeed could it bee denyed by them rationally since in this case Infants are not meerely supposed to bee capable thereof but really to have received the sublime things visibly sealed in baptisme even the spirit of grace love and blessing of Christ the promise of grace and glory c. And therefore not to bee denied baptisme especially seeing this their receiving of the thing signified is also manifested so all usuall occasions that way removed Now then to come to apply what here is granted First then persons may come under the notion of Disciples which were never outwardly taught and cannot personally hold out actuall faith which our opposites elsewhere deny Secondly that it is not contrary to Christs minde and to the rule that persons without personall profession of faith should bee baptized For as the former notion of Disciples if natura rei it were not otherwise applyable then as not ordinarily so neither extraordinarily and whether ordinarily or extraordinarily if applyable so it is not simply to bee denyed so I say in the latter albeit extraordinary things done besides rule crosse not ordinary rule yet neither extraordinarily nor ordinarily is any thing to be done which is in it self contrary to rule It was beside rule for a Priest to kill Zimri and Cosbi but not a breach of rule or any thing contrary to rule Thirdly that there
Booths or Tabernacles to dwell in Deut. 16. 16 17. compared with Levit. 23. 34 35. 38 39 40. which none will say was Infants worke Let none then object that you may as well plead for Infants comming to the Lords Supper as in Cyprians time and was the corruption of the time as was crossing rebaptizing c. in use in his time too and as the Jewes Infants partooke of the passeover the contrary whereof appeares in a word wee spake of initiatory sealing of persons outwardly capable thereof otherwise albeit the parties have a covenant right unto it in the generall yet in that case of incapability it 's peculiar and their jus in re justly suspended from being personally elicited and this doth not make the ordinary rule and ground of right to the initiatory seale to bee invalid suppose an adult beleeving Pagan or Turke to joyne to our opposite Churches who make totall immersion essentiall to baptisme and that they were banished into Freezeland or Greenland or some such cold countrey if this person bee very weake and sick yet desireth to joyne to them ere hee die I demand whether hee hath right to baptisme or no this will not bee denyed Yea but is this right to bee elicited surely no unlesse they would bee guilty of his death But why not baptized because you will say it 's not simply necessary to salvation There being no contempt of it but onely a naturall and corporall incapacitie thereof but this crosseth not that ordinary rule ground and way of baptizing Very true but then let none object against such Infants covenant right to the initiatory seale the case of the females of Abrahams seed which albeit in Abrahams covenant yet not circumcised for when God injoyned cutting away of the superfluous foreskin of the flesh to bee the seale of his covenant the very nature of the command doth in reason if the notion of males had never beene expressed reach the case of the males which have such a superfluous foreskin of their flesh and not the females which are naturally and corporally uncapable thereof as having by nature no such superfluous foreskin and so in that case as in some others that law of circumcision had some things peculiar in it albeit it had other things in common with that of baptisme For the clearer handling of this thesis propounded wee shall lay downe a few other propositions or conclusions SECT II. 1. THat mixt commands of God having some part circumstantiall vanishing some part substantiall abiding the latter is binding to us since Christs time albeit the former be not A seventh day which God shall single out to bee holy is binding to us not the very seventh day of the week to be that day he that commanded the sanctification of the seventh day hee commanded a seventh day of his owne choosing and that to bee that seventh day the former stands in the fall of the latter Hee that commanded a strict holy worship on the Sabbath Exod. 34. 21 c. he commands sutable worship to the day and strictnesse of worship in such and such a manner of expressions the former was perpetuall the latter temporary the moralitie of the second commandement inforceth all the substantialls in seales or worship injoyned nor doth Christ in that sense abolish a title of the Law SECT III. THat consequentiall commandements grounded on Scripture are Scripture commandements as even consequentiall articles of faith are articles of faith and in a word all consequences drawne as necessarily flowing from or grounded upon Scripture principles these are of Scripturall warrant Paul Act. 13. 46 47. maketh a promise yea an old testament promise to bee virtually a command yea a new Testament commandement Loe wee turne to the Gentiles why so For God hath so commanded us How doth that appeare or where It followeth so hath God commanded saying I have set thee for a light to the Gentiles that thou shouldest bee my salvation to the ends of the earth this was spoken too in Esay 42. and 49. and it was a gracious promise in the letter of it yea but Paul rightly drew the force of a command as included in it according to the old rule Hee which promiseth the end hee commandeth the meanes tending to that end but of this more hereafter but here wee see what ground worke is made use of in way of authorising so great and waighty a matter upon It 's verily the mind of God and Christ that Baptisme and the Lords Supper should bee administred to the worlds end yet is it onely to bee drawne by Scripture consequence from such like places as Matth. 28. 19 20. and 1 Cor. 11. 26. So when it 's said As oft as yee doe this our Divines make account it is a virtuall command to celebrate the Lords Supper often and not as in some places twice or thrice a yeare That sisters as well as brethren should in case bee ecclesiastically censured it is of Scripture warrant yet by consequence onely for the rule is of a brother offending c. nor is brother of the common gender Matth. 18. 15. 2. Thes 3. 6. 14. And as in matter of practise so of faith it is thus in Christs time there was no other Scripture how then should that great article of the resurrection bee convincingly proved even to learned Sadduces which deny it verily an old Testament proofe Christ maketh account sufficeth as that Matth. 22. 29. 31 32. compared with Exod. 3. 6 c. and Luke 22. 37. yet this was but drawne by consequence Thus the orthodox fathers dealt against the Arrians denying Christ to bee essentially one with the Father they held him forth to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consubstantiall or coessentiall with the Father yet no direct Scriptures are for the same expresly so in reasoning against such as denyed the deity of the holy Ghost or that hee was to bee worshipped they did the like And where is it otherwise then by consequence to bee drawne from Scripture that there are three distinct persons or substances in that one God or that Christ hath two natures essentially distinguished and yet united in one Person c Circumcision is called a signe of the covenant how did Paul in speaking of Abraham mention circumcision as the seale of the righteousnesse of his faith whence drew hee that that circumcision was in the nature of it else it had not beene so to Abraham or any other any such thing verily it was from Scripture consequence And as in matters of faith and practise so in matters of fact the same rule holds Acts 4. 4. there were foure thousands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 virorum not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hominum a word of the common gender which beleeved What no woman among them none of their wives that were very strange but were they not baptized Anabaptists will yeeld surely they were yea but that must bee drawne by consequence The Church of the Philippians Colossians
Ephesians c. surely had the Lords Supper administred among them so the Thessalonians the seven Asian Churches had baptisme administred to and among them yet this must bee drawne by consequence or no way according to that true rule all this is regular scil Scripture is not the letter alone but the minde and intent thereof drawne by consequence according to the Analogy of faith and by this rule wee are to hold forth the doctrine of faith and rule of manners and worship c. Rom. 12. 6. Else as well many absurdities would follow Must wee actually sell all taking up a Gibbet daily lend freely looking for nothing againe turne the other cheeke to him which smiteth one plucke out our eyes cut off right hands c Analogy of faith must helpe here Hence Evangelicall duties are not alwayes grounded upon expresse commandements either in old or new Testament but from consequences drawne from either such as are praying morning and evening in the family and also in the closet alone constant daily and set meditation daily reading of the Scriptures in the family holy vowing setting a part solemne dayes in private or publique for thanksgiving c. much lesse are many of these come over againe as some phrase it in the new Testament with mention of the persons thereunto oblieged thereby receiving their binding virtue nor is that therefore sound that in point of worship that is excluded which is not expressed doe not such even grant consequences SECT IIII. 3. THat Federall ordinances such as are the seales are as well priviledges as precepts hence circumcision is reckoned as the fathers priviledge Acts 7. 2. 8. hence Rom. 3. 1 2 3 4. see more Acts 2. 38 39. this some which oppose us acknowledge when such speeches as these are used that it is certaine the Jewes had by Gods appointment the priviledge of circumcision and the covenant made with Abraham did belong to them in speciall manner and that children of parents not matrimonially sanctified as Zara and Pharez were in the covenant of saving grace and Church-priviledges surely then circumcision was one which these babes did partake of And the Jewes had this priviledge to bee reckoned in the outward administration as branches of the Olive and one of the wayes of that administration was circumcision was it not And the priviledges in respect of the administration of the covenant are now many wayes inlarged and made more honorable and a little before the promises of the covenant of grace being of the substance not of the administrations are priviledges and the same now to beleevers and as large and honorable as then These speeches indeed seeme not so consonant to some passages before and some after that it is no priviledge to us to have any thing in lieu of that administration but Christ already come who is in stead of all But let mee reason of these things a little the covenant of Abraham in speciall wise belonged to the Jewes and that was a covenant of grace scil to bee a God to them and theirs as I have proved was this no priviledge to them or was that Deut. 29. 14. with 30. 6. no priviledge was it no priviledge for this name-sake of God to have such ingagements not meerely for temporalls but spiritualls even when they had provoked him Ezek. 36. from the 17. to the end Were they with theirs so peculiar a people in these respects and yet were these no priviledges Deut. 14. 2. see more Chap. 7. 6 7 8. it 's reckoned as a choyce fruit of his love And were even sundry Infants of theirs base borne in the covenant of saving grace and Church priviledges and was this no priviledge to them if so since the promises of the covenant of grace are priviledges and the same now to beleevers and as large and honorable as then either these promises to their children mentioned Deut. 30. 6 c. were not of the substance of the covenant of grace and then how could even base borne children bee in the covenant of saving grace or they are no priviledge neither of which I suppose will bee affirmed if these promises to Church children bee not barely of the administration of the covenant for so are the Church priviledges rather which are before made distinct from their inbeing in the covenant of grace but of the substance Then why not now the same and larger rather Why are beleevers children then excluded the covenant And are the priviledges in respect of administration of the covenant now inlarged c. Then either that administration of the covenant initiatory seale as such to their children was no priviledge or there must be such a like priviledge and not straitned at least not wholly excluded as that of a like I say not the same but a like administration of the initiatory covenant seale to inchurched beleevers children now And suppose it bee no priviledge to have any thing in lieu of circumcision of Infants but Christ yet is it no priviledge to have any other thing then Christ to beleevers themselves Circumcision is confessed to bee an appointed seale of initiation to them that entered into covenant with God before Christs incarnation and baptisme such a seale since and that it signified sanctification by the Spirit justification and salvation by Christ and faith in him but as to come and baptisme as come c. and is this no priviledge to beleevers that now they have not that manner of initiation by circumcision yea but in a better way they have scil by baptisme Christ indeed was then to the Saints and so hee is now all in all ordinances and priviledges the Chieftaine that first or principall one Esay 41. Cant. 5. Psal 73. 25. but it was not therefore no priviledge nor is now the like to have together with Christ many pretious ordinances dispensed to them and us and verily the Scripture in old and new Testament accounteth it no small priviledge to have Gods Tabernacle and Sanctuary Church and Church ordinances with us and persons to bee in and under the same hence promised as a reward and a fruit yea part of the ratification of his covenant with them Levit. 26. 9. 11. and therefore in the choyse times of the Gospel it 's so reckoned Revel 21. 3. yea and as of old the childrens Church estate and priviledge was therein included as of that nature so in reference to the other times mentioned was the same of the same account as wee have shewed from Ezek. 37. 25 26 27. SECT V. 4. THat Baptisme is now the onely initiatory visible seale of the covenant which being once administred there needs no more renewing of it First it is a seale of the covenant no bare badge of Christianitie as some have said albeit the more judicious of our opposites yeeld this that the covenant of grace is said properly to bee sealed in Baptisme and that Baptisme since Christs incarnation is the appointed seale of God to such as
enter into covenant with him And it appeares so 1. In that it agreeth in the essentialls with circumcision as an initiatory seale Col. 2. 11 12. whence baptized Gentiles are said to be of the circumcision Phil. 3. and Jewes said to bee baptized 1 Cor. 12. hence first instituted for a seale to the circumcised Jewes to shew it was in the essentialls of sealing Abrahams covenant to them but the same with circumcision in a manner onely as that sealed it to them visibly in Christ as to come this did it in like sort in reference to Christ as come that was the seale of the righteousnesse of Abrahams faith or that whereon his faith acted to righteousnes of justification Rom. 4. 11. even the promise of grace in Christ Rom. 10. 6 7. with Deut. 30. 14. hence when Christ is called the Minister of circumcicision it is thus explained by the end of the signe administred scil to confirme the promises made unto the fathers Rom. 15. 8. Acts 7. 8. Gen. 17. 11. hence the promise premised and then baptisme annexed as the seale Acts 2. 38. hence that washing annexed to the word Ephes 5. 25 26. 2. It 's a Baptizing in the name or covenant fellowship of God the Father Sonne and Spirit hee having exalted his word above all his name Psal 138. 2. 3. It 's a seale of remission of sinnes and therefore of the promise tendering the same hence joyned Acts 2. 38 39. Acts 22. 4. The nature of it sheweth the same it being a Gospell Sacrament and that is a visible seale and the seale is to the covenant hence called by the name Acts 7. 8. 1 Cor. 11. 25. Secondly it is an initiatory seale as first annexed to the Gospell dispensed with reference to covenant fellowship with God in Trinitie not first Disciple them and then let them come to my Table but baptizing them scil so soone as ever brought into covenant and Church estate and seale them up thereby unto covenant fellowship with the Father Sonne and Spirit Hence repent and bee baptized for the promise is to you not repent and come to the Lords Table for the promise is to you Hence that order observed of communion in breaking of bread after they were baptized vers 41 42 43 44. there John began in any sealing way Matth. 3. Marke 1. As of old circumcision long before the Passeover hence called the washing of regeneration metonymically attributing the thing sealed to the visible seale Tit. 3. 5. the new birth is the first fruits of the spirit of promise nor is this ascribed to the other Sacrament as that which is its proper Sacramentall worke initiatorily to seale albeit after it bee thus initiatorily sealed by baptisme the other doth also virtually confirme it Thirdly this being once administred needs never bee renewed as if two initiations or beginnings or regenerations or first enterances into covenant or first ingraffings into Christ c. as there was not Iterations of circumcision It were but to take the name of God in vaine and a wilworship indeed if ever before dispensed in the truth of the essentialls of the ordinance and it were unsafe to say wee may renew that one baptisme as wee may renue that one faith of ours unlesse as many times in a day and as in variety of occurrents changes services sufferings temptations ordinances businesses c. wee are to renue our faith so wee should renue our baptisme nor will the 19. of the Acts beare out any such practise Luke mentions Pauls discourse touching the manner of Johns baptisme scil to hold forth the duty which God required in reference to the Lord Jesus and accordingly they were by John baptized into the name of Jesus whom John held forth as vers 4 5. compared shewes and as the annexing of Pauls name 1. to this declaration vers 4 5. and then 2. to his act which hee then did vers 6. â—…inceth It 's not said then Paul baptized them but then Paul laid his hands upon them It 's said of the other seale As oft as yee doe this 1 Cor. 11. But not a whisper that way touching being oft baptized The Apostle in mentioning of one spirit body hope of our calling metonymically put for the thing hoped for even glory which is but one essentially as one faith which I suppose is taken as oft in Scripture for the doctrine of faith which is but one Gal. 1. 6. 7 8. Jude 3. and so one Lord and one God hee mentions one baptisme and why doth hee not as well say one Lords Supper too which albeit oft renewed to the same persons yet it 's but one institution and the same ordinance still if no further matter bee in that onenesse of baptisme but to signifie that it 's one and the same baptisme indeed but yet so as that it hinders not but it may often bee renued upon one and the same person warrantably though it were before orderly administred to him Fourthly that baptisme is the onely initiatory seale I never heard this yet so much as questioned by any which deny it not to bee a seale therefore I need not speake any further in confirmation thereof SECT VI. 5. THat the Application of such an initiatory seale of the covenant of grace made in reference to an ordinary politicall visible Church which God shall appoint and whereof the severall parties in that covenant are capable this is an externall condition of that covenant and to bee so farre forth kept by all that are externally interested in the same and that for that very reason and ground because they are in such sort interested in that covenant Ere wee confirme this let us premise that that covenant Gen. 17. was a covenant of grace and it was made with reference to an ordinary politicall visible Church as we have before shewed And albeit that Church quà such a politicall Church nationall c. differ from congregationall Churches yet quâ visibilâ—… ecclesia politica ordinaria so it was essentially the same with ours hence then needs no scrupling or startling As for their externall interest also in the covenant of saving grace it hath been likewise cleared that also need not breed contention upon the point of disparity This being premised the proposition may more easily proceed Gen. 17. 7. God propoundeth his gratious covenant vers 9. hee informeth of one externall condition to bee observed by persons taken into that gratious covenant and inferreth the condition upon the premised covenant thou Abraham and thy seed after thee and when Isaac with whom this covenant is established vers 19. as in whose race the Church and Church seed is to bee continued hath seed then it is thou and thy seed and when Jacob hath his seed it is still the same thou and thy seed in such covenant language what hee speaketh to one father hee speaketh to others all are but Abraham and his seed still yea and as then the same to Abrahams
beleeving seed with their children so it 's but the same now thou beleever and thy seed after thee are the same parties as Abraham and his seed yea thou Abraham and thy seed after thee scil in their generations wherein fathers and children begetting and begotten are comprehended And so now Abrahams spirituall seed in their generations are Abraham and his seed thus farre it 's the same yea but what must Abraham and this his seed doe and therefore doe because in covenant they must keepe the covenant But some are Infants there intended in the seed after thee and seed in their generations how can they keepe covenant Yes verily in the sense intended they may scil receive such a covenant and Church initiatory seale as he shall appoint to them according to their outward capacitie else to imagine any other externall way of their keeping of covenant it were vaine Abraham and his adult beleeving seed which so farre forth hee as communis persona did therein represent they may keepe Gods covenant many other wayes but the Infant seed of Abraham and of his beleeving children then or now cannot externally and actually keepe the covenant and externall condition thereof otherwise And let it bee attended that the wise gratious covenanter and Law giver of his Church hee distinctly layeth downe first this generall rule and principle with the ground of it before hee instance in or pitch upon any particular way or branch thereof Wherefore this generall being with greatest wisedome thus laid downe it must have its distinct consideration and weight by and in it selfe absolutè as well as any particular branch thereof may and doth admit of the like or as even this generall may have its consideration also comparatè in reference to any such particular Hee that were to preach of this Text Gen. 17. 9. might and would so handle it and raise distinct observations from it if one were to deale with an adult person a seeker which denyeth all visible Church ordinances c. and onely pleads interest in the promise in Christ and the Spirit and Father spirituall illuminations and consolations and quicknings promised this Scripture ground amongst others might now bee urged Thou shalt therefore even because of the promise and covenant keepe my covenant saith the Lord. Yea suppose it were some Jew that should bee converted and not deny the ordinances of Baptisme but like as many in former times as Constantine Theodosius and divers others did upon unwarrantable grounds hee should deferre his baptisme too long and nelect it too much pleading the fulnesse of the covenant and that all in all ordinances is their and in the branches of it the promises as in the well-springs Esay 12. 3. this Gen. 17. 9. might bee very pertinently urged to him Thou shalt therefore keepe my covenant either then hee must deny this Sacrament to bee any externall condition of the covenant on our parts as well as a visible seale thereof on Gods part which were ridiculous or if it bee yeelded to bee a dutie on mans part externally in covenant then it is manifest indignitie to God yea a breach of covenant to neglect it as receiving the initiatory Sacrament is a speciall branch of keeping Gods covenant so neglect or contempt thereof must bee acknowledged to bee a speciall breach of it and as much might bee urged in respect of neglect or contempt of the initiatory sealing of their seed or children both are equally made Gods covenant to bee kept or the covenant condition and dutie which most immediatly and necessarily and properly doth follow thence Hence this is firstly and principally here included as the keeping of Gods covenant by the persons interested therein according to their outward capacitie of it This royall generall covenant Law was not ceremoniall nor was the ground work of it ceremonial that covenant I will be a God to thee and thy seed was not ceremoniall vanishing but an everlasting if everlasting then an immutable covenant even the same to the worlds end that inference of this covenant duty laying upon such as were externally interested in it as propounded with Church reference Thou shalt therefore keepe my covenant and thy seed after thee this was not ceremoniall That covenant dutie in the generall and the keeping of it I meane an initiatory visible seale of the covenant and the receiving of it was not in the nature of it ceremoniall for then every species of this subalterne genus an initiatory covenant seale had been abolished by Christs comming and so not circumcision onely in the symboll and circumstance of it but in the genericall nature of it as an initiatory seale and sense of the righteousnesse of faith interest in the covenant c. and so baptisme too had never been instituted because it had been then to revive abolished ceremonies c. this generall Law was never repealed or abolished Say then that particular way of initiation first pitched upon on this ground worke namely cutting away of the foreskin of the flesh and that of males of eight dayes old c. were ceremoniall yet this generall covenant Law must not run parallel with it too I conclude then that particular way also of initiation unto covenant and Church fellowship by Baptisme of confederate parents and their seed as it is a covenant duty of which more anon so it depends upon externall covenant interest nor let any here interrupt the proceeding hereof with the old cavill touching covenant females it hath been said their naturall incapacity of that former way of initiation exempted them then and yet not now Nor yet doth that any way invalidate the conclusion propounded no more doth the objecting of Job It 's likely hee had a family Church which was not to abide and was a peculiarity of those times and no ordinary visible politicall Church in reference whereunto wee speake So to what some object about any beleevers in Rome or India c. we say such pearles are not ordinarily looked for in such dunghils nor would any seeke such living ones amongst those dead persons they are not a formed matter of a politicall visible Church but they are as materia informis They are quoad homines actually without and not within any politicall visible Church The covenant of grace nakedly considered giveth a person which is actually in it a remote right to the initiatory seale but it doth not give an immediate right thereto for so the covenant of grace as invested with Church covenant onely giveth this proximate right to that seale God being the God of order will have that his Church seale to bee attained in a way of order as of old strangers might not bee circumcised but with some submission to that Church order explicitly or implicitly and so now the orderly and ordinary dispensation of the seale is committed to the visible Church Matth. 28. 19 20. so that what ever right any have to the seale which are not of any particular visible
Nay they are not onely opposed but the Gentile body is received in instead of the Jew-body broken off vers 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ramorum defractorum locum Beza on Rom. 11. 17. and vers 19. They were broken off saith the collective Gentile that I might bee graffed in The Apostle yeelds this as truth well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if hee would say it is true now growne ones among the Jewes were broken off who came in their stead growne Gentiles True but Jewish babes and little ones too amongst other branches and sprigs are broken off that Gentiles might come into covenant and Church estate in their stead What Gentiles growne ones nay roome is made for them in the breach of the growne Jewes Verily then such a like species of Gentiles unto those rejected Jewish sprigs scil Gentile babes and little ones must necessarily bee thus inserted and admitted into that covenant and Church estate out of which the other were broken So then as Jewes were so Gentiles are considered in this Chapters discourse touching communion in federall and Church ordinances and priviledges under the notion of Olive fatnesse c. not in a bare personall way but in reference to people of both kindes and persons of all sorts and species younger or elder which is a strong argument that God never intended to limit the benefit of his covenant grace to growne ones or parents personally but rather extends it to them in a parentall way at least Hence when that commission Matth. 28. 19. was given for this end it is in the old terme and notion of nation a large word and subject God delights to inlarge his grace in these times and his very intent in Matth. 28. is inlargement of Gospel mercies The more crosse are their minds to Gods thoughts who from that very place would conclude a straightning such a Gospell mercy as this mentioned was and is both to parents and children and for which they have nothing equivalent in stead thereof The Apostle it 's confessed bringeth in Rom. 11. 16 17. as an argument to prove the receiving in againe of the Jewes scil unto actuall fruition of all covenant and Church priviledges vers 15. For if the roote bee holy so are the branches vers 16. and so vers 28 29. To the same purpose now if the covenant with godly ancestors bee so forcible to fetch in such Apostates after so grosse and long a time of their desperate revolts from and contempts of covenant grace in Christ is it not much more of force to the receiving in of the babes of next beleeving parents unto the visible fellowship of covenant grace God forbid that any should obstinately gainesay it SECT II. BY roote I. S. saith in that Rom. 11. 16. is meant Christ personall and yet the same author elsewhere would have it meant mystically considered and elsewhere of union and communion with God in ordinances and elsewhere of Abraham in his faith and elsewhere of beleeving parents in part for hee saith not onely beleeving parents are the roote c. not onely in part then such parents are the root But indeed this author refuteth himselfe in that hee knoweth not where to fix Abraham in his faith as latherly and eying the covenant in this latitude as to him and his seed of Isaac by propagation and to the beleeving Gentiles with their seed by proportion thus hee might bee a root in his faith but if Abrahams faith bee considered in a meere personall respect so neither Jewes nor Gentiles are properly said to bee inserted into that but rather into his faith with its object the covenant It is improper to say of the Gentile that they stood in it scil in the root of faith by faith or that the Jew was broken off from Abrahams personall faith by unbeliefe Abrahams faith was a saving faith if this therefore had been in them all or they in it they had not fallen as many Jewes and Gentiles priviledged by externall covenant right did and might or supposing the root to bee meant not of Abraham Isaac and Jacob but of Christ as Mr. B. also affirmeth who is elsewhere called a root Apoc. 22. 16. and 5. 5 c. if they had been in him by any proper and invisible union neither those of the Jewes had been nor so many of Gentiles could have been broken off as they were whole Churches of these are witnes this Church of Rome to which the Apostle wrote this But otherwise if understood of impropper and visible union with Christ scil a visible union with Christ mysticall thus indeed many such may fall away finally as did these Hence that John 15. 2. now in this sense parents and children Inchurched whether Jewes or Gentiles by being in the holy root of those covenant fathers they are visibly in that holy root Christ or Christ mysticall as was shewed I. S. will and doth confesse the first fruits of whom yet the same holy effect is affirmed Rom. 11. 16. to be these fathers and why not then as wel the same fathers to bee the root since the context cleareth it that the Apostle intendeth the same of the selfesame persons under divers Metaphors Either then Christ is the first fruites as well as roote intended or those fathers are the first fruites as well as the root mentioned Verily covenanting Abraham in reference to his seed is called a rock whence that Church as a Church was hewen for in that sense the Prophet speakes to them Esay 51. 1 2. yet is Christ the rock of the Church too in another sense and why is not Abraham then a covenant root to such Church branches as that from whence they in that sense doe spring And what I say of Abraham is as well to bee referred to Isaac and Jacob in the same respect as being other veines making up this one root the Instrumentall meanes and cause of the mercy offered and exhibited both to Jewes and Gentiles in regard that to them all this large covenant was made over in a radicall way see Gen. 17. 2. 7. and 22. 18. compared with Gen. 26. 3 4 5. and 28. 13 14. whence such frequent mention in Scripture of Abraham Isaac and Jacob in reference to covenant blessings yea their names are pleaded in prayer for that end Exod. 32. 13. Deut. 9. 27. see more 2 King 13. 23. and Mich. 7. 20. c. This was not in respect of any personall holinesse of theirs or barely in respect of their personall faith but it was by reason of that large covenant made with them in this reference as the places quoted shew see further for this end Luke 1. 71 72. Rom. 15. 8. Deut. 4. 37. and 10. 15. with other like Scriptures Hence too they are made here a radicall meanes of the Jewes receiving in againe Rom. 11. 15. grounded on this reason vers 16. compared with vers 28. Whence also the Jewes which are called holy branches by vertue of their
holy root vers 16. they are termed naturall branches too scil of that root and Olive tree vers 24. not naturall branches of Christ as the root Our very opposites will say that were improper to affirme nor meerly of Abraham but Isaac and Jacob also nor is it proper to call one Abraham fathers vers 28. or first fruits vers 16. Now as to Jewes so to Gentiles were those covenant fathers and root God saith to Abraham and Jacob distinctly that hee would blesse all nations and families as in their seed so in them Gen. 12. 2 3. In thee Abraham Gen. 22. 28. in thy seed and Gen. 28. 14. in thee Jacob and in thy seed How in them at all distinct from the seed Christ who is the sole author worker and meritorious cause of all covenant blessing Verily in respect of the covenant made with them in reference as to the nation of the Jewes and the families therein so to Gentile nations and the families therein to bee by virtue of that covenant partakers at least visibly of the covenant blessing Hence wee Gentiles are said to come and sit downe with those fathers Matth. 8. 11 12. as inserted branches are in some sense seated and setled in and with the root Hence likewise this root is said to beare the Christian Gentiles collectively taken and for that cause the Gentile is not to boast against the Jew branches branches of what of the root mentioned what root Christ That were improper to affirme but rather of those fathers SECT III. THe Olive tree some take it of the Fathers also in opposition to the other wilde Olive tree out of which the Gentiles were cut vers 24. scil Their wilde ancestors or ancestors estranged from the covenant Ephes 2. 12. The Jewes indeed are cut out of these fathers Abraham Isaac and Jacob as covenanting in respect of any present actuall benefit of the covenant but yet are not cut out of those fathers as begetting as it is evident they are still Abrahams stock which by the way observe against that distinction by which some use to avoid our arguments in this businesse They say Abraham Isaac and Jacob were onely a root to the body of the Jewes as naturall and begetting fathers and not as spirituall and beleeving fathers or fathers by faith imbracing the covenant made with the Jewes also Surely such men would frustrate the ground of the Apostles discourse here supposing so sad an exclusion of the Jewes from a former sweet and sappy Church estate yea such as into which the Gentiles could not come but by a preter-super yea contra-naturall way vers 24. if they were in those fathers as begetting fathers onely so are they still their naturall children and then not cut off from them at all contrary to this expresse Scripture Others would have the Olive tree to bee meant of the visible Church distinguished from the root vers 17. see Jer. 11. 16. spoken of the Jewes in their Church as well as civill relation into which as into their owne Olive by that generall covenant right Rom. 11. 16. 24. they shall bee re-ingraffed in so farre as they are federally holy vers 16. scil intentionally in so farre is a Church right their owne with which latter respect of the Olive I fully close but of this more afterwards By ingraffing into the Olive seemes to bee meant an actuall interesting and instating into the visible Church or into those covenant fathers in reference to the Church whence also ariseth the actuall fruition thereof By Olive fatnesse mentioned vers 17. must needs bee meant such covenant or Church blessings priviledges and ordinances c. whereof all sorts of Church members even such as may bee fatally cut off may partake of as well as others which are not the graces of the Spirit for they flow not immediatly from the Olive the Church nor from any of the best of the sons of men but rather they are the seales and other Church ordinances visibly dispensed to persons according as they are capable of them These are the instrumentall causes of the bright shining at least in visible profession of Christ unto the whole Candlestick and all the greater or lesser branches and parts of it Zach. 4. 2 3. 11 12 14. SECT IIII. TO draw to a Conclusion 1. Then looke how the Jew-branches were set into their Olive and root mentioned so are the Gentiles which come in their stead Rom. 11. 17. 19. But they with all their buds and sprigs scil children as Esay 44. 3. and 18. 5. and 61. 9. and Psal 128. 3. they are called were set thereinto therefore in like sort are the Gentiles with their children inserted Amongst them were three sorts thus inserted 1. Growne ones truely beleeving as were godly proselyted Gentiles 2. Growne ones which did not prove truly beleeving as many of the proselytes 3. The children of Jewes and of both those sorts of proselytes some whereof afterwards made holy improvement thereof others abused and rejected their covenant priviledge and so is it with us now 2. Looke how they were by unbeleefe broken off so are the Gentiles taken in by faith but they both parents and children were broken off through the unbeleeving rejection of the covenant expressed by the wicked parents onely therefore the Gentiles are inserted with their children albeit the parents onely expresse a beleeving embrace of the covenant Gentiles children are not indeed expressed by name in this inserting but yet the Gentile is collectively spoken of as was proved and so must needs include at least the children of such inserted Gentiles as in the cutting off of the Jewes and casting away of them their children are not mentioned except comprehensively here or in Matth. 8. 11. and 21. 42. yet all grant that they were intended and so in this case 3. Looke how the Gentile in case of apostasie is cut off from his Church estate and union and communion in the Olive root and fatnesse and looke as hee is not spared in case of his unbeleefe so was the Gentile graffed in vers 20. 21 22. But in that case of unbeleefe and apostasie the Gentile both parent and child is cut off from federall grace and Church priviledge witnesse the case of those which at first fell off when first the Asian and other Churches as of Rome c. were unchurched Therefore so was the Gentile parent and child graffed in 4. Looke how the better part of the Jewes which did not thus actually obstinately reject the covenant and Gospel of grace Christ the foundation thereof did then when the Apostle wrote this Rom. 11. 17. remaine still in their roote in such sort are the Gentiles with them partakers thereof But those Jewes parents and children abode in that covenant estate Therefore Gentile parents and children so partake with them Of those Jew parents none will make question and of their children is no ground to doubt which being once in covenant in their ancestors yea and
children of Gentile in-churched parents Though even this also is of grace that they should naturally descend from such parents Gen. 49. 26. Object 4. The Gentiles come into and abide in Church-estate by faith Rom. 11. 20. But children have not faith Therefore this Scripture concernes not them Answ 1. The Gentiles that so stand by faith are collectively taken as including also their children with them so abiding untill that these their children come to reject as did the children of those godly Jewish ancestors their covenant right And observe it by the way how tender God was of covenant children They were never excluded untill they came after many generations so wholly to degenerate as Rom. 11. 16 17 18 19 20 21 25 28. sheweth and then but not till then they are rejected so is it still God is tender of unchurching and discovenanting any that come of godly ancestors till they grosly and obstinately reject their owne mercy But if they grow up to that obstinacy then they cut off the gratious covenant entailed as from themselves personally so to their children parentally as did those of old Rom. 11. 20. and as those of Rome Corinth and Ephesus c. have done since 2. This faith mentioned is not a bare personall faith respecting this or that particular Gentile but such as is in direct opposition to that unbeleefe of the Jewes by which they were broken off as that opposition Rom. 11. 20. sheweth now it is evident that their unbeleefe was the obstinate rejecting of the covenant of grace as it was held out in Christ to them and theirs joyntly and not as barely made to themselves personally Acts 3. 25 26. and 13. 46 47. Matth. 21. 41. 42 43 44. Rom. 9. 31 32 33. and 10. to the end see Rom. 10. 21. with 11. 1. c. and vers 20. So verily is it in the faith of the Gentile opposed thereunto It is a faith that lookes to Gods covenant as in reference to families and kindreds of the earth so imbracing it and so being quickned and comforted by it That pretious fruit of faith must hold proportion to the nature of the seed thereof scil the words of promise 1 Pet. 1. 23. now the words of promise run not barely in a personall way but in a parentall oeconomicall and plurall way as well Jer. 31. 1. Acts 3. 25 c. our faith is or de jure should bee inlarged according to the latitude of covenant as was before proved Rom. 10. 8 c. By what hath been said their grosse mistakes appeare which say that none are the subjects of this lumpe but elect ones That the branches were such onely which were in Christ by faith and hee in them by his spirit for neither Jew nor Gentile branches many of them were such as appeares by their being broken off nor is that assertion sound but absurd and crosse to the very text that the Jewes owne naturall root and Olive tree whereof they were naturall branches onely by faith was union with God c. since that way of being branches onely by faith is no where called naturall nay in the same verse Rom. 11. 24. speaking of the first growne Gentiles inserting by faith it is said to bee contrary to nature nor is inserting which is onely by faith more naturall to Jewes then it is to Gentiles Neither is that true and sound that no other holinesse inrighteth any in any priviledges of grace if understood of Church priviledges now in question then holinesse of justification or sanctification since many of those naturall branches which as naturall branches of that holy root were holy federally and did partake of the root and fatnesse of the olive before their rejection as well as some better Jewes did afterward yet they were not justified for which compare Rom. 11. 16. 24. 17 18 19. so likewise the Gentiles which came to partake of that Olive fatnesse in their stead ibid. yet were fatally cut off many of them which had never bin if they had been justified and sanctified Object 5. Doth not the Apostle only speake here of the invisible Church under the notion of the Olive which sometimes was amongst the Jewes and therefore called their Olive the Apostle reasoning about the elect remnant Rom. 11. 1 2 3 4 5 6 c. and making the tree to bee the Church of beleevers still standing and some branches broken off and others graffed in and so it might seeme the graffing in to bee inserting into the invisible Church by election and faith Answ I deny not but that the Apostle discourseth about the elect and invisible members of the invisible Church vers 1 2 3. c. and therefore proveth fully enough one principall thing propounded scil that the invisible elect membes of it or the elect seed and branches of Abraham Isaac and Jacob did not could not fall away finally but it will not therefore follow that hee speaketh onely of the invisible Church in the whole chapter or that he discourseth not as well of the visible Church of the Church seed of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. Yea it wil appeare by good reason that in that part of the Chapter where hee discourseth of the Church as an Olive communicating its fatnesse to all the branches of it hee principally intendeth the visible Church as visible For 1. The objection acknowledgeth that it is the Church of beleevers still standing and some branches broken off and others graffed in now none that were in the invisible Church by election and faith could ever bee broken off Yea but they might bee in the Church in appearance or visibly as branches may bee said to bee in Christ and after broken off John 15. 2. Not to answer this with an exposition of that according to some to bee meant of Christ considered with his body the visible Church as 1 Cor. 12. 12 13. here is more said of these scil that others came in their roome and place Rom. 11. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ramorum defractorum locum as Beza noteth on that particle they had then a reall place there and a reall breach was made neither did the Gentiles come into an imaginary place in the Church but a reall and yet they came into no other place then into the place of the broken branches therefore theirs was a reall not a seeming place in the Olive the Olive then must bee the visible Church where hypocrites may have place and not the invisible Church where they can have none Besides they were such branches of the Olive as did partake of the fatnesse of the Olive not like withered branches seemingly in Christ which are saplesse nor did ever partake of the sap of Christs saving grace as these did of Church sap hence the Gentile is said to partake in common with them Rom. 11. 17. Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. and thou partakest in common with them in the fatnesse of the Olive What did the collective Christian
saith Lydia's houshold was baptized saith not that any more beleeved but Lydia and because this example is diversly controverted I shall indeavour to cleare it as for and not against us the story is so exactly in all the circumstances of it set downe that as I wonder of that evasion that wee are to seeke the explication of this by that other distinct story as distinctly and independently set downe from this as this from that The holy Ghost is exact in setting downe many particular passages in mentioning the occasion of this here expressed from Acts 16. 6. to 14. and in the particular circumstances of this passage of the first successe of Pauls ministery at Philippi The person wrought upon is described shee was no meere Pagan but a worshipper of God before albeit not one that beleeved in Christ Jesus as the promised Messias which then was the great article of faith and full of difficultie to bee beleeved in all likelihood a Jew or one of the best sort of proselytes venturing hard for Religions sake they were not allowed the libertie of a Synagogue at Philippi as in some other places under the Romish jurisdiction but they withdrew to a remote place from ordinary concourse view and though Sabbath solemnities were loathsome to the Romans there yet shee with some other women adventure to spend the time in Prayer Thither Paul repaires and amongst them all shee is wrought upon and no other mentioned God opened her heart that shee attended c. if any of her houshould too had beene then or presently after that brought home to Christ the holy Ghost so exact in the circumstances of this story as in that other afterwards of the Jaylour it 's very unlikely that he would have omitted the same here more then in the other place Yea after shee and her houshold were baptized the Text expresly saith If yee have judged mee not if yee have judged them also faithfull come into my house If there bee but one seeming example for rebaptizing and neither rule nor example to colour that wrested sense of Acts 19. 4 5 6. that must be currant and warrant for that innovation and we upbraided if there were but one example so good for Paedobaptisme as that for rebaptizing they will yeeld the cause to us and so may wee to them if this bee not fuller for us then that for them Yea but saith Mr. B. would you baptize a Turke in his Masters faith and what of that therefore here were none baptized but beleevers unlesse that bee granted Non sequitur is it not rule for us herein to make use of a Synecdoche as well as you when wee urge you with families baptized and so children in them you tell us it is a Synecdoche of the whole put for the part the whole were baptized that is the growne part capable of being preached unto in the house Acts 16. 31 32 33 34. Yea but here was none preached to of this house that is mentioned but Lydia only yet the houshold baptized that is say we a part thereof by a Synecdoche even that part which might most properly be baptized in her right more then in their owne as were her children For so house in Scripture is oftentimes used for children of such or such a person onely as Judg 9. 16. 18. dealing ill with Gideons house that day is expounded to bee murdering of his 60. sonnes so the poore widow and her house that shee was providing for and which after lived of that meale and oyle was but the widow and her sonne 1 King 17. 12 13 15. compared Davids house which at that time was not so orient 2 Sam. 23. 5. was but his children many whereof proved badly and came to sad ends witnesse Absaloms Ammons act and end c. If Noah onely beleeving and upright yet all the rest with him are typically baptized for that ground Come thou and thy house even wife sonnes and sonnes wives and all into the Arke For thee not for them have I found righteous Gen. 7. 1. with 1 Pet. 3. 21. if Abraham alone bee a beleever yet hee and his have the same seale of the righteousnesse of faith of the covenant Gen. 17. Rom. 4. if the growne Israelites have faith it furthers that extraordinary baptisme in the Sea Lesse then this herein is not to bee denied yea but the rule is plaine otherwise Matth. 28. 19. Marke 16. therefore the Apostles did baptize none but beleevers and Disciples Nay verily by their leave I conclude that that restriction of that word Disciple onely to one that is an actuall beleever in Christ was never there intended in Matth. 28. nor was that in Mark 16. ever intended to bee a rule of baptizing persons excluding every other person then such a one as there is mentioned from being baptized and I further adde to that that it pointeth out what a kind of person shall bee saved rather then bee baptized Wherefore it is not said hee that shall bee baptized hee must beleeve but hee that doth beleeve and is baptized shall bee saved hence contrâ hee saith not hee that beleeveth not shall not bee baptized but rather shall bee damned or not saved If children bee excluded from baptisme because of the former clause hee that beleeveth and is baptized they must bee excluded salvation because of the latter clause hee that beleeveth not shall bee damned will not our opposites themselves say that the latter clause is taken de adultis and not as any rule of exclusion of Infants from salvation and I say as much in that other as no rule thereby to exclude Infants from baptisme it is the same in Act. 2. 38 39. if Infants because not beleeving and effectually called are excluded the promise then by the same reason excluded remission of sins promised yea salvation promised to them that cal upon God v. 21. if not therefore excluded these why therefore excluded baptisme in defect of actuall faith if the promise of justification salvation be not denied which are the signats for want of actuall faith repentance why is baptisme the signe denied them is the signe more then those things signified is not faith and repentance more simply required to salvation Luke 13. 5. Heb. 11. 6. then to baptisme As for what C. B. addeth that that Gal. 3. 27. excludeth Infants I deny it if that be taken as if each baptized person had really effectually put on Christ then none of the Galatian members had bin such as Gal. 3. 3 4 5. and 4. 11. 19. 21 22. and 5. 3 4 5. he speakes thus in a Sacramentall sense as 1 Cor. 10. 4. 6. Heb. 10. 29. and such like and so each Infant too Sacramentally puts on Christ are buried with Christ Rom. 6. 3. that is that which is visibly signed and sealed thereby and that is the doctrine of the visible word of the Sacrament holding forth what baptized persons are called upon as they are
Gods faithfulnesse impeached or impaired nor need the faith of beleevers bee shaken if this or that child should prove live and die wicked the force of the Covenant is not to bee measured by the fatall miscarrying of many of Abrahams Church seed To bee sure it taketh in some of his Church-seed as the Apostle reasoneth Rom. 9. 4. 6. compared Whether our doctrine herein or the adversaries which deny any interest at all to any beleevers Infants in the Covenant bee more uncomfortable let the world judge And therefore to affirme with Paul if taken in the strict of elect ones and of sincere beleevers that they onely are Abrahams choyce seed yet it 's no other then Gospell to affirme as much as wee have done of others ye they also are Abrahams Church seed SEâ—T V. 4. A Fourth Conclusion is that the Church in dispensing an enjoyned Initiatory seale of the Covenant of grace looketh unto visibilitie of interest in the Covenant to guide her in the application thereof Nor is it the saving interest of the persons in view which is her rule by which shee is therein to proceed The matter to bee dispenced is not an Initiatory seale of the Covenant before it bee commanded as before Circumcision or baptisme bee commanded but supposing that de facto they are commanded the rule of judging of the jus of persons propounded to the Church with desire of her admission by her officers to the fellowship of the initiatory seale of the Covenant it is not the internall and saving state of the partie or parties but the visibility of covenant right and estate saving right consisting in Gods electing act which is a very secret in saving interest in Christ and his death in saving influences and operations of his spirit and the like all which incurre not to outward discerning nor can be infallibly known by man being things per se invisible to others John 3. 8. John Baptist did and might lawfully baptize those multitudes albeit in the generall hee knew that many yea most of them would prove false and frothy Matth. 3. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12. It sufficeth that albeit hee were perswaded in the generall that many were unworthy members of that floore and Church of Christ amongst them all yet they having appearances of a better estate and hee not being able to say in the particular persons presented to baptisme which of them notwithstanding would prove chaffie and vile hee baptized them Albeit wee may think in the generall that to bee sure in all visible Churches there will bee some vessells of dishonour sometimes and yet Ministers which are the Churches as well as Christs servants they are not therefore to refuse to dispense Church-Ordinances since they are in the face of the Church such utensils as the Lord may have and hath need of Hence the Apostles which as extraordinary persons knew the guile of persons secret from the Church witnesse that act against Ananias and Saphira Act. 5. 1 2 3 4 5. to 11. Yet in administring the Church-seale of Baptisme they refused not Ananias and Saphira no nor Simon Magus Act. 8. nor thousands of others of the Jewes amongst whom how many proved false let Acts 2. 41. and 4. 1 2 3 4. compared 21. 20 21 22 23 24. 28. 30 31. 36. and 22. 20. 22. and 23. 12 13. witnesse Nor could the Apostles imagine otherwise in the generall but many of them would prove such Yea Christ himselfe who by his divine knowledge knew Judas to bee a devill John 6. 70 71. and 13. 18. yet hee ministred to him that Supper whether the Pascall Lambe or the Lords Supper Verse 1. 2. 26. and 21. compared with Luke 22. 19 20 21. I determine not one of them it appeares it was Austin and others thinke Judas was admitted to the Lords Supper and that he did partake of the bread of the Lord albeit not of the Lord that spirituall bread so thinkes Mr. Cartwright from that connexion Luke 23. 19 20 21. but if admitted by Christ to the Passeover which Christ administred to him formerly and at that time it sufficeth to our purpose Christ ministring as man dealeth with Judas in his ministration of the Sacrament as man and as Judas was according to man and to the rest of that family to which hee then in speciall sort ministred Ishmael God discovered by a divine revelation to Abraham Esau to Rebeckah not to bee Gods elect seed of the Covenant yet Abraham and Isaac as Prophets and Priests at that time to the Church in their families circumcise them extraordinary cases brake not ordinary rules If Peter kill bodily any persons or Phinehas or Elias It 's not a warrant for Ministers to bee executioners or orderers of civill justice It 's the Magistrate is to do that by ordinary rule Rom. 13. If Ananias a private Disciple by extraordinary call in a vision baptize Paul yet it 's no crosse to that ordinary rule of ministring baptisme onely by preaching ministers Matth. 28. 19 20. So here in extraordinary cases persons to bee admitted to the seales of the old or new Testament may bee discovered to bee false hearted as was Ishmael Esau and Judas yet that hinders not but being in facie Ecclesiae visibly interested in the Covenant the seales are to bee administred unto them The Church in Abraham and Isaacs house had not that revealed to them touching Ishmael and Esau as neither the family of Christ knew that of Judas therefore as to them they had visible right to those seales so were they administred to them A Minister may see much good or evill in persons which are to partake of the seales yet if this bee not as well visible to the Church as to himselfe hee cannot of himselfe admit or reject them regularly hee is not the Church but acteth in admission rejections to or from the fellowship of Church-Ordinances such as the seales are by and with their consent A person Ecclesiastically holy is admittable and hee may not refuse them upon his owne private surmises It were to breed confusions in Churches and lay foundations of enthusiasmes The ordinary Elders of that visible Church of Ephesus must feede the Church in the dispensation of the word or seales occasionally Albeit many admitted to that fellowship many among themselves will prove Apostates Acts 20. 28 29 30. If particular persons saving interest in Gods promise and Covenant of grace were the rule it were either to necessitate ministers to come under guilt of sinne or Anomie breach of rule or for avoiding of that which they must needs doe with such breach of rule never to administer any Church-ordinances since they sometimes shall breake that rule in administring the same to hypocrites and albeit they doe sometimes administer them to elect ones yet not being able to know that secret infallibly they observe not that rule in faith but doubtingly and so can have little comfort of any such of their administrations
elect or reprobate but one in nature albeit in use and efficacy it were various according as the Spirit of God and faith made thereof improvement or not To adde one word more in way of proofe that Gentile-inchurched-beleevers Infants they are the seed of Abraham this being wholly denyed by Anabaptists If I prove that this species or sort of persons are Abrahams spirituall seed without personall actuall faith by which onely they say persons come to bee Abrahams seed quoting for it Gal. 3. 7. 6. 9. 16. 27 28 29. it sufficeth Now the place to mee is full proofe thereof whole Christ mysticall in all the parts of his body the Apostle maketh it to bee the seed of Abraham but that sort of persons the Infants of beleevers are a part of Christ mysticall or Christ considered with his body the Church as Christ is in Gal. 3. and 1 Cor. 12. 12. compared as hath beene proved Ergo that sort of persons as well that other of actuall beleevers are Abrahams spirituall seed And here supposing according to them that Christ is considered there as with his body the invisible Church it maketh still more for what I am to prove since if that sort of persons bee not of the invisible Church whereof Christ is head there can none of that sort not beleevers children at all bee saved since out of the invisible Church is no salvation at all as some of the most judicious of our opposites doe speake in way of answer to what is brought by our friends that extra ecclesiam non est salus that is say such extra ecclesiam invisibilem non visibilem But wee will goe yet further and take this as meant of Christ considered with his body the visible Church according as formerly it was proved to bee considerable And I say to exelude that sort of persons scil beleevers infants from being a part of the visible Church in generall is to exclude them from any ordinary state and way of salvation Nay I will go further and say that for any to suppose all the individuall Infants and each of them which come of such inchurched parents not to bee also parts of this body of Christ the visible Church and consequently not to bee Abrahams spirituall seed is to exclude them from a state and way of salvation in respect to the ordinary course thereof and so to leave them all under the consideration of such a way to bee saved in as is onely extraordinary ordinarily they are not to bee supposed to bee saved as at least it is not to be supposed that ordinarily or that in any ordinary way any Pagans or Turkes out of the visible Church or any in and of Rome as Tridentine and Antichristian should bee saved yet God may and sometimes doth and will have some soules brought on to him thence and even from amongst Mahumetans c. but all will yeeld I suppose that this is an extraordinary case so crosseth not that rule that without even the visible Church there is no salvation scil taking the maxime in reference to ordinary times and withall to the ordinary course and way of attaining unto salvation Such then as exclude all Infants of beleevers one or other from the notion of Abrahams spirituall seede from Covenant and Church estate they put them in the Pagan Gentiles estate of which Paul speakes who being they and theirs strangers from the promise and covenants and from the visible Church they place them in that respect in an estate of persons that are without God in the world and so under the devill the God of the world and in an hopelesse estate neither they nor any for them can have any grounded hope of them they are without hope in regard at least of any ordinary way or meane of salvation Ephes 2. 11 12. Nor let it seeme grievous that our friends and brethren in the Lord of name and worth in the Church have as it seemeth urged that in case of such an exclusion of beleevers children they are made as Turkes or Indians so farre forth in regard that being not in covenant nor Church estate the Apostle truely states such persons cases they are without hope and without God in the world Hee maketh no distinction of potentia remota propinqua in that case Yea but hee speakes of Pagan parents wee of Christian and there is not the same reason of the childrens estate which are of the one as of the other Tell me the difference supposing them actually excluded from covenant and Church estate It is not in their parents prayers or in the Churches nakedly considered without reference to any covenant or Church estate of theirs for they pray as well for Indians c. as for them Nor is it barely in their instruction and education of them for if they have any Indian or Black more bond servants in their house they must instruct both them and their children in Gods feare as they are capable thereof Yea but for the one their prayers and instructions come from a nearer bond and are carried on with more strength then in the other grant that yet this is but more and lesse and they vary no species of any formall reason of difference yea but they may beleeve more for the one then for the other and why so because usually the one sort prove religious when the other is not usuall This confirmeth what I am to prove that God is a covenant God to the children of his people and Church because albeit sometimes some prove vile enough yet usually they prove religious and pious and God speakes of things as they more frequently prove Yea I demand what is the ordinary revealed instrumentall meanes of the saving efficacy which is upon any children of Gods people and Church especially supposing they die very young is it not the word of Gods covenant as hath beene often said from Rom. 9. 6. and Eph. 5. 25 26. Yea I would know whether if beleevers have hope to take hope most properly concerning their childrens good or glorious resurrection by Christ if they die in Infancy have they other ground then that of Gods being a God to them This is Christs demonstration in that case Luke 20. 36 37 38. Is it any other then Scripture hope or comfort that way or must they sorrow as persons without hope If they draw any waters with joy Esay 12. 3. must it not bee out of the wells of salvation the promises not other promises which concerne not the case they will not helpe at such a dead lift but promises pertinent to the case of their children Yea can they have such hope without faith or can they have well-grounded faith where they have not a word of faith for it and when they cannot beleeve that God should bee so much as externally much lesse internally and savingly a covenant God to them or can they conjecture that ever any were saved ordinarily if at all touching whom God never made