Infancy as well as I. Shew me a reason now why my dying Infants might not have the application of Christ's Blood by the holy Spirit as well as yours As for the manner of the Spirit 's operation herein I suppose we know it both alike that is not at all Nevertheless I do believe the Father Son and holy Spirit does what is needful in their respective operations tho I know not in all Points how it is done in the case of dying Infants It is enough that we have Christ's Testimony that to them belongs the Kingdom that is to all in that state for he rejects not any one of them neither in these words nor in any other that proceeded from his sacred Lips nor from the Pens of the Writers of the Holy Scriptures And then what is Mr. Firmin that he should by this presumptuous Argument send many Millions of them to Hell because in his conceit the Holy Ghost has nothing to do with them in the business of their Salvation the Spirit 's Operations being limited by him herein to the Infants of Believers only and if you look well to his Notions there is not a few of them too who have no help from the holy Spirit for they being not all elect must be damned for all their Baptism and this is the kindness he has to write a Plea for Infants Divis 3. Wherein is considered whether the Covenant of Grace was taken from the whole World and appropriated only to Abraham and his Seed from the time of the making the Covenant of Circumcision Gen. 17. Mr. Firmin p. 20. Now I come to my Question and shall make it appear your Answer signifies nothing You tell me of a Covenant of Grace made with the whole World in the promised Seed to Adam c. I tell you while Adam Noah and Abraham lived under that Covenant made with the whole World God was pleased to make a Covenant with Abraham and with none other but Abraham to be his God and the God of his Seed and sealed this Covenant by which Covenant and Seal God did separate and divide all Abraham's Seed from the World living under the Covenant you speak of Answ 1. It is evident that either Mr. Firmin holds That the Covenant made with Adam Noah and Abraham before that mentioned Gen. 17. was not the Covenant of Grace or else that Covenant Gen. 17. was not the Covenant of Grace or that the Covenant of Grace was now taken from all the World and appropriated and restrained to Abraham and his Seed only The latter is clearly his sense that God was now only the God of Abraham and his Seed in the Covenant of Grace and of none other But this Doctrine is most false and absurd as I evidently shewed to Mr. Petto to this effect We ought to understand that Abraham and his Seed was not the only Persons in the World which were under the Covenant of Grace at that time when God made with Abraham the Covenant of Circumcision Gen. 17. For as Mr. Broughton observes Sem lived 50 Years after the Covenant of Circumcision was made with Abraham and divers other holy Men lived long after the Covenant of Circumcision was made who were all true Worshippers of God according to the Covenant of Grace Melchisedeck blessing Abraham from whence St. Paul infers that he was greater than Abraham Heb. 7. 7. yet neither he nor the rest of the Patriarchs were concern'd in the Covenant of Circumcision And as neither these nor their Infants or Posterity were liable to any loss of the Covenant of Grace by their not being Circumcised after the manner of Abraham so neither Job nor other Worthy Men that were not of the Seed of Abraham had no necessity at all to be concern'd in the Covenant of Circumcision From whence it must needs follow That God did not intend the Sign of Circumcision as necessary to entitle Men to the Covenant of Grace nor that none could be Saved who were not under the Covenant of Circumcision But certain it is the Covenant of Circumcision was appropriate to Abraham and to his Seed for very great Ends respecting special Preservation to the Family of Abraham as being now the Family from whence Christ should proceed according to the Flesh And with whom God would presence himself in a Land of Promise by a distinct way of Worship from all other Nations who were then falling very fast to Idolatry Again Mr. F. telling us That God made that Covenant of Circumcision with Abraham and none other By this he has given a fatal Blow to his Cause which he is so zealous to defend Because by this it is evident that the Covenant made with Abraham Gen. 17. considered as it was peculiar to him and his Seed and no other no not of the Patriarchs then living it was therefore at least so considered not the Covenant of Grace But it was only so considered the Covenant of Circumcision as it is also called Acts 7. 8. without any such adjunct as the Covenant of Grace as if all that were not in that peculiar Covenant throughout the World must be damn'd without Mercy No no God had his tender Mercies for others tho this Covenant was peculiar to Abraham God was no such respecter of Persons when he made the Covenant with Abraham Gen. 17. But in every Nation from the beginning even to the end of the World all that feared the Lord and wrought Righteousness found acceptance with him This old Truth Peter himself being tinctured with this Notion that God had no Grace for any but Abraham's Seed could not perceive till God by Miracle did reveal it to him no tho his Commission Mat. 28. 19 20. did oblige him to teach all Nations and to preach the Gospel to every Creature yet till now he durst not preach to the Gentiles Acts 10. And therefore it is the less strange that Mr. Firmin and such as he who take themselves to be Abraham's Seed because they are born according to the Flesh of such as they take to be Believers should be so cruelly dark in this glorious Truth that God is no respecter of Persons Nor do I see any thing more liable to puff Men up with Pride than this that they were in the Covenant of Grace from their Infancy because their Parents were Believers or at least one of them or their Grandfather c. was so as Mr. F. words it This Opinion undid the Jews generally and I doubt it has spoiled many of the Gentiles Our blessed Saviour John 8. has a long Disputation to deliver the Jews from this their vain Confidence which they built upon their being Abraham's Seed And St. Paul bent his Stile against the same thing Rom. 2. 26 27 28 29. and Chap. 3. ver 19. to the end But the more they laboured to undeceive these deceived Jews the more they were hated by them and if we meet with the same measure we must bear it For indeed scarce any
so fierce against us for extending the Grace of God to all Men as being therein no respecter of Persons and yet shewing to Sinners the necessity of actual Repentance towards God and Faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ as necessary to their Membership in the Church Militant by the Baptism of Repentance for Remission of Sins I say none so fierce against us as those who boast they are Abraham's Seed because descended from Gentiles who they suppose to be Believers But let me have a care I must now Answer for my self for Mr. Firmin demands of me Page 21. By what Scripture-Warrant do you reduce our Children into the state of the Children of Adam or Noah c. since we are never called their Children but only Abraham ' s whose Seed differ from theirs by a special Covenant made with Them and sealed with Them. To which of them did God say I will be the God of thy Seed and I will seal it But I reply These seem to me to be great swelling words of Vanity much worse in a Gentile than in a Jew And I would know what special Covenant hath God made with Mr. F. and his Seed which he hath denied to Tho. Grantham and his Seed But to the Question 1. I am far from denying Abraham's Fatherhood over the Faithful Christians but I deny that every Believer that hath an Infant is the Father of the Faithful And I deny many to have any right to that Title who boast much of it because they do not the works of Abraham but despise those that worship God according to his Will. Thus did not Abraham But thus does Mr. Firmin 2. I find that Adam was the Son of God Luke 3. Whether called so meerly for his Creation or for that after the Promise Gen. 3. 15. He walked with God or for both I will not dispute And I find that Christ's Descent is reckoned from Adam and the Saviour of the World was first promised to him and to proceed from him and therein was the Covenant of Grace in the first place made with him and in him with all Mankind who then were in him Nor do I find that this gracious Covenant was ever repealed but is in force to this day as is granted by Mr. Baxter 3. I find that Noah found Grace in the sight of the Lord being righteous before God. And I know that Mr. Baxter and other Learned Christians acknowledg the Covenant made with Noah and his Generations to be a Covenant of Grace and of perpetual Duration being indeed the renewal of the Covenant made with Adam I find also that Noah became Heir of the Righteousness which is by Faith and that his Faith did lead him to believe that which was as difficult to Sense as that Abraham should have a Son viz. That the whole World should be Drowned His Faith also was made perfect by Works for Whatsoever the Lord Commanded that did Noah 4. I find that all men from the time of the Flood are the Generations of Noah and that he was perfect in his Generation a Just Man and one that walketh with God and as one of his Sons proved wicked so did one of the Sons of Abraham I do also find in Scripture that we are all called the Sons of Adam To you O Men I call and my Voice is to the Sons of Adam or Man Prov. 8. 4. And as the Sons of Adam God shews them what is Good even to do Justly to love Mercy and to walk humbly with their God Mich. 6. Now from these Scripture-Warrants I honour my Great Grandfather Adam because to him was committed the first Oracles of God making known the Covenant of Grace I honour my Grandfather Noah because he was Heir of the Righteousness of Faith and had the second Edition of the Covenant of Grace extended to all his Generations till by Sin they eject themselves I likewise honour my Father Abraham because he had the third Edition of the Covenant of Grace as a Blessing to all Nations or to all the Families of the Earth Gen. 12. And also for that God was pleased to choose his Posterity as the People from whom Men should look for their Saviour with respect to his Descent according to the Flesh and of this Covenant as also of the Land of Promise was Circumcision given as a Sign to his Posterity that they might not mix with other Nations in Life or Religion but to Abraham himself as a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith which he had near 30 Years before he was Circumcised But for all this I know that in Gospel-times unless we crucified the Flesh with the Affections and Lusts we cannot be Abraham ' s Seed nor Heirs according to the Promise Gal. 3. 29. And the Seal of our Sonship and Right to the Inheritance is the Holy Spirit Ephes 1. 13. Gal. 4. 6. Ephes 4. 30. Mr. Firmin Now suppose that were true which is the great business of your Pamphlet to prove that all dying Infants are saved That thereby you may take off the Odium which lies upon you for shutting the Children of Believers out of the Church and denying them Baptism they being under the Covenant of Grace made with Adam as you say Tell me Is this Covenant of God with Abraham's Seed in vain Does the holy One make vain Covenants As to his Seed they were well enough before If Isaac die before the 8th day he is saved so that this Covenant might have been spared Answer 1. I havâ— said enough to shew that Abraham's Covenant Gen. 17. was not in vain but I am sure you here make a vain use of it For had Isaac died before he was Eight Days old in your Judgment he had not been saved and consequently no Male Infants which died before they were Circumcised were saved This is that wretched Doctrine which I oppose And seeing you make Baptism as necessary to Salvation as Circumcision was and call it the Seal of the Covenant you either make Infants which die unbaptized saved by an unsealed Covenant as you speak or else you damn all Infants which die unbaptized No other sense can be made of your strange Questions P. 73. Your Question is this Are they all Justified and Saved then it must be by a Covenant of Grace And shall they be under the Covenant so as to be in a justified and saved state by it and not have the Seal of the Covenant As if the Covenant of Grace were of no use to poor Infants without the Crossing Sprinkling or as you Pouring a little Water on their Forehead for which you have no Rule at all in the Word of God. I cannot but admire your great Blindness 2. The Covenant of Circumcision might not now be spared because God had now designed to honour Abraham's Faith and to make him and his Posterity famous both for Multitude Religion and other Excellencies but chiefly to point out all Nations from whence to look for a Saviour which
accordingly was foreknown and expected by many other Nations by means of the Covenant made with Abraham But you add If their Seed die while little ones I hope they are not further from Salvation by this Covenant nor Parents the less hope two strings to a Bow are good But I answer 1. You so string your Bow of Salvation for Infants that you break it and so kill more Infants than you save yea an Isaac himself cannot escape you but must perish if he die before the 8th day Pray Sir what manner of Doctrine is this is it in the power of Infants to live till the 8th day And if God take them away before the 8th day will God damn them because they were not Circumcised when yet by his own Law they might not have it Are these the comfortable Strings you give Parents to the Bow of Infants Salvation 2. Hence it is evident that it is you not I that make Infants further off from Salvation by the Covenant of Circumcision For I say though all the Commands of God be good in their place and use yet he never ordained any Rite to be necessary to the salvation of poor Infants But according to your Doctrine if Infants died before the Covenant of Circumcision was made whether the first second third fourth fifth sixth or seventh day their Salvation was never the more doubtful for that But now the Case is very hard for if Isaac himself die before the 8th day he is lost according to your sense of the Covenant What follows I have answer'd before Mr. Firmin Yet again as to that Notion wherein you so much glory I have made five remarkable Demonstrations as you call them to prove it you must make three more Demonstrations or else these five will not do the Feat 1. That God does save those that are under that Covenant without any Condition in it Name that Text I pray Answ 1. Here observe again Mr. Firmin is in good Earnest that no Infants can be saved unless they keep the Condition of the Covenant And he makes Heart-Circumcision and the Circumcision of the Flesh both necessary Conditions of the Covenant for Infants Salvation in the time of the Law or ever since Abraham's time And Repentance and Faith and Baptism the Condition in the Gospel 2. I am to demonstrate the contrary which with much ease by God's Grace I shall do I say then Almighty God made a Covenant of Grace with Adam in the Promised Seed Gen. 15. in which Covenant stood the Salvation of all dying Infants and yet no Condition was there to be annexed on the part of Infants howbeit Faith was necessary on Adam's part or else he had sinned in not believing the Promise And its evident Abel had Faith in this Promise by his offering a Lamb a Figure of Christ the Lamb slain from the foundation of the World. See Diod. on Gen. 4. To prove that God requires nothing of Duty as a Condition of the Covenant on the part of Infants in order to Salvation I will set down two Texts Deut. 11. 1. to 10. Rom. 5. 14 18. And I also give you this Argument Circumcision it self was not appointed to be a Condition of the Covenant of Grace necessary to the Salvation of so much as one Infant Ergo There was never any thing imposed or required of Infants as a necessary Condition of the Covenant for the Salvation of Infants The Consequence I suppose will not be denied because nothing can be pretended with so much probability this way as Circumcision And for the Major it is clear from the case of Moses's Child Exod. 4. 24 25. where we find that God sought not to kill the Child because it was not Circumcised the 8th Day but he sought to kill Moses which shews the Child was not guilty of Sin in this Case And that this Note may be the more acceptable I shall make some Addition to the Testimonies formerly given and here shew the Judgment of some Learned Writers in this Case Cajetan a Man no less Zealous for Infant-Baptism than Mr. Firmin yet writes thus Consentaneum est c. It is sit that none should be Punished but they which had committed the Fault But Infants can commit no Fault therefore the punishment here assigned doth belong to the Adult only they only be rightfully Punished which only are justly blamed for the omission of Circumcision And saith a Protestant Doctor upon this Sentence Put Baptism meaning of Infants in the place of Circumcision and this Sentence is most true of the one as well as of the other Yea the Ancients quoted by the said Doctor tell us Circumcision did not profit the Soul but was only a sign of Grace For Children when they understand not what is done to them can reap no profit thereby to their Souls Chrys Hom. 9. in Gen. And Irenaeus is alledged to say Circumcision was only given as a Sign to the People The conclusion is that as it is certain that Infants shall be cleansed and renewed before they come to Heaven so God hath not tied this Mercy to any Ritual or thing to be done by us but by the Obedience of Christ and his Free-Grace sanctifies them in a manner unknown to us Mr. Firmin 2. You must demonstrate saith he that by this Covenant he saves those who have lost the Image of God and are corrupt by Nature for Infant-Regeneration and Heart-Circumcision is denied by you and yours Answ This Demonstration also will easily be made or else I am sure Mr. Firmin and my self shall not be Saved for that we are as corrupt by Nature and have lost the Image of God as much as any Infant nay we are sent to Infants to learn the Qualifications we want And as all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God so they are Justified freely by his Grace through the Redemption which is in Christ Jesus Rom. 3. 23 25. And tho Christ is set forth to be a Propitiation through Faith in his Blood for the Remission of Sins that are past through the forbearance of God yet this Faith is not required of Infants because they cannot believe on him of whom they have not heard Rom. 10. And tho you reply That this is spoken of the Adult yet you are to know as it is the Adult only to whom the Gospel is preached so it is the Adult only who are required to believe As for the Way of the Almighty in the business of Infants Regeneration 't is a thing not revealed and therefore you do but vainly pretend to know it And seeing it is said That we know not the Way of the Spirit nor how the Bones do grow in the Womb of her that is with Child It is strange that Mr. Firmin should know after what manner the Hearts of Infants are Circumcised and how they are Regenerate It is enough for us to know that they are redeemed by Christ and saved by Grace for in
knowing this we know our Gracious God will deny them no Supplies which is needful for them If this do not satisfie Mr. F. then let him give some account to the World now he is grown up how the Spirit did work in the business of his Regeneration in his Infancy and if he can give no account of his own Infant-Regeneration then I think it will be hard for him to give it of the manner of the Regeneration of other Infants Mr. Firmin 3. You must demonstrate that tho Infants have not actually sinned against the Covenant of Grace yet they have not unbelief and impenitency seminally which are quite opposite to the Covenant of Grace Answ 1. I conceive nothing can be spoke more irrationally nor unrighteously than to suggest that poor Infants have Unbelief and Impenitency in them And yet so 't is the seeds of those Impieties at least Mr. F. will have to be in them And I demand of him how he knows this And how he can tell when these Sins against the Covenant of Grace are purged from Infants Seeing he has told us they are not holy by their Birth I would know whether they be purged before their Birth or after But let us hear our Saviour's Judgment of little Children which all will grant to be more worth than Mr. Firmin's He speaks of some just Persons which need no Repentance whom he opposes to such as have gone astray I will not presume that this is only meant of Infants to whom our Lord tells us the Kingdom of Heaven belongs but I humbly conceive as it is true of them so it does include them as being of that Number Again He tells us Except we be Converted and become as little Children we cannot see the Kingdom of God. But if Infants be guilty of Vnbelief and Impenitency in such a degree as these Sins in them are quite opposite to the Covenant of Grace we should have but little benefit by such Conversion And thus he reflects upon Christ in his Directions to his Followers as if Christ gave not good Counsel herein St. Paul exhorts Christians as touching Malice to be Children in which Speech he is directly contrary to Mr. F. And St. Peter would have us like new-born Babes i. e. to lay aside all Malice Guile Hypocrisie and evil Speaking But if Unbelief and Impenitency be in them Seminally these Impieties are there also and then they are bad Presidents being as wicked as it is possible for them to be in Mr. F's judgment However Mr. F. is compelled to confess Infants are not guilty of any Actual Sin against the Covenant of Grace And then who made you a Judg of their Hearts Sir Sure this is an Attempt too high for any Man. But I must demonstrate that Infants have not unbelief seminally Well I will plead their Cause as well as I can and I Argue for them thus They who have no object of Faith propounded to them seminally can have no unbelief seminally But Infants have no object of Faith propounded to them seminally Ergo They can have no unbelief seminally If Mr. F. deny the Minor I will hold him to his own Law Affirmanti incumbit probatio If he affirm that Infants have an object of Faith propounded to them seminally let him prove it As for the Major our Saviour's words John 15. 22. do establish it and indeed This is the Condemnation that Light is come and Men love Darkness He that has no Light cannot be blamed because he cannot see Our Lord charges not the sin of Unbelief till means to believe was rejected And will he be more unkind to the Infant than to the grown Person Who can have so vile an opinion of the Almighty But I must demonstrate also that Infants have not Impenitency seminally yea such Impenitency as is quite opposite to the Covenant of Grace Well I reply first by way of Admiration That ever such wild Notions should issue from a Learned Head that so he might have some specious pretence to damn poor Infants But God hath said He will turn the Wisdom of Wise Men backward and make Diviners mad Isa 44. 25. 2. Impenitency supposes the Party charged first to be guilty of some Sin committed or desired or conceived But nothing of this can be justly charged against Infants Consider them acquitted of Original Sin by the Mercy of God in their Redeemer Who shall lay any thing to their charge What have they done Mr. Firmin Do you ask what have they done Did you never see Revenge Wrath Pride Envy Rebellion against and Striking of Parents acting in little Children Answ 1. These are not Infants of Eight days old c. but such who by the ill Example of their Tutors quickly may learn these things Otherwise if the Child thinks it has cause to be Angry and to make Defence it does no more than you will vindicate in your own Cause And why does not Charity make you think the best of Infants seeing you ought to think no evil of the weak actions of grown Persons O thou that canst see such Beams as Revenge Wrath Pride Rebellion c. in the Eyes of poor Infants pluck these Beams out of thine own which evidently are thy Distempers from the Books which thou hast written in which not many Pages are free from Tincture of some of these Diseases But you add Blessed Austin observed a Sucking Child that was not able to articulate one word look with a Countenance even pale with Envy upon his fellow-Suckling which shared with him in the same Milk which made the holy Man cry out Ubi Domine Quando Domine Reply How did Austin know that the Child was pale with Envy Suppose this good Man himself had sat down to Dinner and another snatch it all away from him perhaps he would have look'd Pale also for such we must suppose the Child's case to be when another takes the Breast it thinks all is gone for it yet understands not the Rules of Hospitality or Good-fellowship being unsensible of the others Necessity The poor Child attended its own preservation as Nature taught it a poor ground on which to build so severe a Charge Should the best of God's People be tried how duly they make others sharers in their Blessings who have need of Relief they may perhaps be more justly charged than that Sucking Child Judg no poor Infants lest ye be judged To conclude Seminal Faith Seminal Repentance Seminal Vnbelief and Seminal Impenitency are things of which we have no account in Scripture And though I would not offend Mr. Firmin nor at all disparage his Scholarship which I acknowledg to be abundantly more than mine yet when I consider Learning in Saint Paul's sense 2 Tim. 3. 14. I cannot but think these to be very wild and unlearned Notions which no Man can be assured of nor give a good account that he learned them of any of the Master-Builders the holy Apostles And who ever asserts these things shall never
Original the Chaldee Paraphrast Junius c. which sheweth that it must be understood of them that are Adulti and not of Infants If Infants be not circumcised it is the Parents fault as may appear in the Example of Moses whom the Lord punished and not the Child for neglecting it 3. Concerning Baptism I do believe it to be a very solemn Ordinance and also very useful in the Church of God yet I do not find that it is the Hand of the Spirit to convey Grace to the Heart of any Infant seeing what it conveys it doth it by Faith and by its Figure representing the Death Burial and Resurrection of Christ and ours with him c. of all which Infants know nothing being sprinkled as I formerly shewed very often when they are fast asleep and if awake they know nothing of the Mystery of Baptism But Mr. F. brought three Scriptures to prove his Doctrine we shall now consider them Ephes 5. 26. Christ loved his Church and gave himself for it that he might sanctify and cleanse it by the washing of Water through the Word I allow Baptismal Water to be here meant but then we see it does not cleanse but by or through the Word nor doth the Word profit unless it be mixed with Faith in them that hear it Heb. 4. 1 2. The Church is purified in obeying the Truth through the Spirit 1 Pet. 1. 22. And Baptism saves us as it is the answer of a good Conscience towards God by the Resurrection of Christ And to this agree his other two Scriptures Tit. 3. 11. 1 Pet. 3. 21. Now Infants being uncapable of being cleansed by Baptism according to the sense of these Scriptures we may in no wise apply them to Infant-Baptism Divis 2. And because it may be most convenient to treat of Regeneration in this place we will here consider Mr. F's Arguments to prove that Infants have Faith and Repentance His first Argument is as followeth Arg. 1. If all even adult Persons are passive in the work of Regeneration then Infants are capable of Regeneration But the Antecedent is true Answ 1. Here we are told that grown Persons are passive that is they do nothing at all in the work of Regeneration this is the meaning of his Antecedent Now if this be true as he says it is then if they do nothing they neither hear the Word nor believe it nor repent nor hate nor turn from Sin for these are at least some of the parts of the work of Regeneration Now I would fain know who is active in all this if the Party regenerate be not St. Paul tells us With the Heart Man believeth unto Righteousness and with the Mouth Confession is made unto Salvation Rom. 10. 10. When Peter shewed the Jews their Sin and preached Christ to them they were pricked to the Heart Now observe they came to hear the Word they gave Audience they gave Credit to it God blessed the Word with Power Now they cry out What shall we do Peter exhort them to repent c. and they gladly receive his word and had the washing of Regeneration the same day Now let God have the Glory of this and all Conversions who is the first Mover in it and the Efficient Cause of it yet he is absurd that will say Man is as passive as an Infant that can neither hear nor receive any Instruction at all And therefore I deny his Antecedent it is not true the Adult are some way active in the work of Conversion yea all that know the work do know what wrestling with Corruption is and how unable they are to overcome in the Conflict with Satan and Flesh without Supernatural Strength or Aid from Heaven but yet They act and wait for help in all their actings 2. Men are commanded to hear that their Souls may live Isa 55. If they hear and obey not they sin against God Rom. 10. 16 17 18. We grant that the Power Converting is not of the Creature We are not sufficient of our selves to think any thing as of our selves All our Faculties are given us of God. It 's our duty to put these Faculties into Act to hear repent and believe is Man's Duty It is not the Duty of Infants to hear repent believe c. therefore they are not regenerated this way What you urge from the Shunamite's Son and Lazarus being both dead and so equally passive as to rise from Death is wholly impertinent and being put into Argument is false for thus you must argue if you say any thing Infants dead are as capable to rise as the Adult being dead Ergo They are as capable of hearing beleiving and repenting as the Adult The Consequence is false many Instances we have of the Adult who hear believe and repent but no Instance of one Infant ever regenerated this way 3. As for your captious Demands about our being quickned c. you may well spare them till you give better Evidence of your own Conversion for your Books do evidently shew that a jeering idle Spirit has dominion in you Howbeit this we say The Original Cause of our Conversion is the Love of God The meritorious Cause is the Blood of Christ The ministerial Cause is the Evidence of Truth or the Word of Truth The efficient Cause is the Power of God's Grace John 1. 12. The formal Cause is believing and obeying the Truth through the Spirit The final Cause is God's Glory and our Salvation to the obtaining of which all our Faculties of Hearing Understanding Will and Affection are given us of God to be put into Act. This is not required of Infants and how they are sanctified by the Spirit God only knoweth 4. But now saith Mr. Firmin I will not have him for my God who cannot most omnipotently make me both will and do what he will. But I reply These are great swelling words of Vanity and nothing to the purpose We dispute not what God can do for he can of a Stone in the Street make a better Man than either of us And we deny not but God hath sometimes and may still if he please convert some by miraculous Operations But to say that all Conversions are miraculous as Mr. F. does is very false Paul was converted miraculously so was not Lydia What I say upon Ephes 1. 19 20. is mistaken by you for I extend it further than to the Resurrection of the Body for I expresly say he has power to do whatsoever he pleases and so to raise us up c. but if I was short or obscure this is my meaning The Faith of Christians is agreeable to the power which God shewed in Christ when he raised him from the dead and I think 1 Pet. 1. 3. doth very well explain Ephes 1. 19 20. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which according to his abundant Mercy hath begotten us again to a lively Hope by the Resurrection of Christ from the Dead Mr.
Infants are not made clean from their Pollutions and freed from Condemnation without having Faith and Repentance I say they may because God requires not these things of Infants But you argue further Mr. F. All the Members of the Kingdom of Heaven are holy but Children are Members of the Kingdom of Heaven Not by Birth it is by Regeneration Answ First Here I think you have given your Cause its deaths blow It seems now that the Infants of Believers are no more holy by their Birth of believing Parents than others and whether they be regenerated you cannot tell for you do not hold that all the Children of Believers are saved What is now become of the Birth-priviledg so much gloried in by Mr. Baxter and others We have been told Infants are holy by Birth if one Parent be but a Believer and that Children of Believers are holy by Prerogative of Seed But now you confess the Truth and I grant Infants are not holy by Birth let their Parents be never so Christian And I have already granted that Infants must be cleansed from all Sin before they come to Heaven But yet you touch not the Question Whether they cannot be cleansed from Sin without they have Faith and Repentance one would think you begin to be afraid of the Question and I am sure you have cause so to be Arg. 3. Mr. F. tells us If Adam had continued in Innocency his Children had born the Image of God from the Birth I never heard it denied That which I infer hence is that Children are capable of the Image of God and receiving the Seeds of all Grace it was so then why not now Answ What manner of the Image of God Infants should have born had Adam continued innocent is unknown to Man and 't is but vain to concern our selves about that which cannot be known but this we know it should not have stood in Faith and Repentance as now because in both these we confess our selves Sinners and this is enough to shew the vanity of your Question if so then why not now But you proceed thus Mr. F. Shall the sin of one Person be so mischievous to deprive Adam and all his Posterity of the Image of God and bring the Seeds of all Corruption into their Nature and shall the Grace of God be denyed to renew his Image in little Children when and where he pleaseth Children being a great part of the World shall the Spirit of God have nothing to do in their Hearts Answ I know no Man more faulty than Mr. F. in this matter for he will not allow the Grace of God to have any thing to do with the greatest part of Infants I doubt not but God doth all things needful for them to make them holy by the Blood of Christ his Grace and Spirit But all this shall be done without Faith and Repentance because God does not require it of Infants if he does name your Text. Mr. F. now tells us Adam's Disobedience far exceeds the Obedience of Christ which he compares in Justification Rom. 5. 16 17 18. for his Disobedience could defile all his Posterity but Christ's Obedience doth not cleanse and regenerate one Child Answ Come St. Paul thou hast told us that such as thou art by Letters when absent such thou wilt be indeed when present 2 Cor. 10. 11. Wherefore I shall give place to thee to answer for thy self by the very places which Mr. F. has quoted out of thy Epistle to the Romans Chap. 5. 16 17 18. And not as it was by one that sinned so is the Gift for the Judgment was of one to Condemnation but the free-Gift is of many Offences to Justification For if by the Offence of one Death reigned by one much more they which receive abundance of Grace and of the Gift of Righteousness shall reign in Life by one Jesus Christ Thâ—refore as by the Offence of one Judgment came upon All Men to Condemnation even so by the Righteousness of one the free-Gift came upon All Men unto Justification of Life And whereas Mr. F. boldly tells us that Christ's Obedience doth not cleanse and regenerate one Child I ask him whose Obedience then does cleanse Infants Let St. Paul answer again ver 19. As by one Man's Disobedience many were made Sinners SO by the Obedience of one shall many be made Righteous Blessed Paul thou hast answered to the Life Mr. Firmin says Christ's Obedience doth not cleanse and regenerate one Child Thou sayst Christ's Obedience made many righteous and they that are made righteous are clean and regenerated sufficiently Blessed Apostle thou hast turned the Wisdom of the Wise into Foolishness What follows in this Paragraph is answered before and for his uncivil Expressions in the close of it I shall pass them by Mr. Firmin's Arg. 4. If all Children dying such are justified and saved then there will be Millions in Heaven in whom the Spirit of God as the third Person in the Blessed Trinity had nothing to do in their Salvation Answ First I take notice that Mr. Firmin by this Argument would have Millions of Infants damned because in his Judgment the Spirit of God hath nothing to do with Millions of them in the business of Salvation This this is that wicked Doctrine which I oppose 2. But how will he prove that the Spirit hath to do in the business of the Salvation of any of them more than I shall prove he hath to do in the Salvation of all dying Infants He would prove it by two things 1. Because the distinct Subsistences have their distinct manner of working 2. Because Regeneration is given to the Spirit Now suppose this be true it does not prove that some Infants have the assistance of the Spirit and some dying Infants have no assistance from him Thus he beats the Air but proves not any thing at all relating to the Point in Question 3. But I will prove that all dying Infants have all that assistance of the Spirit in the business of Salvation which is any way needful for them I do it thus All those dying Infants for whom Christ shed his precious Blood have sufficient assistance from the Spirit in the business of their Salvation But Christ shed his precious Blood for all dying Infants Ergo All dying Infants have sufficient assistance from the Spirit in the business of their Salvation The Major is evident because no dying Infant does resist the Holy Ghost and because God is no Respecter of Persons The Minor is evident because Christ died for all tasted Death for every Man he bought them that deny him and bring upon themselves swift Destruction And seeing his tender Mercies are over all his Works the holy Spirit is not wanting to further the Salvation of any dying Infant Deut. 10. 17 18. 1 Tim. 2. 6. Heb. 2. 9. 2 Pet. 2. 1. Psal 145. 9. Come Mr. Firmin let me come near you it may be you have had some Children that died in their