Christ for they came in by the Gospel-Covenant as our Brethren grant from Acts 2.38 39. And is not Christ the Mediator of that Covenant Yea are they not Baptized into Christ Are not the Blood and Benefits of Christ Scaled up to them in Baptism But our Brethren seem wholly to forget that or to make a Nothing of it 2. When this Covenant which is called The covenant of God in Christ Gal. 3.17 is Solemnly owned by them wherein they give up themselves to God and submit to the Government of Christ in the Church Is there nothing of Christ in all this 3. The danger of wanting the Wedding-garment is as great to such as come in with the fairest Profession of Faith as to these and is the Church blameable for admitting such because their danger is so great when such want the Wedding-garment But seeing our Brethren urge so much Joh. 10. let them consider ver 13. The hireling careth not for the sheep We have more cause to fear how we shall answer for our careless Neglect of these Lambs of Christ then for our Receiving them into the Fold of Christ for which we have our Warrant from Christ And withall let us remember that weighty Charge Heb. 12.15 16. Looking diligently lest any fail of the grace of God c. lest there be a profane person as Esau who for a morsell of meat sold his Birthright It seemeth the Apostle did think there was a Precious Birthright and that it was the duty of the Church to look diligently to the preservation and improvement of it Let us then take heed we do not take it from them before the Rule of Christ doth require it By this whole Discourse and by these Ten Reasons we may now fully see upon what Principles our Brethren ground their Anti-Synodalia or their Positions wherein they Dissent from the Synod And therefore seeing the Prefacer complains that Their Tenent is laden with Reproaches of Anabaptism I shall crave leave before I pass on to present unto their serious Consideration what Advantages they put into the hands of the Anabaptists who I fear will make such use hereof as our Brethren would not willingly allow them to do It is true that our Brethren confess with us That the Covenant of God with Abraham and his seed is the Gospel-covenant and doth belong to the Faithfull and their seed Acts 2.38 39. But do they not with their Distinctions in effect take away what they have given them They are Members in generall say they but come to the particular and it is onely as wrapped up in their Parents Covenant they are not actual or personal Members And that Membership in their Parents and their Foederal Holiness reacheth no further then their Minority pag. 37. And what Church-Ordinances are they capable of in that time especially if that were true which some suggest That Ishmael came into the Church by Profession of Faith as an adult Member at thirteen years of age And if at adult age they come not up by Profession of Faith and Grace to Enter into personal Covenant and so to a new Membership hey have no right â—o Church-priviledges And may not a Convert out of Paganism upon such terms enjoy as much as this And as for Church-watch and Government it cannot reach them but by their Parents as it may reach an Infidel-servant and when their Parents be dead and they left to the care of such as are not of the Church how shall it then touch them at all And when their Owning of the Covenant is accounted the Form of their Membership what is this but to make a Nullity of their Covenant sealed in Baptism So that it will I fear seem to the Anabaptists That to Baptize Infants is to set a Seal to a Blank or to a Covenant of no use to them Again when our Brethren so oft deny the visible Covenant and the Priviledges thereof to such as want the inward Grace and affirm That the Covenant and the Priviledges thereof are limited to those that with Abraham walk with God whose heart was faithfull who love God and keep his commandments pag. 29. Will not the Anabaptists be ready to inferre Therefore Infants wanting that Grace c. have no right to the Covenant or to Baptism the Priviledge of it Again when our Brethren so oft confound the Outward and Inward Dispensation of the Covenant alledging the Scandalous sins of Church-members in the Scripture to prove that these in question are Self-Excommunicated and have no interest in the Outward Covenant or Priviledges thereof Is not this a Mistake which they will make advantage of Lastly when they say That the Practice of the fifth Proposition exposeth the Blood of Christ to contempt Baptism to be profaned bringeth pollution into the Church c. what are the Reasons For say they it imparteth the Blood of the Covenant to those that are not visible Believers sets the Seal to a Blank severeth Baptism from the stipulation of a good conscience bringeth the uncircumcised in heart into the Sanctuary But they oft confess that Infants have no Faith They are a carnall seed c. And is it not a just fear that the Anabaptists will be ready to inferre Therefore to baptize Infants is to expose the Blood of Christ to contempt c I know our Brethren will say We do not require Faith and Grace in the Infants but in the Parents onely But yet when generally we ground the Baptism of Infants upon the Covenant of God to the Parents and their seed Gen. 17. Acts 2. 1 Cor. 7. and prove they are Disciples Members of the visible Church and therefore to be Baptized I wish our Brethren may consider how greatly this ground is weakned by Denial of Gods Covenant to their Persons and onely as in their Parents and by making it so slight a matter as to wear out with their Minority c. And also let them consider how suitable their Notions and Principles before-named are to the Arguments and Grounds of Denial of Baptism to all Infants as is easie to see in all the Books of Antipoedobaptists These things I mention that our Brethren may keep further off from this danger which themselves count a Reproach I shall now proceed to consider the Answers of our Brethren to the Arguments of the Synod for the proof of the fifth Proposition Arg. 1. These children are partakers of the main ground of baptizing any children whatsoever and neither the parents nor the children do put in any barre to hinder it This ground is the Interest in the Covenant Gen. 17.7 9 10 11. Acts 2.39 Col. 2.10 11. Ans They answer in general that Faith is the main ground of Baptism Rom. 4.11 Acts 8.37 19.4 Reply 1. Here is no answer to the Scriptures alledged which are very full Gen. 17.10 11. This is my Covenant which ye shall keep Every Male-childe shall be circumcised It shall be a token of the Covenant between me and you
So Acts 2.38 39. The Promise is to you and your children 2. Faith is the Condition of the Covenant yet the outward Seal had reference to the outward Covenant it self for Lo and other Believers could not partake of Circumcision but by entring into that visible Covenant with Abraham And our Brethren afterward do grant That the Church-covenant is the next ground of the dispensation of the Seals Now they that have the next ground are supposed to have the more remote Ans 2. More particularly they say the Covenant is not the main ground of Baptism For 1. though they had Abraham for their father yet John 's Baptism takes away that Plea Mat. 3.8 9. and calls for Repentance Reply John took away their vain confidence in Abraham's Covenant for Righteousness and Life as the Prophets also frequently did Isa 1. 58. Jer. 7. Mic. 6. But he took not away the outward Priviledges of Abraham's Covenant as Circumcision Sacrifices c. 2. John indeed calls for Repentance in a people so corrupt to fit them for a more Gospel-dispensation to make them a People prepared for the Lord. But that is not the case of these in the fifth Proposition who are in the Gospel covenant and have the Seal of Baptism 2. We must distinguish say they between the Covenant of Grace and the church-Church-covenant which differ very much for the Covenant of Grace belongeth onely to the Elect and true Believers which the Church cannot infallibly judge who they are But the Church-covenant which is the next ground of the dispensation of the Sealâ— requireth mutuall consent of them that are admitted into communion to walk with God according to the Gospel The Covenant of Grace is made to the children in the Parents but is established onely by the restipulation of Faith and Repentance Gen. 17.7 9. Rom. 11.20 Thou standest by Faith Reply 1. I cannot see how these things can consist one with another For if the Covenant of Grace belongeth onely to the Elect and true Believers and this Covenant of Grace be made with the childe in the Parents then the childe and Parents must be Elect and true Believers which will not be granted Again if the difference of the Church-covenant stands in this That it requrreth mutuall consent to walk with God how shall Infants partake of the Church-covenant and Baptism whereof it is the next ground 2. This Distinction as here laid down doth not prove the thing it was brought for but rather yield the same For 1. It is yielded that the Church-covenant is the next ground of Baptism and that which is the next ground and immediate is the chief for it supposeth the remote and the remote grounds without the next could not give right to Baptism and therefore this is the chief ground Besides when it is said that the Covenant of Grace is made to the childe in the Parents then still the Covenant even of Grace also is the ground of Baptism But say they the establishment is upon the restipulation of Faith Thou standest by Faith Rom. 11.20 Be it so in respect of the Covenant of Grace and the saving Benefits thereof yet the visible Covenant and Dispensation of the Ordinances and Means of Grace remains to such in the Covenant as do continue in the visible Profession thereof as hath been oft proved That Faith by which the Gentile-Churches stand Rom. 11.20 is such a Faith as is opposed to that Unbelief for which the Jews were broken off but they were not broken off for want of holding forth positive Saving Faith to the judgement of Charity but for positive Unbelief whereby they obstinately rejected Christ Rom. 10.21 They were a disobedient and gainsaying people Acts 13.45 The Apostle turned from them to the Gentiles because they contradicted and blasphemed Mat. 21.42 43. The Kingdome of God was taken from them because they rejected Christ the Corner stone See also Acts 18.5 6. 19.8 9. And therefore so long as the Gentile Churches do profess Jesus Christ and his Gospel and Ordinances they may stand in the visible Covenant through the patience of God though they or many of their Members do not hold out such a Profession of Saving Faith visibly to the judgement of Charity otherwiser we must Unchurch many such Societies of Christians whom the Lord hath not Unchurched but continueth to them the Means and Ordinances of Grace 3. I deny that there is such a difference between the Church-covenant and that of Grace for as was said in the second Proposition premised Chap. 2. there is indeed a differing dispensation of the Covenant of Grace in the Church viz. Outwardly in the Priviledges Ordinances and Means of Grace to the whole visible Church or Inwardly in the Saving Benefits thereof to true Believers Now that the Dispensation of the Covenant of God to the whole visible Church is the Dispensation of the Covenant of Grace is proved 1. Because God giveth himself to be the God of all the visible Church Gen. 17. I will be thy God and he avoucheth them to be His People and they avouch him to be Their God Deut. 26.17 18. Now this is the first and chief Benefit of the Covenant of Grace and containeth all the rest as Mr. Cotton noteth upon that Covenant 2. Because the Means of Grace and Life and the offer of Christ and Grace is given to all in the visible Church Rom. 3.1 2 3. 9.4 3. Because all in Church-covenant stand bound thereby to Believe Repent and perform the conditions of the Covenant of Grace and this our Brethren confess that Church-covenant requires they should walk with God according to the Gospel which is the Covenant of Grace I have the more insisted on this Passage because the right understanding hereof is of much use to the main Question in debate That these in the fifth Proposition are still in Covenant the Synod proveth Because they were once in Covenant and never cut off from it Ans To this our Brethren Answer The Lord himself discovenants them Mat. 3. Joh. 8.39 40 41 42. where the Lord takes away their Plea of the Covenant and tells them they have the Devil for their Father And that without any act of Church-discipline c. They may reject the counsel of God against themselves as the Pharisees Luke 7. They may be Felones de se as Mr. Cotton speaks c. There are other grounds of breaking off the Covenant besides notorious sins and incorrigibleness therein as Not standing by Faith Not bringing forth fâ—uit Mat. 3.10 Not doing Righteousness 1 Joh. 3.10 Reply I have many things to Reply here 1. Did the Lord himself discovenant all those out of his visible Church spoken of Mâ—â— 3 Joh. 8 Were their seed thereby cut off from Circuâ—cision Were they excluded from the Sacrifices and Temple-worship Who can believe this when we see the Lord Jesus so oft communicated with them in the Worship of God when he calleth them still The lost sheep of
Abrahams seed as well as of himself ver 7 9 10. Deut. 29.10 11 12. The little ones stood to enter into Covenant with the Lord their God Ezek. 16.8 I entred into Covenant with thee and thou becamest mine This is the common language of the Scripture In the New Testament besides other places note that 1 Cor. 12.12 13. where the Apostle proves that the Church is one Body consisting of many Members some weak and of less honour c. By Baptism the Seal of the covenant we are all Baptized into one Body and so as that there might be no Schism in the Body But how shall the Body be one if some be Baptized into this Body as actual and personal Members some not actual nor personal some into a parental covenant some personal What a Schism might this make some saying I am not actually of the Body though Baptized with the same Baptism and there is but one Baptism others may say I am of the Body personally You are no actual Members of it It seemeth the Apostle knew not these Distinctions So Gal. 3.27 28. All are Baptized into Christ and are all one in Christ 2. I finde that the Scripture doth clearly own the Church-seed grown up to adult age to be in Covenant with God and so Members of the Church by virtue of Gods Covenant made with them in their Infancy and that before any personal Covenant as they call it See Deut. 5.2 3. The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. The Lord made not this covenant with our fathers but with us even us who are all of us here alive this day Now who were these but that generation numbred by Moses and Eleazar when all that were numbred at the first of twenty years old and upward were dead See Numb 26.63 64. with Deut. 1.3 So that multitudes of these now alive were in their infancy and minority when God made that Covenant with them in Horeb and yet it is expresly said God made that Covenant with them even with their own persons that was a Personal not a Parental Covenant as our Brethren phrase it And this is set out with a double Emphasis 1. Negatively Not with our fathers Why so was it not made with their fathers now dead Yes surely but not onely with them or not with us as wrapped up with or in our fathers 2. With us Affirmatively and again Even with us and a third time With us that are now alive in distinction from their fathers that were dead and all this before that second Covenant Deut. 29. for this is said of them before the Repetition of that Covenant at Horeb to provoke them to the obedience thereof Where then is this Parental Covenant distinguished from Personal so as to make two sorts or degrees of Members 3. I observe That when the Scripture calleth this Covenant The Covenant of their fathers or of the Lord God of their fathers it is never so styled to the diminution or abatement of any Blessing Priviledge or Favour that might come to their seed by it but rather for the advantage and greater good of the Children See Exod. 3.15 16. 6.3 4 5. Lev. 26.44 45. I will not abhor them c. But I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their Ancestors whom I brought out of Egypt So Deut. 4.31 So that in these and divers other Scriptures we see no such disadvantage to the seed by being under Parental Covenant as our Brethren call it who first bring down Gods Covenant to a Parental Covenant and then make a very slight matter of that also that it cannot capacitate their seed to Baptism Is not sufficient to establish their seed to be a people to God Will not reach beyond the minority of their seed and the like Object But it will be Objected That although these Distinctions be not so expresly found in Scripture-phrase yet the nature of the subject doth admit such Distinctions Ans 1. Some of them cannot consist with the nature of the subject as for a person to be a Member but not actually a person in Covenant baptized into the Body of Christ and yet not personally these are plain Contradictions in adjecto as we say To be A Member and yet No Member As for this of Parental and Personal Covenant so much used it maketh not two Covenants the Covenant is but one and that Gods Covenant as is said there is but a differing modus or manner of entring into it 2. As for the rest of Mediate and Immediate Members Perfect and Imperfect and the rest Suppose that in some sense the subject do admit them yet they can never bear up such Consequences as are built upon them for they are but distributions ex adjunctis and those common Adjuncts to many other Subjects which cannot make any essential difference As when we distinguish the Church into Visible and Invisible it is still but one and the same Church So Church-Covenant into Explicite and Implicite there is still but one sort of Churches or Covenants So the Church is either Incompleat without Officers or Compleat with her Officers yet still a true Church and not two sorts of Churches Such is this case if we put twenty such Distinctions upon Members from common Adjuncts they make no essential difference These things besides much more that might be said to me afford this Conclusion That in these Distinctions and the Consequences thereof there is no Scripture-Light but a Mist to darken the Free and Rich Grace of God shining out in his Covenant to the Faithful and their seed I return now to consider the Reasons of our Brethren to prove that Parental Covenant cannot capacitate their seed for Baptism Their first Reason is For so the Covenant should be intailed to a thousand generations Ans What our Brethrens Parental Covenant can do I know not but surely Gods Covenant is An everlasting Covenant Gen. 17.7 to be a God to their seed viz. They keeping within the Covenant from generation to generation And if the Lord will intall his Covenant and the Means of Grace thereby to such as keep his Covenant to a thousand generations what hurt is in that Blessed be his Name for it Reas 2. Ishmael and Esau had the Parental Covenant but were not Established thereby Ans This was not from any insufficiency in Gods Covenant for so I must call it but from their sin that continued not in it By this Reason Personal Covenant by Profession of Faith and Repentance is as insufficient for such by their sin may not be established Reas 3. The immediate Parents Vnbelief breaks off the Covenant from their seed Rom. 11.20 21 22. Ans True such Unbelief whereby they obstinately rejected Christ Acts 13.45 46. Mat. 21.42 43. but this was not from any insufficiency in Gods Covenant to capacitate their seed to Baptism or Establish a People but from their rejecting of the Covenant in rejecting Christ that Seed in whom all
follow that because God may justly cut off a man from the Church for not believing or Sins of Omission that therefore he doth so or that therefore a Church-member by Sins of Omission doth actually cut off himself from the visible Church Surely these are worse then farre-fetched and uncertain Consequences from the Old Testament 2. For the Assumption of this Argument They say but without Proof That these Parents in the fifth Proposition do not walk with God c. according to the conditions of the Covenant I answer These do outwardly and visibly at least so Walk with God Love Him and keep His Commandments as the Rule of God doth account A keeping of the visible Covenant These Profess the Faith are not scandalous in life give up themselves to God submit to his Rules and government and were not such as these all along in the Scripture accepted as the People of God in the visible Covenant Deut. 5. when the people professed to Obey Moses in all things God saw they wanted an heart to fear him and keep his commandments yet he entred into Covenant with them How oft are the Kings of Judah that observed the Ordinances of Worship said to do that which was right in the sight of the Lord and to walk in his wayes though they wanted that upright walking with God and love of God which was required See 2 Chron. 11.17 2 Kings 11.2 14.3 15.3 34. And Not to walk in the wayes of the Lord is charged upon them when they walked after Baalim In the wayes of Jeroboam and the like To conclude I would demand of our Brethren that hold this way of Self-Excommunication Whether any Member doth Excommunicate himself by any act that is not Excommunicable or matter of Excommunication by the Rule of Church-discipline If so let us have a Rule for it if not surely these in the fifth Proposition do not Excommunicate themselves for no Rule of Christ would allow the Church to cast them out Ans 2. The children in question say they are in a state of Neutrality at present and such Christ accounts to be against him Mat. 12.30 They are neither hot nor cold Rev. 3. Reply Mat. 12.30 speaketh not of such as these for these are for Christ that Profess the Faith of Christ and Submit to his government That Saying of Christ Mark 9.40 suits better with these He that is not against us is for us As for Rev. 3. Christ calls that Luke-warm Church A golden Candlestick holds their Stars in his Right hand offers to come in c. So that Christ is not so quick in discovenanting luke-warm ones as our Brethren seem to be Arg. 3. From the evil consequences of the contrary Opinion as 1. To deny the Proposition would be to straiten the grace of Christ in the Gospel-dispensation and to make the Church in the New Testament times in a worse case relating to their children successively then were the Jews of old Ans 1. This doth not straiten the Gospel-dispensation seeing it is granted to be extended to all Nations and to both Sexes which was not of old Reply This indeed the Anabaptists answer but it doth not reach the case For such inlargement of the grace of God in Gospel-times would argue rather that it should be enlarged in this Point also and not therefore straitned here because enlarged in other respects Were it Objected to a Father That he straitned his wonted favours to his children in putting them out of the Family and he should answer Not so for I have taken in many adopted children would this answer satisfie Or should he say Not so for though I kept my Family with Pulse before I now give them much better fare would not any man say So much is the greater wrong to your children both to put them out of the Family and deprive them of their share in the better fare allowed to the Family Just so is the case here Ans 2. This doth no more straiten the grace of the Covenant then the keeping of Baptized especially covenanting Parents from the Lords Supper seeing the circumcised Jews were not debarred from the passover Reply The circumcised Jews did not partake of the Passover without suitable legal qualifications viz. A state of legal purity and fitness to eat it to the Lord and therefore they were to instruct their children in the meaning of that Service Exod. 12.25 26 27. In like manner we debarre none from the Lords Supper but for want of Gospel qualifications Ans 3. Gospel-times are in many respects Times of Reformation Heb. 9.10 and therefore to build so much upon the largeness of Jewish practices is a great sin seeing it is a stretching of the narrow way that leads to life to be as wide as the broad way that leads most to destruction Reply 1. We build not upon Jewish practices Ceremonial wherein that Reformation Heb. 9.10 did consist as is plain in the Text but upon the Gospel-covenant with Abraham and that in the substantials of it viz. I will be thy God and the God of thy seed after thee in their generations exemplified in the seed of Abraham 2. It is a strange speech to say that This is a stretching of the narrow way of life to be as broad c. Surely Gods enlargement of the Covenant to the Posterity of Abraham in their generations was an act of Gods grace tending to bring the more to life by giving to them the means of grace and life and therefore was not the broad way to dâ—struction The straitness of the way to life doth not stand in restraining the means of grace to a few for why then should the Lord enlarge the Gospel to all Nations now more then of old 2d Consequence To deny the Proposition is to render the children of the Jews when they shall be converted in a worse condition then they were under the Legal-dispensation contrary to Jer. 30.20 Ezek. 37.25 26. Ans This is denied any more then that they should be in a worse state if they shall not have an High-Priest and Temple-worship when they shall have in Christ a thousand-fold more So here is like reason in respect of His abundant grace Reply The loss of Shadows is nothing seeing they shall have the Substance in Christ but this being an essential Branch of Gods Covenant with Abraham which is the gospel-Gospel-covenant it cannot be taken away without reall loss and the more abundant grace the greater is the loss as was said before Ans 2. This doth no more put them into a worser state then transmitting the Covenant now onely to the next seed which before was transmitted to remote Posterity Reply The Covenant was all along transmitted by the next Parents to their seed in the Old Testament For so long as they were not cast off by the Lord he accounted every generation to be His People even in their worst times So that the transmitting of the Covenant and Church-priviledges was still by