Ordinance that can with any shew of probability be supposed to be it I shall therefore only instance in a fourfold use and end whereunto Circumcision as the Sign and Token of the Covenant was appointed and whereunto it did serve and then shew the agreement of Baptism with Circumcision in regard of those uses and ends The first and two last I shall do little more than mention and a little insist upon the second First Circumcision as the Sign and Token of the Covenant was the solemn Rite or Ordinance whereby persons were admitted into and incorporated in the Jewish Church and by the reception of which they became actual Members of that Church and consequently was that solemn Rite or Ordinance whereby persons were incorporated in and united to the mystical Body of Christ as visible The proving of this I suppose is needless 't will surely be denyed by none And therefore Secondly Circumcision was to seal and assure to the Subjects of it their enjoyment of the good things benefits and blessings promised in according to the true tenour of the Covenant to the administration of which it was annexed See this in a particular Instance viz. Remission of sin or the Righteousness which is of Faith Circumcision was a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith that is it did seal and assure to the due Subjects of it the non-imputation of their sin or the imputation of righteousness to them upon condition of their Faith Thus it is said of Abraham He received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the righteousness of faith which he had being yet uncircumcised Rom. 4.11 The Apostle here shews us one special use and end of Circumcision respective to all to whom it was duly applyed Object But here it is objected That to have Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith was a priviledge peculiar to Abraham the Father of the faithful and was not of that use nor appointed for that end to all to whom it was rightfully applyed therefore it is said He received the sign of Circumcision a seal of the righteousness of faith that he might be the Father of all that believe And hence it may seem that he receiving Circumcision under that notion and consideration upon a reason and ground peculiar and proper to himself the priviledge was peculiar and proper to him and not common to any other with him there not being the same reason and ground of their receiving of it under the same notion and consideration To that I answer two things First Those words That he might be the Father of all them that believe depend not only upon the words immediately foregoing but upon the tenth verse taken in conjunction with the former part of v. 11. he did not only receive Circumcision as a Seal that he might be the Father of all them that believe but he both had righteousness imputed to him while in uncircumcision and also received the Sign of Circumcision as a Seal that he might be the Father of them that should believe whether circumcised or uncircumcised So that he did not receive Circumcision as a Seal of the righteousness of faith upon any reason peculiar and special to himself any more than he had righteousness imputed to him upon a reason peculiar and proper to himself And consequently upon the same account that our Opposites appropriate circumcision as a Seal of the righteousness of faith to Abraham himself and deny it to be of the same use to his Seed they may appropriate the imputation of Righteousness through Faith and Circumcision it self to him alone and deny that any of his Seed had Righteousness imputed unto them or ought to have been circumcised Secondly I answer That the Apostle here rather speaks of the finis cui than the finis cujus of Abraham's receiving Circumcision as a Seal My meaning is this Abraham received circumcision as a Seal not barely for the sake of that relation of his being a Father of them that should believe as it was a good benefit or priviledge to himself but he received it under that notion and consideration In eorum gratiam qui credituri sint for their sake to whom he should sustain the relation of a Father And so the meaning is He received the Sign of Circumcision as a Seal of the Righteousness of Faith not barely that he might sustain the relation of a Father to all that should believe as that was a good to himself but that he might as a Father or common person be a pattern to all that should sustain that relation of Children to him in regard of the good which they as his Children should receive Now then having removed this Objection I shall offer two or three Arguments to prove that Circumcision was appointed for this use and end viz. to seal and confirm the whole Covenant to all to whom it was according to the will of God to be applyed The first shall be taken from the end of Abraham's receiving of it as here declared by the Apostle And thus I argue If Abraham received Circumcision as a Seal of the Righteousness which he had through Faith that he might be the Father of and as the Father of a pattern to all that being circumcised should believe then to all that being circumcised did believe their circumcision was and ought to be looked upon and improved by them as a Seal of that Righteousness they had through Faith But the former is true therefore the latter For the Consequence in the Major proposition I suppose that will not be denyed it being past all rational doubt that if Abraham received Circumcision under that very notion and consideration as a Seal that he might be the Father of and as the Father of might be a pattern to all that being circumcised should believe as he did Then look of what use it was to him or to what end he received it it must needs be of the same use and appointed for the same end unto them to whom he was a pattern as receiving it And therefore 't is only the Antecedent that can be questioned which yet is so evident that to understanding and unprejudiced persons the proving of it may seem wholly superfluous That Abraham received Circumcision under this very notion as a Seal of the righteousness which he had through faith that he might be the Father of all them who being circumcised did believe is expresly affirmed by the Apostle all that can be doubted of is whether he was in regard of the use and end of it as received by himself a pattern to all to whom he was a Father But now this is undeniable in as much as his paternity or fatherhood as I may so speak in part if not principally confisted in his being a pattern and example to all tow hom he was a Father This title of a Father is in a peculiar and special manner given to and predicated of Abraham in this very regard that he was set up
Houshold there is not the least intimation of the conversion of any besides Lydia her self yea there is as we have already seen tantum non a certainty that at least some of her Houshold were baptized upon the account of her faith and not their own personal profession and as for the Gaolers Houshold it doth not certainly appear that any in or of his said to be baptized were converted antecedent to that their baptism It is true there are two passages urged to prove that they were such of his as were wrought upon by the Word as spoken by Paul First It is said verse 32. That they that is Paul and Silas spake to him the Word of the Lord and to all that were in his house Whence it is supposed that all that were in his House and consequently his said to he baptized ver 33. must needs be such as were capable of having the Word preached to them But to that four things may be replyed First It is uncertain whether this speaking of the Word of which Luke speaks was antecedent to the baptism of the Gaoler and his House things are not alwayes declared in that order in which they were done Secondly Suppose that be granted yet it cannot be concluded from thence that there were none incapable of having the Word spoken to them in his House See a like Instance Deut. 31. verse last it is said Moses spake in the ears of all the Congregation of Israel the words of this Song until they were ended Now shall we conclude there were no Infants or little Children in that Congregation The contrary is evident verse 12. Thirdly It is no way evident that the persons in his House to whom the Word was spoken were numerically the same persons said to be baptized all of his said to be baptized seems plainly to intend different persons from all those in his House to whom the Word was spoken But fourthly Suppose the person were numerically the same yet the having the Word spoken to them will not conclude their conversion by that Word the Word may be spoken to those that are not converted by it so that this passage doth no way evince the conversion of any in his House besides himself alone antecedent to his and his Housholds baptism I do not say absolutely there were none but it cannot be certainly concluded that there were any Secondly The other passage urged to prove the conversion of the Houshould antecedent to their baptism is that verse 34 where it is said according as we read He rejoyced believing in God with all his Houshold but the Greek runs exactly thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He rejoyced with all his house he believing in God Now his house might rejoyce though none were savingly wrought upon but the Gaoler himself and indeed the Apostles laying the ground of their joy in his personal believing they rejoyced he believing in God doth plainly intimate that as yet the Gaoler alopne did believe for why else should he not say they believing in God or at least that the benefit which was the matter and occasion of their joy did accrew unto them through his faith 'T is not for nothing that the Apostle makes his personal believing in God the ground of the joy of the whole House so that it doth not certainly appear that any in the Gaolers house did believe antecedent to their baptism And for the Houshold of Stephanus there is nothing evidencing their or any of their faith antecedent to their baptism 'T is true we read that his Houshold did addict themselves to the Ministry of the Saints 1 Cor. 16.15 But whether these said to addict themselves to this Ministry were converted before or after his imbracement of the Gospel and his and his Housholds baptism is altogether uncertain Thirdly observe That suppose some particular persons in or of these Houses said to be baptized might be converted antecedent to their baptism yet from thence it cannot be concluded that in others Houses it must needs be so also not yet that the Housholds as generally considered were not baptized upon the account of the Parents faith as suppose there were any converted in the Gaolers House antecedent to their baptism from thence it cannot be concluded that any in Lydia's House were converted antecedent to their baptism so suppose there should be some of the Gaolers House converted before their baptism yet to argue from thence that Baptism was not administred to the Houses as more generally taken as the Houses of believing Parents is a meet non sequitur So that suppose it could be proved which yet it cannot be that some in or of some one or other of the Houses said to be baptized were baptzed upon the account of their own personal profession of Faith and Repentance yet that would not overthrow the evidence that the Instances of any Housholds being baptized as a Houshold of a Believer gives in to the truth contended for the probability of any one Houshold yea or any one in or of any one Houshold being baptized as the Houshold or as of the Houshold of such a Parent carryes alike evidence to the truth pleaded for as taken abstractly in it self as it would do in case there were the same probability that all these Housholds and all in them were baptized as such Housholds From the whole of what hath been said touching these several Instances and that as taken abstractly in themselves I shall not doubt to conclude that there is at least a very great probability that in primitive times Houses were together with their converted Parents baptized and that meeerly as the Houses of such Parents And yet further for the making it more probable that these Housholds said to be baptized at least some in or of them were indeed baptized not upon the account of a personal profession of their own Faith and Repentance but upon the account of their Parents Faith as received into the same Covenant-state with them let these things be confidered First How exceeding improbable it is that in case none could be admitted into communion with the Body of Christ by Baptism but upon a personal profession of Faith and Repentance the Sacred Historian writing by divine inspiration would mention and leave upon record the baptism of any one Houshold without giving the least intimation of the conversion of at least one or more in or of that Houshold that so the ground of the baptism of the rest might have been clearly inferred That the Covenant together with the Sign and Token of it should be of the same latitude and extent in the administration and application of it that it was under the first Testament might be rationally expected by all men hence it may be well supposed thta our Lord Jesus Christ who is expresly said to be faithful in all his House as Moses was in his would if not have given some express and positive discovery of his will as to the baptism of
evils inconveniencies and disadvantages supposed by them to follow upon the granting unto them such a Covenant-interest and application of Baptism upon the ground thereof But now all that I shall say to this is as for the good benefit and advantage arising to the Infant-seed of believing Parents from both their Covenant-state and Baptism as applyed unto them thereupon 't is exceeding great as will I hope through Divine assistance be made to appear if Providence disappoint not my present purpose At present let this be considered as for their Covenant-interest and state a double benefit ariseth to them thereby First They are as distributively taken under a Promise of God being their God in the sence declared in the insuing Discourse Secondly They are as collectively taken as Members of the visible Church under an indefinite Promise supposing them grown to years of maturity of being to taught of God as savingly to know him How far the certainty of their future Salvavation supposing them to dye in their infancy may be concluded from their interest in these Promises I shall leave to the judgment of the judicious Reader This I doubt not will be found true at the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ when these Secrets shall be made manifest that vastly the Major part of the Seed of Believers and that by vertue of these very Promises made unto them will be found the heirs of that Inheritance prepared for the Saints in light mistake me not I do not say the major part of the Seed of each particular Believer but the major part of the Seed of Believers generally taken or as taken one with another But however methinks it should not be accounted a small matter to be brought in any sense though it be never so little nigher the Promises of Salvation and into a nigher capacity and probability of injoying the good promised than the rest of mankind are in and that they must sure be acknowledged to be by that their Covenant-state and interest in the Promises And as for Baptism the good and benefit of that is hinted in the close of the insuing Discourse and is more fully to be declared if the Lord will As for the evils and mischiefs supposed to follow upon our Doctrine and practice they are really none at all whatever evils may be observed at any time to follow they are only accidental and will be found to have some other Original and not be the natural and necessary fruits and consequences of either the Doctrine or practice of Infant-Baptism Fifthly That which is of a like importance with what hath been hitherto mentioned is peoples placing at least too much of their Religion in an external way mode or form attended with an easiness and facility to be drawn into this or that way by unsound and groundless motives and inducements too many think that if they are but of such a way they are good Christians and secured as to their eternal states hence through the subtlety of Satan and deceit of their own hearts they overlook and neglect the main things wherein the power of Religion doth indeed consist and betake themselves to and fall in with this or that way as supposing themselves thereby insured for Salvation and wanting judgment to discern between Truth and Error fall in with the Judgment and practice under consideration as led thereunto meerly by some unsound and groundless motive and inducement and though it is true truly conscientious Christians cannot satisfie themselves in a bare way or form neither will they be led by any motives or inducements without any regard at all had to the Word of God yet even in respect of many of them especially such who are of weaker Judgments some unsound and groundless motive and inducement hath no little interest in their imbracing this or that way rather than any other and thus the motives and iuducements leading Professors into a complyance with the way or judgment and practice lying opposite to what we have here pleaded for are exceeding various all which to enumerate would under me over tedious all that I shall say therefore is If we would come to a right understanding of the mind and will of our Lord Christ place Religion where it ought to be placed and then setting all such motives and inducements aside weigh impartially the Scriptures and Arguments grounded thereupon readily giving up our Judgments and practices to the guidance of the light and evidence of those Scriptures and Arguments Sixthly and lastly The perswasion and practice here opposed have prevailed so far among Christians in a great measure through their preposterous enquiries after the will of Christ relating to the practice here pleaded for taken in conjunction with the products of those inquiries in and upon their own minds and the preposterousness of their inquiries lyes more especially in these two things First In their inquiring after the will of Christ as to the Baptism of Infants before they have sought after or found out the proper uses and ends of Baptism in the general and the true notion under which it was instituted and commanded by Christ Secondly In their inquiring after the will of Christ relating to this practice without any precedent consideration had to his will relating to the interest of the Infants of believing Parents in the Covenant and Promises thereof by these preposterous inquiries men put themselves under a threefold disadvantage as to their finding out that will of Christ they are inquiring after First They terminate and limit their inquiries to the Scriptures of the new Testament as supposing the whole will of Christ relating unto Baptism it being a new Testament Ordinance must needs be contained in them Secondly Which follows hereupon They search not after nor attend unto the Tenour of the Covenant as at first established with Abraham the Father of the Faithful nor attend to the various Scriptures contained in the old Testament opening and confirming that Tenour of the Covenant as so established with him Thirdly Which follows from both They loose the benefit of those several Inferences that may rationally and according to Scripture warrant be drawn from interest in the Covenant for the determining and concluding what is the mind and will of Christ concerning the application of Baptism But now would people begin their inquiries where they ought to do and proceed regularly therein they would find the mind and will of Christ to appear with much more clearness of evidence on the side of the practice we plead for would they make their first inquiries after the proper uses and ends of Baptism and the true notion under which it is instituted and then proceed in an impartial search after the Tenour of the Covenant and here again begin where they ought to do viz. at the first establishment of it with Abraham the Father of the Faithful and so proceed regularly as the Covenant hath been continued from one Generation to another to Abraham's Seed whether Natural
did So that the Minor Proposition is undoubtedly true whence the Conclusion will undoubtedly follow My second Argument is this If the promise of Salvation may and ought to be applied by the dispencers of the Gospel to believing Parents both with reference to themselves and their Children meerly as such that is as believing Parents without consideration has to the personal faith and repentance of any in or of their houses then the promise of Salvation muse needs belong to them and their houses without consideration had to the personal saith and repentance of any in or of their houses but the former is true therefore the latter Certainly if a Minister of the Gospel may apply the promise of Salvation not only to believing Parents themselves but to their houses then that promise belongs not only to them but to their houses Ministers may not apply promises any other wayes then as they belong to those to whom the application is made Now that the promise of Salvation may and ought to be applyed in this extent and latitude not only to believing Parents themselves but to their respective houses and that meerly as such without consideration had to the personal faith and repentance of any in or of their houses is evident past all rational contradiction by the Apostles proposing the promise in this extent and latitude to the Jaylor As the Apostle did proplse it to the Jaylor as a motive to him to believe it might and ought to have been applied to him upon his actual believing he might have been assured that now he and his house should be saved yet in that way and according to that method or upon the terms hold forth in the Covenant of Grace an account of which we have already given And that the Apostle proposes this promise in the extent and latitu de before exprest to the Jaylor upon condition of his own believing without consideration had to the personal faith and repentance of any in or of his house is evident from the express words of the Text Thou shalt be saved and thy house and consequently might have been applied to him as a Believer upon his actual believing and hence it appears that this promise did not appertain to him alone it was not a priviledge peculiar to him to have his house under the same promise with himself but a priviledge common to all believing Barents Quatenus ipsum concludes de omni The only Objection I have met with is this That as the Promise was made conditionally to the Jaylor himself so to his house that is as the Apostle promised to him that if he believed he should be saved so he promised to him with reference to his house that if they believed they should be saved according to the interpretation given of that promise of Peter Acts 2.39 To that I answer That though it is readily granted that the promise as externally proposed was conditionally both to himself and his house yet I say that his own believing did give his house an actual right to and interest in the promise yet to be fulfilled according to the terms of the Covenant is evident because there could be no reason of the Apostles adding that other branch of the promise as a motive to him to believe unless by his believing a peculiar good which can be nothing else but this right to and interest in the promise did accrew to his house It had been a stronger motive for the Apostle to have said Believe in the Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved and all the Town or Country yea all the World If the Apostle had not intended a peculiar good in relation to the salvation of his house redounding to them by his believing there had been no more reason for him to mention his house than for him to have mentioned the whole Town or Country or whole World in as much as thev should all be saved upon condition of their believmg And hence whereas when this consideration is urged to prove That the Apostle Peter holds forth and declares the Covenant and promises thereof in this latitude and extent to those awakened Jews Acts. 2.29 It is replyed That there were other Reasons of his mentioning their Children then the asserting their right to and interest in the Covenant and I romise thereof That shift for so I shall call it can have no place here for if it should be granted that the Apostle Peter might mention the Children of these Jews with respect to that imprecation they were under recorded in Matth. 27.25 ir wutg respect to that first offer and tender of Christ and the grace of the Gospel to be made to the Jews yet there could be no such reason of the Apostle mentioning the Jaylors house they were under no such imprecation neither had they any priviledge above others in point of the offers and tenders of Salvation to be made to them and therefore the only reason imaginable of the Apostles mentioning of his house was to assure him that upon his believing he should injoy the promise of Salvation in the extent and latitude it was at the first establishment of the Covenant given unto Abraham had not the promise extended to his house as well as to himself personally considered there had been no reason for the Apostle to mention his house and tell him that not only himself but his house should be saved had not a peculiar good redounded to his house by his believing It had been a more effectual motive to have told him that the whole Town should have been saved in as much as then his house had been included and he had had a further intimation of the probability of other of his Friends Relations and Acquaintance Salvation Secondly I answer If we compare this promise of Paul to the Jaylor with that forementioned passage of Christ concerning Zacheus his house 't is evident the Apostle propoundeth this promise in both branches of it to him upon the alone condition of his personal believing and his meaning is that in case he himself should believe he and his house should be saved that is as Peter as hath been already observed expounds it the promise of Salvation would be to him and his house and that this is his meaning appears from that parallel passage of Christ Christ tells Zacheus Salvation was come to his house upon his own believing and that upon that very ground or for that very reason because he now was a Son of Abraham and upon the same ground and for the same reason we must suppose that the Apostle makes this promise to the Jaylor the Apostle is to be understood according to that of Christ it is as if he had said believe in the Lord Jesus and thereby thou wilt become a Son of Abraham and as so related to him shall enjoy the promises in the same exten and latitude in which it was made to him at the first establishment of it God will be a God to