Speak Sir your Mind freely the next time for God willing I shall be ready for you O when will you cease to corrupt the Word of God by your Tradition You say Mr. Tombs saith If Children are Members of the visible Church they ought to be baptized I do not remember Mr. Tombs saith so and if they are Members of the visible Church before baptized they cannot be made Members by Baptism 'T is absurd to say to a Man Come into this House or to say Bring such a Child into the House that is in it before For Baptism say you is the Door through which we come into the Church of God Those that say they are not Members of the Church of God ought you say to shew us a plain Scripture for their casting out if they can of one Church since Adam until this latter Age of which little Children were Members c. And again you say if they were cast out how comes it to pass that there is not one word in Scripture mentioned of it call for a Scripture from those that would shake your Faith concerning this Prerogative Answ 1. I have answered this already We say and prove that Infants were never received at all into the Gospel-Church therefore cannot be said to be cast out of it 2. We deny what you affirm without any Proof viz. That Infants were always Members of the Visible Church since Adam Prove if you can they were received as Members before that Typical Church-state which was constituted in Abraham's Family 3. The First-born of Israel were holy the Priests Sons had a right to the Ministery or Priesthood shew when they were cast out and lost both those Prerogatives and that very way you must take to answer will serve to answer your self in respect of Infants Church-Membership The Answer must be this the National Church and Church-Membership and Priesthood of the Jews are dissolved and taken away and thereby all those external Rites and Prerogatives the Jewish Children had are gone 4. These were as Legacies left in the old Will in the old Testament but there is a new Will made or Christ hath made his last Will and Testament and in this his last Will and Testament none of these external Rites or Prerogatives as you call them are left to Infants Sir there is no need in a new Will in the last Will and Testament to mention Negatives that is not usual not what is not left but only in the Affirmative what is left therefore in vain is this Flourish it will do your People who are shaken in their Belief of your Tradition no good 5. You bid them call for a Scripture from those that oppose their Practice in the Negative i. e. that forbid Infants Church-Membership or speak where they were cast out O how dangerous is your Doctrine May not the Papists say to them also Where do you read holy Water and holy Garments are forbid Moses commanded the People to be sprinkled with Water and many other Rites that were among the Jews We say the Papists call for Scripture where those things are forbid which they have among them or when God cast them out of the Church What Human Tradition may not be let into the Church at this Door You say the unbelieving Jews would have stumbled if Paul had cast out their Children from the Church and put them in the same Condition as the Children of Infidels Answ 'T is your mistake he told them plainly that the Children of the Flesh were not the Children of God i. e. of the Promise or of the true Gospel-Church as such Rom. 9. 5 6 7. yet they stumbled not nay shewed them they and their Children had no external Privileges above the Gentiles and that Circumcision availed them nothing and yet the believing Jews stumbled not at his Doctrine Sir no doubt when the Jews are called they will not be of your mind to plead the old Covenant-right of their Children being Members as such You say That we judg the Adult holy because they are separated unto the Lord in a Profession of Holiness altho it be too often an Hypocritical Profession and shall we not say you judg the Children of the Faithful to be holy whom God so called c. Answ 1. God called the whole House of Israel holy because he separated them to himself both Parents and Children in a legal Church-state whether the Parents were Believers or faithful Persons or real Saints or not but God in the Gospel hath separated none to be Members of the Gospel-Church but such that are Adult Persons Believers in â—ued with real Holiness There is I tell you again no Fleshly Relative Federal Holiness under the Dispensation of the Gospel spoken of disprove it if you can 2. As to the Holiness of Infants born in lawful Wedlock they are by the Lord called holy or a Godly Seed Mal. 2. 15. And did he make one i. e. one Wife yet he had the residue of the Spirit and wherefore one that he might seek a Godly Seed that is a godly or holy Seed by Legitimation whether the Man or the Woman joined together in holy Matrimony are Believers or Unbelievers their Seed is a godly or holy Seed in this respect and not only the Seed of the Faithful as you intimate but the Seed of Unbelievers also and so not a Federal or Spiritual Holiness as you would have it The Seed born to the Faithful say you in lawful Wedlock are a godly and holy Seed God calleth such his Children that were born to them Ezek. 16. 20 21. As it was formerly even so it is under the New Testament those that are separated unto the Lord by Baptism are called a holy Nation Answ It follows then by your Argument that the Children of Unbelievers born in lawful Wedlock are not a holy Seed that is they are Bastards or Cast-aways but you must first prove their Marriage unlawful and the Holiness here mentioned such you speak of before you carry this Point 2. All the Children of the whole House of Israel were typically and federally holy then in that National Church you confound typical federal Holiness and Matrimonial Holiness together which are quite remote in their nature 3. We say all Believers baptized under the Gospel are spiritually holy and are called 1 Pet. 2. 7. a holy Nation a Royal Priesthood but this holy Nation consisteth of none but Adult Persons that believe who are called lively Stones building up a spiritual House 1 Pet. 2. 5 6. not a National Church consisting of Parents and their Fleshly Seed as such as under the Law But if for Argument-sake we should grant all that were in the Gospel-times received as Members in the visible Church should be called holy in Charity from that Profession they made yet this will do you no good until by God's Ordination you can prove that the Infants of Believers were received as Members into the Church in Gospel-times as they were into
hid and concealed such a Practice had there been one Infant by his Authority or Allowance baptized But since the Scripture is silent in it we may assure our Selves 't is not the will of God Infants should be be baptized Also if those who were to be baptized were first to be taught were first to repent and believe Then it follows clearly that Baptism must be deferred till Children were ofripe Years and able so to do and did not Mary delay the baptizing of the Holy Child Jesus As to the House of Crispus you your self acknowledge they all believed these are your words viz. it is true all the House of Crispus were Believers viz. Adult Persons but say you were all the Housholds of the Faithful Barren c. Ans No doubt but in some of those Housholds were Children they might not be all Barren without Children yet their Children might be grown up to maturity but you your self have proved that whole Houses may be said to be baptized and yet none but the Adult in those Housholds might be baptized seeing the Scripture you quoted saith that Sampson was buried by all his Fathers House yet none of the little Children in that House could be concerned in that matter As to the House of Stephanas you say well they are called the first Fruits of Achaia I beseech you Brethren ye know the Houshold of Stephanas that is the first Fruits of Achaia and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the Saints 1 Cor. 16. 15. that you submit your selves to such vers 16. Ans They that is the whole Houshold gave themselves up to administer to the Saints but besure little Babes could not do that nor ought the Adult to submit themselves to little Children or esteem and reverence them for acts of Charity You bring in this Objection viz. we do not read of any Infant that were in those Housholds to which you answer if the Housholds of the Corinthians when the Apostle baptized them were so barren what need had the Apostle to write unto them that their Children were holy 1 Cor. 7. 14. it is more than probable that Children were in every Houshold that was baptized Ans Now you go over again with your former argument and repeat the same things which I have again and again answer'd about the Childs being in Covenant after the Head of the Family or the Parents do believe 2. I say 't is very probable there might be no Children in non-age in those Housholds because 't is said the whole House had believed 3. If there were yet by your own grant all the House might be said to be baptized and yet no little Children baptized that might be in those Housholds because all is often taken but for a part 4. But will you said I build an Ordinance upon a probability and on uncertain Consequences nay one of the sacred Institutions of the Gospel called one of the two great Sacraments thereof that Text 1 Cor. 7. 14. we have already answered Now from the whole we shall draw Conclusions in opposition to yours 1. That the Covenant that God made with Noah and his Family was a Covenant made with all the World and so not the Covenant of Grace though there was Mercy and Grace contained in it to all Mankind and to the Fowls of the Air and Beasts of the Field also 2. That God's taking all Abraham's Family or Household into Covenant as such it was only a Covenant that peculiarly appertained to his natural Seed and it had many Temporal Blessings and Priviledges attending it which no Houshold under the Gospel can pretend unto and of this Covenant Circumcision was a sign and that Circumsion was only given to be a Seal of the righteousness of Faith to Abraham only and not to little Children 3. That the whole House of Israel as such or the whole Nation of the Jews under the Law were all as so considered then the Church of God and that the Gospel Church consisteth not of whole Housholds or any one whole Nation it being not of an National Constitution but Congregational only consisting of none but of believers baptized upon the profession of their Faith who are called the Houshold of Faith 4. That the whole House of Israel was a typical Church who were holy with a Ceremonial and Typical Holiness signifiing that all the Members of the Gospel Church should be spiritually and savingly Holy 5. That God in the Gospel times though now and then he is pleased to call by his Grace all or the greatest part of whole Families yet contrary to the old Covenant he usually now takes but two of a City and one of a Family and brings them into his true Gospel Sion 6. That the first Churches were only planted of such that believed some out of one Family and some out of other Families and that out of the Jewish Church and such that were called of the Gentile Nations 7. That the Parents Faith saves none of his Household either Children or Servants nor gives them any right to Gospel Baptism 8. Lastly one would think these things to be clear enough to give Satisfaction to all that desire Satisfaction about Infant Baptism and that there is not the least shadow of proof for it from what our Brethren argue from whole Families who were said to be baptized if we compare Scripture with Scripture for as we find no Precept nor Example for Infant Baptism so not any Consequence for it that is naturally drawn from any Text of Holy Scripture to which the Pedo-Baptists do refer CHAP. XVII Proving that Children ought not to be Baptized because they were baptized in divers Centuries or Ages under the Apostacy of the Church when most of Christs Institutions were corrupted wherein it is also proved that for the two first Hundred Years after Christ no Infants were baptized containing an Answer to Mr. James Owen's 14 Chapter and 11 Argument to prove Infant Baptism THus Mr. Owen begins in his 14th Chapter of his Book viz. the Children of the Faithful were baptized in every Age of the Church of God since the Apostles time until this latter Age as I can prove at large if it were profitable for the unlearned Reader I shall set down some Examples Ans 8. Your argument is that Children ought to be baptized because they were baptized in every age of the Church since the Apostles time Ans 1. Give one Instance if you can out of approved History of one Infant baptized in the first or second Century but pass by Two or Three Hundred Years after Christ and many errors besides this of Infant Baptism crept amain into the Churches But pray remember now you are without Book you are forced to quit the Holy Bible the Sacred History and great Charter of the Church and therefore all your proof out of Humane History which may be true or may not be true signifies nothing But you had best take heed lest we carry the
Baptism the other after Baptism unto the Adult among the unbelieving Gentiles Teaching precedes Baptism but to the Children of such Baptism preceded Teaching in the same manner as Abraham being the Father of the Gentiles was taught before circumcised but his Children were circumcised before they were taught This yousay is the Signification of the word as appeareth Answ 1. I answer you would have the form of the Commission to run according to your Scriptureless Practice of baptizing of Infants as you call Sprinkling but that the Commission is wrested and abused by you to serve your turn will appear 1. They that are the only Subjects of Baptism according to the Commission are first to be taught or as the Greek word is discipled or made Disciples and then baptized and I will appeal to your Conscience whether they are not the same Persons that were to be taught before baptized that our Lord commands to be taught afterwards all other things that he hath commanded baptized Believers to observe and keep You would have the Parents converted from Heathenism to be taught before baptized but the Teaching afterwards not to refer to them but to their Children baptized before taught or in their Infancy O what abominable Abuse is this of the great Commission of our blessed Saviour 1. The Commission runs Teach them in all Nations whether Jews or Gentiles 2. Baptizing them that are taught or made Disciples by teaching 3. Teaching them i. e. the same them that were Disciples baptized Dare you invert nay subvert the sacred Commission and so make void the Command of God to uphold your own Tradition Sir tremble at the thoughts of it Answ 2. That this which we say is the true Purport of the Commission is acknowledged by Mr. Perkins Mr. Baxter and other Pedo-baptists Take Mr. Perkins's own words First of all saith he 't is said Teach them that is make them Disciples by teaching them to believe and repent here saith he we are to consider the Order which God observes in making a Covenant with Men in Baptism First of all he calls them by his Word and Spirit to believe and repent then in the second place he makes a Promise of Mercy and Forgiveness and thereby he seals his Promise by Baptism They says he that know not nor consider this Order which God used in covenanting with them in Baptism deal preposterously overslipping the Commandment of repenting and believing which is the cause of so much Profaneness in the World Doubtless he said right for you who baptize Infants that are not capable to repent nor believe make a multitude of profane Christians in the World as they are called Who knows which of the Infants you baptize God will call and savingly work Grace in which should indeed be wrought in all before they are according to the direct Order or From of the Commission or ought to be baptized O what profane Wretches doth your Practice bring into your Church if all you baptize you make Members thereof in their Infancy Mr. Perkins doubtless did not foresee how by his honest Exposition of the Commission he overthrew his Infant-Baptism and Church-Membership Moreover take Mr. Richard Baxter's words speaking of the Commission Christ gave to his Disciples Mat. 28. 19 20 viz. Their first Task saith he is to make Disciples of them which are by Mark called Believers The second work is to baptize them whereto is annexed the Promise of Salvation The third work is to teach them that are baptized Believers all other things which are after to be learned in the School of Christ To contemn this Order saith he is to contemn the Rules of Order for where can we find it if not here See Mr. Baxter's Right of Baptism pag. 144 150. This Man tho a Pedo-baptist yet durst not be so bold as to invert the Order of the Commission nor do as you do viz. affirm the Teaching mentioned after Baptism refers not to Believers baptized after they are made Disciples but to their Infants baptized of which the Commission speaks not one word nor can it by any colour of Reason or Consequences be drawn therefrom But to prove your false Exposition of the Text you proceed to do it First from God's Promise to Abraham Isaac and Jacob that in their Seed should all the Nations of the Earth be blessed Gen. 18. 18. 22. 18. Christ came say you to confirm the Promise unto the Fathers that the Gentiles might glorify God for his Mercy Rom. 15. 8 9. If God is not a God to the Gentiles and their Seed according to the Promises made to the Fathers then say you Christ weakeneth and not confirmeth the Promises God forbid we should think so c. Answ 1. God forbid that you should rest always under such dark and cloudy Conceptions of the Covenant and Promises made to the Fathers touching the Gentiles for the Covenant and Promises made to Abraham Isaac and Jacob were that the Gentiles through Faith in Christ should be Fellow-heirs with the Jews that believed in him and with the â—…s that bâ—…ed also And thus runs the Covenant of Grace to Abraham c. and thus it runs to believing Gentiles that all of them and their Children that believe or are in the Election of Grace shall be saved And 't is thus that all the Nations of the Earth are blessed in Christ whether Jews or Gentiles i. e. all such in all Nations that believe and are called by the preaching of the Gospel 2. But because Christ's Church does not now in Gospel-days take in whole Nations and whole Families as the Jewish Church under the Law did take in the whole Nation of the Jews and all their Families doth Christ weaken the Promises Sir that external Legal Covenant erected a Typical Church which Church ceased at the Establishment of the Spiritual Church which is only Congregational under the Gospel as I fully proved before But furthermore You say the Apostles understood Christ's Command unto them in this sense and therefore they have preached Salvation to those that believed and all theirs c. Answ The Apostles understood Christ's Command and Commission no doubt but it appears you understand it not Did they preach Salvation to Believers and to all their Children as such whether elected or not called by the Word or Spirit or not For this you must prove or you say nothing and how absurd would that be should you affirm any such thing Peter speaks of no Promise made to Jews nor Gentiles and to their Children but to such of them that the Lord our God shall call And 't is directly said that the Goaler and all his believed therefore if you will still affirm that the Apostles apply'd as you intimate Abraham's Covenant among the Gentiles unto the Seed the fleshly Seed of Believers as such you do assert an Untruth and cast a Lie upon the Apostles through your Ignorance Prove if you can they were to baptize any Person Adult or
Ordination as the Jews had Are we under the Promises of heaping up Gold and Silver and if we are obedient to live in Peace and to be saved from our external Enemies for many such like Privileges and Promises the Jews and their Children had under the Law The truth is your External Federal Holiness Root and Olive-Tree will-afford but little Fatness either to our selves or Children considered distinct and apart from Spiritual Blessings and Holiness What is a simple external Profession good for without true Grace and a saving Interest in Christ and Assurance of Eternal Life What more doth it serve to do than to blind and deceive the Souls of such external and carnal Professors What is an Ordinance without the God of the Ordinance What is the Sign without the Thing signified What is the Lamp without Oil or a Cabinet without the Jewel or a Shell without a Kernel or the Name of a Christian without the true Nature of a Christian You say The first Parents sanctified the whole Nation of the Jews not with true Holiness in the Heart for many of them were wicked but with a Federal Holiness because they and their Seed were separated to the Lord in an External Covenant I am glad to see you open the Eyes of your People now they may see what little good that federal Holiness and the Covenant with Abraham can do to their Infants 't is but only to give them a Name that they may be called Christians Is this the Promise that belongs to the Faithful and their Children Is this the Blessing of Abraham that is come upon the Gentiles Are they not Spiritual Blessings Is it not Spiritual and Heart-Holiness Is it only to be in an external manner by an external Covenant and visible Profession separated to be the Lord's and called his when indeed and in truth spiritually and savingly they are not so Is this that Covenant confirm'd by the Oath of God that gives you such strong Consolation touching your Infants as such as before you pleaded for 4. Moreover do you not own by what you here affirm that there were two Covenants made with Abraham since that Covenant which was made with the whole Lump or whole House of Israel was as you positively assert not a spiritual but an external Covenant Sure I am you do believe there was a spiritual and an eternal Covenant of Grace made with Abraham and all his true spiritual Seed and that he was a Root spiritually holy by virtue of that spiritual and true Gospel-Covenant God made with him and as the whole Lump were all federally holy in a Spiritual Sense as himself was and as he had first Fruits given to him who were spiritually and truly holy also so there are many Branches still that daily spring out of that Spiritual Root and Spiritual Covenant that are federally and spiritually holy as the Root was holy Sure there was a Covenant made with Abraham and of which he is considered as a common Root or common Head and from which Root and Olive-Tree it is impossible any one of his Spiritual Seed can be cut off for if not so How is the Promise sure to all the Seed Rom. 4. 16. and how is that Covenant a ground of strong Consolation to all the Heirs of the Promise as Heb. 6. 17 18 19. 5. But the truth is the purport of your Exposition of this dark Text all may see is to prove the Gospel-Church to be as extensive wide and large or every way of the same Nature and Latitude with the National Church of the Jews and therefore you plead for the Fleshly Seed as such to be received as Members thereof Sir I know you not but I thought you had held for the Congregational Way but the truth is Infants Church-Membership is only calculated for a National Church and therefore best sutes with Presbyterism and Episcopacy You say the Jews and their Children were broke off and the Gentiles and their Children were received into the same Privileges which the Jews had c. Answer 1. If you would prove that the Gospel-Church is National consisting of whole Parishes Families and Kingdoms you must bring Proof for this Constitution from the New Testament Show where Christ instituted or ordained such a Church-state or what whole Gentile Nations consisting of Believers and their Children and Unbelievers or ungodly Persons professing Christianity and their Children were constituted by the Apostles a gospel-Gospel-Church for evident it is all believing or godly Jews and their Children and all ungodly Jews who owned the Jewish Religion and their Children were Members of the National Church of Israel under the Law 2. Also prove that if such a Gospel-Church Constitution can be proved out of the New Testament that therefore all the external Privileges and Rites of the Jews must belong unto such a Gentile Nation and gospel-Gospel-Church that did belong to the National Church of the Jews Must they have the same Rites and Privileges and yet not the same Is Baptism Circumcision 3. If it came as you dream in the room of it then it would follow that Baptism belongs only to Male-Infants if not so 't is not the same Privilege but differs greatly you must have therefore some word of Institution or some good Authority from Christ to enlarge this Privilege so far as to allow it to Females also 4. And why this Privilege only had not the Jews and their Children many other external Privileges besides Circumcision Why must not the Gentiles and their Children that are grafted in as you suppose in their room receive all the Privileges as well as one or two You have done your Work by halves 5. Besides what you say that the first Parents sanctified the whole Nation of the Jews is false It was not they that separated or sanctified them but God himself i. e. by his absolute Command and holy Institution therefore you must prove the like Command and Institution for such a National Church under the Gospel as was under the Law Sir I desire no better Task than to prove the Gospel-Church consists of none by Christ's Appointment and Institution but only Adult Persons believing and professing Faith in Jesus Christ incorporated together in a holy Covenant And when you write again lay down your Arguments to confute what I here say and I shall God sparing my Life be ready through his Assistance to give you an Answer which will utterly throw away your Infant Church-Membership And since the old Covenant and old Covenant Church-state is taken away and dissolved by the establishing of the Gospel-Covenant and Gospel-Church you must bring your Arguments and Proof from Christ's last Will and Testament or all you do will signify nothing Now Reader having shewed thee that the Exposition Mr. Owen hath given of this Metaphorical Scripture is false and inconsistent with the Truth as it is in Jesus I shall give thee my Thoughts of the true Purport of it and in regard I have once
contrived no doubt to make the Church great and large i. e. to make whole Families Parishes and Nations the Church this is evident and if this be the way to continue and enlarge the Church the Lord deliver the true Church from such a Practice and Invention of Men. I look upon Infant-Baptism to be one of the chief Pillars of the Romish Church and of all National Churches and Constitutions in the European World this is that Christendom that is so cried up and the way of making and continuing the pretended Christian-Name in the Anti-christian Church and World all are made Christians in their Infant-Baptism And thus the Inhabitants of the Earth are cheated and deluded with a Shadow and empty Name that signifies nothing and certain I am until Christendom as it is called is Unchristianed of this pretended Rite or Christendom and the Inhabitants of the Earth become new Christianed there will never be a thorough Reformation I mean until they see that Christianity or Christian-Name which they received by their Infant-Baptism signifies nothing but throw it away as an Human Innovation and labour after true Regeneration or a likeness to Christ and so believe and are baptized upon the profession of their Faith according as in the Apostolical Primitive Church 'T is Infant-Baptism that tends to uphold all National Churches and deceives poor People who think they were thereby made Christians 3. Doth it follow because many Thousands that were baptized as you call it when Infants were after they come to Age truly converted That that blessed work of Grace upon their Hearts was by virtue of their Infant-Baptism or from any Motive that arose from thence Or was it not wholly done by the Power of God's Word preached to them through the mighty Power and Operations of the Holy Ghost upon their Souls God hath shewed his Mercy I grant to such Christians who were Rantized or Sprinkled in Infancy in a gracious manner But this is not to be ascribed to his owning and blessing that Invention of Pedo-Baptism be sure God will never own as you well say an Earthly Invention and I have clearly proved that Infant-Baptism is nothing less or more than an Earthly or Human Invention therefore God never blessed that O how few are converted or truly regenerated that have in their Infancy been as you say baptized nay of the Seed of the Faithful What a Multitude remain ungodly and so live and die notwithstanding their Parents Faith and their Reception of their Infant-Baptism The Lord open the Eyes of you Worthy and Noble Britains and send true Light among you as to this matter Infant-Baptism prevents Mr. Owea saith the shameful Neglect of Baptism if Children had been left unbaptized it would be so difficult to persuade many good People to receive Baptism as at this Time 't is to persuade them to receive the Lord's Supper The Nature of Man is very unwilling to undergo narrow and spiritual Obligation We read in the History of the Primitive Church that several good Men that turned from Paganism delayed their Baptism until their Latter Days Constantine being very Aged before he was Baptised and fallen into a Disease of which he died Theodosius was not baptized until he was fallen sick as Socrates p. 5. 6. And we are not to think say you that People would be more ready to receive Baptism in these Days than they had been in those that are past 1 Answ I Answer it is a shameful thing indeed to see how many good People do neglect Christ's Holy Ordinance of Baptism and to see how difficult 't is to persuade them tho' they do truly believe to be baptised and so orderly come to the Lord's Table But what is the reason of it is it not because you and such as you have strove to deceive them and blind their Eyes by telling them that Sprinkling or Rantism is Baptism or Baptizing and that they were baptized in their Infancy they are alas too ready to build their Faith herein upon their Teachers The Teachers of my People saith the Lord cause them to err And say they such a learned Man such a worthy Doctor and Minister is for Infant-Baptism Can they be mistaken Sure if it were an Error they must needs know it 2. 'T is not very hard to persuade our Children when God converts them to be baptized they readily submit to it and until then they have no more right to Baptism than they have to the Lord's Supper 3. Will you to anticipate your Children in fear they will not be baptized when they come to Age contrary to the Word of God baptize them when in their Infancy I must tell you by the same parity of Reason since some of them you find are so hard to be persuaded to receive the Lord's Supper you may as the Antient Fathers did give them the Lord's Supper in their Infancy also you have as much Authority for to do the one as the other 4. Do you not implicitly on this Occasion grant and confess that Baptism of Right belongs to the Adult but that politically it hath been contrived to baptize Infants for fear they should not be persuaded to be baptized when they come to Age And you are willing to continue the Practice because it is in these Days by you and your Brethren rendered to be a very odious thing to be dipped or baptized when they come to Age and do believe The Truth is this Ordinance calls for great Abasement and much Self-denial 't is a hard thing to come under the Baptismal Covenant and Obligation in Adult Persons when we are rendered as bad as Adulterers and Murderers who baptize Men and VVomen according to Christ's Commission that are Disciples And 't is hard also when the baptized Person knows he being come to Understanding what he is bound and obliged to do by his Baptismal Covenant viz. to mortify the Remainders of Sin and to walk in Newness of Life Rom 6. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. Therefore since you fear they will not freely and voluntarily list themselves under Christ's Banner or become his Spiritual Souldiers when they come to Age you will and that unknown to them force them into these VVars in their Infancy without Christ's Authority or their Consent under this specious Pretence viz. you fear they will not do it when they are grown up 5. What you speak concerning those Christians who in the Primitive Times delayed their Baptism until the latter part of their Lives makes directly against you for those Christians who were converted from Paganism to Christianity did not only delay their Baptism but many Godly Christian Parents I have shewed in the last Chapter did delay the baptizing of their Children until they came to Age and did believe And the Error of that long Delay arose from that great Mistake that Baptism washed away Sin therefore some delayed Baptism until such time they thought they were ready to go out of the World 6. But what
others that believed not or made not a Confession of their Faith Children you say are part of the Nations for if the Apostles were to baptize all Nations then they were to baptize Infants also for Children are a great part of the Nations near one half Answ 1. 'T is evident that our Saviour in his great Commission enjoineth no more to be baptized but such who are first taught or made Disciples and this agrees with his own Practice John 4. 1. He made and baptized more Disciples than John he first made them Disciples and then baptized them nor were there any in the New Testament baptized but such who first made a Profession of Faith in Christ Do you read that those Jews Acts 2. that believed and were baptized were commanded to baptize their Infants or that any other baptized Believers among either Jews or Gentiles were commanded so to do or have we no perfect Rule left us in the Gospel for so it will follow if the Infants of Believers ought to be baptized 2. If the Commission be so extensive as you affirm then all the Heathens and Pagans in all Nations that believe not are to be baptized and all their Children too and all Unbelievers Children in Christian Nations Sir are not these part of the Nations Noble Britains see the nature of the Pedo-baptists Consequences and Inferences for baptizing Infants This Inference proves that all People and Nations in the whole World ought to be baptized from the Commission But I will as I once did to another Minister appeal to Mr. Owen's Conscience as he will answer it at Christ's Tribunal Whether he believes the Commission authorizeth Christ's Disciples to baptize any but such who are first taught and made Disciples whom St. Mark calls Believers repeating the words of the same Commission Mark 1â— 16. 3. Sir are the Infants of Believers near one half part of the Nations I am afraid you are mistaken this is the way to make Christ's Flock a great Flock but the truth is you have as much Reason to assert all the Infants of Heathens Pagans and Unbelievers are to be baptized from the Commissions as the Infants of Believers and then it may be as you say viz. they may be near one half of all Nations But to proceed Sir you say When God threatens to cut off the Nations from before the Israelites the Children were included for the Children were not spared any more than the Fathers On the other side say you when Christ commandeth to baptize the Nations for their Salvation he meaneth the Children as well as their Parents If a Man would command a Shepherd to shear all his Sheep and to set on them an Ear-mark to know them from other Sheep altho the Shepherd had sheared the Sheep and marked them if he leaves out the Lambs without marking of them he performeth not his Duty If he says to the Master the Lambs were too young for shearing true saith the Master but they were not too young for marking you ought to mark them for they are a great part of my Flock If little Children say you cannot receive Instruction they can receive Christ's Mark even Baptism by which Christ's Sheep are divided from the Goats of the Devil The Church of Christ is his Flock is there no Lambs in this Flock Christ is the good and faithful Shepherd who giveth his Life for his Flock John 10. 11. and will he not care for his Lambs and Weaklings of his Flock yea certainly he shall gather the Lambs with his Arms and carry them in his Bosom c. Answ 1. I answer 't is a bold Assertion from your Inference and absurd Consequence drawn from the Commission as I have shewed to affirm when Christ commandeth to baptize the Nations that he meaneth Children viz. because they are part of the Nations but I have answered that already when Children do believe they ought from the Commission to be baptized but not till then 2. As to your Similitude 't is much the same with that Mr. Burkit a Pedo-baptist hath in his Book which I lately answered I will recite my Answer to him which fully answers you both and all others who talk after this raâ—e he argues from the Commission as you do Take his Words and my Answer in order viz. The true Reason saith he why Christ bid his Disciples first teach and then baptize was because he was sending his Apostles forth among the Heathens to convert them to Christianity in which work we all know that preaching of the Word must go before the Administration of the Sacraments Should saith he the King of England send his Ministers into Foreign Plantations to convert the Indians to Christianity they ought not to be baptized before they are taught and instructed but when the Parents are proselyted and make a visible Profession of their Faith their Children may be baptized and afterwards instructed as the Children of the Jewish Proselytes were first circumcised and then taught For tho Abraham was first taught and then circumcised yet Isaac was first circumcised and then taught so that the sense of our Saviour is this Teach such as are capable of teaching and baptize such as are capable of Baptism Answ 1. I answer first how inconsistent is this with the words of the Commission By virtue of the Commission none ought to be baptized but such that are first taught or do believe and therefore some Pedo-baptists pretend that Infants have Habitual Faith Faith in semine c. but you plead they may be capable of Baptism without Faith and also contradict the Order of Words in the Commission Do you not confess by the Order of the Words in the Commission Teaching ought to go before Baptizing Sirs 't is a sign of a very bad Cause that puts you thus to try your Wits and after all confound your selves 2. I ask you how Abraham whom God commanded to be circumcised as a Seal of the Righteousness of that Faith HE had before circumcised could know he ought to circumcise his Son Isaac c. who had no such Faith had not God given him an express Command to do it Besure if he had he had sinned in doing that which God commanded him not So and in like manner since our Lord Jesus expresly in his Commission commanded none to be baptized but such who are first taught unless he had added as in Abraham's case viz. when an Heathen is converted to the Christian Faith and baptized you may baptize his Infants also How dare you make such Additions to Christ's Commission without his Authority and so make the World believe if you could our blessed Saviour gave forth an imperfect Commission to his Disciples which all Men must confess is the only Warrant and Rule of all Ministers to act by in the case of baptizing to the End of the World And doth he not say Add thou not to his Word lest he reprove thee and thou art sound to be a Liar by
fathering that on Christ which he never said nor intended When a King say you by his Charter or publick Writing sets at liberty the Inhabitants of some Town are not the Children Partakers of the Charter altho their Names be not particularly in it So it is here the King of Heaven is through the Charter of the Gospel making of us that were Strangers and Foreigners to become Fellow-Citizens with the Saints Eph. 2. 19. and to that end commanding to receive all Nations through Baptism into the Liberty and Privileges of the City of God and will he not receive the Children into the Privileges of their Parents Answ I answer if it be so as you say in all National States Governments and Constitutions and Civil Societies what doth this prove touching the case in hand unless you dare undertake to affirm the Gospel-Church is National and not Congregational Doth the Constitution of the Spiritual Gospel-Church run as in Human and National Constitutions Prove it for I utterly deny it Besides if your Infants as such are Fellow-Citizens with the Saints and are to partake of all the Privileges of the City of God why do you deny them the Lord's-Supper your Similitude proves no more their right to Baptism to one Privilege than another I never yet could understand what Spiritual or Temporal Privileges any Infant receives in Baptism What good doth that do them that have not the Things signified in Baptism There are great Benefits received in such a Grant you speak of in an external Charter but as God hath not commanded Infants to be baptized so not any Benefits can be proved they receive thereby In this you argue as Mr. Burkit hath done before you Reader take his Similitude viz. I demand saith he whether according to the Mind of God gathered from the words of the Commission the Remedy prescribed should be administred only to grown Persons because they only are capable of understanding and believing the Virtue and Efficacy of it Sure every Rational Man among you would conclude his Child capable of the Remedy as well as himself altho ignorant of the Virtue that is in it and only passive in the Administration of it and that it would be Cruelty yea Murder in the Parent to deny the Application of it to all his Children Reply I stand amazed at such Ignorance and Folly Does it follow because Children are capable to receive a Medicine against the Plague or Bodily Distemper are they therefore capable of Baptism and the Lord's Supper If capable of one say I of the other also For as a Man is required to examine himself and to discern the Lord's Body in the Lord's Supper so he is required to repent and to believe in Christ that comes to Baptism I would know how they prove Baptism to be the Medicine appointed to cure the Soul of the Plague of Sin or as Mr. Owen says for their Salvation Is not this to blind the Eyes of the poor People and make them think that an external Ordinance saves the Soul if not thus how can it be Cruelty yea Murder in Parents to deny the Application of Baptism to their Children as Mr. Burkit says The Antient Fathers from that in John 6. 53. Unless a Man eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink his Blood he hath no Life in him gave Infants the Lord's Supper thinking our Saviour like as the Papists do meant that Sacrament when indeed he meant only of seeding by Faith on Christ crucified But however their Argument for giving Infants one Sacrament was as good as yours for giving them the other But when they are as capable to repent and believe and are helped so to do as they are and do eat Bread or receive a Medicine for a Bodily Distemper let them have both Baptism and the Lord's-Supper and till then if God's Word be the Rule of our Faith and Practice and not our own Fancies they ought to have neither yet the Remedy or Medicine which is Christ's Blood we deny not but dying Infants may be capable of tho the way of its Application we know not as to them that is a Secret as to us You know the Church of England positively affirms Repentance whereby a Person for sakes Sin and Faith whereby he stedsastly believes the Promise of God made to him in that Sacrament are required of those that are to be baptized nay and of little Babes too therefore the Sureties answer for them that they do believe and repent or forsake the Devil and all his Works c. the Child answers by Proxy The Church of England baptizes no Child but as a Believer and a true Penitent Person All that are proper Subjects of Baptism are comprehended in the Commission and must be as such whether Adult or Infants who profess Faith and Repentance But you it may be foresaw the Snake in the Grass viz. That Godfathers and Godmothers is a Tradition and none of God's Appointment nor are they able to perform those things for the Child which they promise for him and in his Name And therefore make use of another Argument and would have them baptized without Faith or upon their Parents Faith of which the Church of England speaks nothing As to your Comparison it is not worth mentioning Baptism as I have told you doth not cure the Soul of Sin or save any Person but it 's the Blood of Christ applied by Faith Not that we say no Child can have the Benefit of that Soveraign Remedy because not capable to believe by reason Men and Women must receive it by Faith or perish God as Dr. Taylor observes may have many ways to magnify his Grace through Jesus Christ to them which we know not of who die in their Infancy yet have we no Authority to baptize them any more than to give them the Lord's-Supper Pedo-baptists talk at a strange rate as if they regarded not what they say or affirm while they bring Similitudes to teach People to believe Baptism is the Balm to cure the Contagion of Sin and as if the Application of it saved a little Babe from Hell and they guilty of murdering the Souls of their Children who deny to baptize them I had thought they would not have laid greater Stress upon Childrens Baptism than on Childrens Circumcision since they would fain have them run Parallel-wise Pray what became of the Jews Female Infants were they damned and what became of their Male Infants who died before eight days old for they broke God's Law if they circumcised them tho sick and like to die if they were not full eight days old Let such blush for the sake of their precious Souls and take more care for the time to come to what they write and preach I am grieved to see my blessed Master's great Commission thus inverted and abused Suppose the King should send you with a Commission into a remote Plantation and command you to act and do exactly according to the express
Creation thus he is our God and Father O Lord thou art our Father we are the Clay and thou art our Potter and we are all the works of thy Hands Isa 64. 8. 2. Saith he By external Calling and Profession there is an intercurrent Relation of the Father and Son between God and his People Thus the Posterity of Seth are called the Sons of God Gen. 6. and the entire Nation of the Jews are so called When Israel was young I called my Son from Egypt Hos 11. Dr. Batesin his Sermon on Mr. Baxter's Funeral Secondly God may be said to be the God of a People by way of special Interest by Election Regeneration and Adoption thus he was not a God to the whole House of Israel both to Parents and Children without exception Yet we grant God was their God by entring into a visible and external Covenant with them and as so considered he was said to be their God and an Husband to them Jer. 31. 32. Which Covenant they broke altho I was an Husband to them saith the Lord. But pray observe the New Covenant is said not to be according to that Covenant which God made with this People when he took them by the Hand and brought them out of the Land of Egypt Thirdly Now if that Covenant in which God is said to be their God was the Old Covenant or the Legal Covenant which God hath took away to establish the Second What doth that signify which you affirm here Certainly John would not go about to establish that Covenant which he knew his Master was ready to take away viz. the Covenant of Peculiarity God made with Abraham and his Natural Seed as such We deny not but the free Promise that God made with Abraham is the Covenant of Grace but that belongs not to Believers Seed as such For some of Unbelievers Seed may be in the Covenant of Grace and some of Believers Seed may not i. e. the Children of the Promise or Covenant of Grace or the Elect of God may lie amongst the Unbelievers Children as well as amongst Believers Children Tho I doubt not but more of Believers Seed are called than of others and have greater Privileges i. e. by the Instruction Prayers and good Example of their Parents c. Fourthly Tho John did not nullify the external Covenant yet he being to prepare Christ's way gave the Jews a clear Intimation of the repealing of it or the period thereof and that now it would stand them in no stead they indeed made this which you say an Argument to come to his Baptism namely because of that Covenant with Abraham or their being his Children But what did John say Think not to say within your selves we have â—braham to 〈◊〉 Father As much as if he should say your being the Seed of believing Abraham according to the Flesh will give you no Right to Gospel-Baptism nor other Gospel Ordinances and Privileges tho it gave you right to Circumcision and Legal Privileges You say He doth not make void the Covenant with Abraham but rather confirms it saying God could raise other Children to Abraham if the Jews brought not forth Fruit meet for Repentance Answ Tho he did not make void that Legal Covenant yet he explained the nature thereof to the Jews and shewed them their great Error and Mistake about it clearly intimating that the Covenant of Grace God made with Abraham and with his Spiritual Seed did differ and was of another Nature with that Covenant which God made with him and his Natural Seed as â—uâ—h for saith he God is able to raise up of these Stones Câ—… to Abraham meaning the Gentiles as Expositors give it If the Covenant of Grace made with Abraham ran only to his Fleshly Seed as such Why did John say God could raise up others to be his Children even such that were not of his Natural Seed And also Why did he refuse them who were his Natural Seed That did not bring forth Fruit meet for 〈◊〉 or did not believe and so shewed themselves not to be the true Spiritual Seed of Abraham Fifthly From hence therefore it follows in opposition to what you say That Gospel-Baptism is not of the same extent with Circumcision As the whole Countrey say you were under Circumcision so doth John receive them to his Baptism he refused none that came to his Baptism but received Publicans Sadduces Pharisees viz. the Generations of â—ipers Matth. 3. 7 8. And can it be thought he refused little Children Answ I wonder you should affirm that John received all the Countrey to his Baptism and refused none no not the Generation of Vipers This I deny and you have no shadow of Reason to assert it since he rebuked them when he saw them coming to his Baptism and bid them bring forth Fruit meet for Repentance Prove if you can that he baptized one Soul but such only that were penitent and demonstrated the truth of their Repentance by bringing forth of the Fruits thereof 'T is very strange to me that any Man should assert that John the Baptist whose Doctrine and Ministry by all Divines is look'd upon to be very severe and sharp should baptize all even the worst of Men yea such whom he called a Viprous Generation But what is the purport of this Argument of yours for Infant-Baptism Certainly all may easily see it Doth it not tend to prove that all ungodly and unbelieving Men and Women are to be baptized as well as Infants Let me but justly infer upon you and from what you say here after this manner viz. If John Baptist baptized all that came to him even all the ungodly Jews as Publicans Sadduces Pharisees yea those Generations of Vipers then Unbelievers yea the worst and vilest of Men are as true Subjects of Baptism as Believers 'T is no matter whether they believe or not repent or not or at present bring forth Fruit meet for Repentance or not John took their Word their Promise that they would do those things afterwards What Notions do you impose upon your unwary Readers I thought all Adult Persons according to the avowed Principle of the Pedo-baptists as well as Anti-pedobaptists must believe and manifest true Repentance before they ought to be baptized Reader see Mr. Baxter's Book Confirmation and Restoration printed 1658. He affirms viz. That a personal believing is the Condition of the Title of them at Age is far past doubt Pag. 16. 1. Saith he The Promise it self doth expresly require Faith of our own of all the Adult He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved Mark 16. 16. What doth hinder me to be baptized And Philip said if thou believest with all thine Heart thou mayst These two Scriptures and many more Mr. Baxter quotes His 2d Argument is this If a Profession of Faith were not necessary coram Ecclesia to Mens Church-Membership and Privileges then Infidels and Heathens would have Right His 3d Argument runs thus viz. It is a
of this Because some have erred in staying too long before they were baptized Will you make too great haste and bring in little Babes to be baptized without any Ground or Authority from the Word of God So much shall suffice to your Twelfth and Last Argument Now Sir we have heard all your Proofs for the baptizing of Infants you have it seems impannell'd for your Jury to Sit Hear and Determine this Grand Cause Just Twelve and if they could speak they would being all agreed the Cause being also fully opened give their Verdict on our Side and against your Infant-Baptism but let them rather be so many Witnesses of your summoning the Statute Book and great Charter of the Church viz. God's Word having been opened and the Matter cleared We will appeal now to our worthy Reader particularly to the Antient and Noble Britains to make Judgment for themselves For in matters of Faith and Things that concern our Souls every Christian is to judg for himself Impartial Reader weigh well the matter Consider this we must all be judged by the VVord of God If you can find you are commanded to baptize your Children by Jesus Christ in the New Testament or can find any Precept or Precedent for it you may do it Or if what Mr. Owen hath said hath convinced you that Baptism doth not belong to Believers by good Authority he hath shewed from the Holy Scriptures but that Infants are the only Subjects thereof and that Baptism is nor dipping or burying the Body in VVater but only sprinkling or pouring a few Drops of VVater on the Person 's Face then continue in your former Practice till God shall open your Eyes But if you are otherwise perswaded that Mr. Owen is in an Error then I exhort you that believe in Christ to arise and be baptized But lest Mr. Owen should say 't is too soon for you to make Judgment yet pray stay till we have heard his Answers to our Objections and also all what he hath further to say CHAP. XIX Containing an Answer to Mr. James Owen's 16th Chapter proving that our Objections against Infant-Baptism are very weighty and his Answers to them very impertinent and defective MR. Owen begins with his Sixteenth Chapter after this manner viz. Thus have we proved by the Scripture saith he and by several Scriptural Arguments that the Children of the Faithful ought to be baptized if we look upon this Truth in the Light of the Scriptures Above the Objections of themselves will vanish away yet for the sake of the Weak I shall lay down the strongest of them 1. Object There is neither a Command nor Example in the Scripture for the baptizing of Infants To this Mr. Owen answereth viz. There is not one particular Command totidem verbis naming Infant-Baptism and that is not necessary but there is an Universal Command to baptize all Nations of which Children are a great part If there is a Command for the baptizing of the Parents then there is a Command for the baptizing of Infants for the Children are included in the Parents even as Parts of them being Partakers of the Privileges of good Parents and of the Judgments of the wicked Parents 1. Answ I answer Whether you have or have not proved by the Holy Scriptures and Arguments that Infants ought to be baptized is now upon a fair Trial committed to the Judgment of the Impartial Reader 2. We do not require you to bring a Command in totidem verbis or in so many Words Let Infants be baptized But your Inferences are not good for as you have no Precept no Command or any Precedent to baptize them so you can draw no fair and good Consequences for it from any Text of Scripture You bring the Words of the Great Commission Matth. 28. 19 20. Go baptize all Nations Sir Why dare you leave out part of the Words Is it not Go therefore teach all Nations baptizing them c. We have shewed in our Answer to you already that the Commission requires none to be baptized but such who are first taught or made Disciples which Disciples St. Mark calls Believers He that believes and is baptized Mark 16. 16. They are Reader the Words of the same Commission tho differently expressed by these two Great Evangelists and hold forth the same thing viz. That the Gospel is to be preached in all Nations or to all the World and that those that are discipled by preaching or that do believe ought to be baptized and none else 3. Whereas you say that Children are a great part of the Nations and may therefore be baptized this is a fallacious or deceitful Consequence For may not I as before argue thus Unbelievers i. e. Turks Infidels Pagans and their Children are a great part of all Nations therefore may be baptized Sir I appeal to your Conscience Whether this Inference is not as good and true from the Premises as yours 3. But you ask whether there is a command for the baptizing of Parents no doubt of this we and you agree that there is a command to baptize Parents that believe in Christ and to baptize Children too that believe in Christ but say you then there is a command to baptize Infants because they are included in the Parents even as parts of them now this is utterly false and also very ridiculous 't is for any Man to assert it 1. For if this was so it follows whatsoever God commands the Parent he commands the Child then when God commanded Abraham to offer up or slay his Son he commanded the Son to slay himself it would also follow That 2. When God commands the believing Parent to partake of the Lord's Supper he also commands all his Children to partake of the Lord's Supper because they are all included in their Parents 3. If Children are thus a part of their Parents then certainly if the Parents go to Heaven all their Children must go to Heaven likewise for the whole of Believers shall be saved and not a part of them only 4. Also if the Children are included in their Parents and are a part of them why may not the Parents Baptism serve for the Child and then it would also follow that no Man is a compleat and perfect Man without his Children was ever such Stuff by a Man of Parts and Learning published to the World 5. Sir will your Feeding or eating your Food feed your Children besure as much as your believing and being baptized will feed the Souls of your Children 6. Moreover why do you say the Judgments of wicked Parents fall on their Children did not God say that Proverb should be used no more in Israel but the Soul that Sins shall die If Children partake of the punishment of their Parents 't is when they are alike wicked and walk in the same steps their ungodly Parents walked in But you proceed and say that there is no particular command for the baptizing of Women Answ Male and
but it appears now this only served for their Infant State they may fall out of the Covenant of Grace and be damned notwithstanding their being once in the covenant of Grace and saved with their Parents unless they do actually believe c. 2. But if they had dyed in their Infancy perhaps they would have perished had not their Parents believed is this your meaning certainly if they are such that are Elected they shall be Saved tho' they had dyed in Infancy tho' their Parents believed or not believed doth the Parents believing procure their Salvation and the Parents not believing obstruct their Childrens Salvation and so bring on them Damnation if so the Salvation and Damnation of their Children in Infancy is put into the hands or Faith of their Parents 3. And if this be so wo to the poor Babes of unbelievers must they be all Damned Can 't Christ save such Children by his Merits and Righteousness nor Sanctifie them that die in their Infancy unless their Parents do believe and baptize them and dare you say he will not what strange Doctrine is this and by what authority do you assert those things which your Doctrine leads you out to do 4. True all our Children are Obliged by the Lord when they come to Years of understanding to remember their Creator and to Fear Love Believe and Serve him by the Authority and Command of his Blessed Word but not by virtue of any Baptismal Vow he hath appointed for them in Infancy to come under or enter into the State of Children in Infancy may through Christs Merits be fast enough if they Die then whether their Parents believe or not and it apppears the Priviledges and Blessings of their Parents Faith doth them no good any longer but only whilst they continue in Infancy 4. You bid your Children that are grown up to live answerable to their Covenant 5. Say you give not place to Temptation in denying your First Baptism Answ Let your Children take heed that they are not blinded by your pretended baptismal priviledge so as to think they are any ways the better for that Young Men and Women 't is not your Patents Faith will interest you in the Covenant of Grace there is a twofold being in that Covenant 1. Decretively 2. Actualy all Gods Elect ones are Decretively in the Covenant of Grace but no one Soul either Man or Woman is actually in it untill they have by Faith Union with Christ O! labour after this Union you are all the Children of Wrath by Nature and your Infant Baptism alters not your State nor had you any right to baptism when you were Infants but if you do believe you may and ought to be Baptized by vertue of Christ's Commission or Authority of God's Word Let not your Faith stand in this matter in the Wisdom of Men but in the Power and Authority of the Word of God to walk according to the Rule of the Holy Scripture herein is not to give way to Temptation but to the dictates of God's Spirit let Mr. Owen say what he will You bid your Children to ask such who deny Infant baptism these following questions 1. Say you ask them Can they prove from the Scripture that the Children of the Faithful were cast out from the Covenant of Grace Let them shew us a plain Scripture for that for if they are not cast out of the Covenant of Grace then baptism the Seal of the Covenant belongeth unto them 1. Answ Young Men and Women pray ask Mr. Owen whether all the Children of the Faithful or their Children as such were and are in the Covenant of Grace 2. If he says they all were and still are in that Couenant ask him whether then it doth not follow that they shall all be saved because the Everlasting Covenant of Grace is well ordered in all things and sure 2. Sam. 23. 5. and the promise of the eternal Life sure to all the true Seed of Abraham Rom. 4. 16. confirmed by the Promise and Oath of God Heb. 6. 13. to the 19th verse 3. Ask him whether the true Spiritual Seed of Abraham are not all Elected to Salvation or the Elect of God 4. Ask him whether there is any final falling away out of the Covenant of Grace or possibility for one of God's Elect eternally to perish 5. Ask him if God did not make a Covenant with Abraham's fleshly Seed as such that peculiarly appertained to them in which the whole House of Israel were taken into an External Legal and Typical Church State and so was a National Church and had many External Priviledges which our Children have not 6. Ask him whether the whole House of Israel both Parents and Children were all in the Covenant of Grace and so God's People by way of Special Love and Eternal Election 7. Ask him whether the Carnal Seed of believers as such are to be taken into the Visible Church in the times of the Gospel as they were under the Law If so ask him why John the Baptist did refuse them 8. Ask him how he can prove that the fleshly Seed of believers as such are the true Spiritual Seed of Abraham Tell him that Mr. Airsworth a Man that he Quotes and a Man of great Learning and tho' a a peao-baptist saith on Gen. 12. 7. thy Seed That is all the Children of the promise the Elect who only are accounted Abraham's Seed Rom 9. 7 8. And in Christ and Heirs according to the promise Gal. 3. 29. And tell him that Dr. Owen in his Book called The Doctrin of the Saints perseverance cap. 4. saith that the effectual Dispensation of the grace of the Covenant is peculiar to them only who are the Children of promise the Remnant of Abraham according to Election with all that in all Nations were to be blessed with him and in his Seed i. e. Jesus Christ Ishmael tho Circumcised was cast out Thus Dr. Owen and say I as Ishmael was cast out tho' Circumcised so Paul saith the bond-woman and her Son is now cast out that is the Old Covenant and Carnal Seed of Abraham as such See Gal. 4. 30. Tell him that Amelius de spraedest chap. 8. Serm 6. A Learned Man saith There are many of the Seed of Abraham to whom the word of promise did not belong then the rejection of many Jews who are of the Seed of Abraham doth not make void the word of promise from whence may we not safely conclude That if the Natural posterity of Abraham were not within the Covenant of Grace by Vertue of the promise Gen. 17. 2. then much less are our Natural Posterity but the former is true therefore the latter 9. Ask him whether the Covenant of Grace simply in its self gave right to Circumcision if so why was not Lot and Melchisedec Circumcised were they not in the Covenant of Grace This being so ask him if he can prove that the Covenant of Grace simply considered in its self gives any