Apostle shews Heb. 11. that under the old Covenant the godly were famous for their faith Were those promises of God exhortations of the Prophets and practise of those Worthies spoken of concerning faith and circumcision of the hart more then was comprehended in the Covenant under which Gods people at that time were Thirdly whereas you say the Church of the Gospel doth stand on faith and circumcision of the heart Is your meaning that there is no Church of the Gospel but all that are therein and professed and acknowledged members thereof are indued with faith and circumcision of heart If so experience of the Scripture and all Christian Churches will confute you sith still chaffe is mingled with graine tares with wheat the children of the wicked one with the children of the kingdome Or is your meaning that faith and circumcised hearts is required of all in the Church of the Gospel and is truly in those that are internall and living members of the same This is granted and may be said as truly of the Church of the Iewes and therefore this can make no difference being common to both Fourthly Can you tell what you meane when you say That the old Covenant stood onely by nature and circumcision of the flesh I cannot tell how you are to be interpreted but one of these three waies Either first that this Covenant was grounded on nature Or secondly that it promised onely naturall or temporall blessings Or thirdly that it was made with all and onely the naturall seed of Abraham all which are grosse and notorious errours openly crossing the Scriptures For if you meane that this Covenant was grounded in nature this is false for God chose Abraham and Israel of free grace and love above all other people Iosh 4. Deut. 7.7 c. neither did they differ in nature from others Or secondly if you meane that God onely required of them outward circumcision and cutting off the naturall foreskin and promised only naturall and temporall blessings this opinion is fitter to be abhorred then confuted Or thirdly if you meane that to be of the naturall seed of Abraham and to be circumcised in the flesh was sufficient and necessary for being in that Covenant so that their being in Covenant consisted in being the naturall seed of Abraham this is as false for first Were not many Proselytes joyned with the Israelites in the same Covenant so that to be of Abrahams seed was not necessary Secondly Did not they want circumcision in the wildernesse fourty yeares and yet remaine in Covenant Thirdly Did not Ishmael and Esau grow out of Covenant though the seed of Abraham and so ten Tribes ceased from being Gods people long before the old Covenant was antiquated and did not the Prophets shew that Legall observations were nothing worth without sinceritie Fifthly though the outward cleansings and ceremonies of the Law have ceased and so that outward faederall holinesse be at an end yet there is an outward and faederall holinesse of the new Covenant whereby Christians are distinguished from other people They have their outward Baptisme and the Lords Supper prayer in the Name of Christ alone the Word and profession of the Gospel by which they are distinguished from unbeleevers Act. 2.41.42 There are reckoned up first Baptisme secondly the Apostles Doctrine thirdly Fellowship or Communion with the faithfull fourthly breaking Bread and fifthly Prayers as distinctive markes of the Church by which it then was and to this day is distinguished from all other societies whatsoever 1 Cor. 5.12 There is a distinction expressed of those that were within the Church or Covenant and members of the Courch and those that were without whereof these were not subject to the judgement or censure of the Church those were But how are these distinguished that the Church may neither goe beyond nor neglect her office within her bounds By inward holinesse that none sees but God and each mans owne conscience and therefore cannot be a note of distinction unto men that cannot discern the heart By outward holinesse of life Not so for some of those that were within were guilty of more grosse profanenesse then those that were without as in the same Chap. 1 Cor. 5.1 and 11. Therefore there must be some note of distinction or faederall holinesse by which those that were wicked in heart and life and yet Saints by calling and members of the Church and so under the Churches jurisdiction might be discerned from them that were without and so subjected to the Churches censure 1 Cor. 5.11 12 13. Yet you say further There is now onely the new Covenant which is a covenant of grace and salvation and brings certaine salvation to all those that rightly enter into it which is onely by faith Hence it is said Act. 2.47 That the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved Answ It is as true that the old Covenant made with the Iewes was a covenant of grace and salvation which brought certaine salvation to all those that rightly entered into it and that it was onely by faith Heb. 11. And as for the Scripture you cite it is said indeed That the Lord added to the Church such as should be saved But it is not said onely such as should be saved were added to the Church or that all those who were added to the Church were saved You proceed And that the holinesse of children is not meant of any holinesse in relation to any Church-covenant will appeare further by these reasons First that which is an effect of regeneration is not brought to passe by generation though the parents be holy But to be of the covenant or kingdome is the proper effect of regeneration Ioh. 3.3 without which none can see it much lesse be of it or enter into it Therefore it cannot be brought to passe by generation though the parents be holy Answ We say not neither can it follow from our grounds that the children of Christian parents are in covenant with God by generation but by vertue of Gods gracious promise and from the nature of the covenant of grace wherein God is pleased to accept parents together with their children for his Secondly to be of or in the covenant outwardly of which being in covenant we speak and which is sufficient to make an externall member of the Church and give right unto the outward seales you can never prove to be the proper effect of regeneration untill you have proved that all those who were baptized by Iohn the Baptist and the Apostles and so admitted into the covenant as members of the Church were truly regenerate which to hold were to contradict the Scripture Your second reason is this Secondly contradictions cannot be the effect of one and the same covenant in one and the selfe-same respect But for one parent to be a beleever that is of the Church when the other parent is not to produce an holy seed that is in covenant 1 Cor.
made concerning the thing signified viz. powring his Spirit which promise belonged to them and their children therefore they should receive the signe which God had instituted to signifie it which may seeme the most genuine resolution of the Text. Or secondly This reason may be understood as brought both to the exhortation Repent and be baptized and the promise And you shall receive remission of sinnes and the gift of the holy Ghost for considering that baptisme and the gift of the holy Ghost are correlatives as the signe and thing signified the reason well may that I say not necessarily must be referred to both Or thirdly if we grant that it is immediately referred to the foregoing promise yet it must necessarily be taken as a reason of the exhortation at least mediately for seeing the promise of remission of sinnes and the holy Ghost is brought as a reason to perswade them to be baptized and these words For the promise is to you c. is brought as a confirmation of the promise Causa causae est causa causati and considering that the cause of the cause is the cause of the caused and the reason of the reason is the reason of the thing proved by that reason this For the promise c. must needs be brought as a reason why they should be baptized and so those who bring this as a reason that the Apostle gives why they should be baptized joyning the thing argued and the Argument together and omitting that which was interposed as not pertinent to the purpose are quit from your slander of false alledging Scripture and you convinced to be a false accuser of the brethren The next Objection that you frame I owne not Assenting that it is true that neither these Iewes nor the Gentiles were in Covenant untill they had entred into the same by repentance and faith seeing that the old Covenant was now abrogated and the Gentiles had beene hitherto foreiners so that you will acknowledge that whensoever Iewes or Gentiles should receive the promise by faith and repentance it did not onely belong unto them but also to their children For though it be expressed to the Iews That the promise was to them and their children it is to be understood to hold of the Gentiles also For now the partition wall was removed and the Iewes had no priviledge for their childrens having right unto the promise any more then the children of beleeving Gentiles Thus farre I have digressed in answer to some objections made against the Scripture which was brought for the proofe of my proposition though it might be handled as well in the assumption yet because I have more to say on the assumption I brought these objections under the proposition The summe of the proposition must be remembred to be this Where is right to the spirituall blessing promised in the word and sealed in baptisme there is right to baptisme which stands firme against whatsoever hath beene objected I come to the assumption The places of Scripture quoted to confirme the assumption have beene spoken of before Onely we may consider now First what things are promised in those Scriptures expresly Secondly what is implied Thirdly to whom these promises are made For the first God promiseth to be their teacher yea though they be uncapable of humane discipline They shall not teach one another but they shall all be taught of God Esa 54.13 Ier. 31.34 Againe that he will give yea powre his Spirit and that his Spirit shall be upon them Ioel 2.28 Es 59.21 Secondly under these two expressions yea each of them severally are comprehended all those things that are requisite for our being in Covenant with God and all those spirituall graces that give us right to the seale of entrance as first Regeneration which is the proper and certaine worke of the spirit of sanctification Ioh. 3.5 which spirit of regeneration to be signified by the water of baptisme may appeare by that Scripture Ioh. 3.5 Tit. 3.5 Againe this implies communion with Christ which must needs be by faith actuall or virtuall Ioh. 6.45 Heb. 11.6 For whosoever is taught of God and hath the Spirit of Christ must needs have Christ and so it follows that such have right unto remission of sinnes Thirdly these promises belong unto the children of the Church the sonnes and daughters of the faithfull all of them from the least to the greatest the seede of the faithfull and their seeds seed as may appeare in the Scriptures quoted and here must be comprehended infants as well as others who have right unto the promise by vertue of their parents entering into Covenant with God as Act. 2.39 The Apostle bids them repent and be baptized and so enter into Covenant for the promise saith he is unto you and your children so that there can no reason be given why infants should be excluded from these promises unlesse any one shall say that infants are uncapable of these gifts which this A. R. seemes to hold in many places of his booke which opinion is more worthy detestation then confutation Are not infants capable of sinne Psal 51.5 and therefore of sanctification shall the first Adams disobedience be available to bring guilt and defilement and not Christs obedience to procure remission and sanctification Or is there no remedie for the poore infants of beleeving parents but if they die before they come to the use of reason they must necessarily perish as being born the children of wrath and being uncapable of remedie Or doth this man hold that they are brutes without soule in that he compares baptizing of infants to circumcising of Camels or Asses 2 Part pag. 21. Are not these profane Atheisticall conceits contrary to the promises of God cleare testimonie of Scripture and example as of Iohn the Baptist who was sanctified and moved by the Spirit even in his mothers wombe Quest But what must we then beleeve that all the children of Christians are already indued with the holy Ghost taught of God and sanctified c. so soone as borne or in their infancie Answ It is enough to prove their right to baptisme that they are under the promise and interessed therein by vertue of their parents being at least externally in Covenant so that whether they have already received the Spirit or have a promise thereof it sufficeth to give them a right to the Sacrament As these are bid repent and so come under promise themselves with their children and then be baptized and afterward they shall receive the holy Ghost Quest But must we think that all children of Christian parents that are baptized either have or shall receive the Spirit and so be saved Answ Iohn the Baptist and the Apostles though they were not to beleeve that amongst those multitudes whom they baptized there were none but truely had or should receive the Spirit for it was after proved by the event that many were hypocrites yet they turned away none because by
this holinesse or unholinesse of children proceeds not from the holinesse or unholinesse of parents but from the lawfull or unlawfull conjunction of parents in the begetting of children for the Apostle in this place speakes of all men universally Answ Let any indifferent man judge whether this be not an uncleane illegitimate and spurious interpretation of and drawing conclusions from the Scripture For first What comfort or resolution had this beene in the scrupulous parent to tell him that his children were holy that is legitimate and no bastards but legitimates because they were begotten in lawfull matrimony that had beene contracted before conversion whereas by your interpretation of these Scriptures if they had continued still unconverted both of them their children had beene as holy that is legitimate and no bastards Secondly how can this place Marriage is honourable in all c. and the bed undefiled be understood of all men universally as you say viz. unbeleevers as well as beleevers Tit. 1.15 When the Apostle saith Vnto the pure all things are pure but unto them that are defiled and unbeleeving is nothing pure but even their mind and conscience is defiled how can the marriage bed then be undefiled to such It is evident therefore that we make not the Spirit of God contradict it selfe that the universall note all men is to be restrained to the subject matter viz. all sorts of beleevers for to such he wrote of what qualitie condition or calling soever Thirdly But I pray you see and if you will not let others consider how all this while in interpreting this Scripture 1 Cor. 7.14 and wresting wiredrawing and pulling in as it were obtorto collo other Scriptures which you would force to favour your interpretation you have directly and manifestly contradicted the Apostle and corrupted the Text. The Apostle tells the beleeving yoke-fellows that their children are holy though their yoke-fellows were unbeleevers because they are sanctified to them viz. by their faith you say therefore the children are holy because their matrimonie was lawfull If the Apostles meaning were that which you would have it he should have said You were lawfully married therefore are your children holy But he saith The unbeleever is sanctified by or to the beleever else were your children uncleane let their marriage be never so lawfull Paul gathers the holinesse of children from grounds peculiar to the faithfull viz. the faith and being in covenant at least of one of the parents shewing plainly that were it not for this the children must needs be uncleane You would draw it from grounds common to Infidels viz. lawfull matrimony affirming that whosoever is borne of parents though infidels lawfully married is holy in the Apostles sense Thus when men set themselves to maintain errours they are not afraid nor ashamed plainly to contradict the Spirit of God You have somewhat further which you call an objection It seems then that the holines here of the children ariseth not from the holinesse or faith of the parents but meerly from the lawfull marriage and conjunction of the parents and then you answer It is even so and goe on to repeat what you have said and adde such like stuffe not worth reading Answ It is even false though you dictate it as è cathedra or è tripode and a manifest contradicting of plain Scripture as hath beene before demonstrated Your two next objections doe not concern us and therefore I passe them by Yet one more objection you bring us in making Have the children of beleevers no more priviledge then the children of Heathens Turks and Infidels you answer In respect of the Covenant of grace and salvation none at all and bring those Scriptures Ioh. 3.7 8. Act. 10.34 35. to shew that the Covenant of grace cometh not by any naturall birth but by a new birth Onely their priviledge you say is in respect of the meanes of salvation for beleeving parents may be a means to bring their children to the knowledge and faith of Christ Answ What Christian heart doth not abhorre this assertion as being directly contrary to the tenour of Gods Covenant Gen. 17. of which more hereafter and repugnant to Gods gracious promises frequently inculcated in Scripture Exod. 20.5 6. Act. 2.39 Esa 59.21 Doth not this strike at a maine pillar of a Christians comfort grounded on those precious promises so that by this tenet if the children of Christian parents die before they be capable of the outward meanes of salvation or their parents be taken from them before they come to yeares of discretion they must be parted with as the children of Turkes or Infidels as being out of the state of salvation as being in a lost and hopelesse condition as having no right to the Covenant notwithstanding all the gracious promises that God hath made to the faithfull to be their God and the God of their seed to shew mercy to their posteritie even to thousands that the promises doe belong unto them and their children that his word and Spirit shall abide on their seed and their seeds seed Let men judge whether the father of lies can speake more contradictorily to Scripture for the extenuating of Gods rich grace and dashing the comfort of Gods people Thus have I vindicated the ground of my third argument Yet notwithstanding all shifts we see this truth remaines firme that the children of Christian parents are faederally holy and members of the Church and so have right to the seale of admission into the Church 4. Arg. 4. Arg. To those that are in Covenant with God the Sacrament or seale which God hath instituted to represent and seale admission into Covenant is to be administred Gen. 17.10 11. Exod. 12.48 But children of beleeving parents are in Covenant with God Gen. 17.7 Exod. 12.48 Esa 59.21 Therefore children of beleeving parents are to be admitted to the seale of entrance into the Covenant which now is baptisme in the time of the Gospel For the confirmation and explication of the former proposition I conceive it is hardly questioned but that when God hath made a Covenant with his people and appointed a seale to signifie and represent admission into the same then the seale or signe belongs to those which have entred into Covenant under what kinde of administration soever the Covenant be dispensed So Philip reasons If thou beleeve with all thine heart thou maist be baptized So Peter Can any one forbid water that these should not be baptized c. For actuall faith at least in profession was necessary to those that at first entered into the new covenant and received the sign or seale thereof to wit baptisme as well as it was necessary to Abraham who entered first into the old Covenant which was sealed by Circumcision though actuall faith was not required of his posteritie as necessarie to their being in Covenant Neither for ought that I see doth the Adversarie deny this proposition Yet if it be questioned it is fully
to maintaine and yet you are not afraid nor ashamed to father this errour upon Christ himselfe and would force his words to the Iewes to sound this way Ioh. 8.31 And among other your toyes that you would fasten on him which are not worth the examining unlesse a man had more time then he knew how well to bestow you bring him in speaking thus in the conclusion of your paraphrase that you make on his words to the Iewes You see then how that Covenant of Circumcision made with Abraham and you his naturall seed was to be an everlasting Covenant in your flesh to wit in me that was to come of your flesh Gen. 17.13 Answ First is not this notorious presumption to father such a fancy as this on Christ to call the flesh of the Iews fore-skinne Christ himselfe for that by the flesh in which Gods covenant was is meant the fore-skin wherein God set the signe and seale of his covenant is apparent by comparing the 10 11 12. verses of Gen. 17. together Secondly If that were an everlasting Covenant which God made with Abraham and the Israelites and made with them in Christ though Christ was not that flesh in which circumcision was made both which you grant here and the Scripture plentifully proveth then certainly was the covenant made with the Iewes and with us all one for substance seeing they and we have one Mediatour and seeing the old dispensation of the covenant is abrogated how was that an everlasting covenant but as the same covenant is perpetuated now in the Evangelicall dispensation of it But you will have Christ give this reason that by the flesh wherein the covenant of circumcision was to be is meant Christ because Christ was to come of their flesh Answ Was he so Was Christ to come of the flesh of strangers and Proselytes or of all the posteritie of Abraham which had the covenant in the flesh Did Christ come of the flesh of all that were circumcised which must needs follow on this conceit What prodigious opinions doth this mans braine conceive and father on Christ After you come as you say to shut up all thus That it is apparent that infants of Christian parents cannot warrantably be baptized untill they manifest and declare their faith by profession as is apparent first from the doctrine and practise of Iohn Matth. 3.6.8 9. Mar. 1.4 Secondly of Christ and his Apostles Ioh. 3 22. compared with 4.1 2. Act. 2.38.41 and 8.12.36 37. Thirdly by the tenour of the commission Mat. 28.29 Mar. 16.15 16. Answ No su h thing is apparent from these Scriptures as is first sufficiently shewed by the foregoing reasons Secondly by the fore examination of those Scriptures and grounds you build upon Thirdly in none of those places doe you finde baptisme so restrained to those that professe the faith that it should be lawfull for none else to have it Fourthly I adde if abusing the Scriptures and inventing and avouching new and monstrous errours may make your opinion for which you plead to be apparent truth then indeed you have made appparent what you say otherwise not Fiftly though in mine answer to that Scripture Matth. 28.29 I hope sufficient hath been said to answer all other Scriptures of that kind yet because some put great confidence in that Mar. 16.15.16 for this opinion though it be the same for substance with the other Mar. 16.15 16. I will adde a little in this place though happily the same for substance that hath beene said The words of Christ are these Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel unto every creature He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved he that beleeveth not shall be damned To make it appeare that nothing can be gathered to confirme the adversaries opinion note these foure things First Here our Saviour doth not forbid his Disciples to baptize any that want actuall faith or confine baptisme to beleevers or expressely shew who should be baptized and who not onely he shews who should by saved viz. those that beleeve and were baptized and who should be damned viz. those that beleeved not so that it is strange that men should promise to themselves any patronage for Anabaptisme from this place Secondly If any should say that though here it be not expressed that beleevers onely are to be baptized yet it may be hence gathered and is implied from the order and connexion of the words He that beleeveth and is baptized so that men must beleeve before they be baptized I adde secondly That no such thing can be necessarily implied by the series of the words which I prove by this very Text. First it would by as good consequence follow that none ought or can preach the Gospel be meanes of working faith baptize or helpe toward salvation but those who have received Apostolicall authoritie and gifts to goe into all the world and preach unto every creature for the connexion and order is alike but no man will yeeld this consequence Secondly by as good and better consequence you might gather that none shall be saved but those that beleeve and are baptized which is false for whatsoever you hold I conceive that none but those that are given over to strong delusions will hold that all the children of Christian parents that die before they come to actuall faith must remedilesly perish and as for the absolute necessitie of baptisme to salvation if with the Papists you hold it will easily be confuted from this Scripture shewing that not want of baptisme where it cannot be had and is not wilfully contemned but unbeleefe condemneth Yet there is as good reason for these inferences from this place as for that you would imply hence Or thirdly that nothing but unbeliefe can be the ground of damnation might as well be concluded hence as that nothing but faith can be the ground of baptisme whereas not onely unbeleife but every sinne is damnable and without repentance will bring damnation Thirdly I answer to this Scripture that though it were granted that the Apostles who were to gather a Church out the unbeleeving world and take them into Covenant that were out of Covenant might not baptize any but those who by professing faith tooke hold of the covenant from which before they were aliens and their families who were now received into covenant with them yet it doth not follow that the children of parents in covenant and so in Covenant themselves should be denied baptisme though they want actuall faith for there is not the same reason of a Church gathered and to be gathered as that latter part He that beleeveth not shall be damned if it be understood of actuall faith must be restrained to the present time and matter for to those that were out of Covenant actuall faith was necessary to bring them and theirs within covenant So that the Gentiles to whom the Apostles were to preach must of necessity actually beleeve else they could not
Gen. 17.23 Gen. 22. Gen. 18.19 For example God commanded Abraham to walke before him and be perfect This binds us as well as Abraham though Abrahams circumcision of himselfe and his family his purpose and endevour to offer up his sonne Isaac his commanding and teaching his children and houshold not onely in morall duties but also ceremoniall in respect of circumcision and sacrifices were parts of his walking before God and being upright yet we may not imitate him in those very particulars But in those duties required in the New Testament which are analogicall and proportionable to these as giving up our selves and ours unto God in the use of those Ordinances which he for the present hath appointed in denying our selves in our dearest comforts and bringing up our children in feare and information of the Lord. And so whereas God promiseth to Abraham to be his shield and exceeding great reward and his All-sufficient God we may apply these promises to our selves though our condition be not the same in all things with Abrahams though we be not in danger of having the nations to rise up against us for rescuing Lot c. So God promiseth to be God to Abraham and his seed and requires that he should lay hold on the promise by faith not onely for himselfe but also for his children and so give up his children unto God in circumcision which is a ground sufficient for Christian parents to lay hold on the promise of God for themselves and their children give them up to God God in baptisme notwithstanding some circumstances wherein the promise and command made to Abraham differ from them as they are applied unto us So God gave a command and a promise unto Ioshua I will be with thee Josh 1.5.6 to the 9. I will not faile thee nor forsake thee Be strong and of a good courage c. This promise and command we may and ought to apply to our selves in any worke that God calls us unto as if it had beene made unto us in particular Heb. 13.5 Though we be never made Captaines of hosts to goe against Canaanites or take possession of a promised land or be types of Christ the true and reall Ioshua or Iesus all which were peculiar to that Worthy yet the command and promise concern us as well as him as the Apostle in that place sheweth Else if you will not grant that we are bound to beleeve promises and obey commands made to Abraham or some other speciall persons unlesse we observe all circumstances and particular actions in obeying the command and jumpe with their estate in every particular qualification in receiving the promises you will deny that we have any thing to doe with any command or promise of God and so go about to overturne all the consolation of the faithfull and discharge them of all their dutie But seeing none I hope is so foolish as to follow such absurdities we may safely hold notwithstanding what you object that Abrahams promise for his children and command to circumcise them is a good ground for Christian parents to lay hold on the covenant for their children and to present them to God in baptisme Thirdly whereas you say As Abraham did what God commanded him so must we doe as he commandeth us and again we must baptize infants when we are commanded and not before Answ I hope your meaning is not that we must have immediate revelation from God as Abraham had for if untill then we sit still we shall never obey nor beleeve Otherwise so many as are the children of Abraham acknowledge themselves bound by Gods command to him to give up himselfe and his children unto God to doe the like though they have no new revelation from God neither are bound to observe all circumstances that Abraham was You bring us in objecting God gave to infants circumcision which was a signe or seale of the righteousnesse of faith and regeneration Gen. 17.11 Rom. 4.11 and we know God gave no lying signe nor sealeth a covenant to any persons that are not therein Therefore infants are in the covenant have faith and regeneration and so ought to be baptized now as well as circumcised then To which you answer It is true God gives no lying sign nor sealeth to any persons that they are in covenant when they are not and therefore seeing that Ishmael was circumcised after that God had declared and made it knowne that he was not in covenant Gen. 17.18 19 20 21. it must follow that circumcision was not by God ordained nor by Abraham understood to be to the persons circumcised a seale of their being in covenant and much lesse of their being in the faith and regeneration Wherefore Gen. 17.11 Rom. 14.11 which this objection is grounded upon of necessitie must be understood as it is applied by the Apostle to wit that circumcision received both upon himselfe and his seed was to him and to them a signe and seale that righteousnesse should be by faith Rom. 4. vers 3.11 12. to 24. Answ God doth not declare there Gen. 17.18 19. and cited by you nor any where else that Ishmael was not in covenant for though the covenant was established with Isaac so that he and his posteritie should continue in covenant untill the promised seed should come of his posteritie yet Ishmael was outwardly in covenant Gen. 17.10 11 12 13 14.23.25 untill he discovenanted himselfe Secondly whether is it fit that we should beleeve you or God himselfe speaking Gen. 17. and Paul interpreting that place Rom. 4. who had the mind of Christ and the Spirit of God you say that circumcision was not ordained by God nor understood by Abraham to be to the person circumcised a seale of their being in covenant much lesse of their being in the faith and regeneration though we say not that it was so God saith Gen. 17.10 11. This is my Covenant which ye shall keepe between me and you and thy seed after thee every manchilde among you shall be circumcised and you shall circumcise the fore-skinne of your flesh and it shall be a token of the Covenant betwixt me and you And Paul saith that Abraham received the signe of circumcision a seale of the righteousnesse of faith c. Let men judge whether of these two parties testimonies is more worthy credit Thirdly It is not to be questioned but those Scriptures Gen. 17.7 Rom. 14.11 must be understood as the Apostle applieth them But so farre is the Apostles application there from excluding or denying our interpretation of those Scriptures viz. that God ordained and Abraham understood circumcision to be a seal of their being in Covenant and so a seale of faith and regeneration to those that worthily used it that the Apostles application presupposeth this and therefore gathers because circumcision was a signe of the Covenant and a seale of the righteousnesse of faith that righteousnesse comes by faith not by workes Fourthly If the same was not the
it is not lawfull for women to receive the Lords Supper for as much may be sayd for that as for this and against this as that But the consequent is absurd therefore the antecedent is false And this I would wish those women to consider which by reason of the weakenesse of their judgment are aptest to be deceived by those that creep into houses and leade captive silly women laden with sinnes led away with diverse lusts ever learning and never able to come to the knowledg of the truth For if they should yeeld to this perswasion their children must not be baptized in their infancie because the Scripture doth not expressely command it On the same ground they must yeeld that they themselves have nothing to doe with the Supper and so by degrees they may be cheated of all Gods Ordinances and their comforts priviledges and obedience on the same grounds As also I would wish that the foregoing argument may be considered by them who have refused to have their children baptized in infancie and shew what ground they have in Scripture for baptizing them when they come to yeares of discretion I cannot see but they have as great cause to question whether ever their children may be baptized as whether they may baptize them in infancy Let them give an example or command in scripture expresse or by just consequence of a beleeving Father which kept his child unbaptized untill he actually beleeved and then brought him to baptisme And then let them bethinke themselves whether the issue will not be either their posterity must not be baptized at all though they beleeve and repent never so much and so they cast themselves and their children out of Covenant or they must be baptized without warrant or commande for all those examples and commands that are in scripture of faith required in those that should be baptized speake of them who themselves and their parents till that time had not been under the new Covenant Or lastly if they will have those commands and examples for their warrant and applyable to them they and their children must become infidels and persons out of Covenant and deny that ever they were in Covenant before or had received any spirituall and Evangelicall favour that so now at last entering newly into the Covenant of grace by faith and repentance whereunto they professe that they have been hitherto strangers they may receive the Sacrament or pledge of admission into Covenant Which how injurious it would be to Gods grace and their own souls and posteritie if ever they tasted of Gods mercy or were but externally in Covenant let all men judge It is usuall in controversies of this kinde after Scripture proofes and reasons deduced therefrom and grounded thereon to produce the consent and testimony of the Godly and learned whether Ancient or Modern especially the former that were most neere the Primitive purest times And I doubt not if a man had helps and leisure for searching Antiquitie it might be easily shewed that the baptizing of Infants was long in use before Antichrist got to his throne contrary to the opinion of this disputant yea in the Primitive times unlesse Authors be silent in this point because no controvesie then rose above this matter or corrupted But as I have said neither having the books of the Ancients that speak of this subject nor time well to turne over those volumes if I had them I must forbeare Onely let the Reader again take notice of these two first-mentioned and Prime Authors whom A. R. cites for his purpose For as touching Origens giving testimony that baptizing children was a ceremony or tradition of the Church not to examine how truly these words are cited out of the Author which I cannot for the reason aforementioned but to take the words on his trust This testimony shews that in his time who lived but 200. yeares after Christ it was a thing ordinarily practised and as I shewed before in vindicating my third Argument an unquestioned practise from which as an undeniable principle that holy man seemes to prove that Infants of a day old are not free from sinne And let none be offended that it is called a ceremony though that name as it is used for humane traditions beside or contrary to Gods word is odious yet the word may in its proper signification be used for any rite either humane or divine and both Baptisme and the Lords Supper may fitly be called ceremonies now as well as Passeover Circumcision and other Divine Ordinances instituted by God among the Iews Neither let any be troubled at the word Tradition for that is used not onely to note things taken up by men but also for the Doctrine of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Institutions of the Apostles 1 Cor. 11.2 2 Thess 2.15 And whereas it is said a ceremony or tradition of the Church there is no necessitie that it should be understood that the Church was the Authour thereof but the subject in which it was used and by which it was delivered to posteritie may well be meant by that phrase So Augustine who lived in the fourth Century after Christ calles it a custome as he saith of the Church Which yet he might well doe and yet it be a divine ordinance for all Gods ordinances are or should be in custome in the Church But if it were a custome of the Church in Augustines time and a ceremony or tradition of the Church in Origens sure it is strange that it should be brought into use a thousand yeares after Christ as one of his Authours saith and be a devise of Antichrist as he holds For customes are things that have been of long use and ancient standing And whereas some Authours speake of such as were Catechized and instructed by the Church before they were baptized and must give a reason of their faith before they were admitted to Baptisme and that they used to Baptize such at two times of the yeare onely I beleeve it will be apparent to those who looke into these Authours that they speake not of the children of beleeving parents but that those Catechumeni who were first Catechized and then baptized were Pagans who lived in those parts where the Church was which were quite out of Covenant and therefore because God did not so miraculously and suddenly bring such to the faith as in the times of the Apostles some space was required to instruct them in the principles of Religion before they could be judged fit for Baptisme But as I said I may not meddle with the examination of his authorities nor produce any humane authoritie for this seeing it hath been sufficiently confirmed by Arguments drawn from Scripture grounds though it were an easie thing I suppose to beat this Adversary with his own weapon And it might be an usefull worke if some Antiquary would take the pains to turne over the ancient Writers and shew what they have left on record concerning this
subject I will come to make some practicall use and improvement of this dispute and so end Seeing all those Arguments that have been brought against the baptizing of Infants have been answered and our Arguments for it defended through the help of God and in his feare how sufficiently let others judge so that the weaknesse of the Adversaries Arguments hath beene detected and the truth vindicated against cavils and it hath been proved from Scripture grounds that children of parents within Covenant have right to Baptisme this discourse may serve First To admonish such as the Authour of this pamphlet answered that are so pragmaticall in broaching their new conceits that they would impartially and without prejudice weigh and examine their owne tenents and grounds by the Scripture before they proceede with such confidence and heate to commend them to and urge them upon others deride rayle upon and condemne as Antichristian and Deceivers all that will not receive their doctrines as infallible I would wish them to consider whether this be the truth of God that they pleade for and maintaine with such grosse perverting abuse and falsifying of Scripture as hath beene shewed throughout the booke whether hath the cause of God neede to be upholden with manifest errors and those of very dangerous consequence bordering on blasphemie such as have beene discovered in this Authour as calling the Covenant under which the faithfull were before Christ a Covenant of workes of Nature and of condemnation And casting out all infants of the holiest Christian parents from the Covenant of Grace and making them equall with the Children of Turkes at least whiles infants and many errors of like sort and that against playne Scriptures Doth God neede mens lyes to maintaine his truth It may be these errours abuses of Scriptures and bold assertions of untruths and those not one or two but many proceeded from ignorance and zeale without knowledge For such is our weakenesse of judgement that wee are apt to take up embrace and maintaine error for truth If so I hope such persons upon conviction may be humbled and give glory to God in confessing the power of his truth in overcomming them But if otherwise they proceede out of pride vaineglory and they be thus active out of a desire to gather Disciples after them that they may be followed and admired of the simple creeping into houses and leading captive Act. 20.30 silly women laden with iniquitie ever learning but never coming to the knowledge of the truth â— Tim 3.6 7. pretending to serve the Lord Iesus when indeed they serve their own bellies and by good words Rom. 16.17 and faire speeches deceive the hearts of the simple professing zealously to affect Gods people Gal. 4.17 that they may exclude and withdraw them from Christs Ministers I would wish them to consider that though Satans Ministers may be suffered for a time to transforme themselves into the Ministers of righteousnesse 2 Cor. 11.13 and 14.15 yet their end shall be according to their works And though there may be false Teachers amongst Gods people 2 Pet. 2.1 2 3. who may privily bring in damnable heresies denying the Lord that bought them they shall bring upon themselves swift destruction Yea though they so farre insinuate themselves into people that many shall follow their pernicious wayes by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evill spoken of c. yet their judgement lingereth not and their damnation slumbereth not Neither will God suffer such abuse and perverting of his Scriptures venting of errours railing against authoritie speaking evill of his Ministers seeking to seduce his people and impoysoning many unstable souls with fond opinions goe unpunished 1 Cor. 11.19 2 Thess 2.11 12. Though for a time he may for the correction and tryall of his own people the discovering of the sound and punishing of the unsound by giving them over to strong delusions to beleeve lyes suffer such persons to escape yet surely men at last shall know what it is with a great shew of Scripture and under pretence of zeale to oppose the truth and draw people from the wayes of holinesse I know the best of Gods servants may erre in judgement aswell as faile in practise But such will blesse God for discovering their errour and be thankfull to the instrument which he useth for that end and to such doubtlesse God is ready to shew mercy in forgiving their errours But as for them who for their credit sake as they thinke when their errours are discovered and opposed shall be more bold in asserting them fly out in rayling and bitternesse against those that would have given an helping hand to the reducing of them to the truth set their wits a worke to invent new Arguments to maintaine falshood against their own conscience and so to uphold one errour by another for no truth will patronize an errour and consequently run from one fond opinion into another such we are commanded after once or twice admonition to reject Tit. 3.10 11. as knowing that they are subverted and sinne being condemned of themselves Secondly It may serve for a warning to those who have beene too apt to listen to the perswasion of such busie pragmaticall persons that they should not be so simple as to thinke the greatest confidence and boldest peremptorinesse and fairest shew of zeal is an infallible signe of the best cause maintained or best heart in the maintainer Hypocrisie oft is attended with appearance of zeale and ignorance is ordinarily accompanyed with peremptorinesse For none usually are more pragmaticall busie and bold then they that are most ignorant 1 Tim. 1.13 none more desirous to teach others ther they that understand not what they say nor whereof they affirme none so unruly and hard to have their mouthes stopped perverting whole houses by teaching those things which they ought not as those that are but vaine talkers and meere deceivers when they come to bee tryed Christians should try the Spirits whether they be of God or no not beleeving a tenent forthwith because men come with it to us 1 Joh. 4.1 under a pretence of love 2 Cor. 11.13 14 15. zeale humility c. Seeing Satan can change himselfe into the liknesse of an Angell of light and his Ministers are taught his art God hath given us his word as a touchstone that we may try all things and hold fast that which is good He hath appointed the Ministers Ministery of his word to this end that we may not be henceforth such children Eph. 4.11 12 14. as to be carryed about with every wind of vaine doctrine by the sleight of men and cunning craftinesse whereby they lie in waite to deceive and seldome doe we see any insnared in these and such like errors till they leave the Ministery of the word the speciall meanes which God hath appointed to prevent them It is true all Christians ought to make tryall of their