change lyes or consists which in Divinity is called Justification The Second is Goâ—s quickening and renewing the inward Powers and Faculties of the Soul by communicating a principle of Spiritual Life to the Sinner in every of the Souls faculties within I do not mean or intend that in this work of Regenerating the Sinner the Natural faculties concreated with the Nature of Adam are destroyed or annihilated but that the Predominancy of those vitious qualities inhering in the Souls faculties is overpowered by the Sanctification of the Spirit and a contrary Principle of saving and unloosable Grace is communicated to every of these faculties in the Soul whereby the new Principle communicated maintains its own Being in those respective Faculties and this through the continual supply of the Spirit which produced the change and making continual resistance against that Vice and Corruption as yet remaining in the same Faculties where the new Creature is appointed to War and Combat until that Sinless Perfection promised in the Covenant of Grace supersede and dispossess that indwelling Corruption in the Soul under which the new Creature continues to groan until a perfect release come This is called Sanctification and when the set time prefixt in Gods Decree for calling an Elect Sinner is come what produceth this great change I will suppose the Sinner to be come to the Years of Manhood capable of acting or exercising his natural Faculties doth his will or his reason help the Almighty in producing so miraculous a change can the Eye of this Sinners blind reason and understanding see into or comprehend the hidden Mystery of that Wisdom manifested and set forth in that stupendious and astonishing contrivance of Gods justifying and reconciling to himself an Apostate Rebel Sinner by the imputed Righteousness of another can the Eye of blind reason be capable of this can the Will of this dead Sinner incline or move it self towards the Sinners own Conversion to be a Coadjutor or Fellow-helper to forward or help the Almighty in effecting this strange and miraculous change can it possibly be that Spiritual or Corporal Blindness can cure it self or that Enmity and Rebellion can change its own Nature Let the experience of every rightly assured Believer speak to this If then nothing in the poor dead Sinner neither the use of his natural reason nor yet any activity in his unrenewed Will doth contribute any help to produce so wonderful a change the work must needs be entirely Gods own work From which I argue in the behalf of poor Infants if God can and doth freely pardon and blot out the Millions of actual Sins added to the original guilt of an adult Sinner if he can and doth freely and most graciously impute the Righteousness of his Son and by thus doing justifies an adult Sinner If God can and doth by the irresistable efficacy of his own Holy Spirit renew the faculties of the Soul of an adult Sinner which is as I may say steeped and even soaked in Vitiosity and actual Pollution cannot the same Almighty Just Wise and Gracious God do and effect the like change in and upon a poor helpless Infant though that Infant understand not what is done to it neither is capable of contributing any help towards so great a change From what hath been here offered to consideration to me it is evident and plain that when Men cry out and say Infants while Infants are uncapable of Regeneration because they want the use of reason c. they speak most injuriously and ignorantly against God himself as if he could not or would not effect that in and for an Elect Infant which he doth for an adult Sinner as the justifying and renewing an adult Sinner hath no dependence on the reason will or speech of a grown Sinner even so the want of actual reason activity of Will or Speech in an Infant cannot possibly hinder God from effecting this great and gracious work in and upon an Elect Infant though the poor Infant can do nothing towards so great a change The Subject Recipient of this work of Regeneration is every way Passive the adult as well as the Infant Agreeable to this Act of Gods in changing a Sinner is that Ordinance of Water-Baptism whose principal use is twofold First to signifie and represent his own gracious dealing with the Sinner Baptized in Pardoning all his Sins for Christs sake whose Blood represented by the Water in Baptism was shed for the Remission of the Sins of all comprehended in that Covenant of Grace whereof Baptism is a Seal And Secondly that it may be a Seal to confirm to the Baptized if Elect all the gracious Promises of the same Covenant of Grace as Gods work upon the Soul of a true Convert is in respect of the Sinner wholly Passive so Baptism the outward Sign and Seal of Gods Covenant of Grace is altogether Passive And as the Wisdom of Christ saw fit to appoint the Element of material Water to be used in Baptism as above all the other Elements most suited to the design of that Ordinance because of the Analogie and resemblance which is between Water and the Blood of Christ so no mode or way of administring this Water-Baptism doth so exactly and to the life set forth the freeness of Gods Grace and Mercy exhibited in the Covenant of Grace then the act of Sprinkling or pouring out the Water on the Party Baptized By this way of Sprinkling under the Gospel there is a sweet and orderly Harmony kept between the Pen-men of Gods Word both under the Old and New-Testament Dispensation with whom whoever studys to agree in applying the Water of Holy Baptism they will be at length found to be in the right how many and black Censures soever are heapt on them by injudicious Spirits The Spirit of God in the work of Regeneration applys the Spiritual Baptism by Sprinkling or pouring out of his Graces on the Soul There must be an Analogie kept between the thing signified and the outward Sign Against what hath been laid down to prove Infants right to Baptism the Seal of Gods Covenant many things are objected I will for brevity sake contract the Objections with my Answers to as few particulars as possibly I can Object 1. In the Words of the Grand Commission there is not one word concerning Infants Mat. 28.19 Go ye and Teach all Nations Baptizing them in the Name c. This seems too weak though well meaning Minds to be unanswerable But in the strength of him who gave out this Grand Commission I hope to shew how wretchedly the Objector is mistaken herein In order whereto let two things be seriously and warily considered First that albeit Christ the Lord doth not mention Infants in particular yet he includes them in the Words of the general Commissionâ— Go Teach all Nations Baptizing them c. Here the Lord commands expresly that all such as belong to Gods Covenant with Abraham Gen. 7.7 shall be Baptized Namely all
be Justified by God's Word should they Judiciously acknowledge that Abraham's Covenant is the Covenant of Grace and that Circumcision was the Seal thereof and that Water Baptism is now come in the room thereof 2. In that some have reflected on that Covenant calling it a carnal Covenant of Works and the Church which was to Observe and Practice Circumcision the Seal thereof a carnal Church all I need to say by way of Reply is to bewail the carnallity of their Uncircumcised Hearts and Lips who have no better or higher Apprehensions of God's Holy Covenant the Grace whereof must bring them to Heaven if ever they come thither and of his so highly Honoured Friends Abraham Isaac and Jacob with all the rest of the Holy Patriarchs Prophets and Godly Believers of that Day than to call it a carnal Covenant and them a carnal Church 3. If Abraham's Covenant was a Covenant of Works to him and his Children then it must needs he so to us Gentile Believers and to our Children now And if so let the Adversary Demonstrate if he can how Abraham or any of that carnal Church as they falsely term it can be supposed to be now in a Saved State Or what ground of hope we Gentile Believers and our Children have that we or any of ours shall go to Heaven when we Die seeing that we are still under the very same Covenant with Abraham which Covenant if it be a Covenant of Works and not of Grace no Salvation can be expected and if the Believers under that dark Dispensation were Carnal and not Spiritual how comes the unerring Wisdom of God to Propound them to Believers under the Gospel for Examples and Patterns of Faith Patience c. Heb. 11. Heb. 12.1 Ja. 5.10 Let it be farther considered that Albeit the Seal of Circumcision Sealed no saving Blessings to the Non-Elect it doth not hence follow that it Sealed no other than Temporal Blessings to the Elect seeing that to them the Heavenly were Typically included in the Earthly As touching the Earthly Blessings which Circumcision Sealed to the Non-Elect they were greater and better than God was any way obliged to give them I am sure than they savingly improved Object We utterly deny that Water-Baptism did succeed and come in the room of Circumcision Answ For confirmation of the Affirmative let the three Arguments already laid down under this Head be seriously and without prejudice considered To which I will only add the Explication of Colos 2.11 12. whereon I have grounded a fourth Argument to prove that Water-Baptism succeeded and came in the room of Circumcision In the place above quoted the Apostle plainly sets forth to the believing Colossians and in them to all believing Gentiles to the Worlds end two things necessary to be known and believed by all true Believers First That they who by a true lively Faith have Embrac'd the Lord Jesus Christ as held forth in the Gospel evidencing their Faith by the Truth of Gospel-Sanctification They and none else who are Adult are made actual Partakers of the true and saving Circumcision effected in the Soul by the Spirit of Christ And which was Externally signified by the outward Circumcision These Believers having now obtained the Spiritual Circumcision are not at all to be Concerned or Troubled that they are not outwardly Circumcised with the Circumcision made with Man's Hands Forasmuch as that which was Externally Signified and Seaâ—ed to the believing Jews by the outward Circumcision is now Internally and Powerfully wrought in their Hearts by the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ Secondly The Apostle sets forth in this place that Water-Baptism is Instituted and Appointed by Christ under the Gospel Dispensation to be to believing Gentiles the same that Circumcision was to the Jews viz. A Visible Sign and Seal of Abraham's Covenant to all his Ecclesiastical Church-Seed among the Gentiles viz. All of that Race who on God's calling them Believe in and Obey the Lord Jesus Christ To these and their Infant-Seed and none else among the Gentiles Baptism doth now under the Gospel Signify and Seal the very same Spiritual Blessings and Church-Priviledges which Circumcision of old did Signify and Seal to the believing Jews and their Infant-Seed This I take to be the Sense and Meaning of the Apostle in that so much controverted place In this Sense I hope I shall Die satisfied And herein I humbly conceive none of the Orthodox will differ from me which Sense being granted it is beyond the reach of all Scriptural contradiction that Water-Baptism was Instituted and Appointed by Christ on purpose to succeed in the room of Circumcision CHAP. IV. Shewing and proving that the Infants of Believing Gentiles now under the Gospel have as real a Right to the Covenant of Grace and to Baptism the now Visible Sign and Seal thereof as had the Children of Abraham according to the Flesh to it and to Circumcision the then Seal of the Covenant of Grace And that they are as capable of the Grace and outward Seal of the Covenant as are the most Adult grown Believers I shall lay down Four Arguments to evince and make good against all Opposition what I now assert Arg. 1. THE first Argument is thus fram'd If God himself did by absolute Soveraign Grace comprehend Abraham's Church-Seed in the Covenant of Grace he made with believing Abraham their Stipulating and Covenanting Father and never since Repeal'd that Gracious Act of his Then the Infants of Abraham's Church-Seed are still Interested in the Covenant of Grace and have as great Right to and are as capable of the Grace and Seal of that Covenant as ever But God himself did by absolute Soveraign Grace comprehend Abraham's Church-Seed in the Covenant of Grace he made with believing Abraham their Stipulating and Covenanting Father which Gracious Act of his was never since Repealed Therefore the Infants of Abraham's Church-Seed are still Interessed in the Covenant of Grace and have as great a Right to and are as capable of the Grace and Seal of that Covenant as ever I cannot see how this Argument can possibly be overthrown but by proving that God did alter and change that Covenant he made with Abraham his Friend for himself and for his Church-Seed The which when the Adversary doth by Evidence of Scripture not abused and perverted I shall then yield the Cause and bewail my Mistake But two things cause in me an unshaken Confidence that this can never be done First The Immutability and Unchangableness of God on which very account he is styled a Covenant-keeping God who never yet cast off any poor Sinner until that Sinner did first actually cast God off the which I think the Adversary dares not deny Secondly The Impossibility of poor Infants actually casting God off and that because of their Incapacity in respect of Age. Arg. 2. If Infants be at all Saved they are Saved by the Grace of God's Covenant made with Abraham which Covenant and the External
the Subject who must undoubtedly be in great fear and in apparent danger of being let fall if not of being Suffocated or Smothered in the Water And strange it is to me that Arminians who plead so much for the universal Love and Mercy of God to Mankind in general should not see how full of Reflection on God this Principle of theirs is which makes the God of Love and Mercy the Author of such a Mode or Way of Baptizing which is not possible to be practised without apparent Danger both to Health and Life of both the Subject and the Administrator too I conclude this Argument with the Saying of Judicious Sydenham viz That if Baptism be to be Administred in that way of Dipping only Happy are those who live in hot Climates or who have Bodies of Brass A third Argument may be grounded on Scandal thus That Mode or Way of Baptizing which is both Immodest and tends to Excite Lustful Motions and Carnal Desires in Men and Women cannot be commanded by Christ neither was the same ever practised by John But that way of Baptizing by Dipping the whole Body under Water is both Immodest and tends to Excite Lustful Motions and Carnal Desires in Men and Women Therefore that Mode of Baptizing by Dipping the whole Body under Water was never commanded by Christ neither was the same ever practised by John He who commands all Matters relating to Divine Worship to be done decently and in order 1 Cor. 14.40 and who commands Believers to abstain from all appearance of Evil 1 Thes 5.22 can never be the Author of such Disorderly Practises as thwart and contradict his own general Rules Now whether it be not an Immodest and unseemly Sight to see a mixt Company of Men and Women stand in Garments to use Mr. Sydenham's Expression next to Nakedness it self Let any not bereav'd of common Modesty Judge And whether the Administrator can possibly handle the Female Sex as he doth when actually Dipping them and not feel the risings and motions of Concupiscence in his Nature I leave to Thinking Persons to Determine and Judge Again in the fourth place to add no more let the last Argument be grounded on the Analogie which is and must be between the Baptism of John and that of Christ The Argument is thus framed If Christ's way and manner of Administring the Inward Spiritual Baptism whereof that of John was but the Outward Visible Sign be by Sprinkling or Pouring out upon Then John did certainly Baptize by Sprinkling or Powering out the Water on those he Baptized But Christ's way and manner of Administring the Inward Spiritual Baptism is by Sprinkling or Pouring out upon Therefore John did certainly Baptize by Sprinkling or Pouring out Water on those he Baptized If there was a necessity that John should Harmonize with Moses the Ceremonial Law and the Prophets I cannot see any reason why he should not be as greatly concern'd to Harmonize with Christ himself And seeing that the manner of Christ's Administring the Inward and Spiritual Baptism is by Pouring out and Sprinkling the Graces of the Spirit upon the Souls of the Elect in the Work of Regeneration why John the forerunner of Christ should Administer his Baptism which was but an External Sign or Christ's by Dipping or Plunging the whole Body into the Water can never be demonstrated by all the Wit and conceited Skill in our Doctor though he were as well Verst in all the Roots and Heemantique Nouns of the Hebrew Tongue as his so much admired Robertson was And if the Doctor will not be offended I am very desirous to know if his so highly commended and admired Robertson was by his so great Excellency in the Hebrew and Greek Tongues more Infallibly acquainted with the Mind of the Holy Ghost than other Men and that Mr. Robertson did certainly believe that the Etymology which he gave of the word Baptizo was Infalible as he said How came it to pass that the Learned Robertson did not Renounce that Baptism which he received in Infancy and by Sprinkling I think I knew Master William Robertson as well as Dr. Russel and during the time of my Acquaintance with him I am sure he was far enough from Anabaptism All the Skill he had in the Tongues with his Acquaintance in the Arts did not convince him that the Baptism he received in Infancy and by Sprinkling was a Nullity as the Doctor holds it is But to return to John the Dooper I think fit to assure the Doctor that I own my self bound to believe John himself rather than Doctor Russel or any of those Learned Men he so greatly Brags of The words of John are so plain that I can see no need of a Commentator to explain their Sense he tells us in Mar. 1.8 and in Mat. 3.11 that he did Baptize with Water but that Christ should Baptize with the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do both intend and signify the very same way and manner of Administration All the difference between John and Christ in both their Baptisms is in the Subject Matter viz. In the outward Water and the inward Grace John he did Administer Water the outward Sign but Christ he did Administer the Spiritual Grace But as touching the manner it was most certainly the very same in both Now if the Doctor grant as he must if he speak Truth that Christ doth Administer the Inward and Spiritual Baptism by Pouring out or Sprinkling the Graces of the Holy Ghost he will find it altogether Incongruous and no way agreeing with the Analogie of Faith to hold or assert that John did Administer the outward Sign in such a manner as was directly contrary to Christ There must be necessarily an Harmonious Agreement between the Sign and the Thing signified thereby which can never be in case Christ Baptizes by or with Pouring out or Sprinkling and John should Baptize by Dipping or Plunging into As Christ applies the Graces of the Spirit to the Soul in Conversion not the Soul to the Spirit so in the outward Baptism John he apply'd the Water the outward Sign to the Person not the Person to the Water For making the Thing or Point now in Debate obvious and plain to the meanest Capacity let it be seriously considered how plain and express the Scriptures are in affirming that Christ's way or manner in Administring the Spiritual Baptism is by Pouring out and Sprinkling the Holy Spirit on the Souls which he Regenerates but never by applying the Souls to the Holy Spirit Read without prejudice Tit. 3.5 6. Not by works of righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he hath saved us by the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the holy Ghost which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath powered on us the very same word is made use of in Acts 2.17 And it shall come to pass in the
Gospel in Hebrew a meer Non-sequitur What though those words be not in Matthew I hope he will not deny that they are in Jo. 20.21 there the Spirit of God hath recorded them and why the Dr. should look to find them in Matthew I know no reason or wherefore his Learned Friend Mr. Robertson should take on him to place the Words recorded by John between the 18th and 19th of Mat. 28. I cannot conceive But whatever moved Robertson to so presumptuous an Act in taking on him to alter things of this Nature as if by his Skill in the Hebrew Tongue he thought himself able to rectifie the Order in which the Holy Ghost hath set down his own Mind in Writing I doubt not but the Dr. was well pleased with so Palpable an Aberration and all for the love and liking he hath to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tabal he Dipped and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Velammddu Disciple ye By what I have said it is easie to judge that could the Dr. but have his will in two things First that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptizo doth alway signifie the very same thing with its Primitive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Secondly that Matthew did write his Gospel in the Hebrew Tongue and that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vetabelu otham and Dip ye them were the very words of Matthew All the Art in Men and Angels could never hinder but that Dipping the whole Body under the Water must needs be the only right way of administring the outward Baptism But both these on which he erects his tottering structure of Anabaptism I utterly deny and do fairly offer and sincerely promise him that if he can confute by Gods Word the Arguments laid down to prove him mistaken in both I will forthwith renounce my Baptism received in Infancy and by Sprinkling as a meer Nullity and not only so but I will in Pulpit and Print too Declare to the World that I am fully convinced that Dipping the whole Body under Water is the only right way of administring Water-Baptism under the New-Testament Dispensation And this I hope with the offer made him in clearing up the Etymology of the word Baptizo will prove as generous an offer as he made to Master James As touching what is usually Objected from Mat. 3.16 concerning Christ's coming up out of the Water And from Acts 8.38 39. concerning Philip and the Eunuch going down into and coming up again out of the Water I need say but two things First For any to affirm possitively what the Word of God affirms not is to me a sure Argument of an Ignorant Rash and Presumptuous Spirit Reader mark the words And Jesus when he was Baptized went up straightway out of Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from not out of the water The Text doth not say in downright Terms that Christ was Dipt under the Water neither doth it appear from Acts â— 38 39. that the Eunuch was Dipt onâ— the Doctor and his Adherents will â—ve it to be so right or wrong Secondly There is nothing more certain than that a Person may be said properly enough to go down into the Water though he go not in above Shooe or Ancle deep which I doubt not was practised by both John and by Philip in the places above-mentioned and that for the better conveniency of catching hold of the Water with their Hands in order to Sprinkle or Pour out the same on those they Baptized And that which may convince any Man not prepossest with Prejudice against the Truth I here contend for that this was the Practise of John and all the first Baptizers so much brag'd of by the Dr. is the Impossibility of the Spirit 's being the Author of any though the least Contradiction in any part of God's Worship Hence I argue That which can no way be prov'd or made good by express Testimony of God's Word or deduced therefrom by sound and necessary Consequence is an Invention in God's Worship which God will Reject and Abominate as not appointed by him But Dipping the whole Body under Water in Baptism can no way be provâ—â— made good by express Testimony of Goâ— Word nor yet by sound or necessarâ— Consequence deduced therefrom Therefore Dipping the whole Body uâ—der Water in Baptism is an Invention in God's Worship which God will Reject and Abominate because not appointed by him The major Proposition will not be denied That which secures the Minor and proves the Conclusion to be the Truth which all the Wit of the Adversary will never be able to prevail against is the Scriptures silence in that it no where gives an express Witness or Testimony heretâ— And the Impossibility of that being prov'â— a sound Consequence from God's Word which makes God the Author of Self-Contradiction The Word of God no where commands Dipping in Baptism neither doth it say in express terms that either John or any of the Apostles did Baptize by Dipping under the Water Reader Keep the Adversary close to this where doth the word Dip appear either in the command of Christ when speaking of Baptizing or in any Instance of Persons Baptized by Joâ— or the Apostles If thou keep close to this the Enemy will retreat and fly to Consequence 〈◊〉 the which if he doth as no doubt he will 〈◊〉 pursue him with a Holy Courage be not a◠〈◊〉 of his daring Brags How do yo prove that 〈◊〉 sound and Scriptural Consequence which 〈◊〉 the Holy Spirit of God the Author of Self-â—â—â—â—â—adiction â—hat thus it is will evidently appear the Adâ—â—â—sary can no way avoid it If thou urge with an Holy Zeal for Truth what is Graphically set down in God's own Word concerning the manner of Application of the Blood of the Sacrifices and the Waters of Purifications both which had a Typical Relation to the Spiritual Baptism Administred by the Spirit of Christ These were applied under the Ceremonial Administration by Sprinkling not by Dipping as hath been before observed The Prophets who foretold of Christ and the great Benefits which should come by him to Believers under the Gospel They set it forth by Sprinkling witness â—sa 52.15 and Ezek. 36.25 and in the Gospel â—e are assured that the Spirit of Christ doth apply â—he inward Spiritual Baptism by Sprinkling or Pouring out the Graces of his Spirit on the Soul in the Work of Regeneration see Tit. 3.6 Now to affirm that Christ either commands Dipping or that he himself was Dipp'd in Baptism what is it but to affirm that Christ's Spirit doth contradict himself What is pretended for Dipping from John 3.23 hath nothing in it to help their Cause but what empty Conceit and Unscriptural Confidence supply John saith the Adversary was Baptizing in Aenon because there was much Water there Therefore he Baptized by Dipping the whole Body under the Water The stress or weight of the Argument is laid on a fond Conceit that much Water there signifies and â—â—ports Greatness and Depth of Water which plainly appears to be otherwise witness the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many Waters denoting ra◠〈◊〉 Rivulets or Springs of Water wherewith thaâ— abounded than that the Waters of that place deep And it was I doubt not for Conveniencâ— that John left Bethabarah a place of deeper Vâ— because Aenon was every way more convenienâ— commodious for the multitudes o People which oâ— daily to his Baptism Piscator's Note upon the place may not here 〈◊〉 either improper or impertinent to the Purpose iâ— hand Videntur significari plures Rivi non autem unuâ— Magnum Flumen Many Rivulets not one grâ—â—â— Floâ— or Water seems here to be signified saith that Learâ—ed Author with whom agrees the best Geographeâ— who give the Description of that place I conclude my Treatise against Dipping in Baâ—tism with that Saying of Godly and Judicious Sâ—denham If saith he there be any absolute need of Diâ—ping it is to cool the heat of those Mens Spirits who deâ— Baptism to be true or right Baptism because not Aâ—ministred by Plunging or Dipping Reader Observe that as in the Sacrament of thâ— Lord's Supper it is not so much the Quantity of thâ— Wine drunk in that Ordinance by a Believer 〈◊〉 the Quality which signifies and represents the Blooâ— of Christ Christ doth not tye a Believer up to such or sucâ— a quantity of Winâ— to be drunk in remembrance oâ— his Blood-shed but only commands Wine to 〈◊〉 drunk leaving to the Discretion of the Believâ— what quantity to drink So in Water-Baptism it is not the depth or quâ—tity of Water which is necessary to right Baptism real Water it matters not how small the quantâ— be so there be but a Sprinkling or Pouring out Water on the Subject to represent the Sprinkliâ—â— or Pouring out of the Graces of God's Spirit on tâ— Elect Soul in Effectual Calling FINIS