of Faith to all Nations Rom. 16. 26. And that Typical Covenant of Circumcision being made void and the Gospel appointing no Ceremony for Infants yet assuring them of Heaven but making Repentance and Faith the two first Principles of the Christian Religion and Baptism the third Principle in order to a due Profession of Gospel-worship in a Church-way it is manifest that Infant-baptism is an Innovation and makes a Breach upon the sacred Doctrine contained in St. Paul's Catechism as set down Heb. 6. 1 2. And therefore all good Men should labour that Truth herein according to Primitive Crder may be restored Nevertheless that Infants even all of them dying such have an undeniable Right in the Covenant of Grace to Life and Salvation I hope to make very evident both from the Scripture and right Reason in the last Part of this Treatise to which I now apply my self and though herein I shall not directly answer to Mr. Petto yet I shall scarce fail to remove those things which may seem to be of any moment in his often and unnecessary Repetitions PART III. In which Infants Interest in the Covenant of Grace without Baptism is asserted and maintained IT is evident from the Writings of many Paedobaptists both Papists and Protestants that they do hold either absolutely that no unbaptized Infant can be saved or at least that their Salvation is very doubtful and amongst those Mr. Baxter and from him Mr. Barret and now Mr. Petto has not a little amused the Minds of Men about this matter First Mr. Baxter tells us and Mr. Barret also that Infants are not so much as seemingly in a State of Salvation without Baptism And secondly Mr. Petto thinks they are cut out of the great Charter of Heaven These are his Words It is the Covenant-Interest and Baptism of the Infant-seed only of visible Believers that I plead for and there are such vast Numbers even millions of these that if Men unduly exclude and raze out the Names of so many out of that great Charter of Heaven they will have a dreadful Account to give thereof to God. In answer to these childish Fears and undue Reflections upon us I shall take the pains to transcribe what I have formerly written upon this Account it being yet unanswered This new Art of pleading for Infant-baptism by virtue of their Church-membership Covenant-Interest c. and not from the Scriptures directly but altogether by remote obscure and far-fetch'd Consequences I say considering these Subtilties of Mr. Baxter and others I perceive the Controversy to rise very high and Questions thereupon to be multiplied insomuch that I have had for my share not less than five hundred of them sent out by Mr. Barret abovenamed which has been redargued in two Books of Antiqueries Hereupon I conceived it needful to consider this matter for I perceived very wise and good Men engaged on both sides and as I believe much more straining in the Point of Church-membership or Covenant-Interest of Infants than needed By which the Readers of the Controversy as handled between Mr. Baxter and Mr. Tombs shall sooner fill their Heads with Amazement than their Hearts with Satisfaction in tracing the several Meanders of their Scholastick Disputations And though I am abundantly short of the Accomplishments of either of these Champions yet standing to view till they engage I hope I have thereby been led to the Consideration of a Medium which if well considered and improved will reconcile the difference about Infants visible Church-membership and Covenant-Interest and yet do not doubt at all that Infant-baptism will be found unnecessary and unlawful To which purpose I shall lay down once more this Position That all Infants as such are in a visible State of Salvation by the Covenant of Grace and so are of the universal Church of God and cannot be put out of that blessed State till by their voluntary Departure from God by chusing sinful Ways they destroy themselves And the better to convince my present Adversaries I will make my Enterance hereunto by a Passage out of Mr. Baxter's Book of More Proves c. pag. 8. where he saith All Mankind is brought by Christ under a Covenant of Grace which is not vain nor repealed by God but as their Abuse of the Grace of the Covenant may cast them out For as a Covenant of intire Nature was made with all Mankind in innocent Adam so a Covenant of Grace was made with all Mankind in lapsed Adam Gen. 3. 15. in the promised Seed and renewed again with all Mankind in Noah Now this Doctrine being no more than plain Truth we shall apply it to the case in hand by shewing 1. That this Covenant of Grace was a visible Church-Covenant 2. That it was made with all Mankind and takes place in their Infancy 3. That it was never repealed by God. 4. That no Infant did ever abuse the Grace of this Covenant and that therefore no Infant was ever cast out of this Covenant And then fifthly they all stand visible Members of the Catholick or universal Church by virtue of this Covenant however their Parents do abuse or neglect it And hence it will follow no dying Infant is damned but are all in a visible State of Salvation These things I hope to shew to Satisfaction Demonstration 1. That this Covenant of Grace first expressed Gen. 3. 15. was either a Church-Covenant or else there was no Church-Covenant in the World that we read of from Adam to Noah this being indeed all the Covenant which is found in Scripture during these times besides that Covenant of intire Nature made before the Fall. And that Covenant of Nature being broken by Adam and in him by all his Posterity it being not a Covenant of Grace could not afford means to justify the the Offenders in the Sight of God. There must therefore be some supervening Act of Grace or Mercy from God else Adam even whole Mankind who were then in his Loins must have stood under Condemnation for ever seeing no Man could redeem his Brother nor give to God a Ransom for him Psal 49. 7. It is the received Doctrine of Christians that the visible Church began in Adam and that his Family was the Church wherefore the whole World being then the Church and that Church-Covenant being made with the whole World which was to proceed from Adam and this Covenant yet remaining it follows against all Contradiction that whole Mankind considered as they came into the World in the several Ages of it are in that Covenant and so in a visible State of Salvation and therefore of the Universal Church of God. But whereas many did apostatize from the Grace of God's Covenant by corrupting his Way Gen. 6. 12. it was necessary that they should be ejected and therefore was the Profession of this blessed Covenant accommodated and appropriated to that Part of the Adult who had not sinned themselves out of it But still we do not find that the
Innocent was ejected with the Guilty For this is God's Order It is he only that sinneth whom he will blot out of the Book of Life Exod. 32. 32 33. And therefore neither the Method which God took with Noah in setling the Covenant of his Grace nor yet that Order which he observed with Abraham Gen. 12. was exclusive of any Infant in the World as to the Grace or Mercy of eternal Life no more than the Establishment of it by Christ in the Gospel in a far more excellent way for distinguishing the precious from the vile is in any wise no not in the least iota exclusive of any dying Infant of ill Men but contrary-wise the Right of Infants without excepting any of them is asserted by Christ in this last and most ample Edition of the Covenant of Grace Nor can any Man shew either by Scripture or Reason that God will shut out all the dying Infants of wicked Men from Life and Salvation by Christ no nor so much as any one of them For we are sure that the Judgment of God is according to Truth that the Judg of all the Earth will do Right That the condemned shall all be judged according to the Deeds done in the Body But as for poor Infants what Evil have they done Demonstration 2. That this Covenant was made with all Mankind because it was made with Adam without the least Intimation of the Exclusion of any part of his Posterity as they proceed from him to the End of the World. Neither has God himself explained the Covenant of Grace to be exclusive of any but for the Cause of their own Iniquity And this was evident first in the case of Cain who not being faithful in his Offering was not accepted yet God was pleased to tell him how he might be accepted Gen. 4. 7. If thou dost well shalt thou not be accepted It should seem God never rejected Cain till now neither did he now delight to reject him but graciously expostulates with Cain to convince him of his Evil and assures him of Acceptance if he did well If then Cain had an Interest in the Grace of God who can we suppose to be shut out of it Or how should Infants be cast out of his Favour till they with Cain shut themselves out of it Evident it is that the Covenant of Grace extended to those Rebels in the old World because we read that the Long-suffering of God waited in the Days of Noah upon them and he gave them time of Repentance and sent a Preacher of Righteousness even the Righteousness of Faith among them Heb. 11. 7. 2 Pet. 2. 5. therefore it is said Christ went by his Spirit and preached to them 1 Pet. 3. though none of them believed his Word Now such Acts on God's part are great Evidences of his Graciousness towards Men and shews that he remembers his Covenant made in Christ for them even for them that rebel against him and so perish And then how should we think that he should not be gracious to poor Infants who never rebelled against him Demonstration 3. The Covenant of Grace Gen. 3. 15. was never repealed by God. For if it be there is now no Covenant at all Nor can it be repealed to one Man but it must be repealed to all Men. 'T is true Men may forfeit the Mercy of God held forth in that Covenant but the Covenant cannot be repealed for then there can be no certainty of Mercy for Sinners Christ our Lord may as soon be made null as this Covenant For what if some do apostatize shall this make the Grace of God without effect God forbid When we continually see the Covenant of God's Grace displayed making Overtures of Kindness to Sinners by beseeching them to be reconciled to God 2 Cor. 5. What shall we say Has the chief of Sinners this Benefit by the Covenant of Grace And shall poor innocent Babes have no Benefit by it Is he not worse than the chief of Sinners that is thus exposed to Damnation Sure there are better things with God for poor Babes and chiefly in this he has not given Parents power to make void the Covenant of his Grace with respect to their Infants For he hath said the Son shall not bear the Iniquity of the Father The Soul that sinneth it shall die Demonstration 4. No Infant did ever abuse the Grace of the Covenant made with them in Adam therefore no Infant was ever cast out of it Although it is most true that Original Sin is come upon Infants and Death by Sin Yet this is as true That Original Sin was not committed against the Covenant of Grace And therefore Infants are not guilty of any Sin committed against the Covenant of Grace and consequently are not deprived of the Benefit of it Otherwise if the Sin of subsequent Parents should make void the Grace of the second Covenant as the Sin of Adam made his Posterity guilty of the Breach of the first Covenant we may then cry out who then can be saved But therefore was our Saviour the Mediator of the New Testament for the Redemption of the Transgressions which were under the first Testament Wherefore seeing Infants stand acquitted from the Trespasses committed by Adam against the first Testament or Covenant and having not sinned against the Grace of the second Testament they cannot come in the Condemnation of Hellish Torments The Church of Rome who make Baptism as necessary for Infants as any Body does yet they have so much Kindness as to condemn Infants only to a State of Loss but not of Torment Whilst those of Calvin's Spirit do send them by their Doctrine to yell among the damned in Hell-fire Sure this is no part of the Gospel I will not call it so Yet I will say those that reject that great Salvation held forth in the Gospel are justly condemned but this is not the case of Infants Demonstration 5. That all dying Infants are Members of that vast Body of which Christ is the Saviour finally and so of his Church considered as universal is evident because they are in a visible State of Salvation And I think no Man will deny the Catholick Church to contain the whole Number of the saved I have nothing more to do but to prove all Infants in a visible State of Salvation which shall be done more particularly by answering such Objections as I have met with more especially from Mr. Barret Objection I. I gave you thanks for some things before granted concerning Insants and I here promise more Thanks if you will prove the same of all Infants Answ When I speak of the Right which Infants have to Life by Christ I intend it only of that Right derived to them by the first Edition of the Covenant of Grace Gen. 3. 15. wherein they are equally concerned and so have the same or equal Right And I hope you cannot charge them with forfeiting the Grace of that Covenant and then they cannot
they covenant again which is commonly 20 30 or 40 years after they have sprinkled them For which strange Practice they have not the least Tittle in God's Word to warrant it and where then they can find a Rule for this Practice I know not I have been told that Mr. Firmin's Questions are taken by some to be unanswerable Let us therefore view them in his Words verbatim The first is thus Mr. Firmin's Quest I. Since God was so gracious to make a Covenant with Abraham and his Seed and it did then consist with his Wisdom to constitute his Church of Parents and Children while the Parents did believe in the Messiah to come Why may it not consist with his Grace to continue that Covenant and with his Wisdom still to constitute his Gospel-Church of Parents and Children the Jews now believing in Christ come Answer You must allow that the Covenant of Grace was not restrained to Abraham and his Seed but did belong to many at that time both Parents and Children many holy Patriarchs being then living and some outlived Abraham himself and yet none of these were concerned in the Covenant of Circumcision as made with Abraham Gen. 17. but only in the Covenant of Grace as made with Adam and Noah which had now continued more than 2000 years during all which time no Infant was concerned either in Circumcision or Baptism and yet were as much of the Church as was needful for their Salvation And hence a Man may very well answer your Question by asking you another Thus Since God was so gracious to make a Covenant with Adam and Noah and their Seed and it did then consist with his Wisdom to constitute his Church of Parents to practise his Ordinances and of their Children to partake of the Grace of eternal Life without being concerned in the Practice of Ordinances in their Infancy for more than 2000 years before Christ came Why may it not confist with his Grace to continue that Covenant of Grace made with Adam Noah and Abraham himself 24 years before he was circumcised and with his Wisdom still to constitute his Gospel-Church of Parents to practise his Ordinances and of their Children to partake of the Grace of eternal Life without being concerned in the Practice of his Ordinances in their Infancy since Christ is come especially considering that Christ himself did not appoint those very Infants who were brought to him to have his Ordinances imposed upon them If Mr. Firmin be not satisfied with this Reply then let me tell him it becomes no Man no not Mr. Firmin himself to propound such an unlearned Question which is guilty of no more reason than this Since God was so gracious and it did consist with his Wisdom to give Abraham a Command to offer up his beloved Son as a Sign of Christ to come why may it not consist with his Grace and Wisdom for us of our own Heads without any Command from God to offer up every one his dearest Child in remembrance that Christ is come Sir What may or may not consist with the Wisdom of God in relation to his Church-constitution and our serving him in matters of Religion must not be concluded from the likeness which we fancy to be between his former Institutions and our own or others Inventions but from such Directions as he has given us by the Messiah which was to teach us all things John 4. both concerning our selves and concerning our Infants And we do therefore know that it was not consistent with the Wisdom of God to constitute his Gospel-Church so as to impose Gospel-Ordinances upon Infants although he did impose Legal Ordinances upon them Because Christ who is the Wisdom of God hath revealed no such thing to his Apostles nor they to us And like as ye know it to be inconsistent with the Wisdom of God to bring little Children so into the Church as to partake of the Lord's Table because God hath required Faith and Humiliation in every one that comes to that holy Manducation So we do know it to be inconsistent with the Wisdom of God to bring Infants so into his Church as to partake of holy Baptism because Repentance whereby Sin is forsaken and Faith to believe God's Promises is required by him of those that he requires to be baptized You see then that we do not deny Infants to be of the Church in such sort as to obtain Salvation with them that shall be saved although we deny them to be in the Church in your sence But let us hear your second Question Mr. Firmin's Quest II. If God hath repealed his Covenant with the believing Jews Seed turned their Children out of the Church and deny them Baptism tho the Jews truly believe in Christ come what hath God left in the room of these that carry any shew of his Blessing or good Will towards their Children during their infant-Infant-state Answer The Words Covenant and Church as used by Mr. Firmin are ambiguous I do not find that Abraham nor Isaac neither were out of the Church till they were circumcised It 's evident Abraham's Seed was in Covenant before they were eight days old even as it was a peculiar visible Church-Covenant else all that were uncircumcised for forty years in the Wilderness were out of the Church and Covenant Mr. Firmin himself believes that Infants are in the Covenant and in the Church also before they be sprinkled by him For this is the Minor of one of his Arguments p. 103. But Children of believing Parents are Church members and this before you sprinkle them Now Sir if your Doctrine be true then it is not our waiting for a fit time to baptize our Children which turns them out of the Church nor does God for our so doing turn them out of the Church any whit more than your waiting a fit time and you make it perhaps twenty thirty or forty years for your bringing your Children to the Lord's Table turns them out of the Church Indeed if they live to years and chuse sinful ways they then turn themselves out of that Relation they had to God and his People in their Infancy by virtue of God's gracious Covenant and they thus turning his Mercy into Jndgment shall perish whether yours or ours The Case is equal I need say no more to a wise Man. Yet I add That the believing Jews and their Infants also were now made free from the Jewish Church-state Gal. 5. 1. But neither they nor their Infants were deprived of any place in the Church which was needful for them in their respective capacities yet the Parents had many Duties upon them which the Infants had not and of these the Baptism of Repentance was one they had also Priviledges which the Infants had not of which the Lord's Table was one Yet the little Children had these Priviledges which the Children of Unbelievers had not First to be devoted to God by the Prayers of the Church warranted therein by the