righteousness of Faith Which wheâ—her it did any such thing to anâ— sâ—ve to â—braham only â—n mâ—ch doubten so by vertue of iâ—'s 〈…〉 and remanemâ—y in their flâ—sh it did that work when the 〈◊〉 came to age But in Christian Infants tâ—e case is otherwise for the new Covenant being estabâ—ished upon better promises is not only to beâ—ter purposes but also in a distinct manner to be understood when their spirits are as receptive of a spiriâ—ual act or impress as the bodies of jewish children were of the sign of circumcision then it is to be consign'd but the business is quickly at an end by saying that God hath done no less for ours then for their children for he will do the mercies of a Father and Creator to them and he did no more to the other but he hath done more to ours for he hath made a Covenant with them and built it upon promises of the greatest concernment And note further we have as much ground of comfort concerning our dying Infants as the faithful had for the first two thousand years during all which time the Covenant of grace reached to Infants though there was no external ceremony to consign it to Infants For the insinuation of the precept of Baptizing all Nation of which children are a part does as little advantage as any of the rest because other parallel expressions of the Scriâ—ture do determine and expound themselves to a sence that includes not all persons absolutely but of a capable condition as adoâ—ate â—um omnes gentes persallirae Deo omnes Nationes terra And Nation shall rise against Nation where Infants are excluded and divers more But Erasmus hath well expounded this text where he restrains the baptizing to such as are repentant of their former life As for the Conjecture concerning the Family of Stephanâ—s at the best it is but a conjecture and besides that it is not prov'd that there were children in the Family yet if that were granted it follows not that they were baptized because by whole Families in Scripture is ment all Persons of reason and age within the Familie for it is said of the Ruler at Capernaum that he beleived aâ—d all his house Now you may also suppose that in his house were little babes that is like enough and you may suppose that they did beleive too before they could understand but that 's not so likely and then the argument from baptizing Stephen's Family may be allowed just as probable but this is unmanlike to build upon such slight and airy conjectures But tradition by all means must supply the place of Scripture and there is pretended a Tradition apostolical that Infants were baptized but at this we are not much moved for we who rely upon the written word of God as sufficient to establish all true Religion do not value the allegations of Traditions and however the World goes none of the reformed Churches can pretend this argument against this opinion because they who reject Tâ—adition when 't is against them must not preâ—end it at alâ— for them But if we should allow the Topick to be good yet how will it be verified for so far as it can yet appear it relies wholly upon the Testimony of Origen for from him Austin had it Now a Tradition apostolical if it be not consign'd with a fuller testimony then of one person whom all after ages have condemn'd of many errours will obtain so little reputation among those that knâ—w that thing have upon greater authority pretended to derive from the Apostles and yet fâ—sly that it will be a great argument that he is credulous and weak that shall be deâ—ermined by so weak probation in matters of so great concernment And the truth of the business is as there was no command of Scripture to obliedge children to the susception of it so necessity of â—aeâ—o-baptism was not determined in the Church till the eight age after Christ but in the year 418. in the Mileritan couâ—cel a principal of Aâ—râ—ca there was a Cannon made for Paedo Bapt never till then I grant it was practised in Africa before that time and they or some of them thought well of it and though that be no Argument for us to think so yet none of them did ever before pretend it to be necessary none to have been a precept of the Gospel St. Austin was the first that ever preach'd it to be absoâ—utely necessary and it was in his heat and anger against Pelagâ—us who had warm'd and chafed him so in that question that it made him innovate in other doctrines possibly of greater concernment then thâ—s And that although this was practic'd antiently in Africa yet that it was without an opinion of necessity and not often there nor at all in other places we have the testimony of a learned Paedo Baptist Ludovicus Vives who in his annotations upon Augustin De Civit. Dei l. 1. c. 27. afirms Neminem nisi adultum antiquitus solâ—re baptizari And because thâ—s Testimony is of great import I will set down the very words of Augustine and Ludovicus Vives as I find them in the English Edition of the said book of the City of God cap. 26. Where Augustine puts forth this question What is the reason then that we do spend so much time in our exhortations endeavouring to annimate thâ—se whom we have baptâ—zed eiâ—her unto Virginity or câ—â—st widdow-â—ood or honest and honourable marriage Now upon these words â—hose whom we have baptizâ—d Vives comments tâ—us Least any man should mistake this place understand thaâ— in times of old no man was brought unto baptism but he was of sâ—fficient years to know what that mistical water meant and to require his baptism and that sundry times I hear that in some Cityes of Italy they do for the most part observe the antient Custome as yet And it is to be observed that in the Margent are two Notes the 1. is that this is the old manner of baptizing The 2 That all this is left out in the Paris Edition whence we may note how the writings of the Antients are abused and how ingeniously it is confessed Paedo-Baptism is not the old manner of baptizing And here we will insert some other testimonies from the learned Paedo-Baptists touching the Novelty of Infant baptism The first is out of Robertus Fabianus his Chron. 4. part in fol. 107. where he brings in Augustine the Monk speaking thus to the Brittain Bishops Since ye will not assent to my Hâ—sts generally assent ye to me specially in three things the first is that ye keep Easter-day in due form and time as it is ordained The second THAT YE GIVE CHRISâ—ENDOM TO CHILDREN c. But THEY WOULD NOT THEREOF This was about the fifth Age after Christ whence its remarkable that Infant bapâ—ism was then opposed by â—he joynt consent of the Britaâ—n Bishâ—ps which were sent to the Assembly to consulâ— the affairs of Religion at
divine institution is from Heaven the promise which it leads to â—s perpetual and Universal it belong to the whole body There is one body and one Spirit even as ye are called i◠〈◊〉 hope of your calling A POST-SCRIPT Taken out of the Works of Dr. Jer. Taylor in defence of laying on of Hands as a never-failing Ministery WE have seen the Original of laying on of hands from Christ the practice and exercise of it in the Apostles and the first converts in Christianity that which I shall now remark is that this is established and passed into a Christian Doctrine The Waranty for what I say is the words of St. Paul where the holy Rite of confirmation so called from the effect of this Ministration and expressed by the Ritual part of it imposition of hands is reckoned a Foundamental point 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not laying again the foundation of Repentance from Deas works and of faith towards God of the Doctrine of baptism and of laying on of hands of Resurrection from the dead and of Eternal Judgement Here are six foundamental points of St. Pauls Catechism which he said as tâ—e foundation or beginning of the institution of the Christian Church and amongst these imposition of hands is reckoned as a pâ—rt of the foundation and therefore they who deny it dig up foundations Now that this imposition of hands is that which the Apostles used in confirming the baptized and invocating the Holy Gâ—ost upon them remâ—ins to be proâ—â—â— Absolution of penitents cannot be meant here not only bâ—cause we never read that the Apostles did use that Ceremony in their absolutions but because the Apostâ—e speaking of the foundation in which baptism is There needâ—d no absolution but bapâ—ismal for they and we believiâ—g gone baptism for the remâ—ssion of sins this is al the absolution that can be at the first and in the foundation The other was secunda post 〈◊〉 fragâ—â—m tabula 〈◊〉 me in after when men had mâ—de Shipwrack of their good Conscienscience and were as St. Peter saith unmindful of the former cleansing 2. It cannot be meant of Ordination and this is also evident 1. Because the Apostle saves he would thence forth leave to speak of the foundation and go on to perfection that is to higher misteries Now in Riâ—uals of which he speaks there is none higher then Ordination 2. The Apostle saying he would speak no more of laying on of hands goes presentlâ— to discourse of the misteriousness of the Evangelical Priest-hood and the honor of that vocation by which it is evident he spake nothing of Ordination in the Catechism or Narrative of Foundamentals 3. This also appears from tâ—e context not only because laying on of hands is Immediately set after baptism but also because in the very next words of this discourse he does enumerate and apportion to baptism and impâ—sition of hands their proper and proportioned effects To bâ—ptism ilâ—umiraâ—ion And to Confirmaâ—ion he reckons tasting the Heavenly gift and being made parâ—akers of the Holy Ghost By the thing sigâ—ified declaring the sign and by â—he misteâ—y the 〈◊〉 Upon these words â—t Chrisostomâ— discoursing sayes That all these are foundamental Articles that it that â—e ought to repent from dead works to be baptized â—â—to the Faith of Christ and be made worthy of the gift of the spirit who is given by imposition of hands and we are to be taught the misteries of the Resurrection and Eternal Judgement This Catechism sayes he is perfect so that if any Man have Faith in God and being baptized is also confirmed and so tasts the Heavenly gift and partakes of the Holy Ghost by hope of the resurrection tasts of the good things of the World to come if he falls away from this state digging down and turning up these foundations he shall never be built again he can never be baptized again Confirmed again God will not begin again c. He cannot be made a Christian twice This is the full explication of this excellent place and any other ways it cannot be reasonably expâ—icated I shall observe one thing more out of this Testimony of St. Paul He calâ—s it the Doctrine of baptism and laying on of hands by which it does not only appear to be a lasting Ministry because no part of the Christian Doctrine could change or be abolished but hence also it appears to be divine Institution For it were not St. Paul had been guilty of that which our blessed Savior reproves in the Scribes and Pharises and should have taught for doctrines the Commandements of Men. Which because it cannot be supposed it must follow that this doctrine of confirmation or imposition of hands is Apostolicall and divine The argument is clear and not easily to be reproved Yea but what is this to us it belong'd to the days of wonder and extraordinary The Holy Ghost breathed upon the Apostleâ— and Apostolicall men but then he breath'd his last vecendente gratiae recessit disiplina when the grace departed we had no further need of the cerimony In Answer to this I shall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by divers particulars evince plainly that this Ministry was not temporary and relative only to the Acts of the Apostles but was to descend to the Church for ever This indeed is done already in the proceeding Sect in which it is clearly manifested that Christ himself made the baptism of the spirit necessary to the Church He declar'd the fruits of this baptism and did particularly relate it to the descent of the holy spirit upon the Church at and after that glorious Peâ—tieâ—st He saâ—ctified it and commended it bâ— hiâ— example just as he sanctified the flood Jordan and all other waters to the misticall washing away of sin viz. by his great example and fulfiâ—ling this righteousness also This doctrine the Apostles first found in their own persons and experience and practised to all their Converts by a solemn and externall rite And all this pâ—ssed into an Evangelicall doctâ—ine the whole mistery being signified by the externall rite in the words of the Apostle as before it was by Christ expressing only the internall So that there needs nâ— more strength to this argument But that there may be wanting no moments to this tâ—uth which the holy scripture affords I shall add more weight to it And 1. The perpetuity of this rite appears because this great gift of the Holy Ghost was promised to abide with the Chuâ—ches for ever And when the Jeâ—s heaâ—d the Apostles speak with tongues at the first and miraculous dâ—sâ—ent of the spirit in Penâ—â—câ—st to take of the straâ—geâ—ess of the wondâ—r and the envy of the power St. Peâ—er at that very time tells them plainly Reâ—â—nt and be baptizâ—d eveâ—y one of you and 〈◊〉 shall receâ—â—e the gift of the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not the meanest person among you all but shall receive this great thing which ye observe us to have received and not
instance and yet the obligation all the world cannot reasonably say but is the same they are as honest and as reasonable that do neither And since the antient-Church did with an equal opinion of necessity give them Communion and yet men now adays do not why shall men be morâ— burthened with a prejudice and namâ— of obloquy for not giving the Infantâ— one Sacrament more then they arâ— disliked for not affording them the other If Anabaptist shall be â— name of disgrace why shall not somâ— other name be invented for them that deny to communicate Infants which shall be equally disgraceful or else both the Opinions signifyed by such names be accounted no disparagement but receive their estimate according to their truth Of which truth since we are now taking account from pretences of Scripture it is considerable the discourse of St. Peter which is pretended for the intitleing Infants to the promise of the holy Ghost and by consequence to Baptism which is supposed to be its instrument of conveyance 't is wholly a fancy and hath nothing in it of certainty or demonstration and not much probability For besides that the thing it self is unreasonable and the holy Ghost works by the heighting and improveing our natural faculties and therefore is a promise that so concerns them as they are reasonable Creatures and may have a tittle to it in proportion to their nature but no possession or reception of it till their faculties come into act besides this I say the words mentioned in S. Pâ—tâ—rs â—rmon which are the only record of the promise are interpreted upon a wâ—aâ— mistake the promise belongs to you and to your Children therefore Infants are actually receptive oâ— it in that capacity that 's the argument but the reason of it is not yet discovered nor never will For indeed it is without reason To you and your Children iâ—s you and your posterity to you and your children when they are of the same capacity in which you are effectually receptive oâ— the promise Beside the promise of the Spirit in this place is refer'd to the giftâ— of the holy Ghost anâ— is therefore made tâ— those who had alreadâ— received it in the quicâ—ning or illuminating opperation of it anâ— is the poâ—tion of beleivers as such and iâ— consequent to baptism Acts 2 38 39 and is therefore wrongfully made an argument for the baptizing of Infants whâ— what ever they may have of the gâ—aces of the spirit yet have neither need of nor any capacity to use the gifts of the spirit and therefore evident it is that this promise of the Spirit belongs not to Infants at all And for the Allegation of St. Paul that Infants are holy if their Parents be faithful it signifie nothing buâ— that they are holy by designation or according to Erasmus they to wit Infants born of such Parents as the oâ—e being a Christian the other not are holy legâ—â—â—â—ately for the conversion of either wife or â—â—sband dâ—th not dissoâ—ve the marriage which was made when both were in uâ—bâ—â—eif And however it is true that Auâ—tin was a great stickâ—er for Paedo-Bapâ—ism yet he denys that any such thing can â—e deduced from the text in hand his words â—re these lib. 3 De pec mer. remiâ— It is to be held without doubling whatsoever that sanctification was it was not of power to make Christians and remit sins He might well say so considering that the holiness of the child is derived from the sanctity of the unbeleiver as the word else being rightly refer'd doth evince 1 Co. 7. 14. And as the promiss appertains not for ought appears to Infants in that capacity and consistance yet Baptism is not the means of conveying the holy Ghost for that which Peter sayes be baeptized and ye shall receive the holy Ghost signifies no more then this first be baptized and then by imposition of the Apostles hands which was another mistery and rite 〈◊〉 shall receive the promiss of the Father and this is nothing but an infinuation of the rite of Confirmation aâ— to this sense expounded by diverâ— antient Authors and in ordinary Ministry the effect of it is not bestowed upon any unbaptized persons for it is in order next after baptism and upon this ground Peters argument in the case of Cornelius was concluding enough a mojori ad minus thus the holy Ghost was bestowed upon him and his Family which gift by ordinary ministry was consequent to baptism not as the effect is to the cause or to the proper instrument but as a consequent is to an antecedent in a chain of câ—uses accidentally and by positive institution depending upon each oâ—her God by that miracle did give Testimony that the persons of the men were in gâ—eat dispositions towards Heaven and therefore were to be admitted to these rites which are the ordinary inlets into the kingdome of Heaven But then from hence to argue that where ever there is a capacity of receiving the same grace there also the same sign is to be administred and from â—ence to infer Paedo-Baptism is an argument very fallatious upon several grounds first because Baptism is not the sign of the holy Ghost but by another mistery it was conveyed ordinarily and extraordinarily it was convey'd independently from any mistery and so the argument goes upon a wrong supposition 2. If the supposition were true yet the proposition built upon it is false for they that are capable of the same grace are not alwayes capable of the same sign for women under the law of Moses although they were capable of the righteousness of Faith yet they were not capable of the sign of Circumcision for God does not alwayes convey his graces in the same manner but to some mediately to some immediately and there is no better inâ—tance in the the World of it then the gift of the holy Ghost which is the thing now instanc'd in in this contâ—station And after all this least these arguments should not ascertain their cause they fall on complaining against God and will not be content with God unless they may baptize their children but take exceptions that Gâ—d did more for the children of the Jews But why so because God made a Covenant with their children actually as Infants and concin'd it by circumcision well so he did with our children too in their proportion He made a Convenant of spiritual promises on his part and spiritual and real services on ours and this pertâ—ins to children when capable but made with them as soon as they are alive and yet not so as with the Jews bâ—bes for as they rite consign'd them actually so it was a national and temporal blessing and covenant and a separation of them from the portion of the Nations a markâ—ng them for a peculiar people and therefore while they were in the Wilderness and sepâ—rate from the commixture of all people they were not at all ciâ—cumcised but as that riâ—e did seal the
that time Our next testimony is from the Learned Casuist Hugo Grotius who tells us To defer baptism till ripe years was in old time left at liberty now the observation is otherwise Plainly giving the case that Paedo-baptism is not the old way but a new observation But here we will again give place to Doctor Taylor who saith That besides that the tradition cannot be proved to be Apostolical we have very good evidence from antiquity that it was the opinion of the primitive Church that INFANâ—S OUGHâ— NOT TO BE BAPTIZED And this is clear in the sixâ—h Cannon of the Câ—unsel of Neâ—â—aesarea The words have this sence A woman 〈…〉 may be baptized when she please for her baptism concerns not the Child The reason of the connection of the parts of that Cannon is in the following words Because every one in that confession is to give a demonstration of his own choice and election meaning plainly that if the baptism of the mother did pass upon the Child it were not fit for a pregnant woman to receive baptism because in that Sacrament there being a confession of faith which confession supposes understanding and free choyce it is not reasonable the child should be consign'd with such a mistery since it cannot do any act of choice or understanding The Cannon speaks reason and it intimates a practice which was absolutely universal in the Church of interrogating the catechumens concerning the Articles of the Creed which is one argument that either they did not admit Infants to baptism or that they did prevaricate egregiously in asking questions of them who themselves knew were not capable of giving answer and to supply their incapacity by the answer of a Godfather is but the same unreasonableness acted with a worse circumstance and there is no sensible account can be given of it for that which some imperfectly murmure concerning stipulations civil performed by tutors in the name of their pupils is an absolute vanity for what if by positive constitutions of the Romanes such solemnities of Law are required in all stipulations and by indulgence are permitted in the case of a notable benefit acruing to Minors Must God be tyed and Christian Religion transact her misteries by proportion and complyance with the Law of the Romanes I know God might if he would have appointed Godfathers to give answer in behalf of Children and to be Fâ—de-jussors for them but we cannot find any authority oâ— ground that he hath and if he had then it is to be supposed he would have given them comission to have transacted the solemnity with better circumstaâ—ces and given answers with more truth and if the Godfathers answer in the Name of the Child I do believe it is notorious they speak false and ridiculously for the Infant is not capble of beâ—ieving and if he were he were a so capable of dissenting and how then do they know his mind And therefore Tertullian gives advice that the bapâ—ism of Infants 〈◊〉 be deferred till they could 〈◊〉 an account of their faith and the same also is the counsel of Gregory bishop of Naziazum although he allows them to hasten it in case of necessity for though his reason taught him what was fit Namely that none should bâ— baptized till they were of understanding yet he was overborn with the practiâ—â— and opinion of his Age which began to bear too violently upon him and yet in another place he makes mention of some to whom baptism was not administred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of infancy To which if we add that the Parents of St. Austin St. Jerome and St. Ambrose although they were Christian yet did not baptize their Children before they were thirty years of age it will be very considerable in the example and of great efficacy for destroâ—ing the supposed necessity or derivation from the Apostles and for further evidence we may well alledge in this place that of Theodosius the Emperor born in Spain his Parents being both Christians and he from his youth educated in thâ— Christian Faith who falling sick at Thessâ—onica was baptized and recovered of his sickness but however Paedo baptism it is against the perpetual analogâ— of Christs Doctrine to baptize Infants for besides that Christ never gave any precept to bapâ—ize them nor never himself nor his Apostles that appears did baptize any of them all that either he or his Apostles said concerning baptism requires such pretious dispositions to it of which Infants are not capable and these are faith and repentance and not to instance in those innumerable places that require faith before baptism there needs no more but this one saying he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned Plainly thus faiâ—h and baptism in conjunction will bring a Man to Heaven but if he have not faith baptism shall do him no good So that if baptism be necessary then so is faith and much more for want of Faith damns absolutely it is not said so of the want of baptism Now if this decretory sence be to be understood of persons of age and if Children by such an answer which indeed is reasonable enough be excused from the necessity of Faith the want of which regularly does damn then it is sottish to say the same incapacity of reason and Faith shall not â—xcuse them from the actual susception of baptism which as less necessary and to which faith and many other acts are necessary predispositions when it is reasonably and humanely â—eceived The conclusion is that bapâ—sm is also to be defer'd till the time of â—aith and whether Infants have faith or no is a question to be disputed by â—ersons that care not how much they 〈◊〉 nor how little they prove 1. Personal and actual faith they have none for they have no acts of â—nderstanding and besides how can â—ny man understand that they have since he never saw any sign of iâ— neither was he told so by any oâ—â— that could tell 2. Some sâ—y they have imputativâ— Faith but then so let the Sâ—cramenâ— be too that is if they have the Parent faith or the Churches then so leâ— baptism be imputed by derivatioâ— from them also For since faith 〈◊〉 necessary to the susception of baptisâ— and they themselves confess it bâ— striving to find out new kinds of faitâ— to daub the matter up such as thâ— faith is such must be the Sacramenâ— for there is no proportion betweeâ— an actual Sacramen and an imputative faith this being in immediaâ—â— and necessary order to that anâ— whatsoever can be said to take oâ— from the necessiâ—y of actual Faith aâ— that and much more may be said tâ— excuse from the actual â—usception 〈◊〉 baptism 3. The first of these devices waâ— that of Luther and his Schol arâ— the 2 of Calvin and his And yet there is a third device which the Church of Rome teaches and that is
designs prevented and though perhaps charity for some time hath born with such in hope of the best yet this is no other thing then ought to be as may be seen by the carriage of our Lord toward Judas and his Apostles towards fome others The gifts of Doctrine and praising our God with a Psalme is not yet removed our Teachers as taught of God remaining in every Church where also are some that are skillfull in praisiing the Lord to the edification of the Church As for Revelations there might perhaps sometimes be strange or hidden things made known by some speciall gift of God and why may not God do such things now However it is not unsafe to understand the Revellations here ment by Chap. 14. 30. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by let the first hold his peace c. which cannot so well be understood af a new Oracle as of some further subject or more full explication of the matter treated on by him that spake first according to which interprâ—tation we may say the Church hath yet the gift of Revellations And thus far we seem to be got safe not any thing so materiall intervening as to conclude against the continuance of these spirituall gifts in the Church to this day so that the present repairers of the House or City of God may comfort themselves by the consideration of the words of the Prophet Hagg. 2. 5. According to the word which I covenanted with you when you came out of Egypt so my SPIRIT REMAINETH amoâ—g you fear ye not But now the gâ—ft of Tongues and interpretation of Tongues these where shall we find them Doubtless these gifts are rarely if at all found in these days and in this Nation so as to sute with those who frequently in some Churches at first received those gifts the reasons are many but none such as conclude the Church from under the promise of these gifts as first these gifts differ much from the rest chiefly in this that they may be supply'd another way for the conversion of persons of all Languages or such as can speak other Languages and interpret the same to others doth supply the absence of those gifts 2. The Churche in this and I suppose other Nations have very little need of these gifts and therefore considering that they are not so necessary as the rest the Apostle leaves these with a forbid them not whilst the rest he wills us to câ—vâ—t earnestly But 3 one great cause as I conceive why these gâ—fts are so much absent and the other no more received iâ— because we either ask them not at all or else we ask them amiss For many have been so â—ar from a king these gifts of the spirit that in truth they have been arguing that these gifts are not attainable and then t is no wonder they have not been received Again where there hath been some understanding of the interest we have in those gifts there faith in asking hath been and is very low and atended perhaps with great wavering and then little can be expected at the hand of the Almighty Jam. 1. And here let me premonish you of one thing which by my little reading I perceive to have been a great provocation to the Lord to wiâ—hdraw his gifts in times pâ—st and I fear it again And that was â—and and I doubt is an over curious performance of that which God gave spirituall gifts for to wit the ministering of the word when the Churches grew populous and great personages came to her communion the unwary pastours let go the simplicity of thâ— Gospell enclining so much to curiosities that some Counsells decreed thaâ— a Bâ—shop should not read Heathen Authors and Graâ—ian is said to have this passagâ— viz. Doth not he seem to waâ—k in vanitâ— and daâ—kness of mind who vexing himself day aâ—d night in the studies of Logick in the persuite of physicall speculaâ—ion one while elevates himself above the highest Heavens and afterward throws himself below the nethermost part of the Earth True the use that may be made oâ— reading is one thing and the abuse another however let the least gift oâ— God be preferred in the ministry oâ— the word above the greatest of human Arts otherwise we are in danger to incur the guilt of despising Prophysyings Lastly the truth in hand appeareth from the silence of Scriptures touching thâ— privation of any of the gifts of the spiâ—it till that which is perfect become 1. â—or 13. 8. 9. Charity never faileth but whether there be prophesies they shall fail whether there be tongues they shall cease whether there be knowledge it shall vanish away for we know in part and we propheâ—â—e in part But when that which is perfect is come THEN that which is in part sha'l be done away Hence observe a finall determination of the matter in question If any ask when the gifts of prophysie knowledge and tongues c. Shall cease The Apostles answer is even THEN when that which is perfect is come or when we come to see face to face or as we are seen So then seeing the gifts of the spirit do yet remain to the Church and every of them as her need requires are attainable it remains that we humbly consider our wants and desire spirituall gifts you â—oveâ— earnestly the best gifts From these considerations I conclude that howsoever it is too true that the gifts received by the present Churches are but low and truly so are her graces yet thence we may not we ought not to infer that the gifts promised are ceased or that the Church hath now no interest therein But contrarywise as the promise of gifts as well as graces pertains to us as we are the called of God we ought to â—tir one another up to seek with all dilligence and full assurance for the spirit of promise which being received will abundantly supply our wants help our infirmities convince the contrary minded by its powerfull evidence and demonstration in the ministry of the word and prayer There be two things objected against that which is said the first Ob If the promise of the spirit do thus belong to the Church then this will follow that the doctrines delivered by such gifted men must pass for Oracles of God being the effects â—f the spirit of truth whose propertie it 〈◊〉 to lead into all truth And hence â—ome have conceived the decrees â—f their Counsells to be infallible and â—thers have given out of their private â—tters or books that they were as inâ—allibly the word of God as the Scripâ—ure c. Ans 1. Those gifts do not argue â—he infallibillity of him that hath them â—or then all the gifted brethren at Coâ—inth had been infallible which yet they â—ere not witness their great want of Wisdom how to use their gifts to ediâ—ication as also the Apostles referâ—ing what they delivered to Tryal telling â—s of gifted person in general and as â—uch not