where their Commission is thus enlarged were herein differenced from the Nation to which their Ministerie was first limitted 3. Let that text of the Prophet be well weighed where speaking by the spirit of prophecy of the rejection of the Jewes and the glorious call of the Gentiles in their stead in that ample way as it is there set out hath these words Behold I will lift up mine band to the Gentiles Isai 49.22 and set up my standard to the people and they shall bring thy sonnes in their armes and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders If there were but such an hint as that by way of prophesy to have left them behind we should from some have heard of it with a noise 4. In the Lord Christs Dialect who is best able to expresse his own meaning they are Disciples To belong to Christ is to be a Disciple of Christ This is plaine from our Saviours owne mouth comparing his words recorded in Matthew and Mark Matth. 10.42 Mar. 9.41 To give a cup of cold water to drink in the name of a disciple it is in the one To give a cup of water to drink in my Name because ye belong to me it is in the other To belong to Christ to be a Disciple of Christ and to beare the Name of Christ is one and the same thing with our Saviour Now that Infants are of the number of those who as Disciples in Christs account doe belong unto him and beare his Name is yet further plain by another text of St Matthew where Christ setting a little childe in the middest of his hearers saith Who so shall receive one such little child in my Name Matth. 18.5 receiveth me By all which it appeares that which is done to Infants is done to Disciples hath a glorious reward as done to Disciples Infants therfore are Disciples of Christ are of those that doe belong unto him and beare his Name who then is not afraid to refuse them who will receive Christ who will not baptize them that is willing to baptize Disciples in the Name of Christ For Examples which they say we want of the Baptisme of Infants 1. I answere first we walke by Rule rather then President the Rule hath been examined 2. Examples are often very rare where the rule is unquestionable and undeniable we have no Example of any triall of the suspect wise by the water of jealousie For womens right to the Lords Supper we have no particular institution no particular President more then for this of Infants Baptisme 3. We have Examples not to be contemned of the Baptisme of whole housholds and whether Infants were there or no as it is not certaine though probable so it is not materiall The President is an Houshold he that followes the President must baptize housholds It appeares not that any wife was there yet he that followes the President in baptizing of housholds must baptize wives and so I may say servants if they be of the houshold Objections are yet brought from humane authoritie Object which I have reserved to the last as accounting them the least And if this dispute might this way be determined that plurality of votes might carry it the adversaries know how it would fare with them in it Origen is vouched calling it a ceremonie or tradition of the Church Hom. 8. in Levit. in Epist ad Rom. lib. 5. Gregorie also in decret distinct de conse One of those traditions which the Apostle charged the Thessalonians to keep Answ 2 Thess 2.15 which I speake not by guesse but we have it in the same Epistle cap. 6. from his own mouth The Church saith he received Baptisme of Infants from the Apostles The greatest points of Faith as is well known are ordinarily called by the name of traditions by the Antients Traditions being onely such things that are delivered from one to another they are as well written as unwritten And we have cause willingly to embrace this testimonie Origen lived 226. yeares after Christ in the beginning of the third Century Alsted Chronol he cals it a tradition of the Church it was therefore delivered over to the Church in his time and of antient use before him Austin cals it a custome of the Church de Baptis contra Donat. lib. 4. cap. 23. And so doe I also call it Answ and the observing of the first day of the weeke the imposition of hands on Church-officers the giving of the Lords Supper to men of growth is a custome of the Church likewise Erasmus saith they are not to be condemned that doubt whether the Baptisme of Infants were ordained by the Apostles Lib. 4. de ratione Concio His words evidently imply that it was their errour Answ and it seemes his thoughts were other of those who openly did oppose it and refuse it Papists openly professe that the Baptisme of Infants is grounded upon tradition and not upon Scripture for which Eckius and Bellarmine are brought in This they doe not really and cordially but for their owne advantage Answ to make good unwritten traditions against Protestant adversaries They know that we maintaine Baptisme of Infants and disclaime these traditions and if Baptisme of infants doe appeare to be one then they have us building what we have destroyed Bellar. indeed in his book de Verbo Dei standing for unwritten traditions as a part of the Word of God will have Baptisme of infants to be one but when he disputes for Baptisme of Infants against Anabaptists then he can heape up texts of Scripture de sacra Baptis cap. 8. So also cap. 9. in the entrance of it Satis apertè colligitur ex Scripturis the Baptisme of Infants is evidently enough gathered from Scriptures The like fetch of his I could shew in other particulars It appeares to be forced on the people by authority of Councels out of the Councell of Milevitanum this Canon is urged It is also our will that those that will not that children be baptized that are new borne from their mothers wombe be excommunicate So in the Nicene Councell it was decreed that we should beleeve that there is one God Maker of all things visible and invisible Answ The greatest points of faith we know under Anathema's are decreed in Councels This Councell was in the fifth Century 200 yeares after Origen who stiles Baptisme of Infants as we have heard a tradition of the Church in his dayes And Austin who was not onely present but as is said President of that Councell returning answer to those that desire divine authority for the Baptisme of Infants for satisfaction first produceth that rule Quod universa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi authoritate Apostolica traditum rectissimè creditur That which the whole Church holds and was not ordained by any Councels but hath ever been held that is rightly beleeved to be by Apostolicall
authoritie This he takes to be sufficient yet for more full satisfaction he goes on to dispute for it from the Scriptures whence we see what himselfe meanes by the custome of the Church And by what authoritie that Councell did appoint the Baptisme of Infants Augustinus de Bapt. contra Donatist lib. 40. cap. 24. ad initium By all this that hath been said it more fully appeares what regard is to be given to that which is cited out of Luther and Cassander concerning the time that Baptisme of Infants was brought into the Church Luther as it is said affirmes that it came into the Church a thousand yeares before his time which must be one hundred yeares after Austin and three hundred yeares after Origen Cassander affirmes that it was brought in three hundred yeares after Christ and his Apostles which must be an hundred yeares after Origen at least If this had been true these fathers must have said as St Paul of contentions 1 Cor. 11 16. We have no such custome neither the Church of God and could not have said that it was a custome or tradition of the Church Origen then had never knowne it and Austin might have called it an innovation Those conjectures of Tuicencis Iohannes Bohemius cōcerning the occasion of the first in-let of Infants Baptisme into the Church fals to the ground likewise when men heare of a beginning they will be bold to assigne some reason of it If my conjecture may be heeded I suppose it was in some dis-use with many not long after the Apostles times and that by reason of the superstitious conceit that too soon prevailed of the opus operatum in Baptisme that it cleanses all sinnes that are past whether originall or actuall And therefore many that were converted at ripe yeares deferred their Baptisme as neere the houre of death as might be to have all their sinnes cleansed by that water against which custome Bellarmine at large disputes by reason of the absolute necessity of Baptisme though both his grounds and theirs are on a false bottome May we not then beleeve that parents upon the same ground did put off the Baptisme of their children and after did re-assume it upon the necessity of it And this is that which the authour produced viz. Iohannes Behemius speaks of But Mr Daniel Rogers above all is stood upon in his Treatise of the Sacraments he hath these words I take the Baptisme of Infants to be one of the most reverend generall and uncontrolled traditions which the Church hath and which I would no lesse doubt of then the Creed to be Apostolicall although I confesse my selfe yet unconvinced by demonstration of Scripture for it I wish the Reader to consider what the adversary gaines by this testimony Answ It is generall uncontrolled he saith and so he knowes unwritten traditions never were Orthodox Divines antient and moderne have ever opposed them In gaining a peice of a witnesse such an one that hath his reasons to beleeve Baptisme of Infants to be Apostolicall they have the Church unanimously in all successive ages their adversatie And as the Infants of beleeving parents are to be received to Baptisme The consectarie enlarged so no Infants that descend from those that make Profession of the faith of Christ are to be refused Any solid reason which will lye against any for ought can be said may be a ground of the challenge of all The promise made to those that professe Christ and their seed takes in the seed of all that make profession Some that doe not withstand but maintaine and practise the Baptisme of Infants have found a middle way as betweene rigid Brownists and Presbyterians so between Anabaptists and as I may say Paedo-baptists All Infants they will not have to be refused confessing them to be within the verge of the promise yet they will not have all promiscuously received The parents by solemne Covenant must first be made members of some particular congregation and so their Issue is to be admitted their children baptized otherwise both parents and children are to be accounted as without by nature unholy and only the Godly regenerate so farre as men can judge no one of loose life to be admitted But this middle way under correction I cannot but take to be a step out of the way I will here dispute it no further then as it concernes this particular Either the vicious and scandalous life of such a parent or his non admission into Covenant in a Congregationall way is the barre of the Infant that he is not admitted unto Baptisme but neither of these may be a barre First not the vicious life of his parent If the ground of a childs admission to baptisme be not the faith of his immediate parent but the promise made to Ancestors in the faith whose seed he is though at the greater distance Then the loose life of an immediate parent can be no barre to his baptisme This is plaine if Iosiah have no right from his father Ammon yet he is not to be shut out in case he have right from his father David or his father Abraham And though the immediate parent were not wronged when his child is so shut out and denied yet such Ancestor in distance is wronged out of whose loynes the Infant is descended If Phinehas were not wronged in case Ichabod had been debarred yet Eli yea Aaron had suffered But the ground of a childs admission is the promise to Ancestors whether at neerer or greater distance The promise is to beleevers and their seed Now Iosiah was the seed of David Christ was the seed of David An Ancestor at distance and not alone immediate where the race within the Church may be derived in a continued succession gives right of admission therefore unto baptisme 2. There is nothing that can exclude the seed of him that is a beleever as beleever is opposed to an Infidell the seed of one that is of a dogmaticall or historicall faith This we have before made good and from 1 Cor. 7.14 may be further cleared He that is no Infidell is there a beleever whose seed is holy But a man of a vicious life is in that sense a beleever Simon Magus Acts 8.13 Luk. 8.13 the hearers compared to the rocky ground were beleevers therefore a loose life will not exclude the Issue His seed who is a member of a particular Church society must be admitted unto baptisme a Church member and all that are his must have their priviledges But it often falls out that men of loose lives are members as the Church of Corinth yeelds many proofes 2 Cor. 12.20 21 c. Therefore vicious life excludes not the Issue Secondly The non-admission into Covenant is no barre in the parent 1. It was no barre when themselves who now are members were admitted in their infancy their parents for the most part being no members in such a way Therefore now it is no barre though
that Affront which those in the Gospel met with in their tender of Infants Here is somewhat produced to that end and left to thy Judicious censure The Authour hath spared all invective language and intreats like dealing from any that differs in opinion Some will complain of a naked Margin to which much might be said The Authour was with books when it was compiled for the Pulpit but taken from them when it was fitted for the Presse So that use of Marginall References must have put him upon the borrowed copies of others and a new pains for quotation of Chapter Page Besides the quotations desired must either have been friends and so their Evidence would be challenged or else Adversaries which perhaps might provoke some personall offences and distaste which the Authour studiously professeth to avoid We all must stand or fall to our Master Rom. 14 4. and this dispute must stand or fall according to his sentence which is the Voyce of Scriptures Iohn 12.48 If this put no end to the difference the dispute will be everlasting Witnesses from the dead are in vain mustered Luke 16.31 Ephes 3.20 when Moses and the Prophets Prophets and Apostles cannot be heard If by this candle from thence lighted thou seest any thing to make more clear this title to thy selfe and posterity let God have the praise and the Authour thy prayers THE BIRTH-PRIVILEDGE GAL. 2.15 We who are Jewes by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles THis Chapter contains a two-fold Narration of the Apostle The Introduction 1. Of his journey to Jerusalem with the severall occurrents which happened there brought in by him for the vindication of his Apostleship from the first to the eleventh vers 2. Of his dealing with Peter at Antioch which Narration some say is continued to the end of the Chapter others that it is broke off at the seventeenth verse and in the verses that follow the Apostle doth not relate what he said to Peter but directs his words to the Galathians to whom he writes which difference I intend not now to examine My text is within this last Narration or report of the Apostle In which observe 1. The occasion given by Peter Before that certain came from James he did eat with the Gentiles but when they were come he withdrew Verse 12. and separated himselfe 2. The Issue which followed upon this carriage of his Verse 13. And the other Iewes dissembled likewise with him insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation 3. The Arguments brought for cōviction of Peter of this error which are two First Verse 14. in the fourteenth verse If thou being a Iew livest after the manner of the Gentiles and not as doe the Iewes why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as doe the Iewes Thus the Argument runs It is unreasonable to draw others into a practice that thou thy selfe purposely forbearest But thou thy selfe keepest not the Jewish Rites and Ordinances And therefore it is an unreasonable and a blame-worthy practice by thy example to compell other-to their observation yea thou being a Jew takest thy selfe to have freedome unreasonably then dost thou draw on others who were never under any such obligation The second Argument is in the fifteenth and sixteenth Verses Verses 15 16. We who are Iewes by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by the saith of Iesus Christ even we have beleeved in Iesus Christ that we might be justified by the faith of Christ and not by the works of the Law for by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified which is thus inforced In that way wherein we who are Jewes with all our birth-priviledges cannot attain to righteousnesse we may not teach the Gentiles to attain to it But we who are Jewes by nature and not sinners of the Gentiles cannot this way attain to righteousnesse We know that a man is justified by faith we are compelled to quit the Law and to cleave to faith without works for justification The words of the text contain First Division the Priviledge of Peter Paul Barnabas with the rest of the Jewes Secondly The Character of the Gentiles in opposition to the Iewes As to the full purpose for which the words are brought by the Apostle they have for the sense of them their dependance on the words that follow but so farre as they contain the priviledge of the Iewes in opposition to and above the Gentiles so farre they are full of themselves shewing first positively what himself and Peter were Iewes by nature Secondly Negatively what they were not sinners of the Gentiles For some explication Explication Nature is here taken not in the proper but vulgar acceptation for birth or descent from Ancestors As usually in our common phrase of speech we say men are naturally Dutch French Spanish Irish when they are such born and bred this Scripture therefore Camero cites for one in which the Apostle speaks after the vulgar manner we have a Scripture paralell with this Rom. 11.24 where Nature and naturall is only by birth and off-spring Peter Paul Barnabas were all naturally Iewes born of Jewish parents and bred up in the way and Religion of the Jewes such only Christ chose for Apostles being himself a Minister of the Circumcision Rom. 15.8 Act. 22.3 Phil. 3.5 Act. 4.36 Exod. 19.6 Deut. 4.7 8. Rom. 3.1 Psal 147.20 Peter therefore being one of the twelve must necessarily be such Paul was such as we know from his owne mouth a Iew and of the tribe of Benjamin Barnabas was such of the tribe of Levi. And being such they enjoyed a priviledge which the Gentiles wanted they were by birth off-spring of a Nation that is holy No Nation was so great as they who had God so nigh unto them who had Statutes and Iudgements so righteous The Jew had every way Prerogatives advantages but chiefly the Oracles of Gods God had not dealt so with every Nation when other Nations were without God they had God nigh unto them when others were unclean they were holy This great priviledge of birth Gentiles wanted and so were by off-spring sinners as birth renders all so they remaine unholy and uncleane among the unholy and uncleane without any such title to the Covenant of God that thereby they might obtaine any other denomination they are dogs while the people in Covenant are children And by this meanes the seeming opposition which is betweene this text and that of the Apostle Ephes 2.3 is easily reconciled Here the Apostle makes an opposition in nature betweene Jewes and Gentiles Jewes by nature had a priviledge above Gentiles there he makes Jew and Gentile in nature equall We saith he were by nature children of wrath as well as others as well as heathens that have no birth-priviledge Nature in that text is not the same as Nature
Baptisme we know the answer that he had If thou beleevest with all thine heart thou maist And Calvinists denying actuall faith to be found in Infants their Adversaries the Lutherans come in with their argument ad hominem making against us say they though not against the thing it selfe Every Sacrament without faith in him that uses it is a vaine Ceremony But the Baptisme of Infants is a Sacrament without the faith of him that useth it A speech directed to a man of yeares and without any title to the Covenant other then his actuall faith did confer upon him is ill applyed to Infants within Covenant that otherwise have title to it Answ 1. This exception carries equall strength against Infants circumcision Answ 2. There is no more faith in the Infauts of Iewes then there is in the Infants of Christians And faith is no lesse necessary in the circumcised then in the baptized There was an equall necessity of the ingrediency of faith in every one in that age as in this yea in the ages more ancient then that of circumcision as appeares by the Apostles argument Heb. 11.6 Their capacity to receive the signe answers their capacity to receive the thing signified they are passive in the receiving of Christ and any interest in him and so also they are and circumcised Infants were in taking the signe And so the Lutheran proposition being understood of any thing wherein we are active is a truth but applied to Infants uncapable of action in the Sacrament where they are only passive it is to be denied If Infants have the like gift intitling to and interesting in the priviledge of baptisme with beleevers then they withstand God who deny their baptisme This is the Apostles argument brought for his own defence Acts 11.17 which I wish were more seriously considered And let it not be objected that the gift there specified is a gift extraordinary peculiar to those times It is enough to make the argument of force that it is alike in them with that which now intitles growne beleevers Now the want of those gifts extraordinary doth not disable grown beleevers The want of these doth not then disable Infants And that they have the like gift intitling to and interesting in the Sacrament of baptisme is plaine A Covenant-holinesse unquestionable Inherent qualitative holinesse hopefull is a like gift to that which growne beleevers are able to produce But Infants have Covenant-holinesse unquestionable inherent qualitative holinesse hopefull A beleever by the profession of his faith is able to make good his title to the outward Covenant and so can the beleeving parent the title of his Infant A beleever can make good such a title to the inward Covenant that none can say thou hast no part or portion in this thing And because it cannot be denied though absolutely and infallibly it be not affirmed it is to be presumed This a beleeving parent can make good in the behalfe of his Infant and this is sufficient this is a like But it will yet be said Object An institution is wanting we have no precept we have no president of the baptizing of Infants The institution is Goe teach all nations Mar. 28.19 baptizing them c. We must baptize those whom by teaching we have discipled to the word signifieth I answer First That which hath beene said doth conclude that they are within the verge of an institution being such that have so full title I have heard one of the most learned and reverend that ever I knew or heard of that was of that way more then once professe with no small solemnity that if he knew an Infant to be sanctified as he acknowledged John Baptist was such a one he would baptize And that the particular infants whom Christ was seene for to blesse might have beene baptized Those then that are thus intitled through want of an institution are not to be excluded and how farre and fully Infants of beleeving parents are intitled we have heard 2. The place quoted hath not in it the Institution of that Sacrament Baptisme was appointed of God before those words were uttered He that spoke them was himselfe before baptized Mat 3.16 Ioh 4.6 Mat. 10.5 They to whom they were spoken had baptized others It is only an enlargement of their Commission for the exercise of their Ministery being before confined unto one Nation now it is enlarged to all Nations 3. The words there comprize infants they are no more excluded then men of yeares serving to make up a Nation as well as parents The Infants of Niniveh did make a considerable party of the City of Niniveh The Infants of any Nation make up a part of the Nation and the Nation where they came was to be discipled And that Infants are here comprehended further appeares by this argument * This argument hath strength frō that of the Apostle Act. 3.25 As it was with the kindred of Abraham in respect of covenant holinesse so it is with all kindreds of the earth they iointly make one party in the Covenant But infants of Abrahams kindred were in the Covenant and of the nation in respect of Covenant-Blessednesse Ergo c. In the same sense and latitude as Nation was taken in respect of the Covenant of God when the Covenant and Covenant-initiating-Sacrament was restrained to that one only Nation where their Commission was first limited In the same sense it is to be taken unlesse the text expresse the contrary now the Commission is enlarged This cannot be denied of any that will have the Apostles to be able to know Christs meaning by his words in this enlarged Commission But Nation then as is confessed did comprehend all in the Nation in respect of the Covenant and nothing is expressed in the text to the contrary therefore it is to be taken in that latitude to comprehend Infants Object Will it be said that an exception of Infants is implied in that all of the Nation must be discipled before they be baptized but Infants are not capable of being discipled and so they are made uncapable of Baptisme I answer 1. Here is rather implyed that they are of capacitie to be Disciples Answ 1. in that Christ sends to disciple Nations and they serve to make up the nation 2. It is the way of the Scripture Answ 2. speaking of an universality of a people in a land expressely to except infants in case they be to be excepted As we see in the judgement that befell Israel in the wildernesse to the cutting off of those that came out of the land of Egypt Numb 14.31 And in the Covenant entred by the body of the Nation of all degrees and sexes at their returne from Babylon Nehem. 10.28 and an exception could be no where more usefull and necessary then here to let us know that it is otherwise with Gentiles in this particular then it was with the Iewes that the Nations
Baptisme No sooner doe we heare of a convert but we presently heare of his baptisme no Church-covenant intervening They have right to all the immunities of this house to all the priviledges of this city of God There is some time after baptisme in infancy before they have capacity to be hearers but as soone as they can heare to profit so soone they must be received not as strangers but as children not as Infidels but Christians They must be hearers and that with some good proficiency before they can be communicants But to deny a person entitled and qualified as before because not in Church-fellowship in a Congregationall way offering himselfe and desiring it is to debarre him of that right of which by the gracious dispensation of God he stands possessed He belongs to Christ he must therefore partake of that which is of Christ He is of the houshold he must therefore have of the foode of the houshold The stewards of the mysteries of God must be accountable in case they doe deny it To come to some practique observations 3. Consectary Holy conversation All possible engagements and obligations unto holinesse of conversation necessarily follow from this royall priviledge and high advancement of birth-holinesse We blame those of noble and generous birth that betake themselves to sordid and ignoble wayes Those thus degenerating are a blot to their families a disgrace and reproach to their race No birth equall in honour to that of Christians Theodesius worthily esteemed it a greater honour that he was a Christian then that he was an Emperour None degenerate so foulely and blame-worthily as they when their conversation is unchristian Wayes of sinne are for sinners of the Gentiles a way proper for Turkes and Pagans let the holy seed be holy their demeanour suited to their honour Sardanapalus the King may with lesse in-infamy spinne among women a worke farre below his throne then a Christian may sinne with heathen The Martyrs in the primitive times being moved to sweare by the fortune of Coesar thought that the answer was full and faire to say they were Christians Such answer should he have that would tempt to ungodlinesse Nebe 6.11 Should such a one as I flie saith Nehemiah his honour would not suffer him to be so base Should such a man as a Christian the least of whom is greater then Nehemiah's better be for sinne not a sinner by birth Mat. 11.11 be for sinne in his life Baptisme is the greatest honour Such beare Christs name and weare his livery Iamos 1.1 Iude 1.1 1 Pet. 1.1 1 Tim. 2.19 They have that title in which Iude Iames and other of the Apostles gloried A Servant of Iesus Christ Baptisme is the greatest engagement Let every one that nameth Christ depart from iniquity To talke of baptisme and live in sin is to weare the Colours of one and plot and fight for another to weare Christs colours and sight for Satan Baptisme renders a sinner up to the heaviest punishment Amos 3.2 The high favours shewed the Jewes made a Jew to fare worse in the wayes of sinne then an heathen Heb. 2.3 The high favours shewed to Christians make Christians to fare worse in sinfull wayes then heathens Let me preste it in the Apostles words though the providence of God keeps me out of his condition Ephes 4.1 1 Pet. 1.15 1 Thes 4.7 Ephes 2.19 Mat. 25.31 Rom. 1.2 Ephes 1.13 Heb 9.8 4. Consectary Holy education I therefore the prisoner of the Lord beseech you that ye walke worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called All in a Christians calling bespeakes this holinesse Hee by whom he is called The worke to which he is called The company unto which he is joyned The Attendants by whom he is guarded The Rule wherby he is guided The Seale by which he is confirmed and the place whither he makes and tends all are holy Let the Parents of such seed now see what education is expected Breeding must answer Birth and Descent A Christian is of the noblest birth The Apostle calls upon parents to bring up their children in nurture and admonition of the Lord God may call on them thus to bring up his children In nature theirs in Covenant Gods Every Christian parent hath a child of God committed to his care and tuition How great a solecisme is it that parents should dedicate children so soone as borne unto Christ professing to the world that they belong to him and that with Hannah concerning Samuel they intend them for him when nothing appeares in their lives but that they might be given to Moloch somewhat worse then the mongrell seed that spoke halfe in the language of Canaan and halfe of Ashdod Scarce a word can be heard out of their mouthes for to argue that they are Christians lisping out oathes as soone as words put to learne trades and little regard had that they may know Christ Iesus And how much is it to be desired that authority who I trust will make good that we have a Christian Nation would take order for more carefull catechisticall teaching of youth in the wayes of Christian Religion that God may not complaine of England is of Israel My people perish for want of knowledge Hosea 4. â— A people of God and a people ignorant to perdition and destruction England is highly honoured of God by this gracious call with Capernaum listed up to Heaven Enegland would highly honour God if care might be taken that all might know God from the highest to the lowest We shall never be a Gospel-like people till we be a knowing people till we take care that as we are lewes by nature so we may be Iewes in qualification so borne so bred that as our youth is descended so also they may be trained Those may see whom they oppose that stand in opposition of a people thus interested a people so ingratiated to God in Covenant that there is not the least infant in whom God hath not his title and right of challenge 5. Consectary The danger of persecution Psal 79 1 2 3. The aggravation of the Psalmists complaint is that the heathens are come into thine inheritance the dead bodies of thy servants have they given to be meat unto the fowles of the Heaven the flesh of thy Saints unto the beasts of the earth The whole body of such a people stand in relation to God as the Inheritance the servants and Saints of God Such inscriptions we sind in St Pauls Epistles not one of the whole body is excluded but they are such by Covenant and such by calling Psal 127 3. Mat 18.5 Psal 137.9 Enough hath been said to make it to appeare that the denomination reaches even infants who are the Lords heritage and Christs name is upon them As it is accounted an happy work to dash the little ones of Babylon against the wall because of the hostlity of that Nation against God and his people So it
is noted there the glory of his Race is magnified which is yet further honoured Ruth 4.18 in that Christ according to the flesh was made of his seed That seed of Abraham per Eminentiam was out of his loynes Iephtah was indeed driven out by his brethren but not because that he was not of the seed of the Iewes and people of God Iudg. 11.2 but because they would not have him to share of the inheritance among them 1. The maine ground of this is the great Charter of Heaven Reasons 1 which God pleases to grant unto those whom he takes and chooses to himselfe upon earth If a King grant to any subject a personall priviledge as to keepe his great Seale to be Lord Treasurer this priviledge dyes with him his posterity hath nothing to doe with the Seale or Exchequer unlesse the Prince finding them qualified makes a second choice of them which doth not often happen But in case the priviledge be perpetuall and successive and not terminated in the person but the words of the grant rune to them and their heires then the priviledge remaines to posterity Noblemen with us have their honours not for themselves only but their Issue and some men have Offices which they call Offices of inheritance And all English subjects have divers Immunities and freedomes Now the great Charter of Heaven Gen. 17.7 Acts 2.38 runs in the largest words to them and their seed after them in all generations 2. This is of the nature of those things Reasons 2 which descend from parent to child from Ancestors to posterity In that Religion which is of God we have here found it and all other Religions doe lay claime to it There are those things indeed which are personally inherent in men and proper to them so that they cannot convey them to their issue there is no deriving of them to others by succession as 1. Individuall accidents of the body wounds scarres or singular comelinesse of feature these are so in the parent that they are not conveyed to their children 2. Habits or proper guifts whether acquired by paines or infused The sonne of a learned man inherits not his fathers guifts The sonne of an Artificer is no such Artist The sonne of a Prophet hath not by vertue of birth the guift of pophecy nor is the sonne of a regenerate man endowed with saving grace for that reason There are on the contrary those things that passe from parent to child which the parent by nature or speciall priviledge hath power to convey as 1. The essentiall or integrall parts of a species with the naturall properties that doe accompany it so one bruit beast brings forth another one bird brings forth another and man brings forth one of man-kind 2. The priviledges or burdens which in Family or Nation are hereditary they are conveyed from parents to posterity from Ancestors to their Issue As is the father so is the child as respecting these particulars The child of a Free-man with St Paul is free borne Acts 22.28 The child of a Noble man is noble The child of a bond-man where servants were wholy their Masters to dispose is a bond-man likewise Exod. 21.4 So the child of a Turke is a Turke The child of a Pagan is a Pagan The child of a Iew is a Iew The child of a Christian is a Christian As by vertue of the grand Charter of Heaven among the people of God this priviledge doth descend So it is of the nature of those things that are descendable 3. Reasons 3 The name of Iew or Christian would not long hold in any family among any people if this truth that there is a generation according to the flesh which have this priviledge to be accounted of the people of God may not be yeelded but as it is in trades the father is of one the sonne of another so we should see it in religions But God provideth for a continuance in succession from age to age from generation to generation he keeps them still within Covenant though many doe degenerate But some say Exception all this is blowne away at one breath That the Iewes had this priviledge cannot be denied But this was a priviledge peculiar to the seed of Abrahams flesh and not to the seed of his saith Beleeving Iewes had this birthright-priviledge Beleeving Christians have not they must make profession of their faith before they be accounted among them that be holy I answer Satisfaction 1. In the Negative the Charter not reverst Such a grant God did once vouchsafe by free Charter to his people How can it be made appeare that ever it was reverst or any such limit put unto it The Church of God hath held it in Fee by vertue of this grant from Abraham to this very houre and there is no word of God to challenge them for usurpation They that will out us of so long possession must make their plea punctuall for our eviction Secondly Heb. 8.6 Christians can produce new Covenant-advancing Scriptures that Christs comming put them into a better and more comfortable condition then were beleevers in former ages I would faine have them to produce any one new Covenant-depressing Scripture to shew that we in any case are in a worse or more uncomfortable condition then our fathers If it be said that though this Birth-priviledge be taken away Object yet we are not in a worse condition having it in other more desireable things enlarged Let these then shew when Answ and where this was taken away and what was given in lieu and recompence of this want and greatest discomfort that can come to a parent as a parent to have his Issue expunged out of the number of Gods people who are holy Let them produce those Scriptures which so difference the old and new Covenant made with believers that the one should be perpetuall the other personall That the Covenant with the Iew shall transcend the Covenant with Christians as an Inheritance for ever exceeds a Grant for terme of life Let them give us an hint of any Reason why this priviledge should belong to the heares of Abrahams body and not to the heires of his faith That reason held forth by some that Christ should come out of his loynes is of no force it excludes all the tribes out of that priviledge but Iudah when every tribe of Israel in this were equall with Iudah every familie of Iudah's tribe but David's And most of all Gen. 17.12 13 it would have excluded the seed of the Proselites that according to the flesh were strangers to Israel when yet in this priviledge they were equall Exo. 12.48 49 2. In the Affirmative The priviledge cotinued Six Arguments But not to rest in Negatives and Generals though the first grant being presupposed this might abundantly satisfie but to come to some Positive proofes particularly evincing this priviledge of Christians 1. The Apostle in time of the
new Testament when the Spirit was actually given propounds this Covenant in as full a latitude and ample extent as ever it was made to Abraham or belonged to the Iewes yea in the like words as under the old Covenant it was delivered Repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Iesus Christ for the remission of sinnes and ye shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost For the promise is unto you Act. 2.38 39. and to your children and to all that are asarre off even as many as the Lord our God shall call I doe not now dispute the end why this Covenant is there urged it is enough for the present purpose that such a Covenant yet remaines and so concludes the promise still to stand in its antient latitude and extent Had God in these last dayes put this limit to it then the Apostle now the prophecy of the last dayes was fulfilled would not have put this latitude upon it 2. The Beleevers of the Gentiles succeed the Iewes in the Covenant Iewes were broken off that Gentiles might be graffed in Rom. 11.16 17. and Iewes being broken off Gentiles were graffed in for them And beside Scripture-silence of any abridgement of priviledge to the successor enjoyed by the predecessor which is a good ground of claime to the same we have further Evidence in the same place that it is divolved upon Gentiles in as large a way as ever it was enjoyed by Iewes We are now branches of that root by vertue of this insition and if the root be holy the branches are holy is the Apostles argument and if the first-fruits be holy the lump is holy Will it be said that this proposition is brought by the Apostle Object to prove a remaining holinesse in the people of the Iewes that they are not so cast off but that they shall be againe received but intends no proofe of Holinesse in succession to the Gentiles To this I answer first Answ 1. That a proposition universally true may be applyed to all particulars This position is such and being by the Apostle confessedly applyed to the Iewes is of equall truth being applyed to the Gentiles Secondly I say if the holinesse of the Root Abraham Isaac Answ 2. and Iacob receiving the promises be an argument of weight to prove that the whole body of the people of the Iewes were it not for their present actuall unbelief were all holy with a federall holinesse and that this their unbeliefe shall yet be done away that they may be again as before holinesse to the Lord Then it much more proves that the Gentiles remaining in the Root and continuing in the faith are universally Root and branch holy But this with the Apostle is an argument of weight as plainly appears in the Chapter See vers 28. and 29. As concerning the Gospel they are enemies for your sakes but as touching the election they are beloved for the fathers sakes They were enemies to the Gospel for the Gentiles sake that they might be received but beloved for their sakes out of whose loynes they issued and that they shall therefore be again received is there also demonstrated seeing the gifts and calling of God are without repentance Will it be further said Object that the Branches actually by faith engraffed are holy but it doth not follow that these as a Root transmit any such holinesse to their Issue To this I answer Answ 1 that the consequence is necessary first because the branches of Ancestors are the Root of posteritie being made an holy branch in reference to their issue they now become an holy Root Iesse was a branch of Abrahams stock Isai 11.1 yet he was the Root of David and of Christ A subordinate Magistrate is a subject in reference to his superior yet a man of authoritie and command in respect of his inferiours Each man is his fathers child but his childs father So it is here a branch of those that went before is the root of those that follow after Secondly Answ 2 The Apostle hath not at all to deale in that place with a personall holinesse but with an holinesse derivative and of succession the personall holinesse mentioned in the objection and maintained by the adversaries of this Doctrine is qualitative and inherent derived from no other Root then Christ this here is from Abraham Isaac and Iacob receiving the promises Either no holinesse at all comes this way to Beleevers as from Abrahams stock or else it is such as Abraham by vertue of the Covenant doth communicate to posteritie 3. The Grand Birth-priviledge by the Jewes enjoyed is to be an holy Nation Exod. 19.6 Deut. 14.1 2. Isai 63.18 â— 1 Pet. 2.9 to have the whole body of their people as distinguished from others accounted holy to the Lord This was peculiarly their honour from age to age from generation to generation But this honour to be a chosen generation an holy Nation a people peculiar Phrases as high as ever were given the Jewes is given to beleeving Christians Christians therefore in this Birth-priviledge equall the Nation of the Jewes Neither will this be avoyded Object by affirming that the text in Peter is meant of the Church invisible the living and lively members of Christ who are all holy by an inherent qualitative holinesse of sanctification So that here is not any equalizing of the body of Christians with the Nation of the Jewes but only an allusion to the titles given the Iewes to advance the Excellencie of regenerate Christians called according to Gods purpose The contrary to this in the text is cleare Answ First by looking backe to the words that there precede It is meant of all those who doe not professedly with the unbeleeving Iewes reject Christ Iesus which will yet more fully appeare by comparing the words of St Paul Rom. 9.32 33. But all that doe not professedly reject Christ Iesus are not men called and qualified as before Simon Magus had enough to make him one of this number Secondly by looking forward to that which followes in the Character which the Apostle before he ends his description addes Hos 2.23 Which in times past were not a people but now are the people of God A speech taken from the Prophet to set out the case of the Gentiles as it is also by St Paul interpreted Rom. 9.26 But the Gentiles thus called and of no people made a people have all a Covenant-holinesse and not alwayes holinesse inherent The Gentiles are called from not-covenant into covenant from non-federation into federation This is that call and therefore a call into Covenant The Call of those who are not a people to be a people of God is the call of Nations into Covenant Deut. 32.21 Rom. 10.19 I will move them to jealousie Deut. 32.28 Rom. 10.19 with those that are not a people I will provoke them to anger with a foolish Nation But this in the