would inferre that because beleevers are exhorted by Paul to performe their civill Covenants and lawfull Contracts which they have made with men that therfore it appeareth that the gloss which you gave upon the Apostles words 1 Cor. 7.14 is a true interpretation What weight is in your words let any one that hath sence and reason judge For the like might have been objected in the time of the Law against the infants of the Church then whom the Lord did call and sanctifie and cause to approach neere unto him that because the parents and others were to performe their Conditions and bargains which they made each with other or with strangers not changing Psal 15.4 or going from their word though it were to their hindrance that therefore their holy infants then had no more holinesse then a meer lâ—gittimacie nor were different from the infants of Heathens and Infidells Were it not foolishnesse thus to thinke much more to affirme yea surely and therefore such affirmations of yours are to be taken for sensles imaginations and vaine conceptions not worthy to be uttered to any much lesse unto many Neither should they at this time have been mentioned heer but to manifest the vanitie thereof That reasonable creatures may not be deluded by such unreasonable collections and false inferences But may examine what they receive before they receive it and embrace nothing but what is agreeable to the Rule of Truth Further you say A. R. Pag. 11. at lin 5. to lin 23. And this may likewise appeare in Mal. 2.14 15. where the Spirit of God by the Prophet sheweth the reasons why their offerings were no more accepted because saith he God hath been witnesse between thee and the wife of thy youth that is his first wife then living against whom thou hast dealt treacherously yet shee is thy companion and the wife of thy Covenant and did not he make one yet had he aboundance of the Spirit and wherefore one in that he sought a godly or holy seed therefore keepe your selves in spirit and let none trespasse against the wife of his youth In which words it plainly appeareth that the scope of the place is that those Children which are generated by one man and one woman lawfully married are a godly or holy seed and those that are generated otherwise are not so but Bastards And the reason of this holinesse ariseth not here from any relation they had to the Jewish State nor from any Church Covenant but meerly from Gods first Institution of Marriage in the Creation and his then providing one woman for one man and which therefore is of Vniversall concernment to all man-kinde by the Law of Creation Ans Herein you pervert the Scripture and bring such Conclusions therefrom which are not included therein Whereas you say it is his first wife then living I aske you why not his second * Jacob had 2 wives Leah and Rachell the one was elder then the other and one was married before the other But the children which he had by theÌ„ as also those by Billa and Zilpah were all holy in their infancie and so are the Infants of beleevers a godly and holy seed and all other Infants are otherwise whether legitimate or illegitimate wife then living If you will limit it onely to the first wife then it seems by your speech that he might deale treacherously with the other and beare no blame for it But you should know that these Jewes to whom the Lord speaketh were taught to follow the righteous steps of their holy parents and not to deale treacherously with any of their wives You say that the scope of this place in Mal. 2.14 15. is That those Children which are generated by one man and one woman lawfully married are a godly or holy seed and those that are generated otherwise are not so but Bastards But that this is the scope of the place wee must take upon your bare word or else choose for Scripture to prove it you have none But by these your speeches it seemeth that you would have us to beleeve that godlines holines of children dependeth upoÌ„ the parents lawfull generating of them And so by this it will follow that all the legitimate Infidells in the world are godly and holy both young and old which is very strange and absurd and overthroweth the Scriptures which declareth that there hath been alwayes a difference between the holy and prophane between beleevers and Infidells between the Infants of the Church and the Infants out of the Church one sort being called the children of God the other the children of men Againe This speech of yours in saying that the children of one man and one woman lawfully married are a godly and holy seed and those that are generated otherwise are not so but Bastards It doth imply that then all legitimated persons shall be saved and that no Bastards shall be saved And so out of your owne mouth for ought you know you bring a heavie censure and sentence of condemnation against your selfe for it seemeth by your words that your owne assurance of salvation must rest meerly upon humane testimony for you know not whether you are legitimate or no but by the testimony of your parents which if they were not lawfully married at the time of your begetting then where is your godlines and holines You have it not at all upon your own grounds howsoever at the best I thinke you will say that you have it not from your owne knowledge but by humane testimony But for your comfort you should consider that in a religious respect a Bastard if he be a Convert must not be rejected as a cast-away for although his father and his mother sinned in his procreation yet their sinne shall not be imputed unto him neither will the Lord reject him any whit the more for his being unlawfully begotteÌ„ Yea though beleeving parents should through temptation derogate from Gods institution by begetting children contrary to Gods Law yet we will not say but as there is repentance forgivenesse for the parents returning unto God so the beleeving parents may have hope from the Scripture that sweet fountaine of consolation that God will not impute that their sinne unto their children who never sinned actually but will receive them to mercy with themselves So Davids childe which he had by the wife of Vriah the Hittite though it was unlawfully begotten contrary to Gods institution in Paradise yet it doth evidently appeare that we have no ground to say that the infant was out of Gods covenant any more then David was David repented and his sinne was forgiven him and his childe was cleane both in a civill and religious respect the which cannot justly be sayd of any infant whose parents are both of them unbeleevers though they are lawfull husband and wife and the childe legitimate yet the parents being neither of them in the Covenant were not to esteem any of their Infants
circumcision of the flesh was to teach them it being the signe k Gen 17.11 and seal l Rom. 4 11. Col. 2.11 12. of the righteousnesse of faith as baptisme is now And this you may minde also that though the rebellious seed of Abraham according to the flesh were rejected m Esay 2.6.9 yet the strangers that joyned to the Lord were still received n Esay 56.3 4 5 6 7 8. wherefore this is a plain evidence that they stood by the grace and life of God and Christ and circumcision of the heart for the cause why God rejected some of the circumcised seed of Abraham according to the flesh was because they were uncircumcised in heart o Ier. 9.25 26. and therefore the Lord threatned to visite them and did visit them with the uncircumcised in flesh Wherefore it appeareth that without faith and circumcision of the heart they could not stand at all And the Scripture saith that the unbeleeving Jewes were cut off for unbeliefe and that those that stand doe stand by faith and therefore are admonished not to be high minded but fear p Rom. 11.20 and take heed q v 21. and continue in the beautifulnesse of God r v. 22. and that the unbeleeving Jewes also if they abide not in unbeliefe shall be grafted in again Å¿ v. 23. Wherefore it appeareth that as unbeliefe was the cause why the unbeleeving Jewes were cut off from the olive tree whereon they were so unbeliefe was the bar which kept them off for if they abide not in unbeliefe they shall be grafted in again and this proveth that their standing was never to be otherwise but by faith and circumcision of the heart Neither are we to thinke that the giving of the Law at mount Sinai or the ceremonies which the Jewes then had to lead them to Christ or any of Gods Oracles being committed unto them or any persons groundlesse departing from the State doth argue that the constitution of the same Church was as you would have it taken to be Neither did their circumcision of the flesh argue that they stood not by faith and circumcision of the heart no more then the outward baptisme doth now argue that the Saints now stand not by faith and the inward baptisme of the heart and spirit but meerly upon nature and baptisme of the flesh But you should know that as it is not possible to please God now without faith * Heb. 11.6 no more was it then * Psal 50.18 In the time of the Law God abhorred his own Ordinances if they were not done in faith * Isa 1.13 14. And as faith gave Abraham the denomination of Gods friend the righteousnesse of which faith Circumcision was a seal * Rom. 4.11 so none were ever esteemed as the holy people the sonnes and daughters and friends of God but those that were made nigh unto him by the promise of Christ and by faith and circumcision of the heart And you should know that the Jewes had not outward spirituall holinesse visibly imputed unto them meerly because they were the children of Abraham but because Abraham their Father and they his children were the children of God and their childrens children were in Covenant and so they were the children of the promise as Isaack was and blessed with their Father Abraham And this may further appeare unto you because when any of the seed of Abraham according to the flesh did degenerate their rejection was not for or because that they were the children of Abraham but because they had taken upon them the image of Satan and so degenerated from the steps of Abraham and thereby became the children of Belial And as we may say concerning these Hebrews so we may say concerning the Heathens when any of the Gentiles or Heathens became Prosolites their childeren that were at yeares of discretion were not to be circumcised unlesse they were willing to enter into covenant with God and to take upon them the Lords yoake and fight under his banner Howbeit whether they were circumcised or not they were still the Prosolytes children according to the flesh But concerning the infants of the Prosolytes there was no questioning of them they were to be circumcised being in the covenant with their parents and yet not circumcised because they were their childeren by nature but because they were in the same covenant with their holy parents and so they were the childeren of God by his free Grace And the Scripture doth evidently declare that none were to be admitted into the Church of the Jewes but believing Hebrews and Prosolytes and their holy seed By all this it apeareth that the members of the Jewes state had a spirituall holinesse upon them and stood no otherwise but by faith and circumcision of the heart And were not as those who were neither beleeving Jewes nor Prosolytes Aliens from the Common-wealth of Israel without hope without God in the world without Christ and strangers from the covenants of promise But the Church of the Jewes the Lorâ—s peculiar people were made nigh unto God by the blooâ— of Jesus Christ which was then to be shed and is now shed for the remission of their sins and their reconciliation to God the father and his blessed spirit And whereas you say that the state or Church of the Jews is abollished I tell you I am not bound to beleeve that God abollished his Chuâ—ch state whereof David Solomon Hezekias Josias and the holy Prophets and righteous men were members such a Church at the constitution whereof there was no prophane person to be admitted or any root beating gall or wormwood to be suffered but if you thinke that God changed the state in the daies of the Messias his manifestation in the flesh and made it more glorious Even as the Moone is said to be changed when shee hath run her course but remaineth still the same Moone though more glorious then before this I would rather beleeve then that And touching your speech of the abolishing of the other things If you mean an abolishing of all the beggarly rudiments taking away the Elimentish part of some Ordinances and planting other materialls in stead thereof then I grant it But be sure that you stick to this that Christ came not to deceive the Infants of beleeving parents to take away the substance of the Ordinances but rather the yoakes which cleaved thereunto which circumstantiall things he nayled to his Crosse in token that those who rightly and truely enjoyed them before were now benefited without them and were to have through a generall distribution an equall proportionable share and right to whatsoever came in stead thereof Now let us consider that if the infants of beleevers members of the Church of the Jews were not then aliens from the Common wealth of Israel nor without hope nor without God in the world They were not then without Christ neither were they Strangers from the Covenants
6.5 In death there is no remembrance of God in the grave who shall praise him But the Comforter which would not have beleeving parents mourne 1 Thes 4.13 as those which have no hope hath informed them that he is the Circumciser of their heart and of the heart of their seed * Deut. 30.6 a plain evidence that they love and know him or rather are beloved and knowne of him He that loved them in their life will not forsake them in their death For the dead which die in the Lord are fully blessed yea saith the Spirit for they rest from their labours and their workes doe follow them * Rev. 14.13 But by your words it appeareth that you judge the infants of beleevers and Infidells all alike Yea the Infidell servants which serve beleevers if these your words be true have a greater priviledge then the Infants of beleevers for the servants are capable of instruction in respect of a naturall capabilitie but the Infants are not Now if you will still grant that the Infants of beleevers though they die in their infancie have a greater priviledge then the infants of unbeleevâ—rs then you must also grant that that their priviledge resteth in something else besides the bare publication of the Gospel which they are not in their infancie capable of And you should not have over-topped them so far as to say that because beleeving parents may be a means to bring their children to the knowledge and faith of Jesus Christ that therefore they have no more priviledges then the unbeleeving wife As if this were the greatest priviledge which beleevers infants have which unbeleevers themselves may have Mark 16.15 But you should rather have reasoned thus Beleeving parents may publish the Gospel to their unbeleeving servants unbeleeving wives to all other unbeleevers but they may yea ought to apply it to their infants * See Mar. 16.16 Luk. 1.76 77 78 79. as well as to themselves also to all those whom they are to esteem in the state of salvation he that hath faith thus to do is a Christian he that hath not so much faith but refuseth to apply the Gospel so the Lord be mercifull to his soule by giving him repentance and remission of his sinne All godly parents â—ike faithfull Abraham were to teach their children the way of life both what things were and what things signified Gen. 19.17.19 Josh 4.21.24 and to declare unto them the goodnesse of God in the land of the living yea to hide nothing from them which might be profitable to them or beneficiaâ—l for them But as they grew up to be capable of knowledge the parents were as before mentally so now verbally to apply the promises unto themselves and their children c. Psal 78.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. And surely this is one cause why the Land mourns why the Lord smiteth the earth with cursing Mal. 4.5 6. because the heart of the parents are not linked to their Infants This part of good Elias and John Baptists ministâ—ry doth not worke upon them And how can it worke upon them so long as they continue in their sinnes and so wrap themselves and their off-spring in many mischiefes and miseries and doe not choose life the thing that pleaseth God but refuse it and follow the wayes of the strange woman whose wayes are wayes of death and whose steps reach downe to hell And surely I may well say unto you that those are Physicians of no value who in stead of curing them doe kill them and in stead of preserving them doe poysen harden corrupt and pervert them with such damnable doctrine which so violently possesseth them that they thinke the Infants of beleevers have no priviledge at all in respect of the Covenant of grace no more then the children of Turkes and Heathens who are unholy A dangerous doctrine and to be abhorred detested and witnessed against by those that feare the God of heaven and desire to make a difference between the precious and the vile against all such Mongrell opposites who by speech and writing contrary to the Tenour of the whole Scripture do labour to rank all infants in one condition Thus coupling light and darknesse God and Belial the beleever and the Infidell together But woe unto them may we say as sayth the Prophet Isaiah Isa 10.1 which decreâ— unrighteous decrees and write grievousnesse which they have prescribed Thus drawing * Isa 5.18 iniquitie with the cords of vanitie and sinne as it were with a cart-rope Woe ** Ver. 20. unto them that call evill good and good evill that put darknesse for light and light for darknesse bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter Psal 73.1 Yet surely God is good unto Israel may wee say to those that are pure in heart The Lord hath been mindfull of us He will blesse us He will blesse the house of Israel saith that sweet singer of Israel He will blesse the house of Aaron Psal 115.12 13 14 15. He will blesse those that feare the Lord with small and great The Lord shall increase you more and more you and your children You are blessed of the Lord who hath made the heaven and the earth NExt * See A. R. Pag. 12. lin 40. Pag. 13. li. 1 2. Pag. 13. l. 3. you say The fourth Scripture is That which speakes of Christs commanding little Children to be brought unto him and sayd That of such is the kingdome of God Hence you say therefore some reason The kingdome of God belongeth to little Children why not the Seales I Ans If by these some you mean the people of the Seperation then I say you have not set it downe according to our expression It is too generally laid downe We say the kingdome of heaven belongeth to the Infants of beleevers and we doe not barely question why not the seales But we set it downe affirmatively that the seales doe belong to the infants of beleeving parents But for as much as our poynt is particularly concerning the Baptisme of infants I intend to proceed directly to the matter in hand and answer your trifling objections by the way as I trace you Mat. 28.19 Mat. 16.16 First It is to be minded that Baptisme is one of the priviledges of Christs Church which is his house and kingdome Secondly It is also to be minded that Jesus Christ the eternall Sonne of God and Lord of Glory and of all administrations and giver of every good and perfect gift when he sayth Suffer the little Children to come unto me Mar. 10.14 Mat. 19.14 c. For of such is the kingdome of heaven He doth hereby apply the Gospel unto them I say It is Gospel which he speaketh here Where the kingdome is ther 's the Gospel Get the kingdome thou hast God and Gospel and all And so wee are to understand that with the kingdome the infants of beleevers have the Gospel of the
kingdome also appertaining unto them together with the priviledges thereof It being so the Argument lieth thus Those persons to whom the Gospel may lawfully be applyed to those Baptisme doth of right belong and upon them it must be administred Mar. 16.16 Mat. 28.19 But the Gospel may lawfully be applyed to Beleevers infants Isa 22.24 Jer. 30.20.22 Mat. 19.13 14. Mar. 10.13 14 15 16. Luk. 18.15 16 17. 19.9 10. Gen. 17.7 8.11.13 14. Rev. 21.3 22.14 Infants Baptisme Jure Divino Therefore Baptisme doth of right belong unto them and must be administred upon them The first and second part of this Argument being thus expressed and also proved by the Scriptures cited for Confirmation thereof the Conclusion is true and certaine and may further appeare so to be by what hath been said in this Treatise where the poynt hath been handled and may be further evinced by taking away whatsoever else you can object against the same And now let us heare your Answer First A. R. Pag. 13. lin 5. That if Infants have right to one of the seales if I may so call them then to both to the Supper as well as to Baptisme To which I reply That this objection is impertinent The Infants of beleevers the Lords blessed Saints have right both to Baptisme and the Lords Suppâ—r Mar. 10.14.16 1 Cor. 7.14 as the infants of beleevers in the time of the Law had right to Circumcision and the Passeover and wee are to minde that although persons were not nor could not be capable * In respect of a naturall capabilitie at all times to receive the Ordinances yet they had right unto them then and so persons now have right to those heavenly things which they are not capable to receive So wee know that divers Saints though in yeares have right to the preaching of the Word yet have not capabilitie * In case of deafnesse or other defects in nature at all times to conceive what is taught Wherefore your arguing that if Infants have right to one of Gods Ordinances they have right to both hath no weight in it against Infants right to Baptisme Your next words are that Here they say not to the Supper A. R. Lin. 8 9. untill they be able to examine themselves which is required of all that receive the supper Answer If by they you mean those of the Seperation And if by infants you mean their infants I answer then that wee affirme no such thing as you would â—ather upon us * Lin. 5. that holy infants have no right to the Supper for we know they have a right unto it though they want capabilitie to partake of it The Lords supper being an active Ordinance there is more required then a bare suffering for there is an acting required of the partakers thereof Mat. 26.26 Take eate doe this in remembrance of me * Luk. 22.19 c. But Baptisme being a passive ordinance the partie upon whom it is imposed is not required actually to doe it The Lords supper is active Baptisme passive in refereÌ„ce to the receivers thereof but onely to suffer it to be done So the infants of beleevers in the time of the Law had right both to Circumcision and the Passeover yet Circumcision they might receive when they were not capable to partake of the Passeover because that as hath been formerly minded there was an activenesse required of the partaker in partaking and at administration of the Passeover but onely a meer suffering by the subject when Circumcision was imposed upon him So that holy infants now are as capable to receive Baptisme as the infants in former time were to receive Circumcision and these are as capable to receive the Supper now as those infants were to receive the Passeover then Wherefore seeing there was no reason to keepe those infants from being Circumcised though they could not partake of the Passeover having right unto both Therefore there is no just reason can be given to debarre such holy infants from Baptisme now though they cannot partake of the Supper yet they have right both to Baptisme and the Suppâ—r It may be you will say that all that had right to the Passeover were not to be kept from it but to partake of it at the time of administration and that all who have right to the supper are to partake of it when it is administred c. Ans No not so for persons might have just occasions which might justly hinder them from the Passeover and yet they had right unto the Passeover As when they were uncleane or in a journey yet they had still a right unto the Passeover though they were not at that time to partake of it And if they were driven from the societie of the Saints they had still right unto the ordinances though they could not come to enjoy them So if persons were sicke wee will not say that the Passeover was to be infused in them against their stomack yet had they a right thereto though they could not partake thereof When the Children of Israel were in Aegypt Exod. 12.11 they were commanded to eat the Passeover with their loynes girded their shooes on their feete and their staves in their hands and to eat it in hast for it was the Lords Passeover and though every member of the Congregation had right thereto * Exod. 12.47 yet we will not say they were to partake thereof when they could not for the causes before specified or the like occasions And as it may be said concerning comming to the Passeover then so it may be said of communicating in the Lords Supper now that all that have right thereto are not commanded to partake thereof And those Saints then that could not partake of the Passeover did not and these that cannot partake of the supper doe not sinne in not partaking thereof and therefore these are not commanded or injoyned by God to partake of the Supper for God requireth not impossibilities of us neither are we commanded or injoyned to administer it unto them but circumcision was commanded to be administred upoÌ„ unto the other therfore it appeareth that though they were not capable actually to receive the Passeover yet seeing they were still the Saints of God they had right thereunto And the like may be sayd concerning all the holy infants of the Church now and concerning the ordinances now which are in stead of the ordinances then and in effect the same Though the Infants of Beleevers have right to the Supper yet have they not capabilitie to receive it and therefore it must not be administred unto them but Baptisme that passive Ordinance may because there is required no actuall doing of the receiver but a suffering for the water in Baptisme is not to be drunken by them nor to be infused into them but imposed upon them Moreover Concerning their not having the Supper A. R. you have answered
position be true yet this reason brought to confirme it is impertinent considering that the Proselytes and their infants in former time were received into Gods covenant to whom salvation was not denied then though Christ were not manifested in the flesh nor the Goâ—pâ—l published unto all Nations as now since by Christ it was commanded to be And as for the Scriptures cited by you they make much for beleeving parents and their infants for as much as the application of the Gospel appertaineth unto them all In Mar. 16.15 16. the Gospel is commanded to be preached unto every creature and it is said that Whosoever belâ—eveth and is baptized shall be saved and whosoever beleeveth not shall be damned * When Christ sayth He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved He no more intendeth to exclude the infants of the faithfull from Baptisme then from salvation but those that exclude them from the Covenâ—nt doe as much as in them lieth to exclude them from both And in Mat. 28.19 Goe make all Nations Disciples sayth Christ baptizing them As if he should say in former time I bound my selfe to one Nation and published my name unto them but now I stretch forth my hands further that all Nations might be made Disciples and baptized as that one nation of the Jewes were made Disciples and circumcised Now sure as we cannot justly deny the infants to be creatures to whom salvation or damnation appertaineth so we cannot deny but that the Gospel appertaineth unto the infants of beleevers as well as to their parents though they die in their infancie or that the holy infants are Disciples inclusively with their parents as they have been heretofore If then infants are included in the generall Commission as doubtlesse they are then they are not to be excluded but the infants of beleevers are â—dmitted by God to come into the Church with their parents according to the anciâ—nt custome which was very profitable and comfortable and no dishonour to God nor discredit to his cause nor hinderance to his people but a glory unto his house they being his pure vessels which he prized at such a high rate as to send his onely begotten Sonne into the world to take upon him the nature of them and to suffer for them and to make them new creatures such as are mentioned in Gal. 6.15 which availeth with God when neither Circumcision nor uncircumcision doth therefore they are not excluded from the generall Commission Moreover Christ hath declared them to be his by blessing them and testifying that they are of his kâ—ngdome and seeing then that they are Christs they are Abrahams sâ—ed and heires according to promise Gal. 8.29 and have interest into this grace wherein they now are so that they cannot be deprived of their inheritance no more then those who professe faith and doe act that which these Infants have not a naturall capablenesse to doe As touching your demand * Lin 13. which you say is demanded in coole bloud how wee doe become Abrahams seed you have testified what wee will say * Lin. 14 15. which may be stood to without danger namely that wee become Abraham seed onely by faith * Imputatively As for the inference * Lin. 15 16. which you bring upon it that so must our children by the same way wee grant the same it is one of our principles as also that there is as you confesse but one seed and not more in the sence and acceptation of the Gospell Next you say * Pag. 20. at lin 18. They further reason from the equitie of circumcision thus As infants then by Gods allowance received that seale of the covenant so by proportion why not this now of Baptisme And in answer hereunto you rehearse * Lin. 21. Gods commandement to Abraham coÌ„cerning circumcision and say That it was both right equall that Abraham should doe herein as God had commanded him and it had been sinfull for him to have done otherwise more or lesse And so likewise it is right for us to doe as God hath commanded us to doe and no otherwise To which I answer that Gods divine institutions are full of equitie and there is no iniquitie in them nor in any thing which he doth and God not only allowed but strictly commanded Abraham to circumcise and without the command or institution he was not to put the same in execution But when once Circumcision the signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith was instituted then it was to be administred and this was â—ight and equall and allowed oâ— by God Now it remaineth for you to prove if you can when the substance * Mr. Spilsbery granteth that the matter of Gods worship is not changed at the coÌ„ming of Châ—ist in the flâ—sh See his Tâ—â—â—t Bap. pag. 〈◊〉 lin 15. of this institution was taken away Peradventure you will say that the institution of Baptisme hath put anullitie to the sâ—alâ— I answer That the inlargement of a thing or taking away of the circumstances doth not take away the substance or being of it Wherefore it appeareth that the command for sealing of Infants is not yet abrogated but remaineth still and seeing Baptisme was instituted by Christ in stead of circumcision the infants are to be baptized But yet you question * Lin. 28. Where the institution for baptizing of infants is And my answer is That the Institution for sealing of the infants of the faithfull was given to Abraham and Baptisme being in stead of Circumcision and more generall and it being now the seale they are to be baptized as formerly they were to be circumcised But you say * Lin. 30. That was to circumcise not to baptize that all his males not his females that all borne in his house or bought with money at eight dayes old Ans All this maketh nothing against the baptizing of Infants for the signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith is not câ—ased but the substance thereof continueth though the outward shadow or element is departed and delivered unto us as it were in another garb And you granted before that the females were implyed in the males And you ought to know that the generalitie of the latter Commission above the former doth plead a specialitie which the Infants have in the latter as well as in the former But you say * Lin. 32. If they ground it from this institution then must they observe it in every thing for so did Abraham who had sinned in doing otherwise in any thing To this I answer That we may well ground this from the institution of that though we are not tyed to observe that in every thing The institution for sealing the infants of the faithfull ought to be observed by us in every thing and though God have altered the circumstances as he hath done in divers other ordinances the substance of which wee have now in the ordinances of the Gospel