the Chariot wheeles of the Aegyptians sticking in the mire to fall off and hinder their pursuit Psal 77.16 c. After this the Apostle taught by Gods Spirit manifesteth the mysterie which before was kept secret namely how this passage under the cloud which rained and through the sea was a baptisme to the Israelites even as Christian mens washings in rivers or vessels was a baptisme to them And as the Manna which Israel eat and water from the rock which they dranke was the same spirituall meat and drinke which wee have signified by bread and wine in the Lords Supper so their washing in the cloud and sea and our washing in vessels or rivers is spiritually the same baptisme from hence we gather the baptizing of our Infants by two Arguments 1. All our fathers sayth Paul were baptized in the cloud and sea therefore say wee Infants for seeing there was no other baptisme but that in the cloud and sea such of our fathers as then were Infants were at that time baptized or else many of our fathers even all the infants of many thousand families were never baptized which is contrary to the Apostles doctrine And if Infants had baptisme under Moses it cannot be denied them under Christ 2. In that the Apostle teacheth us that the extraordinary and temporary sacraments or seales of salvation which Israel had were the substance and truth which wee now have though Moses doth not so expresse It followeth upon like ground that their ordinary seales namely Circumcision and the Passeover were the same in truth and substance with baptisme and the Lords Supper which wee now have and being the same As Infants had Circumcision then so they are to have baptisme now Secondly Whereas they say that of Moses was called baptisme by comparison as if it were not properly baptisme they swarve from the right way it was as truly and properly baptisme to them as ours is to us though the manner of administration differ even as their Manna and water were as truly and properly the Sacrament of Christs body and bloud to them as bread and wine in the Lords Supper are to us Otherwise the Apostle should not say truly that they were the same 1 Cor. 10.3 4. Thirdly Noahs Arke is not called the figure of baptisme as these corrupters of Scripture tell us but baptisme sayth the Apostle is a like figure or antitype 1 Pet. 3.21 So that the saving by water of eight then in the Arke was a type or figure and the saving of a few now by water in baptisme is an antitype or like figure both of them figuring salvation by the death of Christ Fourthly Neither doe these men set downe the reason fully and rightly why they are sayd to be baptized namely because the cloud and sea was their safetie as Noahs Arke was for though it may in some sense be granted that these were their safetie as baptisme is our safetie for it is said to save us 1 Pet. 3.21 yet properly they are sayd to be baptized in the cloud and sea because they were in them sacramentally washed from their sinnes and planted together in the likenesse of his death buriall and resurrection as wee are now by baptisme Rom. 6.3 4 5. The cloud served them for three uses 1. To protect and keep them safe Isa 4.5.6 2. To guide them in the way that they should goe Numb 9.17 c. Exod. 14.21 And these two were ordinary 3. To baptize them by powring downe water and this was extraordinary and but one time in the red Sea for ought wee finde And in this respect Paul sayth they were baptized in it Fifthly Their last speech of injoyning infants to suffer persecution as well as to baptize them is spoken with a wry mouth for as we injoyne not Infants to be baptized though we baptize them so can wee not enjoyne them to suffer persecution But this wee say and know as Infants are baptized into Christ so oftentimes they suffer persecution for Christ being with their parents afflicted imprisoned banished c. yea and bereaved of life it selfe so that they have even the baptisme of bloud or martyrdome also Thus you may see that there hath been long agoe a large and sufficient Answer made unto this Answer of the Anabaptists of old which is even one and the same with yours Thus much for reply to your Answer to the third objection As touching the fourth fifth objection the charitable construction being set aside I except against them both but especially the fourth that the outward baptisme is not needful to him that hath the * Pag. 17. lin 8. other And so for the fifth objection * Lin. 19. which is that Baptisme is nothing though it may beare a charitable construction yet if any conceive Baptisme is nothing as it is an ordinance of God they erre Neither doe I know any one amongst all the Seperation that holdeth Baptisme to be nothing but they reverence it as an ordinance of God It is true as you have granted in answering hereof * Lin. 26. Christian Reader See Mr. Henry Barow one of the three Martyrs in Q Elizabeths time his discovery of the false Church for there he treateth on this particular poynt at large and reproveth the scholasticall partie who did labour to perswade the Queen that seeing her Majestie had the inward Baptisme and had done many works of mercy and pietâ—e that therfore shee might rest her selfe satisfied whether shee had the outward baptisme or no On the other hand the Romanistâ— said that shee must count the Church of Rome a true Church or else denie her Baptisme But these were deceived and did not consider how that Gods ordinance is his ordinance though in the depth of Apostacie See the Ans to your fiâ—st Treatise That in some sence Baptisme is nothing even no more was Circumcision in former time yet as it was Gods holy ordinance it was to be regarded as a thing of great concernment and was not worne out then though in the middest of Antichristianisme or Apostasie So Baptisme now being no lesse durable though more generall then Circumcision was nor lesse honourable it ought not to be rejected but regarded and the reverent receivers of it respected and the contemners of it reproved and condemned Take notice heer how that in pursuing after these scattering Objections * In Pag. 14 15. 17. you have strangely varied from the poynt concerning Infants and so have shot at rovers Therefore I would have you for order sake to observe what hath been set downe by me to prove the lawfulnesse of the Baptisme of holy Infants against all your objections which you have set downe unto this period all which I leave to the consideration of you and the observation others and so proceed to answer the next which followeth BVt say you * Pag. 18. at lin 2. their fifth and maine Argument is yet behinde from the Covenant which God made with
is of force against the infants of beleevers to prove them also not to be in the new Covenant nor to be baptized But this is very weak against such parents Therefore it is of no force against their infants Seeing it is so you may plainly perceive that I have just ground to except against your conclusiō Pag. 4 l. 22 23 that because all the children of beleevers are not saved Therefore the infants of beleevers are not in the Covenant now on foot nor ought to be baptized Such an excuse as this might as well have served informer time for the children of Israel that they might not onely have neglected Circumcision but also all other Ordinances But such arguing bringeth large liberty tending to Athisme destruction and ruination of the foundation of Christian Religion Rom. 3.1 2 3 4. But what saith Paul when he declareth that the Jewes had the Oracles of God committed unto them what if some did not believe shall their unbeliefe make the faith of God of none effect God forbid yea let God be true and every man a lyar c. The Apostasie of Cain could not hurt Adam nor hinder Abel from eternall life For though Cain and his seed perished yet God was still good unto his Church unto Israel to those that were of an upright heart Furthermore for to maintain errour you bring errour false things to prove a falshood like two false witnesses that stand one for another for to prove your own false affirmation that infants are not in the Covenant outwardly nor have that holinesse whereby to be admitted now to the outward ordinance of baptisme as infants were then to Circumcision in the time of the Law and state of the Jews You say That the state or Church of the Jews were under the old Covenant and Law Pag. 4. l. 29. and stood not by faith and circumcision of the heart as this Church of the Gospel doth but stood meerly upon nature and circumcision of the flesh and accordingly had their outward and fiderall holinesse and outward cleansings all which are abolished with that state and no such holinesse or distinction is now between any persons in the world as you say shall be further declared by and by To which I answer That the Church of the Jews were in the old Covenant and Law is true But that they stood not by faith and circumcision of the heart as this Church of the Gospel doth but stood meerly upon nature and circumcision of the flesh is not true for the Church of the Jewes had the new covenant * Mr. Spilsbery granteth the Covenant made with Abraham and the Covenant now to be the same in substance See his treatise pag. 8 line 10. that was confirmed to Abraham * Gen. 17. Gal. 3.16 17. before of God in Christ which covenant the Law which was foure hundred and thirty yeares after could not disanull that it should make the promise of none effect* The Jewes were Gods holy speciall a Deut. 7.6 and peculiar b 26.18.19 people who were not constituted of a visible mixt multitude of prophane persons and holy beleevers and Infidels good and bad together c 29.18 32.9.12 Esay 5.1 2. but were a people called d 41.1 2. 43.1.7 Mat. 12.2.13 and separated e Ps 135.4 148.14 125.2 Deut. 33.29 14.1 2 from other Nations God brought them out of Egypt f Ex. 12.41.42 and baptized them in the cloud and in the sea g 1 Cor. 10.1 2 and went before them by day in a pillar of cloud and by night in a pillar of fire h Ex. 13.21 22 and at the great and victorious deliverance which they had over the Egyptians they beleeved his Words and sang his praise i Ex 15.1 Ps 106.12 then God led them through the wildernesse k Ex. 15.22 and made the bitter waters sweet for them l ver 25. that they might trust in him who healed them m v. 26. and he fed them with Manna which neither they nor their fathers knew to the intent that they might know that man could not live by bread only but by every word of God n Deut. 8.3 and he made the flinty rock a fountain of waters o Ps 114.8 Num. 20.8.11 that they thereby might quench their thirst Yea The Lord came from mount Synay and rose up from Seir unto them he shined forth from mount Paran and he came with ten thousands of his Saints from his right hand went a fiery Law yea he loved the people p Deut 33.2 3 they were therefore to trust stedfastly in God the sword of their excellencie q ver 29. and to look continually for eternall life of him and cleave unto him r 10.20 who was their life and the length of their dayes ſ 30.19 20. whom they were commanded to fear and to love and to serve with all their heart and with all their soule t Deut. 10.12 so the Lord was with them they with him and as he had commanded them so they were still to be a holy people to the Lord their God even as he was holy u Levit. 11.44 19.2 20.7 By all which it appeares that there was a manifest difference put between them and the prophane of the world as is between Christ and Antichrist In brief as their Church was the Church of Christ a See Cant. and the Covenant b Rev. 21.3 which they had c Gal. 3.16 17. the Covenant of Christ so the Commandement d Deut. 30.11.12 13 14. Rom. 10.6 7 8 9 10. or word which was not hid from them was the Gospel which they were not to enquire after as though it were some strange thing afar off or beyond the seas c. for it was nigh unto them in their mouth and in their heart that they might doe it even the Gospel of Christ the same word of faith which Paul preached yea further they had not onely the Gospel of Christ but Christ himselfe his presence in a speciall manner amongst them though he were not then manifested in the flesh Esay 63 9. Wherefore I would have you to consider and revoke those rash speeches that this heavenly society and blessed fraternity stood not by faith but meerly upon nature and circumcision of the flesh It is an infidelious opinion to judge them to be Infidels in the Jewes state whom God did so call and separate which had his Oracles and Ordinances whom he called his holy people his chosen e Deut. 10.15 and peculiar people f Cap. 14.2 his beloved ones g Cap 7.7.8 to whose seed he promised life as to themselves h Cap. 30.19.20 whose hearts he promised to circumcise as also the hearts of their seed i Deut 30.6 as he hath promised to his people in the last dayes which thing
the distillation of the spirit of giddinesse into the hearts of their hearers that they walke indeed as you speak * Lin. 33. in a circular Maze And so by confounding Law and Gospel have laboured to bring you or rather detaine you in bondage to sinne See A. R. pag. 26. at lin 10. Next You would make us beleeve that you desire that the doctrine of free grace by Jesus Christ might be set forth distinctly in its native luster and the spiritualitie thereof in its fulnesse of beautie and glory clearly layd open Which is indeed a thing to be desired both in the continuance and encrease thereof But alas little doe you thinke as I in charitie judge how all your labour in this Treatise tendeth to the darkening obscuring eclipsing restraining and limitting of the doctrine of free grace by Jesus Christ the distinct displaying of whose native luster though it be never so often done or the spiritualitie thereof in its fulnesse of beautie and glory never so clearly layd open before you yet you cannot see it clearly indeed so long as you thus hudwinke the eyes of your charitie and present the blessed babes of beleeving parents unto you and your selfe unto them in such beastly shapes as you have don throughout your discourse coÌ„cerning them You talk freely of free grace as if it were excellent in your eyes and that you desire to be satisfied with the fulnes of the beautie thereof But in the mean while you would not have us thinke that any part thereof belongeth to the holy infants But surely as I sayd before * See before in this Treatise pag. 82. it is well they are not at your finding for if they were it seemeth that you would Dives-like not admit them the least crum which falleth from your Table But our sweet Saviour Jesus Christ who was once an infant and is and alwayes was the onely begotten Sonne of God full of grace and truth hath free grace enough in store for them and hath displayed the same excellently in its native luster as is frequently manifested in the Scripture of God Which thing no doubt you will perceive when once God openeth your eyes to see how the covenant of mercy is made with beleeving parents and their seed that he will be their God and will accept of them in Christ binding them to do nothing above their abilitie And this free grace of God ariseth from his loving kindnesse or good will which he hath unto them and alwayes had which kinde mind moved him to look upon them with the eye of pittie and so to take such his chosen ones to himselfe And this grace may well be said to be free and why Because it proceedeth not from workes but from the love of God in Christ Jesus The love which is in God is that which moveth God who is love to love Because He loved thy fathers Deut. 4.37 Gen. 17.7 8. therefore He chose their seed So the covenant of free grace runs thus I will be the God of thee and of thy seed after thee And he bindeth the holy infants to no action or any thing which they cannot doe but giveth them the true blessednesse without works And therefore though you talke never so long of free grace and tosse it never so often in your mouth yet it is no freedome for you but bondage unto you so long as you doe by with-standing holy infants as it were snatch their bread out of their mouths The ground whereof is your unbeliefe because you perswade your selfe that the holy infants are not visibly in the state of salvation till they actually and verbally expresse faith As if the beleevers infants dying in their infancie were not saved by Christs righteousnesse imputed unto them without workes And your own errours you mention which like hypocrites twinnes doe smile and weep stand and fall together may be justly fathered upon those who bâ—râ—e out the infants from the said priviledges which Christ hath bequeathed unto them as they are selected unto him As for the gay Clergie which you mention Pag. 25. meaning those of the Church of England as I suppose which you now run upon as you did at the latter end of your first book though it be to little purpose for as much as it doth not concerne our poynt in hand yet I will tell you what I know and have found by experience that they are faine to betake themselves to Anabaptisticall Arguments both for the maintenance of their state and retaining of evill persons therein which indeed ariseth from their grosse mistake of the Historie of the Scripture thinking as you doe that the Church of the Jewes was constituted meerly upon nature and carnalitie and the like stuffe never considering that God from the beginning of the world alwayes constituted his Church onely of such persons who in all visible account were faithfull and holy And still provided a way and means to purge the Church from corruptions Moreover The parties formerly specified in maintenance of their state have also a fond erronious conceipt that because they have some of Gods ordinances therefore they are a true Church not considering that Gods ordinances may be in a false state as in Jeroboams whorish Church as hath been observed formerly ** See the Answer to A. R. first part Hereupon they are forceably driven either to confesse the Church of Rome to be a true Church or else to maintaine that an unbaptizâ—d person may baptize Now if they stand to denie the baptisme in the Church of Rome they denie their owne Baptisme which they received successively from thence which if they doe as upon your grounds they are driven thereunto then how doe you thinke they will raise baptisme except an unbaptized person baptize another Thus you may see into what streits they wrap and ensnare themselves in taking up such groundlesse Arguments as you bring and all to justifie themselves in their own way and to avoyd and withstand the way of Seperation which is the onely way of God Whereas you bring in the disorders in worship government which you say the Papists have brought in I tell you this is a varying from the matter in hand yet I say we ought to learne by the same to avoyd them and all those who seek to ruinate the foundation of Christian Religion by casting darke shadowes upon the heavenly beautiâ— and glorious excellencie of Christs Kingly Priestly and Propheticall office and eclipse his Mediatorship as if it were lesse then it was before he was manifested in the flesh As if he who hath all power both in heaven and in earth hath not given so much authoritie as generally and universally to make Disciples and baptize them as the Saints of old had to make Disciples and circumcise them Surely seeing Christ is as faithfull in his house as Moses As the Gospel of Christ in former time was so effectuall and powerfull as to cause Proselytes and
A CHRISTIAN PLEA FOR INFANTS BAPTISME OR A CONFVTATION OF some things written by A. R. in his Treatise entituled The second part of the vanitie and Childishnesse of Infants BAPTISME In the Answer whereof The lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme is defended and the Arguments against it disproved by sufficient grounds and forcible reasons drawn from the sweet fountains of holy Scripture S. C. Deut. 4.37 Because he loved thy fathers therefore he chose their seed Jer. 30.20 Their Children also shall be as aforetime Isa 65.23 They shall not labour in vaine nor bring forth in feare for they are the seed of the Blessed of the Lord and their off-spring with them Acts 2.39 The promise is unto you and to your Children and to all that are a far off even as many as the Lord our God shall call LONDON Printed by T. P. and M. S. and are to be sold by Ben. Allen in Popes-head-Alley 1643. A CONFVTATION OF SOME things written by A. R. in hâ—s Treatise intituled The second part of the vanitie and Childishnesse of Infants Baptisme In the Answer whereof The lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme is defended and the Arguments against it disproved by sufficient grounds and forcible reasons drawn from the sweet fountains of holy Scripture Mr. ARS YOur former Treatise intituled The vanitie of Childish Baptisme being answered I according to my promise made unto you in that answer * Pag. 28. lin 31 32. doe now proceed to answer this your other Treatise which you have intituled The second part of the vanitie and Childishnes of Infants Baptisme And I conceive it is the Treatise whereof you spake in your vanitie of Childish Baptisme * Pag. 29. lin 30 31 32. wherein you say that the grounds which Seperates and some others urge for the baptizing of Infants should be answered And here in the beginning of this your second part you say * Pag. 1. Having formerly treated of the Baptisme of the nationall Church you have now thought it meet likewise to consider the grounds upon which the seperated and some other Churches doe baptize their Infants which you say are from severall places of Scripture But in answer to your first Treatise pag. 27. line 26 27 28 29. I there tell you that these some others besides Seperates I know not who they are and if they are not seperated from the unclean thing they are still uncleane And though such may bring good grounds for baptizing of Infants from severall places of Scripture yet they cannot bring good grounds to warrant any Churches to baptize that are not seperated from Idolatry and doe not cleave unto Christ in puritie in his visible way of worship But those that are so seperated indeed may very justly alledge Scripture to justifie what they do in things of this nature for of all Churches and people in the world they are the most holy and sincere yea and cleave closest to the Rule And they in baptizing their Infants do that whereunto they are bound by the Covenant which both they and their holy seed are under Whereas you say the grounds are from severall places of Scripture especially these five which you promise to examine in order I answer I know not what five you meane for you have not so plainly distinguished them whereby wee may know how in your book to find them But it may be you have not done it of set purpose but through some over-sight for in pag. 3. li. 16. you speak of a second argument from places and in pag 3. lin 39. you speak of a third argument from 1 Cor. 7.14 The fourth in pag. 12. lin 40. is expressed to be the fourth Scripture As in pag. 1. Act. 2.39 is declared to be the first But in pag. 18. lin 2. you speake of a fifth argument Now by this your disorderly manner of proceeding it appeares that you doe not performe what you promised in pag. 1. where you say the grounds are from severall places of Scripture especially the five which you there promise to examine in order THe first you say is that in Act. 2.39 The promise is to you and your children But this Text you say is to no purpose in the poynt To which I reply that this your bare affirmation will not beare the least weight in the ballance of Gods Sanctuary for this promise spoken of by Peter is the promise of eternall life and all those who are heires of this promise are the right Subjects of Baptisme * Act. 10.47 But the Infants of beleevers are heires of this promise for so the tener of the whole Scripture declareth There is no place of Scripture which describeth the blessednesse of the parents but it also includeth their Infants yea in this place Act. 2.39 where beleevers children are mentioned their Infants are meant As shall be more clearly proved in answer to your next objections following And this being prooved it followeth that they are the right subjects of Baptisme But you say it is not there said of Infants but to your Children not promises but promise To which I reply that this your Answer is of no weight for Infants are Children as well being young as old and this great promise of God includeth promises for though Gods great promise in generall be but one yet in particular it is divers But seeing you say it is worthy enquiry to know what is meant by you and your Children I will by Gods assistance prove unto you that it is meant of beleevers and their Infants Consider therefore that the Apostle doth not onely distinguish them from their parents by the title Children and also from those afar off But he likewise declareth them to be those children to whom the promise appertaineth as well as to the parents themselves which doth plainly shew that it ought not to be understood as if it were spoken of all their Children both godly and wicked but of all those Children who doe not degenerate from the steps of their holy parents which sinne of Apostacie or degeneration you cannot justly lay to the charge of beleevers Infants who never sinned actually * Mr. Spilsbury sayth the word coÌ„demns none but with respect to actuall sinne See his Treat of Bap. pag. 11 lin 30. It is a sure truth that the sinnes of the parents being forgiven the Lord will not impute the same unto their Infants * Sinne remitted is not imputed unlesse it be acted again Originall sinne I say taketh no more hold on the Infants then on their parents and touching actuall sinne they are as cleare as their parents * Exod. 20.6 But the like cannot be said of all their children of ripe yeares * Ezek. 18.10 11 12 13. Wherefore it plainly appeareth that the promise is made generally to all the infants of the faithfull howbeit not to all their Children but onely to such as abide in the steps of their righteous parents amongst which holy children the infants of beleeving parents
this see his treatise of bapt p. 11. and having their spirituall priviledges as they have had heretofore Consider throughly the words of Peter how at the very preaching the Gospel of Repentance to the parents in the application thereof he did not barre out but expresly mentioneth their children and if wee doe but seriously weigh the Text and compare it with other places of Scripture which set forth the blessednes of the children with the parents we may well conceive that it is meant of holy infants as hath been formerly observed And as I plead for none to be baptized before they doe beleeve so I plead for none to have the Gospel applyed unto them before they have faith by imputation and that is to be judged by some visible rule out of Gods Word But the infants of beleevers have faith by imputatioÌ„ as is proved before therefore in this consideration they are beleevers holy and spirituall a 1 Cor. 7.14 and therefore the Gospel may be lawfully applyed unto them b Mar. 10 13 16. Mat. 19.13 14 15. Luk. 18.15 16 17 See Luk. 1.76 and What letteth water that these may not be baptized which have received the holy Spirit as well as wee c Acts 10.47 As for actuall profession or verball demonstration of faith God hath not required the children of beleevers to performe in their owne persons in the time of their infancie which thing though they are not able to doe yet they are in the faith of Christ and shall certainly be saved though they die in their infancie for God will be no more wanting unto them then to their parents d Isa 22.24 Heb. 13.8 It is to be minded that God baptizing e 1 Cor. 10.1 2 many families f Ex. 12.21.37.41 Ps 77.17 19 20 did not exempt such children from the parents but baptized those persons that passed through the Sea both men women and children young and old And so in the middest of their afflictions by this Oracle gave these faithfull g Heb. 11.29 persons a glimpse of that which should be in the dayes of the Messias where one element and passive ordinance should be generall for all his precious Saints both young and old So the Apostles baptizing many families did not omit their infants neither can wee finde in all the New Testament that ever the infants of the faithfull are exempted in expresse words nor can it be gathered by necessary consequence The Apostle Peter maketh the Baptisme in the Arke equivolent with our Baptisme now a 1 Pet 3.20 21. And Paul declared that he would not have the beleeving Corinthians ignorant * 1 Cor. 10.1 2 that God baptized his Church then which consisted of many families in which there were many infants who were the approoved subjects of Circumcision b Exod. 12.48 Jos 5.2 5 7. and of that Baptisme then And therfore Baptisme now being a generall ordinance yea and alwayes more generall in the administration then Circumcision ever was yea and it being given to all the visible members of Christs body c Mat. 28.19 Mar. 16.16 amongst whom the infants of beleeving parents are no small number d Zach. 8.5 Luke 18.15 16 17. Isa 22.24 they ought to be baptized both male and female thereby to set forth the excellent benefits which they have by Christ A. R. A Third argument of theirs say you is from 1 Cor. 7.14 where it is said Else were your Children uncleane but now are they holy Pag. 3. l. 39 to pag. 4. l. 3. Whence you say they thus reason If the Children of beleeving parents be holy that is to say in the new Covenant then they may have the seales of the Covenant and be baptized To which I adde this argument both for explanation and confirmation of the former All those persons whom wee ought to judge to have the invisible Seale even the holy Spirit of promise Eph. 1.13 ought to be esteemed spiritually holy and in the new Covenant and ought to be baptized * Act. 10.47 Mat. 28.18 19 Mar. 16.15 16 Act. 10.47 But the infants of one or both beleeving parents ought to be esteemed to have the invisible Seale even the holy Spirit of promise * 1 Cor. 7.13 14. Exod. 12.48 Luke 18.15 16 17. John 3.5 A. R. 1 Cor. 7.13 14. Therefore the infants of one or both beleeving parents ought to be judged spiritually holy and in the new Covenant and ought to be baptized Your Reasons that they are not in the new Covenant are * Pag. 4. l. 22 23. Pag 4 l. 3 4 5. to l. 13. First Because there is now but one Covenant on foot which is a covenant of grace and salvation Secondly Because there is but one manner of entering and being in that Covenant Thirdly That there is but one holinesse now acceptable with God which is inward spirituall c. To which I answer that the like you may say of the members of the visible Church which doe actually and verbally professe faith As if you should say thus unto them There is but one new Covenant now on foot therefore you beleevers are not in it This reason is threed-bare Secondly There is but one manner of entering and being in that Covenant therefore you are not of that Covenant This is as poor as the other Thirdly Because there is no holinesse accepted with God but that which is inward spirituall and in truth c. Therefore you beleevers are not in the new Covenant nor ought to be baptized Is not this mad kind of reasoning But to performe that which you promised you should have proved that the infants of beleevers are not spiritually holy nor never did or can enter in the new covenant and then I would have said you had done somewhat like to that you tooke upon you to doe but instead of taking awaâ—â—he position that infants are holy and in the new covenant you tell us that there is but one covenant the manner of entering into it and abiding in it but one the holinesse now acceptable with God to be but one To which I further answer that though a person be not holy internally nor under the new covenant in Gods secret acount yet in our acount he is to be esteemed to be in the new covenant An hypocrite may make a glorious shew yea and seeme in outward acts of obedience to goe further then a true Saint 1 Cor. 13. He may give his goods to the poore and his body to be burned and yet want love Ob. But peradventure you will aske how then we must judge of an hypocrite An. Surely as the faithfull Disciples of Christ judged of Judas Judas had a Saint-ship an Apostle-ship and a Deacon-ship *** Mat. 10.1 2 4 16. Matk 3.14.19 6.7 12 13. Luke 9.1.10 Iohn 12.4.5 6 13.29 Symon Magus also had an outward Saint-ship * Act. 8.12.13 upon him An hypocrite or saint outwardly I
say must be judged to be as a true Saint is till he be discovered to us for though God know the heart yet wee doe not though he see invisibly we cannot We must judge of invisible things by visible demonstrations Some men may creep in and make a faire shew outwardly for a while yea and a great while and yet be hypocrites but tell they are discovered to be evill what man can poynt them out and say from his own knowledge that they are not under the new covenant A persoÌ„ that offers to joyn himself to a particular Church of Christ and not only by his verball confession but by his life and conversation apeareth unto them to be an out-side Christian they knowing nothing by him but good if they refuse him it is their sinne though all which he doth outwardly is fained A humane creature though he have the wisdom knowledg of Angels yet can he not know what is in man none I say knoweth this but only the man Christ wherefore it is apparent that though none are by us to be esteemed spiritually holy but those that are outwardly in the same new covenant in which the visible Church is yet all the members therein ought so to be estemed till they are seen to degenerate And moreover I would have you to know that God doth not only accept of our inward performances but of our very words yea of all externall holy performances in his worship and service if they be done according to his will so David saith Lâ—â— the words of my mouth and the meditations of my heart be acceptable in thy sight * Psal 19.14 So that though all our worship and service unto God ought to be spirituall and done in spirit and in truth yet God hath not bound us to doe it only internally Holinesse both inward and outward is accepted of God and not externally also yea for as much as he hath made us bodies as well as soules and spirits therefore he doth require outward performances of us as well as inward * Mat. 28.20 Rev. 1.3.11 Zach. 14.16 17 18 19. Luke 22.19 20 but when his saints are not capable God then doth accept of them neverthelesse and imputeth Christ righteousnesse unto them notwithstanding their naturall weaknesse Let them while they are capable keep themselves unsported and doe that which God requireth and then when they are no more capable to know or do any spirituall action they are still not only knowne of God 1 Cor. 5.3 6.1 2 3 4 5 20. 16.1.2 Act. 1.26 2.42 Iam 2.18 but beloved of Christ and sanctified by the holy Sprit for though they cannot apprehend Gods working in them yet God can tell how he worketh in them and saveth them by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse * Ps 3 2.2 Rom. 4.6 And after this manner doth God worke in the Infants of beleevers So long as they are not capable he doth not require them to act but to suffer as holy infants in former time suffered not only the administration of his passive ordinance * Gen. 17.14 23 Ios 5.3.7.8 of circomcision but also death * Ex. 1.22 Act. 7.19 1 Sam. 22.19 A. R. Pag. 4. l. 13. to l. 24. it selfe for his sake from the hands of Gods enimies But your inference from your foregoing reasons is That if beleevers childeren be in the covenant and have this true holinesse then all the childeren of beleeving parents must be saved as well old childeren as young for age doth not make them cease from being their childeren But all the childeren of beleevers are not saved no not of faithfull Abraham himselfe according to that known sentence of the Prophet Isaiah 10.21 Repeated by Saint Paul Romans 9.27 Though the number of the childeren of Israel be as the sand of the sea yet but a remnant of them shall be saved Therefore the childeren of beleevers are not in the covenant now on foot nor ought to be baptized To which I Ans That beleevers children are in the covenant is true but that all the childeren of all beleevers are in the covenant is not true but all their holy infants are and ought so to be judged accounted euen in the state of salvation as wel as the greatest verball professors of the faith of Christ and all these infants of beleeving parents that live till they come to yeares of discretion are still to be acounted holy and spirituall except they apostate Now though the Scripture declareth that a remnant shall be saved yet we are directed by the rule of Gods Word to judge that beleeving parents and their seed that doe not degenerate are of this remnant But the childeren of beleevers in their infancie have not power actually to degenerate from the righteous steps of their holy parents But ould childeren may possibly So Ishmael when he was an infant was not a mocker neither was Cain in his infancie a murtherer but when they came to yeares and acted these wickednesses they were for the same cast out the one from communion with the familie of Adam * Gen. 4.11.14.16 the other from the familie of Abraham * Gen. 21.9.10 And as you reason here against beleevers infants being in the new Covenant because you know not absolutely whether they shall be saved So you may reason against the parents themselves though they are members of the visible Church and also as well plead against every verball professor that is a visible member of the same body Thus All you which seem to be beleevers are a people which have indeed taken upon you the profession of the great name of God and have given up your selves unto him to walke in all his wayes and say you have taken hold of Gods Covenant and have covenanted together to become an entire body City House Temple Garden Vineyard c. unto God whom you suppose to be your builder and planter c. So you thinke your selves to be his holy people his bride by marriage his peculiar treasure in covenant with him c But alas you are much deceived you thinke your selves to be in a holy and happie estate in Covenant with God and that you have right to his Ordinances but it is not so For then it will follow That if you beleevers members of this visible Church be in the Covenant and have this true holinesse then every member of you must be saved as well old as young c. But all the members of the visible Church are not saved no not of the Christian Church in the Apostles time for divers of them perished as Judas Iscareot one of the Lambs 12 Apostles and Simon Magus Therfore though you profess faith you are not in the Covenant now on foot nor ought to be baptised If this be a good and sufficient ground or reason to prove the parents not to be in the new Covenant nor to be baptized then the same reason
of Promise * Eph. 2.12 But the Infants of beleevers who were members of the Church of the Jewes were not aliens from the Common wealth of Israel * Gen. 17.7 Deut. 29.10 11 12 13 14 15.18 Exod. 12.48 49. nor without hope nor without God in the world Therefore such holy Infants were not then without Christ neither were they strangers from the covenants of promise Now for as much as the Infants of beleevers were not without Christ nor aliens from the Common wealth of Israel nor strangers from the Covenants of promise nor without hope nor without God in the world They were such as were made nigh by the bloud of Christ See Eph 2.13 whose bloud was then to be shed and is powred out for them and therefore we may safely conclude that the holy infants are not loosers by his coming And therefore seeing the New Covenant is not abolished it evidently appeareth that the Infants of beleevers now are in the new Covenant because the Infants of beleevers were in the same New Covenant before And this agreeth with the words of the Apostle Paul 1 Cor. 7.14 Else were your children uncleane but now are they holy for the Apostle there speaketh to beleevers and of a holinesse in relation to their faith and to the covenant they were in And though you said the old Covenant is abolished yet you grant that the New covenant is not abolished but remaineth Wherefore you must of necessitie be driven to grant also that the infants of beleevers are in the new Covenant because they were of it before and the New covenant remaineth permanent Thus having taken away the foundation of your Arguments which you brought against holy Infants being in the Covenant you may justly expect that all which is builded upon the same sandy foundation will fall to the ground Pag. 4. li. 37. Your next words are these which follow There being the new covenant now on foote which is a covenant of grace and salvation and which brings certaine salvation to all those that rightly enter into it and which is onely by faith Hence it is said Act. 2.47 That the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved Ans That the new Covenant is now on foot and that it is the covenant of grace and salvation and brings it to all those which rightly enter into it in deed and in truth is not by me denied And that the enterance is onely by faith is very true But mind this that there is an externall right and an internall right We finite creatures must judge of the trâ—e by the fruit a Mat. 12.33 Luke 6.44 of the faith by the workes b Jam. 2.18 19 Judas had no internall right for he was a devill c Joh. 6.70 71 inwardly yet he had an externall right for he was a Saint outwardly d Act. 1.17 But so long as he was not known to be a wicked man but still made a great outward shew of holinesse they were to judge him righteous But when he manifested evill fruits of treachery and hypocrisie then they were to alter their former charitable opinion of him And though he had not onely an outward Saintship but also an Apostle-ship and a Deaconship before yet when he Apostated that man who was before to be accounted a Saint and an Angel on earth was afterward to be esteemed as a devill And so the like may be said concerning other wicked men Psal 41.9 10. Psal 69.25 26 27 28. Set thou in office over him the wicked one saith holy David * Psal 109.6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20. and let the Adversary stand at his right hand When he shall be judged let him be condemned and let his prayer become sinne Let his dayes be few and another take his office Act. 1.20 Let his children be fatherlesse and his wife a widow Let his children be continually vagabonds and begge Let them seeke their bread also out of their desolate places Let the extortioner catch all that he hath and let the stranger spoyle his labour Let there be none to extend mercy unto him neither let there be any to favour his fatherlesse-children Let his posteritie be appointed to cutting off in the generation next after let his name be wiped out Let the iniquitie of his fathers be remembred of Jehovah and let not the sinne of his mother be wiped out Let them be before Jehovah continually that he may cut off the memorie of them from the earth c. Now that the Lord added to his Church daily such as should be saved is certaine but here we are to note that this Church in Jerusalem was a visible particular Church And that as far as men could judge all those were to be saved that in outward appearance were rightly added to the same or to any other particular Church of the same constitution And though the Lord added to his Church daily such as should be saved yet wee are not to determine that all that joyned to a particular Church were saved yea though they were added rightly according to order in an externall way Judas was of the visible Church yea of that Church whereof these were members and yet wee will not say that he is saved Persons may be saved which are of no visible particular Church And persons may be of a true visible particular Church of Christ and yet Apostate and not be saved any more then Judas who fell finally as other reprobates doe though never so eminent in the Church Howbeit we will not say that any fall away from the grace of Gods secret election but from an outward sanctification it is possible that elected persons may for a time fall yet not without great sinne no more then the temporary falling away of the incestuous person in the Church of Corinth and others also which the Scripture maketh mention of who were the deare Saints of God yet for a time fell from their stedfastnesse But now I will examine your reasons what they are whereby you say * Pag. 4. lin 41 Pag. 5. lin 1 2 That the holinesse of children here is not meant of any holinesse in relation to any Church-covenant First say you * Pag. 5. lin 3. to lin 9. That which is an effect of regeneration is not brought to passe by generation though the parents be holy but to be of the covenant or kingdome is the proper effect of regeneration Joh. 3.3 without which none can see it much lesse be of it or enter into it therefore it cannot be brought to passe by generation though the parents are holy Ans That regeneration is brought to passe by generation I will not affirme The infants of beleevers are regenerated before they are borne this you cannot justly deny for Jeremie and John Baptist were sanctified in the wombe and the priviledges of beleevers are alike precious Not that it commeth by the
one with them yea they had made themselves one with the abhominable Nations as appeareth by Ezra 9.1 compared with Deut. 7.26 An accursed thing like the accursed thing And did not seperate themselves from the people of these Lands doing according to their abhominations And therefore there was a speciall cause why the children of those Idolaters in Ezra 10.3 should be put away They were not visibly holy the wives were not sanctified unto them to bring forth a visible holy seed The holy seed was mixed But the Apostle saith to the beleevers in 1 Cor. 7 13 14 15. That the unbeleeving husband is sanctified by the wife and the unbeleeving wife is sanctified by the husband Else were your children uncleane but now are they holy But if the unbeleeving depart let him depart A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases but God hath called us to peace Now wee are to take the holinesse and unholinesse to be a holinesse and unholinesse in reference to visibilitie for those that were holy visibly might be unholy invisibly and those that were unholy invisibly might be holy visibly But the Saints of God were not to judge any holy except they had cause so to doe and ground of perswasion arising from some visible demonstration either from God or from men according to the direction of the Word The visible holinesse of these holy children of beleevers here specified arose from their visible being in covenant from the sanctification of the unbeleeving yoak-fellows to their beleeving yoak-fellows The spirituall uncleannes or unholines which the unholy children had was in reference to visibilitie so when he speaketh of holy children proceeding frō a sanctified wife he hath reference to visibility the unbeleevers are sanctified to the beleevers els were the children unclean but now are they holy to wit in visibilitie for the ground of the childrens visible holinesse was first from the parents being visibly in covenant Secondly from the infants being his children against whom there was no exceptions they being conceived by such a wife who did not depart from him and therfore the children are visibly holy Thus when the Vines are visibly of the Vine of Sodome and of the feilds of Gomorrha the grapes are visibly the grapes of gall and their clusters are bitter * Deut. 32.32 but when the wife is visibly as a fruitfull Vine by the house-side of him that feareth the Lord the children are to be estemed as Olive plants ** Psa 128.3.4 A. R. Thirdly say you * Pag 5. lin 19. to lin 35. It appeares from the Jewish Church-state from whence this successive holinesse and beeing in the Covenant is concluded to come The Prosolyte that was to be brought in was to circumcise all his males Exod. 12.48 Where wee may conclude that his females were included in that time in the males there beeing say you no other ordinance of admission for them Whence you say it will follow that if the Jewes Church-state from whence you affirme this succession of beeing in the Covenant is derived doth not admit in any consideration of any lawfull beeing of parents the one a member of the Church the other not to produce a seed within the old Covenant that then such a thing under the new Covenant cannot be concluded to proceed from that rule but you affirme the former is true from the ground before layd and that therefore the later is also true and if not from that rule then from none But not from that by consequence of the former argument therefore from none Ans This is set downe obscurely You say * Lin. 19 20 21. It appeares from the Jewish state from whence this successive holinesse and beeing in the Covenant is concluded to come What successive holinesse and what beeing and what Covenant doe you here meane and who are they that make this conclusion It hath been proved before that the people of Israel had two Covenants * See before pag. 39. one established with Abraham * Gen 17. another long after at Mount Sinai * Gal. 3.17 But for Confirmation of your speech you say * Lin. 21 22 23. The Prosolyte that was to be brought in was to circumcise all his males Exod. 12.48 Where wee may conclude that his females were included in that time in the males there beeing say you no other ordinance of admission for them Ans You spake before of a successive holinesse But what holines was this which the Prosolytes had that were never on the Church before Was this a successive holinesse Surely this doth not import any other holinesse but what is by faith in Christ Wherefore you may see that you have not rightly applied this place of Scripture to prove your successive holines It was faith professed by the parent that brought in his seed with him it was not his beeing circumcised but his beliefe which was alwayes to goe before even as faith now is to goe before Baptisme and to be professed before a man or his seed is to be admitted to the ordinance of Baptisme Now the Prosolytes were to circumcise all their males But wee doe not reade that the Lord did command the Prosolites to put away their unbeleeving wives they being married unto them before even when they were Heathens but they might still retaine them and have children by them capable of the ordinance of Circumcision Whereas you speak of admission I thinke you meane admission to the Passeover for they made themselves one with the people of God by beleeving the promises of God which thing they were to doe before they were circumcised and circumcision was administred afterwards for the sealing and confirming of that faith before professed Now how you understand that the females were included in the males I know not Whether doe you meane in his male children or some other males If you say they were included in his male children Then I put the case that he had no males how then were his females included in the males that were not But your speech in charitie may have this construction That seeing the Lord did command the Prosolyte to circumcise his male children that very command did intimate that his female children were in the Covenant and according to their capabilitie to assent to Gods ordinance that it was good holy though they were not to receive it yet had a right to whatsoever came in stead thereof And this beeing not to be received by them actively it must needs be construed that they were implyed imputatively This then was a great priviledge for without this imputative holinesse they could not be numbered * Isa 4 3. among the living in Jerusalem but rather counted among the uncircumcised Philistians neither could they without this imputativenesse be admitted to receive the Lords Passeover * Exod. 12.43 44.47 which was a figure of our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ our Passeover which is sacrificed
and outward Baptisme to lay hands upon the rest of the holy institutions of God which properly and peculiarly are tyed to the Church And the Proselytes or beleeving Gentiles in the time of the Law before they were circumcised in the flesh they were to be circumcised in their hearts and before they did partake of the Passeover a figure of Christs body they and their holy seed were to be * Exod. 12.48 circumcised in flesh as well as in heart which participation in the Ordinances then was not to be limitted onely to the outward fleshly shadow no more then our partaking of Baptisme or the Lords Supper now ought to be onely limitted to the outward elements of Water Bread and Wine But as for the Infants of beleevers they ought to be judged to have the circumcision of Christ which is of the heart and Spirit as hath been formerly proved and shall be further shewed and therefore it is apparent that they are acceptable and may lawfully have the Ordinance of Baptisme imposed upon them for they being proved to be members of the visible Church of Christ it appeareth that they are to be judged in Christ and new creatures and that therefore the true holinesse accompanieth them And this being so what then will follow but that according to your owne confession they have right to Baptisme Further you say If it be objected that in respect of Justification Pag. 6. lin 3â— it availeth nothing but to Baptisme it may To this you Answer Lin. 37. to Pag. 7. That that which availeth to Justification and salvation doth according to the Rule onely availe to Baptisme for if thou beleevest with all thy heart thou art justified Act. 13.39 and shalt be saved Act. 16.31 and mayest be baptized upon the same and no other grounds Act. 8.37 To which I Answer As is the objection so is your answer without distinction for there is a difference between justification in the sight of God and justification in the sight of men By the Word persons must be justified and by the Word they must be condemned All those persons who are outwardly holy may be justified in the sight and apprehension of men ought to be baptized upon this ground though their heart knowne onely to God be like the heart of Simon Magus not upright in the sight of God But the holy Word of God is our Rule whereby we are to judge both beleevers and their infants now under the Gospel to be in covenant regenerated sanctified and adopted unto God the children of the promise in their infancie as the infants of beleevers were in former time And upon this very ground the Infants of beleevers now may lawfully be baptized as the infants of beleevers who were members of the Church in the time of the Law were lawfully circumcised To the objection * Pag. 7. lin 1 2. That all that were baptized by the Apostles themselves were not saved c. You answer And say * Lin. 3. to lin 15. you doe grant that all baptized by the Apostles were not saved and yet deny the consequence by distinguishing between the rule by which they are to be baptized which is infallible and the judgements of men who are failable and may be deceived in applying this rule but it follows not but that the rule being of God is still as infallible as God himselfe is for all that beleeve shall be saved which is true as God himselfe is true yet all who are judged by beleevers to beleeve doe not beleeve and therefore are not saved This failing then here is not in the rule but in their judgements who are but men and can judge onely in the outward appearance by their f uits yee shall know them Mat. 7.16 And cannot judge as God who onely knoweth the heart 1 Sam. 16.17 Jer 17.10 Ans Though this by construction may be without contradiction yet it may have a little further explanation thus That though the Saints doe judge by the infallible rule concerning persons yet if they alter their judgement according as the persons alter they sinnâ— not in the alteration of their opinion because the infallible rule doth still guide their judgements As for instance The infallible rule doth direct our judgements to looke upon all the members of the visible Church to be in the state of salvation So the Disciples of Christ esteemed highly of Judas as indeed the infallible rule directed them but when once he discovered himselfe not to be that in â—ffâ—ct which before he was in appearance then they were directed by the infallible rule to alter their judgements without faile Further in stead of these words Yet all who are judged by beleevers to beleeve To judge of persons according to the infallible Rule is righteous judgement in which the judgers must lay aside all partialitie doe not beleeve It may be construed thus That all who are rightly judged or ought to be judged by beleevers to beleeve doe not beleeve For there is a difference between what persons do and what they should or ought to doe And persons judging as they ought though their judgement is alterable yet as the Rule is not failable neither is their judgement by it sinfull but righteous holy just and lawfull judgement This being construed thus and so taken I assent thereunto But as for your following inference I abhorre and detest from my very soule Your words are these A. R. * Pag. 7. li. 15. to lin 25. But in the baptizing of infants the case is far otherwise yea quite contrary who will or can faile in judging an infant to be an infant the fayling therefore here is in the Rule it selfe and so the fault and sinne in the appointer of such a deceivable Rule This therefore cannot be of God who is truth it selfe but must be of man For let God be true and every man a lyar And when doth he shew himselfe more vainly to be so then when he goeth about to set his pâ—sts by Gods posts and when he teacheth for doctrines his owne vaine and lying traditions such as this is Ans Groundlesse positions and false inferences there from are frequent with you your words import that in the baptizing of infants because none can faile in judging an infant to be an infant that therefore the layling is in the Rule it selfe and therefore you conclude it cannot be of God but of man a vaine tradition The like might be sayd of the Circumcision of infants in the time of the Law that because they could not faile in their judgements in judging infants to be infants that therefore the circumcision of infants was not of God but of man a vaine tradition and the rule was not infallible But you may know that for beleevers to impose the signe * Gen. 17.11 and seal * Rom. 4.11 of the righteousnesse of faith upon their children in their infanciâ— was good lawfull warrantable *
that what hath bin spoken already in answer to your severall objections and what hath been also gathered from the word of truâ—h in vindication of this truth of the baptisme of holy Infants may be observed It hath been declared how the promise is made to all beleevers Infants as really as to themselves or any of their children * See before in Pag. 3. to Pag. 15. It hath been proved that the generall institution of Jesus Christ is no maner of way lâ—sse generall * Pag. 15. to pag. 24. then circumcision but more generall in respect of the parties upon whom it is to be administred It hath been minded * Pag. 24. to pag. 64. how that the Infants of beleevers were holy members of the visible Church in the time of the Law and that neither the cessation of the ceremonies of the old Law nor any thing else which can be alledged doth argue that they have not still the tâ—ue â—â—linesse which giveth them visible right to Baptisme But seeing the dispensation of Gods gifts and the distribution of his graces are multipâ—yed under the Gâ—spel wee are still to esteem the young Olive plaâ—ts of beleeving parentâ— to be holy as well as the stock or branches upon which they grow And it being so we may conclude that they have right to holy Baptisme as their holy parents have And to debar the holy infants of beleevers from Baptisme is to reject them and so in a manner it is a rejection of their holy parents a means of their discouragement a weakning of their faith a discomforting of their hearts yea and discouragement to others But Truth overcommeth all things it is great and will prevaile against all that oppose it Thus having answered directly to what hath been set downe by you I proceed to the next Your next words are these But now to the Question A. R. Pag. 9. lin 21. What is meant by the holinesse which children are sayd to have 1 Cor. 7.14 In answer whereto I shall shew onely what I conceive it to be and then leave it to the judgement of the wise Answer If you mean the holy children of beleeving parents spoken of 1 Cor. 7.14 Let us heare what you say I say then it is onely such a holinesse A. R. Lin. 25. as is opposite to some kinde of uncleannesse which I take to be this as if when they are sayd to be holy it is no more then to say they are not uncleane to wit no Bastards To which I answer That you are greatly mistaken herein There is no such restriction in the Scripture as you conceive and would gather from thence for it is apparent that when the Apostle sayth to Beleevers 1 Cor. 7.14 Else were your children uncleane he meaneth here such an uncleannesse 2 Cor. 6. which he speaketh of in 2 Cor. 6.17 Which uncleannesse the Saints are bidden not to touch I will dwell in them and walke in them Ver. 16. Ver. 17. Ver. 18. The Apostle speaketh to the same people useth the same Scripture-phrase in applying the precious promises And doth in no way exclude but include their posteritie For confirmation whereof see the practise of Peter in Act. 2.39 and I will be their God and they shall be my people Wherefore come out from amongst them and be yee separated sayth the Lord and touch not the uncleane thing And I will be a father unto you and yee shall be my sonnes and daughters sayth the Lord God Almightie Observe here how that this uncleannesse is directly opposed to the holinesse which those have who are in covenant with God who alwayes did put a difference between the holy and prophane between the infants of the world and the infants of the Church And so the Apostle speaking in the Scripture language calleth the children of Beleevers holy Else were your children uncleane saith he but now are they holy 1 Cor. 7.14 Else were your children bastards say you but now are they no bastards This you conceive is the meaning of that Scripture But you should minde that the Proselytes in the time of the Law and the beleeving parents in the time of the Gospel who were formerly unbeleevers Heb. 13.4 were not all bastards and legittimacie is not a thing peculiar to beleevers but unbeleevers may have it But when the Apostle speaketh of a holinesse which the children of beleevers have it is that which is peculiar unto the Saints of God and not common to Infidells who are without God in the world and not to be communicated with You should minde that the Apostle speaketh in the heavenly language of Canaan in the Scriptures ordinary phrase giving the beleevers infants such a stile which the holy Spirit of God hath given them according as it is plentifully manifested in the Scriptures of God and which he hath not given and granted unto unbeleevers infants There is no place of Scripture which declareth them to be holy Wherefore wee may conclude that there is a great deale of difference between the infants of beleevers and the infants of unbeleevers and that the uncleannesse of the one Rev. 22.11 1 Cor 6.14 is opposed to the holines of the other as darknesse is opposed unto light As Idolaters are sayd to be opposed to those that are seperated from them * Ver. 15 16 17 18. And so the Jewes seperated from Idolaters were all holy both young and old and Gods seperated peculiar people * Deut 29.10 14.1 2. The Lord was their God and they were his people and he dwelt in the middest of them * Levit. 26.11 12. and sanctified them unto himselfe * Exod. 31.13 Psal 135.4 and gave unto them his blessed Oracles * Rom. 3.2 and holy Ordinances yea and the Gentiles also who had like precious faith with the Jewes were then made partakers of the like precious priviledges with them which extended unto their infants * Exod. 12.48 as well as to the infants of the Jewes Therefore as the infants of the Jewes were holy so were the infants of the Proselytes or beleeâ—ing Gentiles And forasmuch as the distribution of Gods gifts under the Gospel are larger then they were under the Law the infants of beleevers now Ephe. 3.5 6. have the same spirituall priviledges as the infants of beleevers had thâ—n and have the same precious holinesse which is available to Bâ—ptisme and therefore we may conclude that when Christ came to die for their sinnes he came not to destroy their soulâ—s and so to râ—b them to pâ—yle them to make them spirituall bankâ—outs to take from them his righteouâ—ness and leave them to be clothed with their own righteousnes But surely wee may rather conclude that Christ as he was once himselfe an infant of a beleeving parâ—nt according to the flesh so he loveth the infants of beleevers Luk. 2.7.16 18.17 because they are Subjects of his kingdome And as he suffered for
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
he the same priviledges in respect of the new covenant as Abraham had I will not say that Abraham had the same outward temporall priviledges which Noah had for Noah was the father of all Nations according to the flesh though not the father of Caine or those before him neither will I say that Jacob or Isaac had the same outward temporall priviledges in every respect as Abraham had for Abraham was the father of the Ismaelites and Edomitâ—s after the flesh And yet this doth not prove that every beleever upon his beleeving doth become a father of the faithfull no more then Isaac who was a father of the faithfull as well as Abraham And seeing your demand * Lin. 35. Where any seed are if all be fathers is grounded upon an if or supposition that all are fathers let it be a supposition still and so upon this ground when you bring suppâ—sâ—tions without distinctions builded upon your own imaginationâ— and prosecuted with such groundlesse cavillations you may expect that your building will fall to the ground as this doth Lin. 36 37 38 39. To your affirmation That their seed and their seeds-seed are all members of the Church and to be accounted faithfull and so to be all fathers of the faithfull as well as Abraham from generation to generation to the worlds end I answer That the infants of the faithfull are all members of the Church and they are not to be accounted unfaithfull though they die in their infancie And seeing Gods kingdome belongeth unto them though they have no children â—or are fathers of the faithfull 〈◊〉 Abrahams was yet they have the same precious priviledges as Abrahams infants had So that they are to be esteemed now tâ— be the sons of God and yet it is not manifested whaâ— they shall be when their terrestriall bodies being made like the glorious body of their sweet Saviour shall 〈◊〉 celestially in the kingdome of Eterniâ—â—â— Next you would make us beleeve that you will expresse your selfe more plainly Lin. 40. and in the intrim you promise this truth That there is now no difference between any circumcision or uncircumcision Pag. 19. lin 1 2. Jew or Gentile bond or free male or female but all are one in Christ Jesus Gal. 3.28 And to this I answer that Gal. 3.28 doth not prove that you have performed what you promised and called a truth for as you have layd it downe it is an untruth namely that there is no difference between any Circumcision or uncircumcision c. In this you have done evill and in fathering it upon the Apostle Paul you have done worse for Paul is no patron of this opinion it was no part of his doctrine that there is no difference between any Circumcision or uncircumcision c. But he putteth a manifest difference between Circumcision of the heart and Circumcision of the flesh as also between Jew and Jew namely he that is a Jew outwardly onely Rom 2.28 29. and he that is a Jew inwardly as also he putteth a difference between Gentile and Gentile namely an unbeleeving Gentile and a beleeving Gentile So that Paul maketh the beleeving Gentiles and the beleeving Jewes all one in Christ and not beleevers and unbeleevers all one in Christ for he applieth his speech to the Saints onely So that it appeareth you have quitemistaken the Apostle yea there is no Scripture which will beare you out in this your absurd affirmation And now I will come to what you call your plaine expression which is that If every beleever by his beleeving doth become a father of the faithfull as well as Abraham A. R. Pag. 19. at lin 3. then it must be at the very instant of his beleeving that he doth become a father of the faithfull as well as Abraham and if so where then will be any children to all these fathers for none can be children before they be faithfull and also at the same instant cease to be chilâ—â—en and become fathers which implyes a flat contradiction and then how â—an Abraham himselfe be father of all beleevers Rom. 4.11 12. Answ Who doth affirme that every beleever doth immediately become a father That which you say implyeth a flat contradiction Pag 19. lin 7. I thinke is builded but upon a supposition of your owne Isaacs fatherhood made him not cease to be Abrahams child no more then our fatherhood doth make us cease to be his Children as if they should affirme that beleevers upon their beleeving at the same instant cease to be children and become fathers And then upon this you aske how Abraham himselfe can then be father of all beleevers Which interrogation of yours implyeth rather a flat contradiction of the Scriptures of God as if Abraham was not both sonne and father 1. A sonne of Noah he was as wee are the sonnes of Abraham by faith in Christ 2. A father of the faithfull he was also So that Abraham was both a sonne and a father You doe not explaine your selfe * Lin. 9. when you aske how Abraham himselfe then can be father of all beleevers for you may know that Noah was father of more beleevers then Abraham Noah himselfe was a beleever before Abraham And if Abraham was not his father then he was not a father of all beleevers who went before him But it may be you meane by all beleevers all that came after Abraham and walked in his steps for if you mean by all belâ—evers all that ever have been are or shall be then by your owne ground there were no beleevers before Abraham was a father or else you must confesse that Abraham was not a father of them But theâ—e were beleevers before Abraham was borne and bâ—leevers there were and are after him therefore Abraham was and is both a father of some beleevers and a childe of other beleevers as wee are the children of him if wee derogate not from his steps and are the fathers of our posteritie after the flesh who doe not aberate from Gods commandements Next you say Or how can the promise be sure unto all the seed if beleevers childrâ—n be the seed for they will not affirme that all their children are saved But this is affirmed of all the seed to whom the promise is made Rom. 4.16 Heb. 6.16 17. Ans You thinke if beleevers children be the seed the promise cannot be sure to all the seed and why is this your reason is for th y will affirme that all their children are not saved But if this be a sufficient reason to prove infants not to be in the promise then it will prove that their parents are not in the promise nor any other and so upon this ground you must baptize none at all nor judge any to be in the promise though they professe faith never so much sith that many who are members and make a verball profession and ought to be baptized by Christs rule fall back like Judas
seventh day so wee may take a ground from circumcision as it was a signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith whereby wee may be grounded in the administration of Baptisme And it is seriously to be minded that Baptisme is not larger then circumcision one way and lesser another way I mean lesse generall but in every respect it is as generall yea and in some respects more generall As generall because such males who had right to circumcision have right to Baptisme More generall because circumcision was to be administred onely upon the males but Baptisme upon males and females Now to make it more generall and lesse generall then circumcision is a contradiction and you by no meanes will allow of contradictions at least you pretend it If a Master promise to give his servants such or such a portion in brasse farthings and above his usuall or ordinary custome give it them in silver weight for weight It is all one He hath fulfilled his promise seeing he lesseneth not the summe and his servants if they are wise know what is good for themselves will not take exceptions therat or refuse the same Even so it is with God and his people The things which he giveth unto them are better and better not worse and worse larger and larger not lesser and lesser and therefore we may apply this to this particular case in hand and beleeve with David that God hath magnified his Word above all his Name Now though Baptisme be greater and more generall then circumcision in respect of the subjects upon whom the same is administred yet it doth not therefore argue that Baptisme is the seale of one covenant and circumcision the seale of another covenant The River of the Sanctuarie mentioned in Ezâ—chiel though it was not so deep in one place as in another place yet it was the same River And a small light and a greater light is all one and the same light though the greater seem in a manner to swallow up the lesser So a fire is still the same fire though it be increased as much again as it was fastening upon more fuell yet it is still one and the same though much greater then before So Baptisme although it be to be imposed upon the females and differeth in respect of the act from circumcision yet it is one and the same in effect a seale of one and the same covenant for the enlargement of a thing as I said before changeth not the nature of the thing enlarged but maketh it to include more then it did before Whereas it is said that Infants were then members of the Church a Pag 22 l. 12. and whereas it is demanded When they were cast out b Lin. 12. To this you answer c Lin. 13. That they were cast out when the Jewes Church-state Line 15. and old covenant was abrogated by the comming of Christ and preaching of the Gospel and planting other Churches farre different from that of the Jewes in many respects To this I reply That this which you have said proveth not at all that infants were cast out There is not one tittle of Scripture in all the New or Old Testament to this purpose that the infants of beleevers are or shall be cast out Bring me one Instance if you can of any one infant of a beleever that at Christs coming was to be cast out then you will say something for their exempting out of the covenant but as yet you have brought none neither can you finde any but many yea multitudes of Scripture there are to the contrary both in the new and old Testament But you seem to poynt out the time when the holy infants were cast out of the Church You tell us they were cast out when the Jewes Church-state and old covenant was abrogated by the coming of Christ and preaching of the Gospel and planting other Churches farre different from that of the Jewes in many respects But alas you take for granted a thing which you have not proved and it is no marvaile indeed to see the thing that is not probable to be without proofe That the Jewes Church-state was abrogated with the old covenant I am not bound to beleeve except I see it in Gods Word much lesse will I grant that the preaching of the Gospel overthrew the Church-state But seeing the new Jerusalem hath gates and foundations Rev. 21. according to the number of the twelve Tribes and twelve Apostles of the Lambe and that the Jewes and Gentiles being grafted into one Olive tree Rom. 11. make up but one Church I must conclude that the Church of the Jewes is the Church of the Gentiles for Christ is not properly the head of two bodies neither did he come to abrogate the old Church * So Mr. Spilsbery sayth That the Church of God under the old Testament and that now under the new for nature are one in reference to the elect of God called to the faith anâ— by thâ— spirit of grace united to Christ as bâ—anches to theiâ— viâ—e and so an holy pâ—ant of Gods planâ—ing of wh â—h indeed the true â—hâ—rch of God â—onsists See his â—reat of Bapâ—â—â— â—1 at lin 14. though he abrogated the old covenant But now let us see how farre you would make this Church different from the Church of Israel you know it must be either in matter or in forme or in both otherwise I suppose you will strive without an opposite for all Christians generally doe confesse that they were bound to observe such circumstances which wee are not bound to observe but all this did not argue buâ— that their Church was fit matter and a right forme and the same with the Church of the Gentiles But you say * Aâ— lin 20. That was corstituted upon nature and the naturall seed of Abraham this upon grace and the spirituall seed of Abraham To which I answer That if by nature you mean corruption as it appeareth you do then by your ground the Church of the Jewes was constituted upon corruption was a corrupt Church a leporous Church in the very constitution You think that the Church of the Jewes in her constitution which was of Gods building Isa 5.1 2 3. * No man sayth Mr. Spilsbery will admit of dead plants to be set in his vâ—neyard or grafted into a stock but onely suâ—h as are capable to comply with the same in the sap and nourishment thereof to the end it may grow and bring forth fruit and so it is with Christ who comes not short of nature and therefore he admits not of any dead plants to be set in his spirituall vineyard or dead members to be joyned to his mysticall body but onely such as by faith are capable to comply with the head Neither tooke he for himselfe a compounded body consisting of both living dead members which all are that have not a living principle of grace c. For this
see his Treat of Bap. pag. 20. lin 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14. consisted all of visible Saints Deut. 29.18 to be câ—rrupt For the like you said before in your book p. 4 That they stood meerly upon nature and circumcision of the flâ—sh not by faith and circumcision of the heart And here you oppose this nature unto grace the naturall seed unto the spirituall seed And thus it appeareth that you hold neither the matter nor forme of the Church to be spirituall then nor the persons graciâ—us but ungracious fleshly and carnall But the Scripture teacheth us that they were a holy nation and a peculiar people unto the Lord their God and so excellent that none were like unto them Great advantage had they every manner of way Vnto them was committed the Oracles of God And shall wee thinke that God committed his Oracles to a Church which had a carnall constitution or that he owned such for his holy peculiar people God made an everlasting covenant with Abraham that he would be a God unto him and his seed for ever And though the Law was added because of transgression yet it could not disanull the covenant and therefore not the Church or people of the covenant or the seale of the promise Now surely if that the Church had been constituted upon nature corrupted such as you have opposed to grace and upon the naturall not upon the spirituall seed * See before in this Treatise pag. 29 30 31. For there it is answered at large then there was no difference between the Israelites and the Heathens and then was the Church of Israel no communion of Saints but a mixt multitude which to thinke is very erronious as may appeare by these Scriptures Exod. 19.5 6. 22.31 12.48 49. Num. 9.14 15.15 Levit. 19.2 20.7 8. Deut. 7.6 14.1 2. 26.18 19. 1 King 8.53 Deut. 4.20 29.10 11 12 13. 10.15 Psal 147.14 But from this your groundlesse affirmation you would through an inference make another disparitie between the Church of the Jewes and the Church of the Gentiles You say That was therefore termed Israel according to the flesh and of the circumcision of the flesh this Israel according to the Spirit and of the circumcision of the heart Rom. 8 28.29 Rom. 9.6 7 8. Coll. 2.11 And to this I answer That your speech doth here import as if none who were Israel according to the flesh were Israelites according to the spirit but the Apostle sayth All are not Israel that are of Israel He maketh a manifest difference between Israel the Church of God and those who were not really Israelites though they came of Israels loynes according to the flesh But your speech crosseth the Apostles speech and tendeth to prove that all were Israel that were of Israel But what will you say to the Proselytes and their seed Were they Israel according to the flâ—sh Surely they were not therefore they were Israelites according to the spirit As well as others who were also Israelites both according to the spirit and flesh Moreover None were to be circumcised externally in the flesh but those who were in Gods covenant and were circumcised in heart so farre as mâ—n could discerne and those that were in Gods covenant were Israelites spiritually and so to be esteemed even as true members of the Church So David sayth Yet surely God is good unto Israel unto those that are pure in heart Deut. 30.6 Circumcision of the flesh sealed unto them the circumcision of the heart and this God promised both to them and their seed and then both male and female were all one in Christ * Exod 12.48 49. Num. 9.14 15.14 15 16. and so they are now ** Gal. 3.28 As for the Scriptures Rom. 2.28 29. Rom. 9.6 7 8 Coll. 2.11 which you cite they make nothing for your present purpose to prove That that was onely called Israel according to the flesh and the other onely according to the spirit The one constituted upon that nature which you have opposed to grace upon the naturall seed destitute of the spirit the other constituted on grace without nature and the spirituall seed of Abraham without the naturall seed Prove this and then you say something else it is nothing to your purpose But indeed the substance of what you say heer is answered at large in this Treatise pag. 29 30 31 32 33. And now I will proceed to examine the Scriptures which you have cited heer for confirmation of these your opinions As touching Rom 2.28 29. there the Apostle declareth who are the true Jewes indeed namely those that are Jewes inwardly and that the true Circumcision indeed is that of the heart in the spirit not in the letter whose praise is of God c. Now will you reason from this place that those who were the naturall seed not degenerating were not the spirituall seed and that because God accepted of the infants with their parents and commanded them to be circumcised that therefore the Church-state was built upon nature and not upon Christ Surely you cannot gather any such thing from the Apostles words in Rom. 2.28 29. nor from any other place of Scripture but rather the contrary Yea the Apostle in the following Chapter declareth that as for the advantage of the Jew and the profit of circumcision it was much every manner of way chiefly because that unto them were committed the Oracles of God For sayth he what if some did not beleeve shall their unbeliefe make the faith of God without effect God forbid And so he concludeth that both Jewes and Gentiles are justified by faith Seeing it is one God which shall justifie the circumcision by faith and the uncircumcision through faith Doe wee then make voyd the Law through faith sayth he God forbid yea wee establish the Law And in the fourth Chapter Paul treateth of justification by faith without workes and expoundeth Davids speech for whereas David sayth * Psal 32.1 2. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne and in whose spirit there is no guile Paul explaineth it thus Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnesse without works From which places of Scripture much may be gathered against those who denie infants to have faith imputatively for the Apostle declareth that he to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne is a righteous person Now every person is either righteous or unrighteous for as righteousnesse is not imputed unto those to whom sinne is imputed So those whose iniquities are pardoned and their sinne covered the Lord imputing no sinne unto them he imputeth righteousnesse unto them without workes and this righteousnesse is that which justifieth before God It was faith which was counted unto Abraham for righteousnesse And so he proceedeth in the 9th 10th and 11th verses to prove that this blessing or blessednesse came not onely upon the circumcision but also upon
the uncircumcision declaring that Abraham received not circumcision before hee had this blessednesse wherefore he calleth Circumcision a signe and seale of the righteousnesse of faith which he had before he was circumcised which importeth that all those who were circumcised then according to Gods appointment were in visibilitie blessed before and had this righteousnesse before even as all those who are baptized according to Gods appointment are righteous before and have in visible account the same blessing which those had who were circumcised according to the revealed will of God And he goeth on in the 13 14 15. verses and there telleth us who are the right heires And in the 16th verse he sayth that the promise is sure to all the seed not to that onely which is of the law but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham who is the father of us all And he further sheweth that this promise so shall thy seed be and that Abrahams beleeving Gods promise was imputed unto him for righteousnesse and was not written for his sake alone but for us also to whom it shall be imputed if wee beleeve on God Touching the other Scripture Rom. 9.6 7 8. Isaac was no mocker though he were mocked no persecuter though persecuted in his infancie which you alledge to prove your former position concerning the different constitutions of the Church of the Jewes and of the Church of the Gentiles it maketh nothing for your purpose neither but directly against you for there wee may see that though all are not Israel which are of Israel yet the Word of God taketh effect according to that in Rom. 3.3 Ishmaels mocking of Isaac did not argue that Isaac was also a mocker Isaac remained still a childe of promise though an Infant But if it be true as you would infer that the state was a state of bondmen and that an heire or Lord differed nothing from a servant of sinne and if it were constituted and stood meerly upon nature and circumcision of the flesh and not by faith and circumcision of the heart it argueth that the Word of God is without effect that all were Israel that were of Israel all mockers with Ishmael prophane persons with Esau c. which to thinke is very erronious for the word of God hath taken effect to retaine the holy Infants and cast out visible prophane persons and therefore the state wherein they were was a state of free-men God was well pleased with them and accepted of their sacrifices and promised unto them remission of their sinnes through Jesus Christ who was then to come and is now come Therefore I would have you to banish such evill thoughts out of your minde as if they had a false corrupt or carnall and not a spirituall constitution Againe consider That Church upon whom holy Baptisme was rightly administred was holy and spirituall But holy Baptisme was rightly administred upon the Church of Israel 1 Cor. 10.1 2. Psa 77.16 17 Therefore they were a holy spirituall Church as well as wee But peradventure you will say you mean that in their Apostacie they pleased not God and therefore their Church-state which they were in formerly had a carnall constitution and was not spirituall To which I answer That the like you may say concerning the Churches now which you acknowledge to be spirituall But you should consider that many are called but few are chosen Gods garden may have some plants therein which possibly may degenerate from their kinde and become wilde yet the garden is still the Lords but the husband-men ought when they discover such to weed them out So corruptions began to spring in the Church of Corinth 2 Cor. 7.11 and they cut downe the tender fruits thereof in time And God threatned the members of some of the Churches of Asia 〈◊〉 Rev. 2. 3. to execute judgement upon them if repentance prevented him not As for Coll. 2.11 which you have cited that the Church of Collossia was circumcised with the circumcision made without hands in putting off the body of the sinnes of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ This implyeth not but that the Jewes and Proselytes before Christs coming had circumcision of the flesh as an outward signe unto them that the Lord would circumcise their hearts and the hearts of their seed to love him more and more according to his gracious promise And seeing that the Apostle maketh circumcision heer the same in effect with our Baptisme it plainly argueth that as infants in former time were to receive circumcision so infants now in their infancie are to receive Baptisme the seale of the same covenant Whereas you say That was a state of bond men * Lin. 23. wherein an heire differed nothing from a servant this not of servants * Lin. 28. but of sonnes and free-men I suppose you mean by bond-men those who were bound-servants to Sathan and by free-men those who were set free by Christ In this respect then you have not done well in saying that such a one that was made free in this spirituall respect differed nothing from those who were visibly bond-slaves of Sathan Then it seemes Isaac differed nothing from a mocker nor the Proselytes infants from Heathens and Infidels And if you mean by servants those who are wicked in the Church I say they were to be cast out as they manifested evill fruits for though they were in the house a while and were as children yet they manifesting themselves afterwards to be servants of sinne were no longer to abide but those who are not servants of sinne are now as they were then to abide for ever therein so Ishmael was in covenant with Isaac and was circumcised but when he manifested fruits of unholinesse out he was cast And why was this Gen. 21.9 10. Not because he was Abrahams sonne according to the flesh but because he manifested himselfe afterward to be a servant of sinne and so degenerated from the righteous steps of Abraham Now you ought to know See before in this Treatise pag. 29 30 31 32 33 147 148 149. that the Church of the Jewes was constituted of free-men and there was not one sinner to be suffered in that church but when he was discovered either he must repent or be cut off therefore it plainly argueth that visible wicked persons bond-slaves of Sathan were not to be the matter of that Church in the first constitution they were such who in all outward appearance were not alliens from Gods covenants or promises or strangers to God but were such whom he knew and owned and such whom he would acknowledge as in the kingdome of grace heer so in the kingdome of glory hereafter It may be you thinke thus That if the Church of Israel were constituted of free-men why then were many of them manifested afterwards to be wicked Corah and his company a congregation of Rebels from whom Moses and the rest were commanded to
seperate famous men and men of renowne amongst the Israelites and yet were chiefe in the rebellion also Nadab and Abihu offerers of strange fire and many more manifested themselves to be evill persons Ans If this be any ground of your prejudicacie against the Church of the Jewes then let this satisfie you that these were free-men at first according to visibilitie as holy as Judas or Simon Magus or Ananias and Saphira And therefore if it be an argument of a false constitution for members of a Church of God to fall from their stedfastnesse then it will follow that the Church now under the Gospel hath not a true constitution seeing that divers fall from their stedfastnesse some for a time like the incestuous person in the Church of Corinth others finally totally and eternally like Judas Iscariot who was one of the Lambs twelve Apostles Let this then be the conclusion that the state may be a state of free-men though some bond-men appeare in it and are cast out as Ishmael the sonne of the bond-woman was cast out of the state of free-men wherein the infants of beleevers were admitted though they were not the seed of Abraham according to the flesh And the consideration of this maketh much for the infants of beleevers now for as much as beleevers even free-mens priviledges are much enlarged since Christs manifestation in the flesh The free-men had this priviledge formerly to bring in their infants and to difference them from those without And surely their priviledges are not lessened now * What had the Infants of beleeving parents done to deserve Excommunication or casting out of the Church If they had don nothing worthy of it as it is sure they had not then I may justly conclude that they were not children of the bond woman and if not of the bond-woman then still of the free-woman and if children of the free-woman then members of the Church and if so then there is no just reason can be given to debarre such holy Infants of their priviledges amongst which Baptisme is one as Circumcision was of old Christ came not to bring losse and dammage to holy infants And if it be true which you say That till Christs coming an heire or beleever differed nothing from a servant If by a servant you mean Ishmael or such as he who manifested themselves to be servants of sinne then why was the son of the bond woman cast out differenced from the sonne of the free-woman But indeed you should minde that Christ came to take the yoake of the Law from the shoulders of beleevers and so to ease them of that servitude under which they were and this doth not impaire the infants of beleevers no not in the least Touching Christs discourse * Lin. 30. which you bring to make your affirmations to appeare evident true It doth evidence that your affirmations in this particular are evident false for Christ sayth no such thing which you faine that he saith for he speaketh to those that did derogate from the steps of Abraham which the beleevers Infants could not justly be said to doe And Christ doth not say that the Church of the Jewes was constituted upon nature flesh carnalitie opposite to the spirit but he sayth that those that continued in his Word they then were his Disciples indeed should know the truth and the truth should make them free not that the Church whereof he and his brethren were members was evilly constituted because evill persons were in it or degenerated from it but that these were members in the Church which had need to amend or else to be cast out See John 8. Their answer to Christ was that they were Abrahams seed and so were free alâ—eadie and were never in bondage to any man But in this they said not true for they had degenerated from the steps of Abraham And Christ in telling them that whosoever committeth sinne is the servant of sinne did therein declare that it was no benefit unto any to be of Abrahams seed if they degenerated from Abrahams steps for this was a means though they were members of the true Church to make them no mâ—mbers of it but to be cast out thence for so sayth Christ unto them the servant abideth not in the house for ever Now by this house is meant his Church in which though sinners abide covertly for a time yet as they manifest themselves to be corrupt and levennous are or at least ought to be cast out Therefore they abide not there for ever So the Jewes were taught by the ceremony of casting away leaven to cast out the leaven of sinne out of their hearts and out of their families and also to purge the Church of God both of sinne and sinners so far as they could discerne by the light of Gods Word But those that were true Saints were to abide in that true Church-state for ever So it is said Psal 15.5 That such shall never be moved out of Gods Tabernacle and holy Mountaine So Christ sayth heer that the Sonne abideth for ever If therefore the Sonne make you free you shall be free indeed By this freedome he meant a freedome from condemnation for ever from the law of sinne and of death for ever because he opposeth it to the bondage they were in Further These persons whom Christ reprehended were not obedient to the new covenant neither did they regard the commandements of the Law for the commandement sayth Thou shalt not kill But Christ sayd unto them I know you are Abrahams seed but yee seek to kill me because my Word hath no place in you c. This wickednesse of theirs was not warranted neither by the new nor old covenant and therefore they were not allowed in any respect but condemned Wherefore it evidently appeareth that you cannot gather from either of the covenants that such visible wicked persons were by God allowed to be in much lesse the ground of his Churches constitution after their discovery These then were not meet to be members of the Church of the Jewes yea though they were the children of Abraham according to the flesh yet by the new and old covenant were to be cast out when the least infant of a faithfull Proselyte remained still a member of the Common-wealth of Israel which was the Church of God Moreover Christ did not affirme any such thing as you would further faine he did thâ—t persons by naturall birth and circumcision of the flesh were admitted free for Ishmalites and Edomites by fleshly generation were the children of Abraham yet they were not therefore admitted free-men till they renounced their parents sinne and came into the Church And the infants of wicked parents were circumcised in Apostacie yet wee will not say that therefore they were free But this wee are to know that the naturall seed of the faithfull that were not apostated or degenerated were to be accounted the true seed and all those who were circumcised